Ten team conferences are so 2009. So why is the Pac-10 still behind the times?

Even the Big 10 has 11 teams after Penn State joined in 1993.

But new commissioner Larry Scott and his new deputy commissioner, Kevin Weiberg, seem to be exploring options of turning the Pac-10 into the Pac-12.

It’s no secret the Pac-10 is a top-level athletic conference but the addition of two teams from top-flight media markets would turn the conference into a pinnacle of college athletics.

Finding the right fit is the issue.

Pac-10 schools fit a certain demographic. They must maintain a certain level of academic standards and they must have a well rounded athletic department. It is not just about football and basketball. Women’s athletics and non-revenue sports play a major part of making the Pac-10 what it is.

So the reason why the Pac-10 has not taken the leap yet is because Pac-10-caliber schools are hard to come by.

You can also cross off Fresno State, San Diego State and Boise State because there is not enough balance between academics and athletics.

Media market size also impacts the decision. The two largest media markets in the western United States that aren’t already occupied by the Pac-10 are Salt Lake City and Denver. That points to three teams to fit the Pac-10 mold: University of Utah, Brigham Young University, and the University of Colorado, Boulder.

All three schools have balanced athletics and put a premium on academics.

I spent my first two years out of high school at Colorado and while many of the students may argue about the premium put on academics, the in-state students say it is one of the most difficult schools to get into in the state. Colorado also has its strongest alumni association in the Los Angeles area. Meaning they already have a large level of support in Pac-10 country.

The choice between BYU and Utah is not as easy choosing Colorado. The Pac-10 would take Colorado first because the Denver market is the No. 16 market in the country, while Salt Lake City is No. 31.

The Pac-10 would choose Utah over BYU without question. BYU would be the better athletic program to take, but the mixture of the Latter Day Saints association with BYU as well as the fact the Pac-10 has had trouble with the power that private schools possess. USC is able to bring in players to school that other schools would not be able to admit into school. Stanford goes the opposite way but they have the ability to have top-notch facilities that are privately funded.

Putting that together means Utah would be the likely choice to join the Pac-10 over BYU.With Southern Califorina being such a fertile recruiting area, it wouldn’t be fair to create Northern and Southern divisions because there could be a few teams that would go a year without playing in California.

One idea that I have heard is sort of an AFC-NFC division separation. In one division you have UCLA, Stanford, Washington, Oregon State, Arizona and Colorado. In the other division you have USC, Cal, Washington State, Oregon, Arizona State and Utah. The way the conference would be set up, you play everyone in your division, plus your natural rival and two other members of the other division. This would allow for up to four non-conference games and a conference championship game.

That move would nurture conference rivalries and allow for a more balanced conference.One of the few things holding back this dream is the Big 12 conference’s rules about schools giving notice of their intentions to leave the conference. If Colorado left the Big 12, it would have to give a two-year notice.

But the move would be more about the long run.

I think the Pac-10 needs a facelift and the addition of two teams would greatly improve the conference as a whole, but if it does expand the big wigs in charge of the conference must get the right schools into the conference.

I just hope they figure it out sooner rather than later.

Ross Coleman can be reached at [email protected]