Cal, Furd to Pac-12 North? Could Our USC and UCLA Rivalries Be Ending?
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 14, 2010 11:30 PM PDT
in California Golden Bears Football
Email
PrintFrom anticipation to shock to despair. I guess Cal fans are used to this, so you'd better sit down at this grim rumor.
Figures we should have yet another surreal bit of news in a day full of surreal news stories. Block U is pretty firm in its belief that Utah will be receiving an invite very soon, so the Pac-12 is probably happening (of course, we all thought the Pac-16 was happening). The biggest news developing? The potential breakup of the California schools. Cal and the Furd could end up in the Pac-12 North while USC and UCLA find themselves on the other side of the bracket.
Sources close to C.U. have told CBS4 Sports the Buffs are projected to be in a 6 team division in the new Pac-10. The Buffs will be joined by USC, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State and probably Utah, which is expected to receive an invitation to join the Pac-10.
...
The remaining teams in the conference that will make up the Pac-10 North are: Cal-Berkeley (WTF. WHAT OTHER CAL IS THERE?), Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
This perplexes me a little geographically (I don't know any map where Boulder and Salt Lake City are south of the Bay Area), but it makes sense financially--stacking one division full of California schools would've been very unbalanced in terms of television, recruiting, ticket interest, you name it. Cal, UCLA & USC have dominated Pac-10 TV football telecasts for much of the last decade, and there was no way the Northwest schools would've agreed to this sort of division unless they got at least two of the four California schools on their side of the bracket to guarantee better distribution and ability to recruit in the southern markets.
Additionally, they learn from the Big 12's mistake of having all the Texas schools placed on one side of the conference. By default that transferred the center of gravity to the Big 12 South, part of the reason Colorado and Nebraska were eager to flee the conference in the first place. The more geographical breakup of divisions would've relegated the Pacific Twelve Northern division to an inferior position while the Pacific Twelve Southern division would've prospered.
The biggest beneficiaries athletically have to be USC & UCLA. The two schools no longer have to make their dreaded northwest stops to the Oregon schools every year (and now with Washington rising, they don't have to worry about them either until the conference title) and who knows what happens with their Bay Area ties. Utah would be their most daunting challenger, but it's a far cry from the madness of Autzen or Husky Stadium. Both of those schools with their vast Los Angeles and Southern California recruiting pools are in prime position to dominate their division if they have the coaching to make it work.
The biggest losers have to be us (well the Furd too, but no one cares about the Furd). We do have to make the northwest stops, and even though we've won at every one of those stadiums the past decade, those are FAR tougher places to play than the LA schools or the Arizonas. We've only won once in Autzen, and we haven't won in Seattle since 2005.
But the biggest issue for us would be the dissolution of our traditional matchups with USC and UCLA. If we move to an eight game conference schedule, there's no way we'd play each other every year anymore. A nine game schedule allows for flexibility (maybe play both of them with one flex opponent, or one of them alternating years?), but the mere possibility of losing these rivalries would be a tough pill to swallow. The Northwest schools will want their LA matchups too, and there just aren't enough games to go around. Someone is going to lose in this scenario, and Cal could be hurt.
The other potentially feasible breakup of divisions came from Scootie, who gave this zipper division format:
What the Zipper looks like if done true east/west for each rivalry
East:
Washington state
Oregon state
Stanford
USC
Arizona
ColoradoWest:
Washington
UCLA
Cal
Oregon
Arizona State
UtahThe idea of the zipper is that it is a logical split that splits up the rivalries. Unless it’s the world’s most complicated zipper, it sort of has to go up the center of each of them. If it’s done any way other than east/west, it would be a bit odd, don’t you think? Hot colors/cool colors? North/south in the rivalries? That would be North: WSU, OSU, Cal, UCLA, ASU, and Utah, and South: UW, Oregon, Stanford, USC, Arizona and Colorado. I’d like our chances of winning the division, but doubt the Souths would go for it. :)
This way every California school would be guaranteed at LEAST two opponents, as the rivalry games would be played at the end of the year and each team (and safe to say that the California schools steer the wagon in the Pac-10 now that Texas is out of our crosshairs). The Northwest schools each get two games against California schools. Logistically, everything works...except one division looks mildly prettier than the other in terms of the sexy matchups (hint: It's not the one with USC in it).
I didn't like the zipper scenario too much the first time I saw it. I like it a lot more now, as every Golden Bear in California ponders the possible end of our state football rivalries eight decades old.
189 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I’m pretty certain that all four will push for a rule requiring all the California series to continue annually even as interdivisional games. Furthermore I think it’s something that would be essential for getting the best TV contract. While Furd-SC and Furd-UCLA are not big games, Cal-USC and Cal-UCLA are pretty big games and even attract some national attention.
I would not be surprised if we had to play one game per year against an LA school (like the FSU-Miami interdivision game). But in this form I’d doubt we’d play both and I’d figure it’d be on a rotating basis. And I’d have to believe we’d stick with a nine game schedule or otherwise interdivision scheduling gets really inflexible.
And our regional games are pattycakes compared to the money a conference championship game would bring in ($12 to $15 million a year if Wilner’s are right). Our rivalries would be small casualties in the big picture.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 14, 2010 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions
Sorry, few typos
*nine game conference schedule and here’s the link to Wilner’s numbers
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 14, 2010 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions
one more scheduling idea
North: WSU, Washington, Oregon, OSU
South: Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah
California: Cal, Stanford, USC, UCLA
3 within pod, 3 each on the other pods
but how do you determine rankings and champions?
No idea, which is why it has no chance of happening.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 14, 2010 11:49 PM PDT up reply actions
…do you ever practice sitting on a throne, you know, just in case?
Cal Football: Some things, you just accept, repress, and move on.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jun 15, 2010 12:20 AM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
dude, that just seriously cracked me up.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions
The crown is heavy, I must admit.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 15, 2010 12:29 AM PDT up reply actions
I really like this idea. The winners of each pod’s conference record would be compared and the top 2 would play in a championship game. In case of any ties, the current tie breaker rules for who goes to the Rose Bowl could be applied.
by BornOnThePlay on Jun 15, 2010 1:42 PM PDT up reply actions
I said this in the other thread, but there will be a bloody revolt to make sure the California schools play one another.
I think this is all moot anyway, because even Tom Hansen knows you can’t leave out games between the #2 and #6 media markets.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 14, 2010 11:48 PM PDT reply actions
I’m not sure how it would work. Having mandatory games between the California schools would completely screw up the divisional scheduling. The northwest schools would literally have to be ok with never playing LA, which I know they’re not.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 14, 2010 11:55 PM PDT up reply actions
The whims of the northwest schools are a secondary concern to scheduling the most compelling games. They can play neutral site games in LA all they want.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 12:02 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm sorry
If you want to talk about scheduling the most “compelling” games, Oregon-USC is going to draw far more viewers nationally than Cal-USC
--Dave
Addicted to Quack, SBN's Oregon Ducks blog
by David Piper on Jun 15, 2010 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Next year? Probably
But historically Cal-USC has had the biggest draw of any Pac-10 game.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 15, 2010 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
*over the past decade at the least.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 15, 2010 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
We’d have to do something like Tennessee does with Alabama, who play every year despite being in different divisions. At the very least, we have to play SC every year. ucla rotating I could live with.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 12:13 AM PDT up reply actions
I actually had no idea this happened re: Tennessee and ’Bama.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
the third saturday in october game.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions
Threre’s some precedent for the “mandatory games.” When the Pac-10 devised the mandatory 8 game conference season (where everybody would miss playing only one other conference member) back in the late 1980s, there was a concern that the master rotation would mean interruption of the series between the California schools. The Pac-10 made a special exception so that the California schools never “missed” one another and the master schedule was changed accordingly. (Maintaining Oregon vs. Washington might have been contemplated, too; I don’t remember specifically.)
However, maintaining “mandatory games” in fashionining an 8-game conference sked is one thing. Trying to do it for a 12-team league with divisions seems to me to be an entirely different animal. I don’t think it can be done fairly.
Yes, I am an Old Blue. Now get off my lawn.
Diluted Pac-16?
I don’t like the idea of Cal/Stanford not playing UCLA/USC annually. I would even stomach having to add 5 more teams to form a Pac-16 if we could somehow manage to keep the old Pac-8 together. The new Pac-16 would consist something of….
Pac-West Division: Cal, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State (pacific coast division)
Pac-East Division: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Colorado State, Utah, Utah State, New Mexico, New Mexico State (four corners division)
Blahhhh. Anything to prevent the elimination of the California rivalries.
by The Trojan Bear on Jun 15, 2010 12:10 AM PDT reply actions
I agree. Add in Duke, Temple, Buffalo, anyone to get to 16 and keep the Pac-8 playing each other every year.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 12:15 AM PDT up reply actions
As I said in the post
The northwest schools don’t want to lose the TV revenue and continued inroads to California recruiting. The only way they would have greenlighted expansion is if Scott provided those concessions.
Considering most of the schools up there do most of their headhunting in the Bay Area, we were the logical choices to take.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 15, 2010 12:16 AM PDT up reply actions
You're thinking too small: Pac-20!
Take the existing Pac-10 and call it Serie A, relegating Washington State, Arizona State, and NCAA-sanctioned USC to a new Serie B.
Colorado, Utah, and Boise State then join the other Pac-10 teams in Serie A, while seven additional western teams (BYU, Nevada, Fresno State, Hawaii, etc.) round out Serie B alongside the Cougs, Sun Devils, and Trojans.
We keep the nine-game, round-robin schedule within each division, and at the end of the year, the top three teams in B are promoted to A, whose bottom three teams are relegated to B.
Go Bears!
by California Pete on Jun 15, 2010 7:28 AM PDT up reply actions
Nah, not complicated enough.
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jun 15, 2010 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions
We need 5 pods with rotating rivals, and a three-legged sack race to determine home field advantage in the championship game.
Sharks with frickin' lasers
"it's like an alarm clock, WOOT WOOT!" -Bubb Rubb
by secret ASian man on Jun 15, 2010 11:00 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Ferreting
It will not be fair unless there are a lot of ferrets.
Sancto Tedford
by Anonymous IV at Mono Lake on Jun 15, 2010 9:18 PM PDT up reply actions
I have a very very very difficult time believing this report from a random Denver TV station. This is pretty much the most illogical way to split the teams, and I have a hard time believing any of the four California schools would support it. I’m not getting worked up about this until Larry Scott says so.
Damn. It’s an outrage. Every year I look forward to the Cal-SC game. And especially seeing Cal stomp on UCLA and USC trample the Furd.
No continuation of the California rivalries makes me a very angry Pac-10 fan.
by The Trojan Bear on Jun 15, 2010 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions
It isn’t totally illogical, but yes, it does some like the California schools wouldn’t agree to this either.
Then again, when we signed up for Pac-10 expansion, we knew someone was going to lose out on something.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 15, 2010 12:32 AM PDT up reply actions
I think it’s very logical in the sense that the desire of the other 8 teams to get guaranteed games each year in California trumped the CA school’s desire to get guaranteed games against each other.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
by norcalnick on Jun 15, 2010 7:21 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
One other thing — I don’t think we (Cal) have all that much pull in the Pac-10. I would say USC, Oregon, UCLA and UW all have more, but I also think it’s a conference where nobody, save maybe poor Wazzu, is ignored. And I can’t believe Sandy isn’t going to stomp her feet and scream bloody murder if the only games she is guaranteed to sell out every year are canceled.
Since Cal and ucla have the same regents, wouldn’t we have the same amount of power as they do? The regents have final say on all policies and could force any move concerning the 2 schools. And since our media market is larger than the northwest, I’d say we have more leverage than any of the northwest schools. Plus the conference office is right in our backyard. Sandy can continue paying a house call to make sure larry hears the message loud and clear.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 12:31 AM PDT up reply actions
Interestingly, it’s not the regents, but the Chancellors who have a seat at the table. No idea on who UCLA’s chancellor is or what he/she is like, but UCLA has heaps more athletic prestige than we do, across the board.
God that just hurt to type.
I wonder how SC fans feel about this mess. They seem so preoccupied with their sanctions that they’re being totally blinded by the bigger picture. It seems like they send a lot of fans to the Bay Area so they can’t be too thrilled if they were paying any attention.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 12:43 AM PDT up reply actions
On the bright side...
We’re on the side with 100% old school Pac-8 schools.
But… that’s pretty much the only bright spot.
PS: Voted the wrong choice. Meant to vote “I don’t like it, but it’s a necessary evil.”
"Today's weather, excessively violent with a chance of dismemberment. Tune in later for our 5-day forecast!"
~ Three Dog - Fallout 3
Even before I read this, the thought actually occurred to me...
…that the North/South split described above (separating the California schools) could be an option. The more I thought about it, the resulting “demise” of the rivalries vs. the southern California schools really didn’t bother me. If we play them under an interdivisional opponent rotation, I’m okay with that. The only traditional rivalry that I care about continuing uninterrupted is the Big Game.
Under the North/South scenario, we’d play 5 conference games vs. our division, leaving at least 3 (and maybe 4 if we keep the 9-game conference sked) against the other division. We’d probably go two years max without playing at least one of the L.A. schools, and there’s prolly a way to schedule it so that we play at least one of them every year.
Yes, I am an Old Blue. Now get off my lawn.
turn it green!
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Interesting article on the political aspect of this, which has gone underappreciated:
Now we know why this realignment went into warp speed. The ultimatum to Nebraska 11 days ago. The quick invitation to Colorado last week. The scheduled regents meetings at UT and Tech today. The Longhorns were trying to outrun their politicos.
Don’t forget, politics stopped Texas’ interest in joining the Pac-10 15 years ago. This time, Texas appears to have misplayed its hand. If UT wanted to go to the Pac-10, it needed A&M as an accomplice. The Aggies should have been brought into the fold earlier.
Instead, A&M gets the last laugh. The Aggies upset Texas’ grand plan.
Some say Texas tried to strong-arm other schools in this affair. In the end, Texas got strong-armed itself.
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
I don’t think Texas got strong-armed at all. They got their own network, which is what they wanted.
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jun 15, 2010 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions
yeah but it’s clear their conference is unsustainable. Where to put the over/under on the Big12ish? 5 years? 10?
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
That will simply enable them to get an even better deal a few years down the line. It’s not like they’re ISU or Baylor and have to worry if a major conference will take them if the BigXII falls apart.
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jun 15, 2010 9:50 AM PDT up reply actions
my only comment on that...
if they do want this deal to go through as fast as they can… they should have placed a plug on the “leak” that been feeding Chip Brown. The first time the story of the alignment broke out, yes that probably could not prevented. But if they really wanted to make it to move without a lot of outside influences, they would have tried to minimize further leaks.
by ximiankernel on Jun 15, 2010 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions
Texas Tech (the president and BOR) is supposed to be absolutely furious about how this deal went down. Especialy the part where UO, Texas, and A&M are guaranteed $20 mil, but everyone else is forced to fight out the rest of the pie.
Maybe Texas Tech can be convinced to join Pac conference? They would make a nice addition and give us a foothold into the Texas market.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 8:52 AM PDT up reply actions
I do wonder how much of the Texas market Tech delivers. The message boards all seem to acknowledge a much bigger alumni base (particularly in Dallas-Fort Worth) than I have given them credit for. Of course the problem with Tech is they aren’t a Tier 1 school yet.
CommonCensus Sports Poll
College Football Team Allegiance by Area
200 Miles Diameter from Berkeley, CA
Cal – 34.6%, Stanford 12.4%, UM 3.6%, UCLA 3.4%, USC 3.1%
200 Miles Diameter from Los Angeles, CA
UCLA 20.3%, USC 19.1%, SDSU 8.6%, Cal 5.1%, ND 3.6%
50 Miles Diameter from Los Angeles, CA
UCLA 26.7%, USC 24.3%, Cal 4.5%, ND 3.0%, UM 2.6%
200 Miles Diameter from College Station, TX
A&M 37.8%, UT 29.7%, Tech 5.9%, Houston 2.5%, Rice 2.2%
200 Miles Diameter from Austin, TX
UT 47.9%, A&M 22.0%, Tech 6.7%, tOSU 1.4%, Rice 1.4%
200 Miles Diameter from Lubbock, TX
Tech 71.3%, A&M 14.0%, UT 5.3%, OU 2.7%, TCU 1.3%
200 Miles Diameter from Dallas, TX
A&M 19.8%, UT 17.7%, Tech 12.7%, North Texas 9.8%, TCU 8.5%
UM??
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jun 15, 2010 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions
The long arm of Michigan!
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 15, 2010 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Wow, greater than UCLA AND U$C. That’s impressive for such a currently crummy team.
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jun 15, 2010 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions
200 Miles Diameter from Los Angeles, CA
UCLA 20.3%, USC 19.1%, SDSU 8.6%, Cal 5.1%, ND 3.6%
Channeling my inner Dave Barr:
SAN DIEGO STINKING STATE?!?!
Yes, I am an Old Blue. Now get off my lawn.
San Diego itself is < 200 miles from LA. The Bay Area is not.
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jun 15, 2010 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions
Hmm, on the other hand, they said diameter, not radius. Still, that would put the circle to within 20 miles of downtown SD.
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jun 15, 2010 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions
This is why I was vehemently opposed to expansion. But my hopes were slightly high with Pac-16 and now this fucking shit
In other words, Go Bears!
I'm sorry Roy.
We were all treated like bitches in this thing.
California Golden Blogs! It`s dat Woo WHOOOOO!
I can’t understand why this won’t work:
West
UDub
Oregon
Oregon St
Stanfraid
Cal
UCLA
East
Wazzu
Colorado
Utah
ASU
Arizona
USC
Puts the dominant team in a weaker conference and legitimate challengers of the dominant team in the other conference. An epic conf. championship game for sure and will not be “the winner of the Big12S is the winner of the Big12” kind of model. Everyone gets an LA trip (really, that’s where the recruits are) and the Apple Cup and the Victory Bell will be played as an out of division game which means those 4 schools rotate through the other division less (the only real negative). With a conference championship game, however, does that really matter?
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
All-Time Winning Percentage of Pac-10 Schools
1. USC…705
2. Washington…616
3. Arizona State…615 *includes when they were apart of the WAC
6. UCLA…587
7. Arizona…571 *includes when they were apart of the WAC
8. Cal…565
9. Stanfurd…559
10. Oregon…545
11. Wazzou…503
12. Oregon State…483
4. Colorado…608
5. Utah…592
Grouping the schools based on rankings
1. USC
4. Colorado
5. Utah
8. Cal
9. Stanfurd
12. Oregon State
2. Washington
3. Arizona State
6. UCLA
7. Arizona
10. Oregon
11. Wazzou
no conclusions, just reformatting available data. I think Utah can be justifiably placed anywhere, simply because their all-time winning percentage is skewed having been in the MWC and WAC. Granted I fully believe the MWC is a good conference now, but prior to the last half of this decade they weren’t and neither was the WAC.
Pick your poison
either we give up the rivalrly with the Washington/Oregon people, or with the LA people.
How about just CA and AZ in the South, everything else in North?
I don't get the shock and dismay...
For the past week, everyone was all fired up to completely destroy the Pac-10’s culture and traditions by bringing in a bunch of wahoos from Texas and Oklahoma.
Now you’re upset about THIS? It’s minor by comparison. It’s a little itsby bitsy tweak compared to the heresy you folks were hootin’ and hollerin’ about.
by Monica's Dad on Jun 15, 2010 9:46 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
I’d say the Pac-16 would actually have been less of a tweak. The Pac-8 schools would have had their own cohesive division and there would have been a round robin within it. Now we don’t get the benefits of Texas but we still have to do divisions and a championship game.
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jun 15, 2010 9:52 AM PDT up reply actions
We could always stand pat at 11 like the Big 10 did for years.
And they didn’t have divisions or a championship game.
by Monica's Dad on Jun 15, 2010 9:57 AM PDT up reply actions
I admire your love for the purity and traditions of sports.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Thanks carp. I've been admiring my love all day myself.
That doesn’t sound weird, does it?
by Monica's Dad on Jun 15, 2010 11:19 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, but at least that makes sense for the SoCal schools.
I mean, they’re a lot closer to Arizona than they are to Seattle. Heck, we might even be closer to Arizona than Seattle. But I think when you have to start taking thousand-mile cross-country flights to play your conference rivals, then things might be just a little out of whack.
by Monica's Dad on Jun 15, 2010 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions
Great point
Simply examine the sort of influence that Texas wanted in the Pac 10 and be thankful that it didn’t happen just yet. Simply wait a few years for the Big 12 to officially implode (ala the Southwest Conference in 1995) so there is some added leverage when Texas comes back to negotiating table.
by BuffsFan99 on Jun 15, 2010 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
"This perplexes me a little geographically" ?
Dude, does it make any less geographical sense than having teams in Oklahoma and Texas in the Pacific-10 Conference?
Suddenly geography matters again.
More on the SEC model. It looks like each team has a permanent inter-division rival. So, the following teams play every year:
Alabama-Tennessee
Auburn-Georgia
Arkansas-South Carolina
LSU-Florida
Miss-Vanderbilt
Miss St-Kentucky
Nice way to continue rivalries in a divisional format.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 10:01 AM PDT reply actions
Who would you prefer to keep, USC or UCLA?
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 15, 2010 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions
It’s a tough call, but I think if it comes down to keeping one team it would have to be UCLA.
But really, I can’t see the conference doing anything to touch the California rivalries. The alumni bases of Cal/UCLA/Stanford/USC have so much more cash than any of the other schools that it’s hard to see the Pac-10 screwing them over. There are a considerable number of baby boomers who will die in the next 10-20 years who have probably apportioned a significant portion of their estate to one of these universities. You do not want to piss these people off and expanding the league at the expense of these rivalries will do just that. My apologies to the rest of the Pac-10 schools, but we don’t really care about you guys that much.
I predict we’ll have a California rule, and maybe an Oregon rule (guaranteed to play USC and Cal every year) because Phil Knight has the cash.
There are a considerable number of baby boomers who will die in the next 10-20 years who have probably apportioned a significant portion of their estate to one of these universities.
That is a seriously morbid thing to say. I don’t think the baby boomers are 10 years away from dying in mass numbers yet.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions
The average life expectancy for men in this country is roughly 75. Baby boomers are people born from 1945-1960ish. My parents are boomers, I know what’s on the horizon, but I’m sorry if I ruined your day.
Speaking as a baby boomer, I don’t plan on ever dying. Just to spite you, Hombre!
Exit, Pursued By A Bear
Haha, I just figure that life expectancy among men would be at least 80 years among the Cal subset of the population, so with the oldest baby boomers just reaching 65 now, the bulk of the baby boomers still have a good ways to go.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions
For sure SC. I’d say Cal-SC is the marquee Pac-10 game outside of the 5 pairs of in-state rivals. SC-Washington would be the runner-up, but the NorCal vs. SoCal backdrop makes it more intense.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 10:15 AM PDT up reply actions
What I find awesome is that Cal-SC played the first game at the Rose Bowl in 1922 with Cal winning 12-0. ucla didn’t even start playing there until the 1980s.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions
UCLA
Why does everyone seem to love getting smashed on by USC every year?! I started school in ‘04, so I’ve never even seen us beat them.
And all the SC sluts try to take over SF that weekend. I guess that can be seen as a positive by some…
by Another Failed Tedford QB on Jun 15, 2010 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah. The quoted zipper has OSU and WSU in the same zip and that doesn’t seem likely. More feasible would be something like:
Washington, Oregon State, Cal, UCLA, Arizona State, Colorado
Washington State, Oregon, Stanfurd, U$C, Arizona, Utah
Then rivals play every year plus let’s go with 2 other games within the conference. We’d miss 3 of the unscheduled 5 each season.
Today's the day the teddy bears have their picnic.
One tweak to this could be the addition of another permanent rivalry. In my sample split, we could call dibs on U$C in addition to Stanfurd, Washington could grab Oregon, …
Today's the day the teddy bears have their picnic.
The one issue here is that you’re assuming there would be 9 conference games. I only see 8 if indeed there will be a CG. Otherwise, a team would play 10 conference games on the BCS, so the chances of a team making it through to the title game are basically zero.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 10:22 AM PDT up reply actions
wait i’m wrong on that, i wasn’t counting properly. 5 divsion games plus inter-division is 8 total.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 10:23 AM PDT up reply actions
As big an issue for me . . .
Is that this reported divisional set up seems way to favorable to USC. At least given the current power structure, the North is much tougher than the South.
Actually, the opposite of how Cal is north of Colorado & Utah.
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jun 15, 2010 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions
Since the formation of the North American landmass?
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jun 15, 2010 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions
wow…just looked at a map. I forgot that the rest of the world doesn’t consider 101-N to be true north.
by Oski4Heisman on Jun 15, 2010 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions
I figure this is how it would work, right?
8-game conference schedule. Cal would play the 5 teams in its division every year, and would play 3 of the other 6 (including one LA school each year) every year.
Example schedules:
2012:
UCLA
ASU
Utah
plus division games: Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
2013:
USC
Arizona
Colorado
Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
You're going to find a significant portion of Cal fans enjoy tradition
They wanted the big kahuna, and if they didn’t get it they didn’t want the minimal expansion.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 15, 2010 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions
Er…um…Just make sure not to refer to yourselves as “UC” and we’ll be fine.
by Oski4Heisman on Jun 15, 2010 11:19 PM PDT up reply actions
I think the North/South idea (with CA split into each division) is going to be good for Cal. We don’t have to beat both Utah and USC, and we don’t have to travel crazy distances. ASU and UCLA will become stronger, and I think Oregon will become weaker (and frankly, I’m not impressed with them on the road).
North Division = Rose Bowl, Rose Bowl, Rose Bowl
The latest rumble seems to be that Texas Tech is the lone holdout in the new Big12-2 conference. While it certainly seems like a small chance that they bolt for the Pac-10, at least they can negotiate better terms for themselves. Smart move.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 11:24 AM PDT reply actions
Rumor is that the leftover 5 [Mizzou, Kansas, K-St, Iowa St, Baylor] agreed to fork over all penalty cash from Nebraska and Colorado to Texas, A&M, and OU. Talk about a modern day fiefdom…
Makes me feel like Texas is behaving worse than Notre Dame ever has.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 11:44 AM PDT reply actions
Texas is pretty much the new Notre Dame
They just have a conference to feast upon now. Quite sad, and bordering on extortion.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 15, 2010 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions
I can’t believe that Texas is so hung up on the steer and queer network. You don’t see Ohio State trying to form their own network, even though they probably could. By giving Indiana and Northwestern an equal cut, they keep all conference teams unified and happy.
In this morning’s press conference, UT president Powers seriously used opera as an example of what might also be aired on the network. So apparently expanding opera coverage is the main driver in all this.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions
It's all about power
Texas now has what Notre Dame used to have a decade or two ago—the inside track to the biggest games with easier schedules. All they have to do is beat Oklahoma (like ND had to beat USC) and they’re in great shape to get annual trips to the BCS. Which’ll lead to more money and more power for Texas. Fun fun fun!
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 15, 2010 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Funny — the rumor I just heard from a Big1T1en guy is that (1) UT, TAMU, TT, OU, and OSU get a piece of the penalty cash, but that UT and OU get a substantially higher share, (2) the rest of the Big 12 Lite get nothing, and (3) TT and the schools who get nothing are pissed.
Yes, I am an Old Blue. Now get off my lawn.
UCLA - USC - Cal Rivalry
UCLA and USC are not really rivalry games. 10 years ago USC was an also ran as was UCLA. The stadiums were not full when we played (true they were more full than any other team we played) and there wasn’t a feeling of this could make or break our season.
That being said, without these games I have no reason to ever go down to that soul sucking desert known as Los Angeles and that trip will be missed.
And remember "Go Cal"
Seriously. a number of people don’t seem to care about losing these games, but Cal playing UCLA, USC, Oregon, etc., those games are the best part of watching Cal football. It’s the reason the season is fun! The fact is that Cal isn’t going to be winning the Pac-10 and going to the BCS every year, even if we avoid playing USC. These potential realignment plans are taking away games that I look forward to for an entire year.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
Why do I get the idea that the Big XXII just PLAYED the Pac-10?
They got to unload a school (CU) that wasn’t pulling its weight revenue-wise, thus splitting the new TV contract between fewer schools. Meanwhile, the Pac-10 now has one more mouth to feed — and it’s currently a weak program in both football and basketball.
The Big XXII also instantly became a better basketball conference than the Pac-10…
“as a 10-team league, the Big 12 would be more profitable and would be one of the top basketball conferences in the country. The source said the remaining Big 12 schools will play a true round-robin 18-game schedule, much like the Pac-10 does in its current form.”
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5286816
We had something good, but we got all greedy. I wouldn’t be surprised if the whole charade was cooked up by Mack Brown and his conference stooge Beebe.
It might have been a good short-term strategy, but long term, they lost 2 major markets (Denver and SLC) to the Pac-10. Colorado won’t always be a bottom-feeder.
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jun 15, 2010 12:56 PM PDT up reply actions
I wouldn't trust the spin from ESPN
given that they’re not really unbiased in this instance.
Here is an interesting reflection from a website of Texas fans
http://www.burntorangenation.com/2010/6/15/1519233/realignment-roundtable#storyjump
The discussants seem to recognize the missed opportunity, cash and conference, of the offer even as they note that Texas took care of itself in the end. Some of the comments disagree, saying the Great Western Conference was a bad idea for UT – the Big XII is something Texas can dominate and is the easiest road to a BCS title (and look at all the money).
I think in the short term Texas will feel good about this: it avoided the difficulty of change and the threat of being in a bigger pond with resultant lack of control and more competition. And all the money helps (if it does indeed show up.)
But in the long term I don’t think being a big fish in a small pond is where a national university wants to be, for sports or otherwise. Notre Dame is a cautionary example – it can schedule a lot of crummy football games to inflate its record, but in the end it ended up lowering its game. Or another way to look at it – if Texas stubs its toe against a conference rival its bid for the national championship is over, and since its conference doesn’t mean much, that is all it is playing for. Moreover, if there is ever a tie between Texas and a team from another conference, Texas will be presumed the less worthy. And that’s just football.
The Texas A&M people are funny. See this discussion thread:
http://www.iamthe12thman.com/2010/6/15/1518669/diatribe
A lot of angst over the missed opportunity to bail on the University of Texas and join up with the like-minded people of the SEC.
jh
Why Wait on Inviting Utah?
Aren’t there two empty spots in the Big 12 North? Could the Big 12 theoretically invite both Utah and BYU, as they don’t have the hang-ups the Pac-10 does about religious schools. Wouldn’t this be preferable to Utah, as their rival would stay in their conference. Also, if you’re Beebe, its pretty delicious revenge against Larry Scott.
I say invite Utah now. What do we gain by waiting?
Agreed.
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jun 15, 2010 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Larry needs to spend some time with the consigliere at Tahoe.
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions
We’re going to invite Nevada???
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 15, 2010 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions
Lake Tahoe State
California Football. At home in Strawberry Canyon since 1923.
by CaliforniaEternal on Jun 15, 2010 2:24 PM PDT up reply actions
The BigX’s survival is not yet guaranteed. He’s probably waiting for all the schools to commit in writing. Basically everyone but Texas and A&M are getting the shaft, so if the magic TV deal is actually just bullshit CGB apocalypse resumes.
Top 50 U.S. Media Markets
1 New York
2 Los Angeles
3 Chicago
4 Philadelphia
5 Boston
6 San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose
7 Dallas-Ft. Worth
8 Washington, DC
9 Atlanta
10 Houston
11 Detroit
12 Tampa-St. Petersburg
13 Seattle-Tacoma
14 Phoenix
15 Minneapolis-St. Paul
16 Cleveland-Akron
17 Miami-Ft. Lauderdale
18 Denver
19 Sacramento-Stockton-Modesto
20 Orlando-Daytona Beach
21 St. Louis
22 Pittsburgh
23 Portland, Oregon
24 Baltimore
25 Indianapolis
26 San Diego
27 Charlotte
28 Hartford-New Haven
29 Raleigh-Durham
30 Nashville
31 Kansas City, Missouri
32 Columbus, Ohio
33 Milwaukee
34 Cincinnati
35 Greenville-Spartanburg, Asheville, Anderson
36 Salt Lake City
37 San Antonio
38 West Palm Beach-Ft. Pierce
39 Grand Rapids-Kalamazoo
40 Birmingham
41 Harrisburg-Lancaster
42 Norfolk-Portsmouth-Newport News
43 New Orleans
44 Memphis
45 Oklahoma City
46 Albuquerque-Santa Fe
47 Greensboro-High Point-Winston Salem, NC
48 Las Vegas
49 Buffalo
50 Louisville, KY
Today's the day the teddy bears have their picnic.
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2010/06/15/pac-10-expansion-the-texas-conspiracy-theory/
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Don’t worry folks, Jon WIlner is on top of everything. Reporter extrordinaire. Next stop, Pulitzer City.
slow…methodical….sarcastic….clapping.
http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/10504/so-whats-next-with-pac-10-expansion
Uncle Ted says a North-South split is most likely:
“Now, with Utah likely to soon join Colorado as the conference expands to 12 teams, there are some complications, starting with how the teams will be split up into divisions.
A North-South split appears most likely. In fact, the Boulder Daily Camera reported that Colorado was previously promised a spot in a South division if the 12-team scenario with Utah prevailed. That means the South would include Colorado, Utah, Arizona, Arizona State, USC and UCLA.
That would not go over well with the schools in the Northwest, which believe they need an annual trip to southern California for recruiting purposes. A “down the spine” split could alleviate that, with traditional rivals posted on opposite sides and guaranteed a game every year, but that creates travel issues, and the ACC tried that model and no one can keep up with which teams are in which division. A source said that idea has “no traction.”
Am I the only one frustrated by Uncle Ted throughout this whole thing? I feel like he has yet to do a single piece of real reporting on it. He’s been late to every party and only passes on other people’s links. Shouldn’t he be ultra-plugged in to the folks in Walnut Creek? Dude’s just phoning it in.
http://cbs5.com/sports/utah.pac.ten.2.1753601.html
“Y’know Tx Tech and OSU, y’all got the short end of the stick. if you guys walk Texas and OU will follow and you’ll get yours.”
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
That isn't true at all
They’ll just replace them with schools happy to be part of the Big 12, like BYU or Air Force. Texas was always the key.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 15, 2010 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions
If we got OSU, TT, and OU, would Texas really stick around in a pathetic remnant of a Big 12 conference? How much would a Texas network really be worth without those other schools in conference?
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jun 15, 2010 5:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Oklahoma, yes.
But OSU and TT by themselves? The Pac-10 doesn’t want them on their own.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 16, 2010 9:43 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, but if we got them, Texa$ would pretty much HAVE to come along too, wouldn’t it?
"UC Davis??? hahahahaha" - Aaron Rodgers
by atomsareenough on Jun 17, 2010 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah it is bro
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Really dude? Where exactly would they walk to on their own?
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Jun 16, 2010 9:46 PM PDT up reply actions
Just a thought
But do we really need divisions? Can’t everyone be guaranteed to play a Socal school at least every other year and just have the top two in the league play a championship game? I’ve personally never really liked the divisions of other leagues, even if I do remember who’s in what division. I don’t want to be restricted to playing UW/WSU and UO/OSU every year and miss a chance to play USC, UCLA and the rest of the Pac-10 South (I’m assuming that’s how it would be aligned). I’m all for adding Colorado and Utah, but lets still play 9 league games.
Best Solution
Follow me on this:
2 Divisions with 6 teams each:
Pac-12 North Division
UW
Wazzu
Oregon
OSU
Cal
Utah
Pac-12 South Division
Furd
USC
UCLA
Zona
ASU
Colorado
Rules:
9 conference games every year
Round robin in your division
Cal plays Furd every year
Utah plays Colorado every year
Cal also gets USC/UCLA every year (keeping CA intact)
Odds: (reciprocating, but all listed for convenience)
UW, Wazzu, Oregon & OSU play Furd, USC, UCLA 3 out of every 5 years
UW, Wazzu, Oregon & OSU play Colorado 2 out of every 3 years
UW, Wazzu, Oregon & OSU play Zona and ASU 23 out of every 30 years
Cal plays Zona, ASU, Colorado 1 out of every 3 years
Utah plays Furd, USC, UCLA, Zona and ASU 3 out of every 5 years
Furd, USC and UCLA play UW, Wazzu, Oregon, OSU, Utah 3 out of every 5 years
Zona and ASU play UW, Wazzu, Oregon, OSU 23 out of every 30 years
Zona and ASU play Cal 1 out of every 3 years
Zona and ASU play Utah 3 out of every 5 years
Colorado plays UW, Wazzu, Oregon and OSU 2 out of every 3 years
Colorado plays Cal 1 out of every 3 years
Check it out: Pac-12 Schedule by daveman
It’s an imbalanced solution since Cal gets Furd, USC and UCLA every year while the other teams in the division only get them 3 out of every 5 years, but this preserves ALL California match-ups and natural rivalries.
This would be great for Cal, but the NW schools would probably scream bloody murder about it
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
It’s not like there are built-in rivalries between the NW schools and the LA schools. Granted, they would prefer to have a game down in LA at least once a year for recruiting purposes and this schedule could mostly deliver on that.
It is very “Cal-biased”, but it also accomplishes having each team at least playing everyone in the same state every year and preserves natural rivalries.
We could swap Cal and Furd in this model and it would be the same, but I figure we’re further north than they are.
I need to blow this out to a full 30 year model to see what it looks like and to see if anyone gets totally screwed, but I have a feeling it would be mostly fair.
I'd be surprised
if the four CA schools seriously agreed to a simple 8-game schedule with the two divisions assumed (NW + Bay Area in one division, LA + AZ + CO/UT in other).
One possibility is to do it SEC-style with fixed “rilvalries”, which would probably be Cal/UCLA and Stanford/USC (you can make a case for Cal/USC, but no one cares about Stanford/UCLA), Washington/Colorado (seems like a fun matchup, and in the long run they’re still two good football schools in great markets), and then fill in the blanks on the rest.
Another is to make NINE game conference schedules, with the Bay Area / LA schools playing each other every year (as would, say, Oregon/Arizona and Washington/CO&UT), then doing an every other year rotation among the others. This would give Cal, for instance, a four year slate:
Odd Years (@/vs reversed in even years):
@ Stan
vs USC
@ UCLA
@ UO
vs OS
@ Wash
vs WSU
other two games
Year 1 (@/vs reversed in year 3):
vs AZ
@ ASU
Year 2 (@/vs reversed in year 4):
vs Colo
@ Utah
Of course, I thought it was wacky to split up the CA schools in the first place, so I could easily be wrong. But I’d be totally stunned to see the CA schools say “whatever, we really don’t care about this” and do a (former) Big 12-style “play all teams from other divisions only twice per four years” rotation.
also
I wouldn’t be remotely surprised to see the league try out a (former) Big Ten-style “fix a couple rivalry games, then rotate the rest” system. Then they could apply for a CCG with 11 teams, and then it’d be the two best teams, rather than risking something like a 5-3 division winner playing instead of a 7-1 division runner-up (cough, cough, 2008 Big 12).
It would also give the league the flexibility to try to expand again if / when either some other league (probably the Big Ten) makes another move, or the Big “12” collapses. IMO this is the most likely short-term arrangement, though I’m totally guessing here.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
GoldenBlogs' FAQ and Community Guidelines
Related FanPosts on California Golden Blogs
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
I recorded the entire last out as Cal clinches the first ever PAC12 Softball Title! It was also a...
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 |
