This is what happens when you hope instead of act. Pac-12’s lack of aggressiveness as far as expanding the conference left the conference vulnerable for too long. It was only a matter of time, though still shocking nonetheless. I just assumed OU would be the first to move.
This is what happens when you hope instead of act. Pac-12’s lack of aggressiveness as far as expanding the conference left the conference vulnerable for too long. It was only a matter of time, though still shocking nonetheless. I just assumed OU would be the first to move.
This is like saying San Jose St didn't do enough to get into the SEC. What could the PAC have done? Adding lesser teams as you mention? Would you have hailed that as a great accomplishment prior to today's news? Doubtful. The only way to improve (some of) the PAC-12 schools positions is what's happening, basically breaking up the conference, and I don't see a conference leadership team wanting to destroy it's own conference. If this UCLA USC move were not happening, and the intact PAC-12 made it to 2024 with a new tv contract probably paying double what they get today, that would have been the best case scenario for the conference. We would still have been behind the SEC & B1G in dollars, and would have continued the slide down the competitiveness ladder, but still could pop into the CFP every few years, delaying the inevitable superconferences rising for a decade or so. The only current deal that would have benefited Cal sports would have been a (PAC-12 self-immolating) package sending UW (tv market #12), UofO (#21), Cal & Stanford (#6), & the LA schools (#2) to the B1G. Short of that, the PAC had no moves.
This right here but they did try to get OU and Texas, that didn’t work out. I feel like the Pac 12 didn’t have many good options after swinging and missing on OU and Texas.
This is what happens when you hope instead of act. Pac-12’s lack of aggressiveness as far as expanding the conference left the conference vulnerable for too long. It was only a matter of time, though still shocking nonetheless. I just assumed OU would be the first to move.
This is like saying San Jose St didn't do enough to get into the SEC. What could the PAC have done? Adding lesser teams as you mention? Would you have hailed that as a great accomplishment prior to today's news? Doubtful. The only way to improve (some of) the PAC-12 schools positions is what's happening, basically breaking up the conference, and I don't see a conference leadership team wanting to destroy it's own conference. If this UCLA USC move were not happening, and the intact PAC-12 made it to 2024 with a new tv contract probably paying double what they get today, that would have been the best case scenario for the conference. We would still have been behind the SEC & B1G in dollars, and would have continued the slide down the competitiveness ladder, but still could pop into the CFP every few years, delaying the inevitable superconferences rising for a decade or so. The only current deal that would have benefited Cal sports would have been a (PAC-12 self-immolating) package sending UW (tv market #12), UofO (#21), Cal & Stanford (#6), & the LA schools (#2) to the B1G. Short of that, the PAC had no moves.
I think you were referring to U of O, right? Not OU...
Yep. Freudian slip.
This right here but they did try to get OU and Texas, that didn’t work out. I feel like the Pac 12 didn’t have many good options after swinging and missing on OU and Texas.
What would you have tried to have done?
In hindsight, even pulling some lesser schools like Boise State and Brigham Young.