which is really about cable subscriptions. Both Utah and BYU would've essentially delivered the same value.

From there, I think BYU fans may overplay the monetary value of the fan base. Maybe out of necessity. The difference between the two schools is easily marginalized when factoring in opponent and national audience.

Which is why Utah had substantially greater viewership this year.

Part of that though is ranking. Utah was able to drive good rankings because they were, at one point, ranked in the top 10. As a result, they were one of the highest viewed games of their opponents as well. Including BYU.

They were ranked in the top 10 because they were able to beat a terrific Michigan team, at Oregon and then beat a ranked Cal. Three ranked teams.

I believe outside of TCU, Utah was the only MWC school that demonstrated any type of capability to play at that level, win those types of games and show the potential to get to the top 10 in a P5 -- and maybe even make a prestigious bowl that brings in tons of money to the conference.

I think that's what BYU fans often miss. Utah and TCU actually brought in far more money to the conference than anybody else in the MW because of the two BCS bowls. Looking at the millions of dollars of came into the conference from those bowls, how many more fans do you have to have to make up that difference?

By getting there twice before anybody else in the MW had even gotten there, Utah showed a much higher ceiling than anybody from the west.

The fact that UU was the only school to reach similar Heights in basketball is telling as well.

So the argument should be better made that expansion is about markets, competitiveness, potential and prestige.

Which is why BYU is now clearly the best candidate now for the big 12.