|
|
Post by grayman on Aug 25, 2023 12:48:58 GMT -8
There isn't going to be a reconstituted Pac-12. Not in reality. At best it will be the melding of fragments consisting of the best schools/programs from other conferences (probably the MWC and AAC, although I suppose there's hope of adding additional schools from the ACC when it falls apart). Or it will be the MWC absorbing OSU and WSU. Worst case is that OSU is somehow left out of a conference completely and unable to get back into a conference due to lack of interest. This seems pretty unlikely, however. Whether you count it in your reality or not... if the MWC and Pac2 merge and keep the "Pac" name for it's intrinsic value it will indeed be a reconstituted Pac12, 13, 15... Just as the Pac12, 10, were melding of teams from the original (4) in the old PCC, then adding WSU ('17), Stanford ('18), SC & Idaho ('22), Montana ('24), UCLA ('28). And, still would have been if Texas and Oklahoma would have been added. From the PCC, to it's dissolution and moving forward to the Pac12 it's always been a melding of teams from different conferences. The key in keeping the Pac name is in the revenue stream over the years '24-30. Of course, depending on what the legal scholars come up with. I understand that keeping the conference naming rights, etc. means (potential) big money to OSU and WSU. The problem I have is people acting like retaining the name is tantamount to the reconstitution of the Pac-12 if you're basically just joining the MWC. |
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Aug 25, 2023 12:49:14 GMT -8
OSU and WSU join the MWC, say hello to a 4 mil a year TV contract and prepare to share the next 5 years of the last 5 year's won't of Pac 12 residuals with every last one that just left. If the MWC votes to disband and join the Pac 2, that IS a reconstituted PAC. It's not locked into a small CBS driven contract, and OSU and WSU get to decide what the Pac does with the residuals that are coming. Whether that happens or not has yet to be seen, but both OSU/WSU and the MWC schools have big financial incentives to do it. . It doesn't matter what it's called. The main difference is that OSU and WSU might be able to bring some money, etc. into the mix. That would no doubt make the conference somewhat stronger but let's stop acting like it's practically the same thing as the Pac-12. Except it's not at all and it DOES matter what it's called - it's not just semantics. It matters a LOT because of the Pac-12 network and its' assets. It doesn't matter if it is equal in intrinsic value to the Pac12, and nobody here is even attempting to say that it is, but the MWC dissolving and joining a reconsituted Pac is a completely different scenario than OSU/WSU joining the MWC. If you can't see that you are being intentionally obtuse. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Aug 25, 2023 12:55:59 GMT -8
OSU and WSU join the MWC, say hello to a 4 mil a year TV contract and prepare to share the next 5 years of the last 5 year's won't of Pac 12 residuals with every last one that just left. If the MWC votes to disband and join the Pac 2, that IS a reconstituted PAC. It's not locked into a small CBS driven contract, and OSU and WSU get to decide what the Pac does with the residuals that are coming. Whether that happens or not has yet to be seen, but both OSU/WSU and the MWC schools have big financial incentives to do it. No. it's the MWC with OSU and WSU added. It doesn't matter what it's called. The main difference is that OSU and WSU might be able to bring some money, etc. into the mix. That would no doubt make the conference somewhat stronger but let's stop acting like it's practically the same thing as the Pac-12. It would be crazy to join the MWC, the MWC would be crazy not to join the PAC. We BEAT the ducks last year, and I bet we do again this year, but I'd be a fool to think they aren't the team with the better "brand". There is brand recognition with the PAC name that will likely never be afforded the MWC. The PAC is its own entity that has gone through changes in the past, and doesn't necessarily need to die just yet. Reconstituted implies changes. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Aug 25, 2023 13:06:44 GMT -8
No. it's the MWC with OSU and WSU added. It doesn't matter what it's called. The main difference is that OSU and WSU might be able to bring some money, etc. into the mix. That would no doubt make the conference somewhat stronger but let's stop acting like it's practically the same thing as the Pac-12. Except it's not at all and it DOES matter what it's called - it's not just semantics. It matters a LOT because of the Pac-12 network and its' assets. It doesn't matter if it is equal in intrinsic value to the Pac12, and nobody here is even attempting to say that it is, but the MWC dissolving and joining a reconsituted Pac is a completely different scenario than OSU/WSU joining the MWC. If you can't see that you are being intentionally obtuse. It does matter if it is equal in intrinsic value to the Pac-12. That's a big part of the point here. And people claiming that this will be a "reconstituted" Pac are using language to 'doctor up' this scenario. People who keep saying that the Pac-12 will be formed again are being obtuse. |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Aug 25, 2023 13:13:58 GMT -8
Except it's not at all and it DOES matter what it's called - it's not just semantics. It matters a LOT because of the Pac-12 network and its' assets. It doesn't matter if it is equal in intrinsic value to the Pac12, and nobody here is even attempting to say that it is, but the MWC dissolving and joining a reconsituted Pac is a completely different scenario than OSU/WSU joining the MWC. If you can't see that you are being intentionally obtuse. It does matter if it is equal in intrinsic value to the Pac-12. That's a big part of the point here. And people claiming that this will be a "reconstituted" Pac are using language to 'doctor up' this scenario. People who keep saying that the Pac-12 will be formed again are being obtuse. If it happens, I guess you are free to argue "This is not the PAC" for years to come. You'll probably be one of the few that thinks the PAC isn't the PAC, while most everyone else thinks it has just changed. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Aug 25, 2023 13:21:28 GMT -8
It does matter if it is equal in intrinsic value to the Pac-12. That's a big part of the point here. And people claiming that this will be a "reconstituted" Pac are using language to 'doctor up' this scenario. People who keep saying that the Pac-12 will be formed again are being obtuse. If it happens, I guess you are free to argue "This is not the PAC" for years to come. You'll probably be one of the few that thinks the PAC isn't the PAC, while most everyone else thinks it has just changed. Sort of like it has since 1915!! |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Aug 25, 2023 13:24:06 GMT -8
After processing for a couple weeks (and still doing so), I've decided where I stand as a lifelong OSU fan. Stanford said on day one that their athletic program was built for Power 5, and they wouldn't accept anything else. This is the correct attitude, and one that OSU needs to emulate. SMU is willing to join a P5 conference and receive no monetary benefit from it. That is also the right attitude. For the small market teams like us, there are two potential impacts from this mess: 1) Less revenue. 2) Lesser competition. We can survive and even thrive with less revenue than other programs. We have done so our entire existence. We cannot survive with lesser competition. Lesser competition begets lesser recruits, lesser coaches, and less fan interest. And it all but ensures less revenue in perpetuity. The current path of college football as driven by TV execs is unsustainable. There will be more massive changes in the coming years. We need to make sure that there is as little friction as possible in having OSU be a part of the major college football landscape as it continues evolving. And while taking a step down to G5 status may sound logical, this discounts how difficult it will be to get back up to a P5 level once we fully absorb this demotion. And make no mistake: it is a demotion, and a big one! Barnes' top priority should be making every conceivable effort to join a P5 conference, and being open to every possible option to make that happen, including giving up some or all of the financial benefits. The donors (myself included), the courts, and the legislature can help stabilize the revenue model. But nothing can replace the excitement, passion, and anticipation of watching our Beavs matching up against the Oregon's or Washington's or USC's of the world. Replacing that with a slate of games against the UNLV's, Wyoming's, and Utah State's of the world, would suck all the emotion out of the room. And without emotion, college sports has little meaning. There is only one correct attitude for OSU to have in this whole mess: P5 or bust. At all costs. Nothing else matters.
Also, doing so would initially wack off $20-30 million of our budget. It would be even tougher than how we've been operating now and we would definitely not be able to afford to pay our coaching staff. I hear that the Pac is looking for teams. Maybe they'll take us. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Aug 25, 2023 13:26:32 GMT -8
It does matter if it is equal in intrinsic value to the Pac-12. That's a big part of the point here. And people claiming that this will be a "reconstituted" Pac are using language to 'doctor up' this scenario. People who keep saying that the Pac-12 will be formed again are being obtuse. If it happens, I guess you are free to argue "This is not the PAC" for years to come. You'll probably be one of the few that thinks the PAC isn't the PAC, while most everyone else thinks it has just changed. LOL. Yeah, everyone will be all too aware of how much it "just changed." |
|
|
|
Post by sparty on Aug 25, 2023 13:38:34 GMT -8
I think the longer all this goes on the worse it is going to be. The sun is setting on being a power 5. Some still think there is a magical way out of all of this. Time to accept the inevitable and most of us are not going to like it.
|
|
|
|
Post by flyfishinbeav on Aug 25, 2023 13:41:47 GMT -8
I mean "changed?".......if it's us, Wazzu, and the MW, it will be the Pac in name only.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Aug 25, 2023 13:59:39 GMT -8
I mean "changed?".......if it's us, Wazzu, and the MW, it will be the Pac in name only. I can't remember exactly what years the mountain schools joined right off the top of my head,('78 and '11 by the way, but had to look it up) and I've actually followed this stuff. If the PAC still exists in '24 and beyond, in a relatively few years the goings on of today will fade somewhat. I was reading Disney over the years has literally absorbed 200 companies, many of them quite big, it's still Disney. If the Pac still exists in several years, there will be very few saying "it's the Pac in name only". |
|
|
|
Post by bvrbooster on Aug 25, 2023 14:17:10 GMT -8
Whether you count it in your reality or not... if the MWC and Pac2 merge and keep the "Pac" name for it's intrinsic value it will indeed be a reconstituted Pac12, 13, 15... Just as the Pac12, 10, were melding of teams from the original (4) in the old PCC, then adding WSU ('17), Stanford ('18), SC & Idaho ('22), Montana ('24), UCLA ('28). And, still would have been if Texas and Oklahoma would have been added. From the PCC, to it's dissolution and moving forward to the Pac12 it's always been a melding of teams from different conferences. The key in keeping the Pac name is in the revenue stream over the years '24-30. Of course, depending on what the legal scholars come up with. I understand that keeping the conference naming rights, etc. means (potential) big money to OSU and WSU. The problem I have is people acting like retaining the name is tantamount to the reconstitution of the Pac-12 if you're basically just joining the MWC. You're not "just joining the MWC," the MWC is joining you - huge, profound difference. The new PAC 12 gets to keep all of the $420 million, which is divvied up among the 8 traitors and the 4 stalwarts if the PAC 12 is dissolved, The new PAC 12 gets to keep the PAC 12 Network. The new PAC 12 gets to negotiate a new media deal, rather than just adding on to the current MWC deal. That's 3 enormous reasons for having the MWC dissolve and join the PAC. |
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Aug 25, 2023 14:34:49 GMT -8
Except it's not at all and it DOES matter what it's called - it's not just semantics. It matters a LOT because of the Pac-12 network and its' assets. It doesn't matter if it is equal in intrinsic value to the Pac12, and nobody here is even attempting to say that it is, but the MWC dissolving and joining a reconsituted Pac is a completely different scenario than OSU/WSU joining the MWC. If you can't see that you are being intentionally obtuse. It does matter if it is equal in intrinsic value to the Pac-12. That's a big part of the point here. And people claiming that this will be a "reconstituted" Pac are using language to 'doctor up' this scenario. People who keep saying that the Pac-12 will be formed again are being obtuse. It's not even remotely just semantics used to "doctor up a scenario". Either you are lacking in critical thinking or you're intentionally just being pig-headed. It's like the joke about the guy running from the bear and stopping to tie his shoe - he tells his buddy that he doesn't need to outrun the bear, he just needs to outrun his friend. The "reconstituted Pac-12" which you are arguing so heavily against doesn't have to outrun the bear (the $20M/yr potential the OG Pac-12 had for a TV deal) it only has to outrun the current MWC. That's a pretty low bar considering that the MWC doesn't have a network and their CBS-based deal pulls in $4M a year. With the Pac-12 name, network and assets alone they will crush that incredibly low bar. It absolutely matters. |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Aug 25, 2023 15:02:38 GMT -8
I understand that keeping the conference naming rights, etc. means (potential) big money to OSU and WSU. The problem I have is people acting like retaining the name is tantamount to the reconstitution of the Pac-12 if you're basically just joining the MWC. You're not "just joining the MWC," the MWC is joining you - huge, profound difference. The new PAC 12 gets to keep all of the $420 million, which is divvied up among the 8 traitors and the 4 stalwarts if the PAC 12 is dissolved, The new PAC 12 gets to keep the PAC 12 Network. The new PAC 12 gets to negotiate a new media deal, rather than just adding on to the current MWC deal. That's 3 enormous reasons for having the MWC dissolve and join the PAC. Don’t forget that keeping the Pac alive creates an opening when and if the whole stupid B1G falls apart or the lawyers tear it apart. No way in hell any of the teams that left would ever return to be members of MWC. But returning to the Pac might be palatable once they see what they’ve thrown away and the costs of this foolishness. Keep the Pac. Keep the faith. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Aug 25, 2023 15:23:36 GMT -8
The Pac-12 has its roots in the ancient and almost never talked about Northwest Conference. The Northwest Conference was made up of Idaho, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Wazzu, and Whitman. The Northwest Conference's final champion in football was Wazzu, who played in the Rose Bowl in 1916. The Northwest Conference split between Oregon, Oregon State, and Washington and Idaho, Wazzu, and Whitman primarily over freshman eligibility with the three former teams arguing for freshman being ineligible and the other three teams arguing for freshman being eligible. Oregon, Oregon State, and Washington decided to join with California, which had just brought back football after a decade without a team. California and Washington had played a home-and-home with Washington hilariously defeating California 72-0 in Berkeley but only eking out a 13-7 victory in Seattle.
Wazzu joined early in 1917, which allowed Wazzu to compete in the Pacific Coast Conference in basketball and football, the Cougars winning the Pacific Coast Conference Championship in both sports.
Stanford joined the Pacific Coast Conference in 1918.
Idaho joined the Pacific Coast Conference in 1922.
USC joined in 1922, but was kicked out in 1923 before rejoining in 1925.
Montana replaced USC in 1924 and stuck around despite USC coming back into the fold.
UCLA joined in 1928. At some point in the 1920s, at least one of California, UCLA, USC, and Washington began to cheat to pay players.
In 1949, Red Sanders went to UCLA and turned the cheating up a notch. USC and Washington seemed to work to match UCLA's rules violations.
Montana voluntarily dropped out of the Pacific Coast Conference, in order to try and find an easier level of competition. Oregon went on probation in 1951 for violating the Pacific Coast Conference's rules. When placed on probation, Oregon indicated that UCLA should be investigated, because UCLA seemed to be cheating more.
In 1956, slush funds were uncovered at, in order, Washington, UCLA, and USC. A slush fund was later found to be at California but was not nearly as pervasive as the slush funds at the first three schools. UCLA, USC, and Washington were each placed on multi-year probation and several players were suspended on the three teams. Oregon State went to the Rose Bowl in 1957 with UCLA, USC, and Washington on multi-year probation. In 1957, each of UCLA, USC, and Washington were voted on to remain members of the Pacific Coast Conference. USC and Washington were unanimously confirmed as full members. UCLA's vote was much closer. The vote was 5-4. The four slush fund teams voted for UCLA. Oregon State broke with Idaho, Oregon, Stanford, and Wazzu to keep UCLA a member. I don't know whether former UCLA coach Tommy Prothro helped sway Oregon State to vote to retain UCLA.
Without UCLA, USC, and Washington, Oregon State won a consecutive Pacific Coast Conference Championship but was denied a Rose Bowl berth, because of the Pacific Coast Conference's "no-repeat" rule. The Beavers would be the final team to not play in the Rose Bowl, because of the "no-repeat" rule.
After the 1958 football season, California, UCLA, and USC convinced Washington to join them in forming a new conference. They then convinced Stanford to join them, who did, rather than remain in a conference without California. California, Stanford, UCLA, USC, and Washington attempted to join what was unofficially known as the "Airplane Conference"," which also consisted of Air Force, Army, Navy, Notre Dame, Pitt, Penn State, and Syracuse. However, the Pentagon vetoed the idea and all of the service academies backed out and the other eastern teams with them. The five Pacific Coast Conference teams created a conference called the AAWU with just five team.
Because of a snafu with the Rose Bowl contract, 1959 was the final year of the Pacific Coast Conference in football. Wazzu joined the AAWU in 1962. Oregon State was invited to join the AAWU but refused to without Oregon. Both teams ultimately were invited and joined the AAWU in 1964.
Arizona and Arizona State were added in 1978, but UCLA and USC had to threaten leaving to Stanford and Washington, in order for Stanford and Washington to agree to play.
Colorado and Utah joined in 2010 to begin play in 2011.
The whole thing has a Ship of Theseus feel to it.
|
|
