|
|
Post by orangeattack on Sept 5, 2024 17:31:17 GMT -8
The best path forward for OSU/WSU is to remain in a Power 5(4) conference. Surely that can't be difficult to understand - maybe for the fans, but not the administration. They'd love for OSU/WSU to make it a permanent partnership but I can't see any scenario where the commitment not being made over the next year burns goodwill. And that's the only real advantage of being in a P4 conference (which we really wouldn't be, we'd be an affiliate with no benefits) over a merged Pac-2/MWC. And, we'd still be in the WCC for basketball, volleyball, softball and any other sports that apply. And the MWC (with us and Wazzu) is superior to the WCC (with us and Wazzu) in every non-football sport. I don't necessarily disagree with you here, given the world today. But we are playing Texas Hold'em here and while our hole cards don't look good, and neither does the flop, we still have a couple more outs on the turn and the river. It's too soon to fold. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Sept 5, 2024 17:34:39 GMT -8
The best path forward for OSU/WSU is to remain in a Power 5(4) conference. Surely that can't be difficult to understand - maybe for the fans, but not the administration. They'd love for OSU/WSU to make it a permanent partnership but I can't see any scenario where the commitment not being made over the next year burns goodwill. Just can't see that happening. Even if we get some kind of scheduling alliance with the Big 12 (or the ACC, which makes no sense), WSU and OSU are not going to receive a full share of CFP revenue like a Big 12 member. No one is going to take a smaller piece of the pie to include us. And that's the only real advantage of being in a P4 conference (which we really wouldn't be, we'd be an affiliate with no benefits) over a merged Pac-2/MWC. And, we'd still be in the WCC for basketball, volleyball, softball and any other sports that apply. And the MWC (with us and Wazzu) is superior to the WCC (with us and Wazzu) in every non-football sport. You can't see that happening, yet somehow Barnes and Murthy seem to think it's very possible. It is highly likely that the ACC will have to add teams in the future. It is also likely that it will look to add OSU and WSU when that happens. IMO, Barnes is very aware of this and has most likely done more than a little talking with ACC administrators. As far as the Big 12, why is Yormark talking about adding more teams at some point if the CFP money is such a huge sticking point? And midlevel ACC schools are not better adds than OSU. Let the Olympic sports join the MWC if it's a better option than the WCC, which is highly doubtful. Baseball and gymnastics are going to be independents anyway. Maybe others. My guess is OSU football will wind up somewhere else. |
|
|
|
Post by 415hawaiiboy on Sept 5, 2024 18:19:39 GMT -8
I think goodwill being burned amongst fans and somehow that creeps into the media and perceptions. I care more about the MW message board fans talking in circles for a year, and disunity. It appears the PAC-2 is seeking independence at least for 2025 and the MW saying “good luck” and won’t help them. If people think this is the case then they will speculate less (and maybe move on). Are you talking about goodwill among OSU/Pac-12 fans or between Pac-12 and MWC fans? If it's OSU fans, I think there's a big difference between disagreeing on a message board about what might happen to the program in realignment and actually coming together to root for the team. As far as the MWC fans, I'm sure a bunch of them are upset that the Pac-12 doesn't want to continue the scheduling agreement for 2025 and spend another $14 million or more and push the poaching penalties back even more. Oh well. I think more about goodwill amongst the MW fans with each other. Some seem to believe that the scheduling agreement ending means a PAC-12 revival is in the works and that they will cherry pick teams (causing folks to freak out or start hypothetical conference alignments). I’m trying to tell them that is a less likely scenario given the reasons I’ve observed. I don’t think the fans care too much about the money aspect of the scheduling agreement nor do they care about playing Oregon St or Washington St. We play you guys anyways Non-conference. The optimist in me would love to play with you guys more often. |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Sept 5, 2024 20:15:56 GMT -8
Just can't see that happening. Even if we get some kind of scheduling alliance with the Big 12 (or the ACC, which makes no sense), WSU and OSU are not going to receive a full share of CFP revenue like a Big 12 member. No one is going to take a smaller piece of the pie to include us. And that's the only real advantage of being in a P4 conference (which we really wouldn't be, we'd be an affiliate with no benefits) over a merged Pac-2/MWC. And, we'd still be in the WCC for basketball, volleyball, softball and any other sports that apply. And the MWC (with us and Wazzu) is superior to the WCC (with us and Wazzu) in every non-football sport. It is highly likely that the ACC will have to add teams in the future. It is also likely that it will look to add OSU and WSU when that happens. IMO, Barnes is very aware of this and has most likely done more than a little talking with ACC administrators. As far as the Big 12, why is Yormark talking about adding more teams at some point if the CFP money is such a huge sticking point? And midlevel ACC schools are not better adds than OSU. Let the Olympic sports join the MWC if it's a better option than the WCC, which is highly doubtful. Baseball and gymnastics are going to be independents anyway. Maybe others. My guess is OSU football will wind up somewhere else. I think they are hoping. Big difference. |
|
Angus
Freshman
Posts: 192 
|
Post by Angus on Sept 5, 2024 21:20:03 GMT -8
Are you talking about goodwill among OSU/Pac-12 fans or between Pac-12 and MWC fans? If it's OSU fans, I think there's a big difference between disagreeing on a message board about what might happen to the program in realignment and actually coming together to root for the team. As far as the MWC fans, I'm sure a bunch of them are upset that the Pac-12 doesn't want to continue the scheduling agreement for 2025 and spend another $14 million or more and push the poaching penalties back even more. Oh well. I think more about goodwill amongst the MW fans with each other. Some seem to believe that the scheduling agreement ending means a PAC-12 revival is in the works and that they will cherry pick teams (causing folks to freak out or start hypothetical conference alignments). I’m trying to tell them that is a less likely scenario given the reasons I’ve observed. I don’t think the fans care too much about the money aspect of the scheduling agreement nor do they care about playing Oregon St or Washington St. We play you guys anyways Non-conference. The optimist in me would love to play with you guys more often. The way I look at is, is that the entire NW is our viewership region, and to a lesser degree all of the west. For the same reason I am going to be tuning into UCLA games, Furd games, Utah games, etc. To me, it makes ALOT of sense for Yormark to eventuallly grab us and WSU. Also Memphis and Tulane. And its obvious that if Barnes thought we are destined for the MWC, he'd have signed us up already. I do agree though that other dominos will have to fall(FSU and Clemson etc.), but for me, i give that better than a 50-50 chance down the road. But not until 2026 at the earliest. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Sept 5, 2024 21:59:33 GMT -8
You can't see that happening, yet somehow Barnes and Murthy seem to think it's very possible.It is highly likely that the ACC will have to add teams in the future. It is also likely that it will look to add OSU and WSU when that happens. IMO, Barnes is very aware of this and has most likely done more than a little talking with ACC administrators. As far as the Big 12, why is Yormark talking about adding more teams at some point if the CFP money is such a huge sticking point? And midlevel ACC schools are not better adds than OSU. Let the Olympic sports join the MWC if it's a better option than the WCC, which is highly doubtful. Baseball and gymnastics are going to be independents anyway. Maybe others. My guess is OSU football will wind up somewhere else. I think they are hoping. Big difference. Sure, there is some hope involved. But I seriously doubt that they are making moves such as going away from the MWC scheduling alliance in 2025 or using the war chest to help fund the athletic department at a power level based on some pie in the sky-type hope like winning the lottery. |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Sept 6, 2024 6:40:40 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Sept 6, 2024 7:53:21 GMT -8
lthis sounds a lot like the attitude the Pac12 had against expansion. We will see how it works out for them. The reality is that the Big10 and SEC are pulling way away from the other 2 conferences and status quo isn't going to get things done, they're going to have to make some moves. Now, that doesn't mean that they are going to take the Pac2 but it does mean that the situation is still fluid. I guarantee you they will accept a smaller piece of the pie in exchange for a much bigger pie. |
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Sept 6, 2024 7:55:53 GMT -8
lthis sounds a lot like the attitude the Pac12 had against expansion. We will see how it works out for them. The reality is that the Big10 and SEC are pulling way away from the other 2 conferences and status quo isn't going to get things done, they're going to have to make some moves. Now, that doesn't mean that they are going to take the Pac2 but it does mean that the situation is still fluid. I guarantee you they will accept a smaller piece of the pie in exchange for a much bigger pie.  |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Sept 6, 2024 9:52:08 GMT -8
lthis sounds a lot like the attitude the Pac12 had against expansion. We will see how it works out for them. The reality is that the Big10 and SEC are pulling way away from the other 2 conferences and status quo isn't going to get things done, they're going to have to make some moves. Now, that doesn't mean that they are going to take the Pac2 but it does mean that the situation is still fluid. I guarantee you they will accept a smaller piece of the pie in exchange for a much bigger pie. Moves that include OSU/WSU are NOT going to move the "pie" needle one iota. Especially in comparison to the SEC and B10. B12 schools have said all along they aren't taking a cut in revenue. OSU can't afford even a partial revenue deal with all the extra travel for full membership. And the B12 isn't going to pay much for football only as OSU doesn't raise their football reputation near as much as UConn hoops raise the basketball credibility. I am always amused reading here that folks think OSU has some cache to have any leverage or positive characteristics to warrant a large $ invite to one of the P4 conferences. Look at the overall record... it's not about the last 4 seasons. Look at the record vs P4 teams as posted recently. Look at the TV market when OSU is the "better" team. Look at the coaching turnover... 5th coach in 10 seasons with the last two never having any HC experience. OSU and WSU are in this boat because they are seen as high quality FCS G5 type programs. Rightly so or not, they were left afloat for a reason. Top that off with the overall "board" sentiment in how stupid it was for the the other teams to make their teams travel, take less than full revenue shares, etc. etc. etc. Yet, it is what OSU should now do? OSU and WSU have fund to more than fund their D1 programs until the dust settles on further negotiations... and there will be a plethora of ongoing negotiations that will effect conferences, CFP, maybe even NCAA divisional classifications. OSU doe not need to take a "beggar's handout" and may be better situated as an independent with no binding conference entanglements than some other teams in P4 conferences. However, the story behind the story will remain the same... when a media partner oks a larger payment to cover a new addition(s) the other conference schools will be more willing to accept them. And, even then they'll most likely want concessions in additional entrance fees, guarantees, structured payouts, etc. to raise their revenue even more. I trust Barnes, Gould etc. to navigate these waters as best as they can. Mistakes will be made as these are uncharted waters and there is no experience to be drawn on to guide them. Worse, a ton of what will happen not only depends on great communication, but trust and honesty. And, as we've seen the latter two are in short supply. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Sept 6, 2024 9:58:36 GMT -8
lthis sounds a lot like the attitude the Pac12 had against expansion. We will see how it works out for them. The reality is that the Big10 and SEC are pulling way away from the other 2 conferences and status quo isn't going to get things done, they're going to have to make some moves. Now, that doesn't mean that they are going to take the Pac2 but it does mean that the situation is still fluid. I guarantee you they will accept a smaller piece of the pie in exchange for a much bigger pie. Moves that include OSU/WSU are NOT going to move the "pie" needle one iota. Especially in comparison to the SEC and B10. B12 schools have said all along they aren't taking a cut in revenue. OSU can't afford even a partial revenue deal with all the extra travel for full membership. And the B12 isn't going to pay much for football only as OSU doesn't raise their football reputation near as much as UConn hoops raise the basketball credibility. I am always amused reading here that folks think OSU has some cache to have any leverage or positive characteristics to warrant a large $ invite to one of the P4 conferences. Look at the overall record... it's not about the last 4 seasons. Look at the record vs P4 teams as posted recently. Look at the TV market when OSU is the "better" team. Look at the coaching turnover... 5th coach in 10 seasons with the last two never having any HC experience. OSU and WSU are in this boat because they are seen as high quality FCS type programs. Rightly so or not, they were left afloat for a reason. Top that off with the overall "board" sentiment in how stupid it was for the the other teams to make their teams travel, take less than full revenue shares, etc. etc. etc. Yet, it is what OSU should now do? OSU and WSU have fund to more than fund their D1 programs until the dust settles on further negotiations... and there will be a plethora of ongoing negotiations that will effect conferences, CFP, maybe even NCAA divisional classifications. OSU doe not need to take a "beggar's handout" and may be better situated as an independent with no binding conference entanglements than some other teams in P4 conferences. However, the story behind the story will remain the same... when a media partner oks a larger payment to cover a new addition(s) the other conference schools will be more willing to accept them. And, even then they'll most likely want concessions in additional entrance fees, guarantees, structured payouts, etc. to raise their revenue even more. I trust Barnes, Gould etc. to navigate these waters as best as they can. Mistakes will be made as these are uncharted waters and there is no experience to be drawn on to guide them. Worse, a ton of what will happen not only depends on great communication, but trust and honesty. And, as we've seen the latter two are in short supply. Agree with most of your post, but that's a stretch. I don't think we're seen as a Montana or Montana St. Just seen as a G5 level program. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Sept 6, 2024 10:00:17 GMT -8
Moves that include OSU/WSU are NOT going to move the "pie" needle one iota. Especially in comparison to the SEC and B10. B12 schools have said all along they aren't taking a cut in revenue. OSU can't afford even a partial revenue deal with all the extra travel for full membership. And the B12 isn't going to pay much for football only as OSU doesn't raise their football reputation near as much as UConn hoops raise the basketball credibility. I am always amused reading here that folks think OSU has some cache to have any leverage or positive characteristics to warrant a large $ invite to one of the P4 conferences. Look at the overall record... it's not about the last 4 seasons. Look at the record vs P4 teams as posted recently. Look at the TV market when OSU is the "better" team. Look at the coaching turnover... 5th coach in 10 seasons with the last two never having any HC experience. OSU and WSU are in this boat because they are seen as high quality FCS type programs. Rightly so or not, they were left afloat for a reason. Top that off with the overall "board" sentiment in how stupid it was for the the other teams to make their teams travel, take less than full revenue shares, etc. etc. etc. Yet, it is what OSU should now do? OSU and WSU have fund to more than fund their D1 programs until the dust settles on further negotiations... and there will be a plethora of ongoing negotiations that will effect conferences, CFP, maybe even NCAA divisional classifications. OSU doe not need to take a "beggar's handout" and may be better situated as an independent with no binding conference entanglements than some other teams in P4 conferences. However, the story behind the story will remain the same... when a media partner oks a larger payment to cover a new addition(s) the other conference schools will be more willing to accept them. And, even then they'll most likely want concessions in additional entrance fees, guarantees, structured payouts, etc. to raise their revenue even more. I trust Barnes, Gould etc. to navigate these waters as best as they can. Mistakes will be made as these are uncharted waters and there is no experience to be drawn on to guide them. Worse, a ton of what will happen not only depends on great communication, but trust and honesty. And, as we've seen the latter two are in short supply. Agree with most of your post, but that's a stretch. I don't think we're seen as a Montana or Montana St. Just seen as a G5 level program. What was meant and I effed up! Fixed... thx |
|
|
|
Post by 93beav on Sept 6, 2024 10:27:14 GMT -8
I believe we do have leverage, and I don't believe it's all public leverage. It may not get us anything, but we do have it.
I also think, giving Barnes the benefit of the doubt that to the earlier poster's point, simply letting a deadline pass and not pursuing anything else (that we know of) indicates there is at least a plan to keep hope alive for bids elsewhere. Elsewhere may be a few different options.
In the end it may all be futile, anyhow because eventually we all know the big boys will split off so they can feel better about themselves and not have to suffer embarrassing losses to "commoner" teams (even though some of them will no doubt get some 1 win seasons piled up, but at least it will be against "quality" talent). And all of that is okay, too, because then maybe the remaining schools and the remaining sport of football will be more about the sport and less about the money.
BTW, I'd just like to take this time to say again for the 957th time that the ASU swimmer in the House settlement deserves zero.
|
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Sept 6, 2024 10:34:07 GMT -8
I believe we do have leverage, and I don't believe it's all public leverage. It may not get us anything, but we do have it. I also think, giving Barnes the benefit of the doubt that to the earlier poster's point, simply letting a deadline pass and not pursuing anything else (that we know of) indicates there is at least a plan to keep hope alive for bids elsewhere. Elsewhere may be a few different options. In the end it may all be futile, anyhow because eventually we all know the big boys will split off so they can feel better about themselves and not have to suffer embarrassing losses to "commoner" teams (even though some of them will no doubt get some 1 win seasons piled up, but at least it will be against "quality" talent). And all of that is okay, too, because then maybe the remaining schools and the remaining sport of football will be more about the sport and less about the money. BTW, I'd just like to take this time to say again for the 957th time that the ASU swimmer in the House settlement deserves zero. I still think our only shot is an ACC implosion. Yet, even if that does happen, I don't think it would happen in time for us before we need to make a decision for 2026. |
|
|
|
Post by grayman on Sept 6, 2024 11:20:22 GMT -8
G5 level? According to what? Money? Wrong. Funding is higher than the vast majority of G5 schools.
TV viewership? Wrong. Not even close last season. Better even in low seasons.
Football success? Wrong. The Beavers were easily above average (averaged nearly 7.5 wins a season) in the Pac-12 during the past 25 years outside of three GAG seasons and the first three seasons of JS (including the 2-5 pandemic season). They still averaged over six wins a season counting those six down years.
The Beavers went to 14 bowl games and had four 7-win teams, four 8-win teams, three 9-win teams, two 10-win teams and the 11-1 Fiesta Bowl season. All while in a power conference.
Head to head vs. MWC teams during that period, the Beavers had one home loss to Boise State in 2016 (GAG). Otherwise, there were three road losses to Boise State, two road losses to Fresno State, a bowl loss to Hawaii in Hawaii and a bowl loss to Utah State (MWC champion). The Beavers lost at Colorado State (GAG) and at Nevada and at Hawaii during the first two Jonathan Smith seasons.
The Beavers won three games (two home) against Fresno State, won three home games and one bowl against Boise State.
They were 4-0 vs. SDSU, 3-0 vs. New Mexico, 2-0 vs. San Jose State, 2-0 vs. UNLV, 1-0 vs. Nevada (2-0 if you count 1998, also a win against Utah State in 1998). And four home wins and one road win vs. Hawaii.
They also split two games with Utah, lost a bowl to BYU and lost to the undefeated 2010 TCU team.
In the past three seasons, OSU has defeated Hawaii, Boise State, Fresno State (road), San Jose State (road) and SDSU.
Only two OSU teams that had eight or more wins during the past 25 seasons lost to Fresno State or Boise State.
So basically the Beavers primarily lost a few road games to Boise State and Fresno State, easily the two most dominant MWC teams. You could definitely make a strong case that Boise State and Fresno State have power level football programs.
So I don't agree at all that OSU specifically is seen as a G5 level program by the people who actually run other conferences. Because OSU is not a G5 level program.
|
|
