In a statement on Tuesday, Pac-10 Conference commissioner Larry Scott said that the Pac-10 is giving “serious evaluation” to the idea of expanding the conference. By the end of 2010, the Pac-10 could have two more teams enter, as the conference is in the midst of renegotiating its television contracts. According to Scott, the conference has not had much conversation with other potential schools, but I think the consideration is pretty serious, and we could definitely see the Pac-12 by the end of this year.

I personally think the Pac-10 is just fine the way it is. The 10 schools are perfect, the geographical locations are perfect and the teams succeed wildly as it is. Adding two more teams will just dilute the conference, make the pie bigger and each school’s slice smaller. It will also probably mess up the perfect round-robin format that the conference has in several sports, including basketball and women’s volleyball (that is, playing each team at home and on the road in a season–compare this to the other conferences that play some schools once, some schools twice and some schools not at all during their regular seasons).

Getting 12 teams would probably mean that the Pac-10 goes to a split-conference in football and then has a championship game at the end of the season. I am not a fan of the split-conference because it all but ruins competitiveness, parity and the chance for success. Look at the Big 12 North and South if you want evidence.

But if the Pac-10 is going to expand (because the financial implications may be looking too good), they should expand strategically. And by strategically, I mean bringing in two schools in the West that are Pac-10 caliber and have close geographic proximity to each other. The two best candidates would be BYU and Utah.

I think it makes the most sense for Scott to consider these two. They are great athletic schools. They align with one of the Pac-10’s biggest assets–geographic proximity–so teams can play both of them on one road trip to Utah. They bring competitiveness to almost all of the sports in which the Pac-10 competes and thrives, and many of their teams have even seen more success than many of their Pac-10 counterparts over the years. They are beginning to dominate and overwhelm the conference that they are currently in–the Mountain West Conference–a conference made up of smaller, less endowed schools that have smaller talent pools and offer fewer sports and scholarships. It might be time for BYU and Utah to “graduate” to a better, more well-known and respected conference. Miami, Boston College and Virginia Tech all made the jump from the Big East to the ACC in the early 2000s in quite a similar fashion. BYU and Utah to the Pac-10 (and a subsequent replacement of those schools in the Mountain West) would be almost no different.

In terms of travel, the Utah schools are decently equidistant from all the current Pac-10 schools. The conference could minimize expansion costs by bringing in those schools that are easy to get to (maybe not in December or January) and close to each other (a 45-minute drive separates them). Another plus is the already-established rivalry between the two schools. A great thing about the Pac-10 is that all the in-state schools have big rivalries with each other. BYU and Utah would fit in perfectly here, as their “Holy War” is already on par with the likes of the Big Game, the Apple Cup and the Civil War.

Then again, adding the Utah schools would throw off the whole idea of the “Pac-10” because the schools would no longer represent a trek up and down the West Coast of the United States. Instead, we must call it the “West-12” or something like that. Adding the two Utah schools would also ruin the pretty picture in those Pac-10 commercials of Washington, Oregon, California, and Arizona all in a row down the coast. Now it would have to jump over to Utah (poor Nevada), which is borderline Rocky Mountain territory. However, I’m guessing that the Pac-10 doesn’t really care about pretty pictures.

If the Pac-10 isn’t looking to go as far East as Utah, the other suggestion I have for two additional teams are San Diego State and the University of San Diego. Again, going with the geographical theme here, the two San Diego schools make good sense to add to the Pac-10 (San Diego State already is in the Pac-10 for men’s soccer). And the whole “Pacific” thing does not get lost here as the schools are in California, so the Pac-10 would still keep its nice shape of schools up and down the Pacific coast. While BYU and Utah are better athletic schools on the whole than SDSU and USD (though the San Diego schools do bring some talent in various sports a la Oregon State and Washington State), I could understand the San Diego picks because of location alone.

Other schools to consider could be Boise State (but really, do they have anything besides football?), UNLV, Gonzaga, UC-Davis and Saint Mary’s. However, I think the previous four schools I mentioned would be better picks than these schools. If the Pac-10 is going to expand to these schools, it seriously needs to reconsider.

Actually, if expanding would bring more lucrative media deals–like Scott is hinting at–then perhaps it is not a bad idea that the Pac-10 adds schools. If that is what it takes to get better TV contracts and thus become more noticed, then perhaps that is the price the Pac-10 has to pay. But if the Pac-10 thinks that these schools are going to enter and be stepped all over, they should think again. Adding Utah and BYU would make the conference pretty competitive in a lot of sports, and I could definitely see one of their teams winning a Pac-10 title in its first year.

So can I understand why Scott and the conference are considering expansion? Yes, I do. Do I think the Pac-10 should expand? No, I do not. I think the conference is doing just fine as is, and things can be done in terms of money and media with the 10 teams. But to offer my best prediction, I think you better start getting used to saying Pac-12.

Danny Belch has volunteered to be The Daily’s new Utah correspondent. Ask him about his impending move at dbelch1 “at” stanford.edu.