[terry]

I don\'t see the benefit to adding Utah. Adding Utah would be a gift to them because it would promote them to the big leagues, but it wouldn\'t do anything to enhance the conference. Utah certainly would not add to the Pac 10\'s prestige. Nebraska adds to the Big 10\'s prestige; Utah probably detracts from the Pac 10\'s prestige. Utah is a small-market team and wouldn\'t add much economic value. I don\'t think the incremental benefit from adding Utah would be significant enough to justify expansion. I would like to see the conference stay with 11 teams and wait for a better option to develop some time in the future. That\'s what the Big Ten did for years, and it eventually worked out. Better yet, I would like to see the Pac 10 un-invite Colorado . . . but I suppose that ship has sailed, with our new commissioner having already made that commitment.

[terry]

I don\'t see the benefit to adding Utah. Adding Utah would be a gift to them because it would promote them to the big leagues, but it wouldn\'t do anything to enhance the conference. Utah certainly would not add to the Pac 10\'s prestige. Nebraska adds to the Big 10\'s prestige; Utah probably detracts from the Pac 10\'s prestige. Utah is a small-market team and wouldn\'t add much economic value. I don\'t think the incremental benefit from adding Utah would be significant enough to justify expansion. I would like to see the conference stay with 11 teams and wait for a better option to develop some time in the future. That\'s what the Big Ten did for years, and it eventually worked out. Better yet, I would like to see the Pac 10 un-invite Colorado . . . but I suppose that ship has sailed, with our new commissioner having already made that commitment.