carp’s crazy thoughts for a Tuesday: retract, replace, or expand?
by carp on Apr 28, 2009 8:56 AM PDT
Email
PrintI suppose my initial feelings on Washington State University (Wazzu) started with my Pac10 expansion proposal, which was the second part of my how to make life better for Cal fans (new OOC rivalry can be found here, and the Eh bowl can be found here). When Bennett left for UVa, I ruffled the feathers of many a mod with my Wazzu question/comments.
As chowder astutely pointed out in yesterday’s DBD, Wazzu is admittedly in trouble as AD Jim Stern outlined in his chat (credit GoCougs of CougCenter for breaking the story to the blogosphere):
I'd like to point out that in the 1960s WSU's membership in the conference was at stake and only a close vote saved the school from being ousted from the conference. The Pac-10 is one of the most prestigious conferences in the country and allows the WSU athletics program and the university's academic programs to be on the same field and classrooms as Stanford, UC-Berkeley, USC, etc. The athletics program at WSU is the only way this membership is achieved. Our annual budget is currently $14 million below the next lowest member in the conference. If we do not take action to create revenue and level this playing field, we may be at some point in the future be facing another vote. I will do everything that I can on my watch to prevent such an action. This is why I am pushing for Phase III of the renovation [To Martin Stadium] and am considering the Apple Cup move.
In this FanPost, we won’t argue whether Wazzu should/will leave the Pac10. We’ll look past that, fast forward to date 20XX and assume that they have left the Pac10 for either the MWC or the WAC. The question I have…is what will the “Pac10” do? In my mind, there are three options:
Retract: Wazzu’s departure leaves 9 teams (Pac9?), 8 league games, and 4 OOC games. The extra game could be spent wooing a primo BCS team or padding the win column. In doing so, this becomes more like the Big12 & SEC.
Replace: If you had to pick one team to replace Wazzu…who would it be? Avinash likes Hawaii because he wants to get lei’d. I like Boise St for their football success of the past 10 years, but they just don’t fit our conference for a variety of reasons. BYU-Cal could be a Nuclear Prop 8 War. The best school, I believe, would be the University of Utah. They have a decent basketball team (somehow got a 5 seed!), academics that would leapfrog the Oregon and Arizona schools and maybe USC, is located in an up-and-coming SLC (host city of the ’02 Olympics) with a major airline hub (seriously…best layover stop for a Chicago/Northeast bound flight?) and, most importantly, a successful football team that’s busted the BCS system twice.
Expand: I don’t have too much more to add to my previous post, but Boise St, Utah, Colorado, Hawaii (for different reasons!) and BYU are all tempting. I suppose the schools that make the most sense are Utah, BYU, and Colorado – and I’m not sold that expansion is worth it without Colorado (63 % of Buffs fans on the Ralphie Report and 80 % of Utes fans over at Block U are on board). Additionally, this might not be so much of an expansion as it could be a future replacement (I’ll let your minds wander).
Of course, if this bores you check out my NSFW All Conference Cheerleading Team.
The opinions expressed in a FanPost are, in every way, reflective of the opinions of every California Golden Blogs Marshawnthusiast. Moreover, they are reflective of every employee of SBNation, including Tyler "Blez" Bleszinski.
98 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Lets bring in the UCSF Chemistry Team as a replacment. They certainly cant be worse.
I am the Tyrant Boy King Of UC Eugene! An endless cavalcade of worthless inanities is my currency!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
I'd like to point out that WSU has two Pac-10 football championships in the last 12 years
Standings in that time:
1. USC (7)
2. WSU (2)
Oregon (2)
UCLA (2)
5. Cal (1)
UW (1)
OSU (1)
ASU (1)
Stanford(1)
10. Arizona (0)
I could understand it if we were just noncompetitive year-in and year-out in football (a la Temple in the Big East some years ago), but that’s just not the case. We had one really horrendous year. If it continues, fine, have this conversation. But I think everyone is getting a little ahead of themselves.
by Jeff Nusser on Apr 28, 2009 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions
Nah,
Nuss, they are obviously done. They have limited to no potential to compete in the conference…aside from, say, winning the Pac-10 in football and being one of the top 20 teams nationally in basketball. Yeah, they are basically gone already.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
F-U-T-U-R-E, future.
Go out on a limb CBKWit. Which one did you vote for?
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
The past is your problem
they have been very good very recently. I’m not really sure why, because I don’t follow them that closely. But until you show what has changed over the last few years to inhibit future success, there’s no way you can say they won’t succeed in the future.
Look, I don’t understand how salmon return to the exact same river to spawn, after they are born and go out to sea. But just because I don’t understand doesn’t mean I suddenly expect them to stop doing this tomorrow.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
I’m not a VC but I bet they have a limited view of the past, especially if the recent past isn’t working. In addition to two good coaches having success at Wazzu and then leaving, how’s this:
Our annual budget is currently $14 million below the next lowest member in the conference. If we do not take action to create revenue and level this playing field, we may be at some point in the future be facing another vote. I will do everything that I can on my watch to prevent such an action.
To me, that sounds like it can inhibit future success.
Not sure if you’ve been following West Coast salmon, but they haven’t been returning to the river for spawning runs thus severe commercial fishing restrictions on the West Coast. It’s been especially bad in CA rivers, due to our wants/needs/desires to supply 25% of the nation’s produce.
Perhaps the salmon analogy is a good one: it used to work not that long ago, now it’s not and the future doesn’t look bright.
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
but what has changed at Wazzu?
they’ve always had less money than people and they’ve had much longer stretches with crappy coaches than they are currently enduring. And yet, they have been very good, very recently.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
not being a Wazzu grad/follower, I don’t know. I’m guessing by Stern’s comment, $14 million is a much higher number than ever before OR the cost of doing business in money making athletics (read: HC & assistant coaches arms race) makes it prohibitively expensive going forward and thus the future looks bleak.
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
They just need USC to make the NC game every year, so Cal gets 2 BCS teams.
I'm old enough to understand. Jerks.
by rollonubears on Apr 28, 2009 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions
Pac 10 gets 2 BCS teams*
I'm old enough to understand. Jerks.
by rollonubears on Apr 28, 2009 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions
fun fact:
the last (only?) time the Pac-10 got two BCS teams? USC and (GASP) WSU in 2002-2003
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Well if USC would stop shooting itself in the foot then it is better for everyone in the conference. Because they are the most talented team in CFB every year, just blow one game. If they go to the NC, we get another team in the Rose Bowl, everybody wins because all the teams get cash.
I'm old enough to understand. Jerks.
by rollonubears on Apr 28, 2009 11:23 AM PDT up reply actions
On Jan. 1, 2001 (following the 2000 season), Washington beat Purdue in the Rose Bowl, while Oregon State beat Notre Dame in the Fiesta Bowl that same day. Only other time the Pac-10 has received 2 BCS bids.
So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!
ah yes, OSU over Notre Dame
One of Notre Dame’s finest showings over their 12 year bowl catastrophe series.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
fun fact:
Who made it 50 years without a bowl game? Wazzu.
They also lost that Rose Bowl by 20 to Oklahoma…a rare BCS win in the Stoops era.
Off the cuff, I’m going to say they had 2 good teams because:
- popularity of football in the state of Washington thanks to Husky dominance.
- USC being way down in the late 90’s
- UCLA being weird, Cal being atrocious, Stanfurd being Stanfurd.
- UDub taking more CA recruits thus opening up more Northwest recruits for Wazzu
- Jesus in Cleats (Bledsoe, Leaf)
Kind of asking for a lot to happen again, no?
Don’t start in with basketball talk either. Football is king.
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
Football rakes in a lot
But basketball isn’t too far behind.
Bork bork bork!
by Avinash Kunnath on Apr 28, 2009 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions
I think they make money in hoops, but I think they are far behind.
Several teams do not make money in hoops. While attending a conference at the Air Force Academy, I watched their AD say that they lose money in hoops despite having a Top 25 and free airfare (cargo planes).
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
yes, I figured this is was coming. You should note that many people here believe this, including Twist (I think?). Historically, this is 100% correct. Was it, though, the exception and not the norm? Will we see a talented young coach, if found, leave for a bigger payday and more prestige as Price & Bennett have done? This, in turn, starts the cycle all over again of hunting for a new young unproven coach.
If it continues, fine, have this conversation.
This wasn’t the point of this FanPost as I stated above. I’m fastforwarding to a hypothetical date following a hypothetical decision. Just because it’s hypothetical, it doesn’t mean it lacks validity (as you pointed out with Temple).
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
Coaches leaving for greener pastures has ALWAYS been a problem. It's not recent.
There was nothing that went on in our run of football success in the early part of this decade — which included three consecutive 10-win seasons — that suggests it can’t be repeated, especially since there was a big downturn in the wake of our first Rose Bowl in 1997. I think basketball is the one that can be debated much more heavily as potential flash in the pan.
3 consecutive top-10 finishes?
Haven’t you heard, WSU only "had 2 good teams"
I guess if the definition of a "good" Pac-10 team is one that wins the Pac-10 title and goes to the rose bowl, then, sadly Cal hasn’t had any good teams in 50 years.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
I think my point was taken out of the context that I meant. I’m not defining a good team, rather I was explaining why Wazzu was good in the late 90’s and early 2000’s.
How’s that future look? How does a routine Top 15 finish sound if they were in a conference like the WAC or MWC? They’re grossly underfunded and need several upper echelon teams to go belly up. Sure it could happen…and it looks like they’ll be voting on what to do with Wazzu (again) unless drastic and immediate measures are taken.
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
ucla a-holes say the same thing about us
the only reason we’re successful (and again, not as successful as WSU has been this decade in either major sport) is because ucla is down. If we can’t even win in LA against Dorrell, how can Tedford win now that ucla is “back”? We’re going to sink right back down to the dregs of the conference…
By the way, don’t you think Utah or Bosie State would love to move up to the Pac-10?
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
I’m not in favor of a quick decision, although if MWC becomes a BCS conference or the rules get rewritten, I think our chance of landing them diminish significantly. I certainly have lived through a part of Cal’s recent past.
What gets to me most more than anything, is how our conference currently operates when it could be so much more. It’s little and big things that they don’t do. This All-American Tennis Champ has a lot to prove.
Did you ever see that movie Lions for Lambs? The movie was so-so, but the main point hit a cord with me: we have lions being led by lambs.
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
so you think Bosie or Utah would like to move up to the Pac-10, so long as their conference does not become a BCS conference. Why, then, would any school in the Pac-10 want to move down?
How does a routine Top 15 finish sound if they were in a conference like the WAC or MWC?
According to you (and I agree with you), these schools would move up to a BCS conference if they could. So I fail to see how any Pac-10 school would be interested in moving down. What’s the upside – they dominate their conference, get routine top 15 finishes…and like Bosie and Utah want to move back up to the conference they just left? This is the classic “I know what’s best for you better than you do” argument, and I don’t think you understand the economics behind being a member of a BCS conference. Do you think WSU would like to share revenue with SC, LA, Stanford, Oregon, UW, Cal…or Utah, Air Force, TCU, BYU, New Mexico, Colorado St? There is no way WSU would pull in more cash playing in the Mountain West (much less the WAC) than they currently do in the Pac.
Furthermore, what makes you think Utah or Bosie State would be any more successful in the Pac-10 than WSU has been? They are located in equally remote areas (more for Bosie, less for Utah), have significantly less athletic history, I would guess less endowment…it seems like you are basing this proposal solely on college football performance from the last 5 years, because if you go back ten years, WSU becomes the second most successful team in the conference (and again, this doesn’t even consider men’s basketball).
I will repeat: I think, as Cal fans, saying another Pac-10 program (particularly the last one other than SC to go to a rose bowl) has limited to no potential is extremely arrogant. People said the same thing about Cal for different reasons (academics too hard for athletes, no institutional support from the administration, no fan support, competing with two pro franchises in the area and a "superior" athletic institution across the bay), but here we are, being almost as successful as WSU was 5+ years ago. Hell, many big profs on campus wanted us to follow the precedent set by U of Chicago and abandon sports altogether.
I respect that you have your opinion and that you are obviously committed to it, but I find the lack of perspective surprising.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
I agree mostly with what you wrote in paragraph 2. Wazzu may not want to move down, but they may not get to choose (who makes the call – I have no idea?). While they may lose shared money (and how much they really get is difficult to say) but if an MWC team makes it to a BCS game, they share their money too. Not as much, but it’s still significant.
An obvious benefit of moving is that it would give them a better chance of winning. Winning puts butts in the seats at Martin Stadium, it gets them buying Montgomery jerseys, it gets people watching them on TV and catching them on an AM station, it gets the nation paying attention to Wazzu again, and it will get them in a bowl game. Again, not saying it can’t be done (as they’ve shown) in the Pac10, but it might be a better playing field for them.
Boise and Salt Lake are a helluva bigger than Pulman – I think that’s uncontestable. No, neither is a major media market, but it is better – especially Salt Lake or Denver. Your “competition” argument is intriguing and difficult to pinpoint; how good would they really be? To that I say, I dunno. No one knows until they try. Initially, I think they can be competitive but after that who knows.
Calling me extremely arrogant is a bit hypocritical since, after all, you’ve insisted on having the should/would debate when I specically stated that we shouldn’t. Moreover, you’ve refused (despite my encouragement) to offer your opinion on the specific question/vote at hand. To address your repeated calls or arrogance, I’ll respond with this: in offering my opinion on the global state of the Pac10, my Cal homer hat is off. Wazzu happens to be the team on the hotseat, but if I was a Wazzu fan and a fan of the Pac10 in general I think I would have a similar stance. Maybe not, I dunno.
The last sentence of my reply above is really what it’s all about: I’ve worked hard to get to wear I’m in and, truth be told, I don’t see why it’s so hard for others to do as well. I say this to my wife all the time, "Do you ever feel like our nation’s best are not in the critical positions that they need to be? Where at first I thought it was just politics, now I think it’s everywhere. We just don’t have enough danzig’s.
A man who headed up Women’s Tennis? Really? That’s the best we could do?
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
I want the conference to be better too
but I don’t think kicking out any program (much less the last one to go to a rose bowl aside from SC/one that went to the sweet 16 last year) is anything close to the answer. WSU (or any Pac-10 school) is not the reason we have crappy tv contracts and bad bowl tie ins. As I alluded to below, the SEC is dominating in terms of revenue and national standing despite having doormats such as Mississippi State, which certainly hasn’t won 2 SEC championships in the last dozen years as WSU has (you can throw in Kentucky, South Cack in there, as well as examples from any major conference – The Big 10 (11) didn’t have to throw out Indiana to create the Big 10 tv network, and when Penn State joined they had a great opportunity to do so).
I’m not calling you arrogant – I deliberately avoided doing so. I’m calling your thoughts on this particular issue arrogant, and I feel I have a valid point:
People said the same thing about Cal for different reasons (academics too hard for athletes, no institutional support from the administration, no fan support, competing with two pro franchises in the area and a “superior” athletic institution across the bay), but here we are, being almost as successful as WSU was 5+ years ago. Hell, many big profs on campus wanted us to follow the precedent set by U of Chicago and abandon sports altogether.
I would say the people who said this about Cal had more of a point than you do now – after all, we also just experienced a 1 win season, had not been to a rose bowl in 40+ years (it’s been 7 years for WSU) and our basketball program was just coming off probation, instead of a sweet 16. So do you agree with those people, who had the same general argument (but a little stronger) than you do, just with a different school? Making your argument now pretends that we were not in the same situation less than a decade ago, and I feel that ignoring history, especially very recent history, is arrogant.
As for not addressing your question, I feel unable to do so because the underlying warrant to your claim is that WSU should be or will be kicked out. I obviously disagree, and since I disagree with the assumption on which the question is based, I can’t really answer it. If I asked “Tedford has failed because he hasn’t taken us to the Rose Bowl and obviously needs to be fired – who should we hire to replace him,” I hope that instead of answering the question, you would argue that Tedford shouldn’t be fired.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
fair enough…can I get a man-hug now? How about from RemorsefulBrunisBabe FTW?
I give the pass on Cal because they had necessary non-football attractions (that 7-8 other Pac10 schools have and Utah & Colorado would have) that would allow a guy like Tedford to take off right away and turn the thing around.
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
yeah, that's a good point
but I think we all have to remember that each school has unique advantages and disadvantages. Cal certainly has their fair share of both.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
I'd take Colorado over Utah
Strictly for the Denver market over SLC. Utah wouldn’t upset me though and I wouldn’t be pissed off by the Colo, Ute, Mormon expansaganza. That “no play on Sundays” deal is dicey to work around though for some of the sports programs.
Academically I could care less. Considering the Arizonas and Wazzu are currently in the league so any talk about “academic qintegrity of the league” is a joke. Just my opinion.
Joe Starkey...Scholar, Humanitarian, Cal legend, worst radio play by play man of all time.
qintegrity
When keeping it real goes horribly wrong
Joe Starkey...Scholar, Humanitarian, Cal legend, worst radio play by play man of all time.
by Fire Starkey on Apr 28, 2009 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions
I Chose Simple Retraction
I had never considered it, but I would prefer a smaller conference of better teams. This also allows Pac-10 teams more freedom with scheduling, and the Pac-10 has consistently proven that most teams will challenge themselves out of conference. More games against other big six conferences would add the much needed exposure for the Pac-10. Furthermore, the Pac-10 teams can schedule a difficult OOC line-up while still having one money game.
They're after our precious bodily fluids
by chowder on Apr 28, 2009 9:36 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Am I the only one who really likes the Pac as is and doesn’t want it to be changed. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
I'm old enough to understand. Jerks.
ah…not the purpose of this FanPost. This FanPost assumes that it was broke, and that action has been taken (Wazzu got kicked out/left on their own accord).
Your opinion, however, has merit and is shared by others. Of course, you did author a CFB realignment post, iirc. What we’re learning is that it very well could be broken, and it might/will need fixing.
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
That was RollOnYouBears667. I remember I vehemently disagreed with his post.
I'm old enough to understand. Jerks.
by rollonubears on Apr 28, 2009 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions
No, I think you’re by far in the majority. Doesn’t mean it isn’t fun to think about the alternatives.
So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!
Regarding Replacement
If we were to replace Wazzou, I’d want either Utah or Colorado. Both have good or growing fanbases, and both have respectable programs with the potential for great success.
I mentioned yesterday I thought University of British Columbia might be fun, but if we could get around the bureucratic limitations in place, they might be a fun school to add. They do like football up there (not nearly as much as hockey), and Vancouver is a relatively large metroolitan area, easy access to and from, while also maintaining the traditional balance of 2 schools per region (Vancouver might be closer to Seattle than Pullman)
They're after our precious bodily fluids
If there is one place where my wife and I would both drop the Bay Area, it would be for Victoria and UBC. That being said, do they play D1 caliber football up there? The Southeast might seccede from the Union again if we opened up our CFB borders…of course, some might few this as a good thing :)
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
probably not,
but if a team were to enter the Pac-10, would UBC be able to compete 10 years down the road? Would placing a team there >>> develop interest in the sport >>> increase participation by youngsters >>> improve local talent pool >>> begin to compete in the Pac-10 >>> develop more interest >>> circle continues >>> Simba comes back = Profit!!!
Plus, I’ve been noticing lately that slowly some Canadian players have been infiltrating the ranks of the BCS. I know of Boseko Lokombo at Oregon off the top of my head. I know there are others but I can’t think of their names.
Also, this guy agrees with me, http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.phpt=136771 (there is always at least one person on the internet that agrees with me)
They're after our precious bodily fluids
As I said yesterday, UBC is trying to join the NCAA as a divison 2 team. Give them a few years to work their way up if accepted and then consider them for the Pac. I don’t know about their football or basketball teams, but they have had a few players drafted in MLB (Jeff Francis was a top 5 pick, I believe).
I'm old enough to understand. Jerks.
by rollonubears on Apr 28, 2009 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions
Where is everyone?
Did everyone catch the swine flu?
But as to your question:
I’m with the group that thinks keeping the Pac 10 as is, is a good idea. But assuming Wazzu secedes from the Union, I would vote for Utah because their academics seem to be better than the alternatives, plus they have a good basketball program as well. As to the other sports at Utah, they would prolly be equal to Wazzu at the bottom of the barrel in the Pac 10.
by oaktownmario on Apr 28, 2009 10:21 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
feh. replace, and I don't care who.
by the time we get to it, maybe UCDavis is a better alternative. They already play every sport, they are a big time UC, not a CSU as far as academics and off field big time involvement. The only draw back right now is AA football, and that might not be an issue it 20 yrs.
Go Bears Go
That’d be a Baylor in the Big 12 situation. Actually, probably worse.
Bork bork bork!
by Avinash Kunnath on Apr 28, 2009 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions
Be the Pac-9
Football wise, it gives us an extra OOC game and brings back the balanced 8-game conference sked (i.e., 4 home games, 4 away).
Marshawnthusiastic Jahvidtician and member of the PRileytariat.
Carp, did an ex-gf cheat on you with a Pullman grad?
This has to be the fifth or sixth time you’ve advocated kicking Wazzu out of the Pac-10.
Bork bork bork!
by Avinash Kunnath on Apr 28, 2009 12:01 PM PDT reply actions
Maybe it was an ex-sheep.
I am the Tyrant Boy King Of UC Eugene! An endless cavalcade of worthless inanities is my currency!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
your mother is a cougar? or did she slept with another cougar?
They're after our precious bodily fluids
not to be the bringer of bad news but…..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtN1YnoL46Q
They're after our precious bodily fluids
lol wut
not sure I “advocated” (as much as “pointing out the obvious”) and it’s only the 3rd time that I know of.
My general theme on these types of topics is that it’s time for the Pac10 to take off. It can do much better, imo, by using the thing 3 feet above their ass. The Pac10 is coasting and it’s time to put this bitch in gear.
In my eyes, this is not a demotion of sorts. It’s a chance for Wazzu to excel like Boise St, TCU, or Utah. They could go from worst to first.
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
The Pac-10 is the only conference to use the round robin system and they’re coasting?
Bork bork bork!
by Avinash Kunnath on Apr 28, 2009 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
?
cuz round robin system is the best system evair for college football. clearly it’s helped us in our national perception.
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
Then describe coasting. Are you talking about Pac-10 officials not taking things seriously?
Bork bork bork!
by Avinash Kunnath on Apr 28, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t have much time to elaborate, but there are several key areas I think they could improve on / invesitgate:
- TV network (like the Big Ten Network)
- TV contracts / time of day scheduling
- Instituting a “BCS only” OOC schedule
- Expansion w/ 2 divisions and a Conference Championship game
- Bowl contracts
- Encourage improved fan experiences
- Media friendly perks (if they’re media friendly, they’ll get better coverage!)
- Improve marketing
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
This is a whole fanpost of its own. But Ill start here:
- TV network (like the Big Ten Network)
- TV contracts / time of day scheduling
Limited due to time zones.
- Instituting a "BCS only" OOC schedule
A-B-C sked is the way to go.
- Expansion w/ 2 divisions and a Conference Championship game
There are pros and cons, but I see no reason why thats so remarkably better than round robin as to make a change. Further, it shows a lack of perspective regarding the other 40 or so NCAA sports involved in such a move.
- Bowl contracts
Never ever ever ever ever gonna happen unless fans start traveling more and the US shrinks in size.
- Encourage improved fan experiences
- Media friendly perks (if they’re media friendly, they’ll get better coverage!)
- Improve marketing
These are somewhat vague. What is an improved fan experience and how does the Pac10 office get involved with that?
I am the Tyrant Boy King Of UC Eugene! An endless cavalcade of worthless inanities is my currency!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
There needs to be another L.A. bowl game. Make it a major one. Most conferences have a bunch of second tier bowls as options. We have one second tier bowl. And it is in the lower end of the second tier. We need to get a deal with the SEC on a bowl game. Maybe have it in L.A. Maybe another major city. But there needs to be a bowl game matching the number 2’s or the number 3’s of the Pac and the SEC.
I'm old enough to understand. Jerks.
by rollonubears on Apr 28, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions
we should put a bowl in OC. Its big enough, has the facilities, and accomdations to make it work. plus, it puts some separation between it and the rose bowl.
They're after our precious bodily fluids
The short-lived Freedom Bowl was played in the OC in the 1980s/early 1990s.
Marshawnthusiastic Jahvidtician and member of the PRileytariat.
Guess it wasn’t that short-lived.
I didn’t remember that the bowl lasted 11 years. I do remember the Fresno State win over SC, now that I see the info from the link — Trent Dilfer was QB, I believe, and it was (still is?) probably the most significant win in Fresno State history.
Marshawnthusiastic Jahvidtician and member of the PRileytariat.
I sometimes wish that college football fans would have these debates with, at least, a modicum of perspective.
I am the Tyrant Boy King Of UC Eugene! An endless cavalcade of worthless inanities is my currency!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
What do you mean?
I'm old enough to understand. Jerks.
by rollonubears on Apr 28, 2009 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions
You want the SEC number 2 to travel across the country to play a bowl game in LA. Im not even sure what the SEC #2 goes to righ tnow off the top of my head, but I predict strongly there is a 0.0% chance theyll give that January 1st bowl game up to play in a second tier bowl on the other side of America.
I am the Tyrant Boy King Of UC Eugene! An endless cavalcade of worthless inanities is my currency!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
The bowl game I am proposing would be a January 1 game. By 2nd tier I mean non BCS.
Plus, I only said L.A. was an option. I also put ‘Maybe another major city.’ in there. I was thinking somewhere middle of the country. Maybe Chicago? Probably not in January.
But either way, the Pac 10 needs to organize something against the SEC so we can show more legitimacy. Because these are the top 2 conferences in CFB, so there needs to be a bowl game with them facing off. Plus, if it was the Pac-10 #2, we could also prove that we aren’t just USC and the nine dwarves.
This post has crazy thoughts in the title, anyways, so don’t get all frazzled.
I'm old enough to understand. Jerks.
by rollonubears on Apr 28, 2009 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions
I have a bad feeling that Alabama versus Oregon would have ended VERY poorly for the Pac10 this year.
I am the Tyrant Boy King Of UC Eugene! An endless cavalcade of worthless inanities is my currency!
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Would not have been Bama, because they were in a BCS game. Would have been Georgia, who beat MSU by only 12 in their bowl game.
I really think Oregon would have held their own against Georgia.
And Alabama pulled a 2004 Holiday Bowl in the Sugar Bowl.
I'm old enough to understand. Jerks.
by rollonubears on Apr 28, 2009 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions
to comment on your comments
Limited due to time zones.
Regarding scheduling, I don’t see why late morning / early afternoon / late afternoon is so difficult. Bottom line: get the games over with before 11 PM EST.
A lot goes into TV networks. It could bomb. Or it couldn’t. Not sure, but someone should investigate this and some reporter should ask this somebody how things are going on this issue.
A-B-C sked is the way to go.
Yeah that sounds nice on paper. So, I guess Oregon’s playing an A, B, B schedule when really it’s a C+, A/A+, A/A- schecule? My point: Teams/conferences don’t really fit into A, B, C schedules. So, setting the bar on OOC policies would be very impressive by anyone who reads these things. Maybe it’s a no-“C” opponents or maybe it’s A’s only although I doubt one could find enough A opponents nation wide to play 30 games against Pac10 teams.
There are pros and cons, but I see no reason why thats so remarkably better than round robin as to make a change. Further, it shows a lack of perspective regarding the other 40 or so NCAA sports involved in such a move.
A Conference Championship game, imo, will carry the same benefits that the SEC & Big12 get: Two BCS games year in/out. You could counter with the ACC argument, but I’d counter your counter with my opinion that the Pac10 is a superior conference (top to bottom). Put another way, how do we know round robins are better than what I propose? Because it’s the current status quo? Regarding your latter point, you will never ever ever ever find schools that compete in every sport. How do you know most current Pac10 teams do well in the minor sports? The best sport to start with is football, as this drives the money machine and in turn helps the minor sports.
Never ever ever ever ever gonna happen unless fans start traveling more and the US shrinks in size.
Maybe. Maybe not. This new Cotton/BCS bowl might work. A new BCS West Coast Bowl might work. I don’t know. Better bowl games = increased fan interest = increased likeliness to travel.
I think we can do better than El Paso.
These are somewhat vague. What is an improved fan experience and how does the Pac10 office get involved with that?
Yeah, it’s vague cuz I don’t know how it would work. Is it possible to allocate/regulate more funds for this, like improved bleacher “seats” at memorial and non Porta Juan bathrooms? Do we go out of our way to make the media love covering the Pac10? Do we do marketing outside of the Conference of Champions commercial during regional ABC games? Do we have a Heisman fund for one legit candidate per conference as voted on by committee X? All kinds of possibilities here, but I think the main point is clear: Hansen was a b00b, and I hope this Scott chap is ready to rock.
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
really i just hope we get a good tv contract, there is no excuse for the pac-10 to not have at least one nationally televised game of the week, at a decent east coast time, I always thought 5:00 pm pacific, 8:00 pm eastern might work, but I’m sure its more complicated than that.
as for the scheduling, I would like an all BCS schedule, but I feel that is unfair for MWC and WAC participants, I would like to erradicate the scheduling of D-II schools.
They're after our precious bodily fluids
Wilner who is a certified b00b had this to say on why the SEC rules:
Reason No. 1: TV contracts.
Last summer, the conference announced separate 15-year deals with ESPN and CBS (for football and men’s hoops) worth more than $3 billion combined. That breaks down to almost $20 million per school per year in TV money alone.
Add the revenue generated from BCS games and all those ticket sales, and money will be less-than-zero object for the SEC schools when it comes to paying coaches in the coming decade.
My guess is that within two or three seasons, either Meyer or Saban will sign a deal worth more than $7 million a year.
Can we get something even close to this?
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
But let's be honest
The SEC only accomplished this after removing perennial doormat Mississippi State which won the conference title twice in the last dozen years.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Can someone explain to me why the Rugby National Championships are held at the Furd?
On top of totally sucking in this sport, you’d think that calling a forfeit against your bitter rival (because you were afraid of your players getting hurt) would disqualify you from hosting this event.
Because they have the best facilities in the nation. Alledgedly.
Joe Starkey...Scholar, Humanitarian, Cal legend, worst radio play by play man of all time.
by Fire Starkey on Apr 28, 2009 2:11 PM PDT up reply actions
I hate the idea of changing the Pac-10 for anything at all
But if your scenario were to happen I vote for replacing Wazzu with Utah
In other words, Go Bears!
Academics are a non-issue here
here is how the Pac-10 stacks up academically:
Cal
Stanfurd
.
.
.
.
UCLA
.
.
.
.
USC
Washington
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Arizona
Oregon
Washington State
Oregon State
ASU
So it’s not like any school you bring in would bring our academic reputation down.
UDub’s better than that, aren’t they? Oregon St’s a smidge better, but your overall point is valid.
Heaps and Hinder...come on down!
Ok, dream on, dude
I know this is a Cal blog, but… no. Wrong.
Linda's in the cold ground, won't see her anymore
Somewhere out on the highway tonight, the drunken engines roar
It's just one of those things, one of those things
-- Al Stewart, "Accident on 3rd St."
In memory of Nick Adenhart and all victims of drunk driving
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
GoldenBlogs' FAQ and Community Guidelines
Related FanPosts on California Golden Blogs
Related FanShots on California Golden Blogs
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
About Us
• About the Golden Bloggers
• Our previous site @ Blogsome
• Avinash @ Bears Necessity
• Best of the Golden Blogs
• Golden Blogs Interviews
• HydroTech's Cal Football Analyses
• Ron Fimrite's Anatomy Of A Miracle
• CGB Weekly Guides
• GoldenBlogs' Community Guidelines
• GoldenBlogs' FAQ
• CGB GIF Army
Learn More About The California Golden Blogs Clothing Store
Pac-12 On SBN
Pacific Takes (Pac-12) NORTH AddictedToQuack: (Oregon)
UW Dawg Pound: (Washington)
CougCenter: (Washington State)
BuildingTheDam: (Oregon State)
Rule Of Tree: (Stanford)
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: (Cal)
SOUTH
BruinsNation: (UCLA)
ConquestChronicles: (USC)
HouseOfSparky: (ASU)
Arizona Desert Swarm: (Arizona)
TheRalphieReport: (Colorado)
Block U: (Utah)
Golden Bears Football Schedule
| Fresno St. | Sat 09/03 | W 36 - 21 |
@
Colorado
|
Sat 09/10 | W 36 - 33 |
| Presbyterian | Sat 09/17 | W 63 - 12 |
|
@
Washington
|
Sat 09/24 | L 23 - 31 |
|
@
Oregon
|
Thu 10/06 | L 15 - 43 |
|
USC
|
Thu 10/13 | L 9 - 30 |
|
Utah
|
Sat 10/22 | W 34 - 10 |
|
@
UCLA
|
Sat 10/29 | L 14 - 31 |
|
Washington St.
|
Sat 11/05 | W 30 - 7 |
|
Oregon St.
|
Sat 11/12 | W 23 - 6 |
|
@
Stanford
|
Sat 11/19 | L 28 - 31 |
|
@
Arizona St.
|
Fri 11/25 | W 47 - 38 |
|
@
Texas
|
Wed 12/28 | L 10 - 21 |
Pacific-12 Conference Standings
(updated 1.2.2012 at 11:12 PM PST)
| North | Conf | Overall | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| W | L | W | L | |
|
Oregon Ducks
|
8 | 1 | 12 | 2 |
|
Stanford Cardinal
|
8 | 1 | 11 | 2 |
|
Washington Huskies
|
5 | 4 | 7 | 6 |
|
California Golden Bears
|
4 | 5 | 7 | 6 |
|
Oregon St. Beavers
|
3 | 6 | 3 | 9 |
|
Washington St. Cougars
|
2 | 7 | 4 | 8 |
| South | Conf | Overall | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| W | L | W | L | |
|
USC Trojans
|
7 | 2 | 10 | 2 |
|
UCLA Bruins
|
5 | 4 | 6 | 8 |
|
Utah Utes
|
4 | 5 | 8 | 5 |
|
Arizona St. Sun Devils
|
4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
|
Arizona Wildcats
|
2 | 7 | 4 | 8 |
|
Colorado Buffaloes
|
2 | 7 | 3 | 10 |
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
