Spread is -14.5

[Cougsocal]

Everything in life is cyclical and this is just a time where things aren't going our way. I think that the failed attempt to create a super conference of 16 teams in 2010-11 was the catalyst for our current situation. We wanted Texas, OU, OSU, CU, TT and TAMU. Those discussions didn't work out because of Texas, but it convinced TAMU that it was time to go to the SEC, which led Missouri to the same decision. Nebraska bailed for the B1G. We did get CU and the Big 12 pulled in West Virginia from the Big East and TCU from the MWC to salvage their conference. For a brief moment, it looked like Larry Scott had done some great things. The MWC and Big 12 were both weakened and our conference had the opportunity to be the power in the West.

Unforunately, the SEC got extra TV's in Texas and Missouri with their additions that included the St. Louis, Kansas City, Houston, San Antonio and Dallas TV markets. We got SLC and Denver. The Big 10 added Nebraska, Maryland and Rutgers. Nebraska, while sucking, did increase their influence in the upper midwest and Rutgers and Maryland are from population dense regions with lots of TV's. Our power move forced others to do the same and they did it better. The ACC gutted what remained of the Big East when it came to football.

Although the ACC was generally regarded as the weakest of the Power 5 for years, the rise of Clemson has made that conference relevant. Extra eyeballs on the conference for the past four years is paying dividends now. Frankly, although we all hate Oregon and USC, our conference as a whole benefits when those teams are elite. I'd say the same for UW but, hell no, f#ck UW. I'd also throw UCLA in that mix, but they've been irrelevant for so long that it's hard to take the Bruins seriously. It's amazing to think that the Bruins have one Top 10 finish in two decades. USC's fall from grace is tied directly to the jealousy expressed by the SEC over the Reggie Bush scandal. It was a mess, but the punishment probably outweighed the crime.

So, I don't know that I'd say that we are where we are because of leadership being cheap. I think we are where we are because the relatively sparse population of the western US and the geographic diversity of the region has created an environment where our fans are not as numerous and involved and too many of our elite athletes are willing to go to other conferences where the perception is that fans care more.

Leadership not being cheap? The league's flagship football school does not have its own football operations building, sharing the multi-use McKay Center, a building that cost less than our single-use FOB, despite LA construction prices being twice as much. Hired low cost assistants Kiffin, Sark and Helton to be HC and waited until 2018 to update a stadium that was built 90 years ago. Somehow, I just don't see the likes of Michigan, tOSU, Alabama, Texas, LSU, Clemson and other powerhouse schools, being so fiscally responsible. Do you?

Fish rot from the head down.

 

[roses04]

Borghi maybe back, the spread is down to 13

 

[Wasichus]

******************************
I have a hazy memory of OSU recognizing those big buck donors, but what is more distinct to me is how damn hot it was, having to lay down at halftime to rest my painful back. Which was a real joy, since those aluminum seats were so hot I was just about blistered from the seats! Yikes!

I do have other good memories of that trip: visiting Fort Sill for your memories, visiting Big Al's family homes, driving through the worst rainstorm ever, and the BEST BBQ meal ever at Arthur Bryant's in KC. Good times. 👍

I think the ferociously hot aluminum bleachers were in Dallas, at SMU? I remember that day so well, as when a puffy little cloud would dare pass in front of the sun, the temp would drop about 20 degrees....for about twenty seconds!

The Okie St trip was one of my favorites, for all the reasons you mention.

Going back to Ft Sill, and then to Okie St, where my big sis and former bro-in-law went to school (I spent quite a bit of time on campus, when they got married and he was going to grad school there, too. I stayed there with them a month, or so, one summer) was really special....some FIFTY YEARS LATER!!!

I miss those kinds of trips a LOT!

DAMM COVID............

 

[FnuLnu]

Can we talk about how far the conference has actually fallen. When I was in school (secondary and post) in the 70's and 80's, the Pac-10 owned the Rose Bowl, 15-2 between 71 and 87, we had the best overall bowl record, the best OOC record and had the most players in the NFL by a significant margin. The Pac-12 in now clearly the weakest of the power five conferences. We aren't only soft, we are talent deprived, top to bottom.

What happen? The conference presidents just weren't, and aren't, willing to commit to continuing excellence in their flagship sport. They went cheap, so cheap in fact they allowed themselves to be conned by the ultimate "mono rail" pitch man Larry Scott in an obvious get rich quick scheme.

Pac12 (Pac8?) "dominance" was brought forth by large federal spending by FDR and Feds which brought forth large migration of football playing whites and blacks from the south (aka "Okies" and "Arkies") to the state of California and Washington (state of Oregon much much less which is why they sucked pre Uncle Phil).

The sons of these "Okies" and "Arkies" were the ones kicking the asses of Big 10 and yes SEC teams (when they rarely played the Pac8).
This benefit is long gone and not coming back.

Btw, this is also why Jim Walden was a bad coach compared to the other coaches then at WSU. Had the same demographic advantages that Chaplin, Raveling, and Bobo did but instead ran a undisciplined clown show program.

 

[Stretch 74]

I think the ferociously hot aluminum bleachers were in Dallas, at SMU? I remember that day so well, as when a puffy little cloud would dare pass in front of the sun, the temp would drop about 20 degrees....for about twenty seconds!

The Okie St trip was one of my favorites, for all the reasons you mention.

Going back to Ft Sill, and then to Okie St, where my big sis and former bro-in-law went to school (I spent quite a bit of time on campus, when they got married and he was going to grad school there, too. I stayed there with them a month, or so, one summer) was really special....some FIFTY YEARS LATER!!!

I miss those kinds of trips a LOT!

DAMM COVID............

********************

Yeah, I remember that Dallas trip also, it was also brutally hot. I remember hanging out in that bookstore by the SMU stadium and getting to meet and chat with Everson Walls. Since my wife and I were both Cowboy fans I bought his book and had him sign it for her. He seemed like a pretty cool guy, down to earth and glad to be talking with us peasants.

I remember that trip for visiting/staying with your sis, visiting the Book Depository, and great meals at the Mexican place and Bone Daddy's!

I still have that picture that George took of the Three Amigo's sitting in the stands in Stillwater with their football bldg in the back ground. It's in the office, see it every day.

 

[Wasichus]

********************

Yeah, I remember that Dallas trip also, it was also brutally hot. I remember hanging out in that bookstore by the SMU stadium and getting to meet and chat with Everson Walls. Since my wife and I were both Cowboy fans I bought his book and had him sign it for her. He seemed like a pretty cool guy, down to earth and glad to be talking with us peasants.

I remember that trip for visiting/staying with your sis, visiting the Book Depository, and great meals at the Mexican place and Bone Daddy's!

I still have that picture that George took of the Three Amigo's sitting in the stands in Stillwater with their football bldg in the back ground. It's in the office, see it every day.

Bone Daddy's...yumm...on a number of levels!!

Funny thing - I also have that picture on display in my "Coug Den"!!

 

[425cougfan]

Second post...what the PAC should do.

This one, frankly, is harder. There are no obvious geographic fits that also meet the academic profile. So growth is off the table, unless you want to span multiple time zones, and unless the B12 craters, there are not a lot of good choices there. So I'm going to assume that we stay at 12 schools for the foreseeable future. Frankly, growth is not the solution to all problems, regardless of what you might be told at business school, so this is not a killer...it is simply a less attractive path for the PAC at this time.

So what to do? And specifically, what to do in football? I'll start with our 9 league/3 noncon format. I understand why we do that to ourselves; one reason was so that the WA and OR teams play in LA at least every other year. However...the SEC fattens their W/L every year with 8 league/4 noncons. IMHO we either do the same, or we go the other way completely, and play every other team in the league...11 league/1 noncon. What is dumb is handicapping ourselves with the 9/3 format. We will never be in a position to change the SEC to match...they will stay 8/4...so to have a level scheduling playing field we either do the same, or we differentiate ourselves by playing a full league schedule. There are some downsides to the full league schedule approach...less exposure around the country, and less likely to have an undefeated team are two that come to mind immediately...but you can sell anything that you can differentiate. 9/3 vs 8/4 is not sufficiently differentiable enough to sell. I'd dump the 9/3 format...the only question is what should take its place.

The second question is the PAC network. Somebody who knows more than I do needs to do a legitimate analysis of the options. If fully owning and running your own network is likely to pay off within a reasonable amount of time...I'll call that 3-5 years at most...then maybe you keep it as-is. If not, you move to one of the other options...either a deal with a major network, or instead you make a deal with a streaming giant. Pick your giant. Again, it has to start with a rational assessment of where we can reasonably expect to be from a PAC network financial perspective within a few years. Larry is not capable of doing this. The PAC network is his baby, and nobody wants to be told that their baby is ugly. The league presidents have to engage the consultant on their own, and make every effort to make sure that the consultant does not do what most consultants do...cook the results to fit the intent of those who hired them. Ideally I would hire two groups...one being one of the big 5 accounting firms...and the other somebody more out of the box...like Creative Artists Agency, for example. Then hold up the recommendations side by side.

Finally, CTE is not going away. The whole covid experience is likely to reinforce for anyone with a pulse that, while people always want to stick their head in the sand and ignore reality, they can't do it forever. There is a role for the league in research into understanding the CTE process. And no, it is not fully understood. Not even close. Existing changes in equipment and rules are only general guesses when the actual process is not fully understood. We as a league need to be the leader in that research, and as the research is done and conclusions can be drawn, we are likely to be the leader in both equipment and rules innovation. That is both smart business and good ethics (usually the two go hand in hand). The PAC has the research horsepower to do this, and it is not even a strictly sports related topic. We should own this.

CTE research may be a good and noble thing to do ... not contending otherwise. Not sure why it's good business, though, unless it's to be the first mover in going to flag football or abandoning football for soccer (with headers banned). If the Pac-12 or its member schools conducted research finding means to reduce CTE, those simply would be adopted by everyone else, too, especially if we're just talking about a rules change. I guess I could see it if the thought is that we'd have a university develop a patented invention used in helmets and then make a bunch of money off of licensing that patented invention ... but it seems like that would just result in massive increases in the costs of helmets for broke high schools, and would involve a ton of money spent on the research, with research funds lacking generally. Sort of like COVID-19 vaccine purveyors, using those as profit centers probably doesn't work.

Again, not saying the research is unimportant or shouldn't be done. CTE is real and significant. Just not sure why the Pac-12 should consider that a business imperative or something it needs to lead on if we're talking about ways to keep the conference from becoming irrelevant on the football field and national stage.

 

[cr8zyncalif]

CTE research may be a good and noble thing to do ... not contending otherwise. Not sure why it's good business, though, unless it's to be the first mover in going to flag football or abandoning football for soccer (with headers banned). If the Pac-12 or its member schools conducted research finding means to reduce CTE, those simply would be adopted by everyone else, too, especially if we're just talking about a rules change. I guess I could see it if the thought is that we'd have a university develop a patented invention used in helmets and then make a bunch of money off of licensing that patented invention ... but it seems like that would just result in massive increases in the costs of helmets for broke high schools, and would involve a ton of money spent on the research, with research funds lacking generally. Sort of like COVID-19 vaccine purveyors, using those as profit centers probably doesn't work.

Again, not saying the research is unimportant or shouldn't be done. CTE is real and significant. Just not sure why the Pac-12 should consider that a business imperative or something it needs to lead on if we're talking about ways to keep the conference from becoming irrelevant on the football field and national stage.

Fair and valid questions re: why I think there is a role for the PAC relating to CTE, 425. I'll try to respond. Bear in mind that these are merely my opinion, but I've had quite a bit of time to think about it, so perhaps some of this will make sense. I wish Larry was able to spend some productive time thinking about these things, because if you can't/don't renew your vision for the future periodically, it can get out of step with reality pretty fast.

I'll start with the difference between leading and managing. The PAC has not been a leader in "major" sports for at least 30 years. Frankly, I have not been impressed with our management, either, but we certainly have not been perceived as a leader. Part of the recovery program for the PAC needs to be a national change in that perception. CTE strikes me (sorry...accidental pun) as being a very good vehicle for that leadership perception change, while permitting us to also market to recruits that we are committed to them, not just big sports bucks. A lot of that research would be underwritten by existing programs, but without leadership the effort will probably never be focused.

A second issue in the PAC has been second rate officiating...and I'd measure that in terms of inconsistency, if nothing else. If we were the perceived leader in CTE research, and if the research was at all productive, you would see changes in the game resulting from the research. Rules...equipment...frankly, I am not sure exactly how it would change. Nobody is sure at this point, which is why we either lead and cause football to evolve, or we wait until the public outcry over CTE simply grows to the point that it buries it. As these changes occur, the rule changes will inevitably lead to adaptations in officiating. We could couple this with an overall drive to improve our officials, further improving the perception (as well as the reality) of the PAC. A good place to start would be consistent targeting enforcement (not necessarily targeting calls; often that happens so fast, you can't really expect officials to be perfect...but with review, the enforcement could be made more consistent; and that also probably means more than the minimum 6 camera angles at every game). A commitment to better officiating could go hand in hand with a commitment to being the CTE comprehension leader.

Finally, I'll note that the SEC is probably perceived today as the leader in college football...and you can understand why. Wins over enough time will do that for a conference. But there is also an undercurrent of cheating, lack of concern for the player's future, safety being secondary to W/L, etc., that corrodes the SEC's perception; which is the same thing as saying that it corrodes their brand. As part of the improvement of the PAC brand, it would help to be perceived as being the adults in the room. And while there are many ways to do that, CTE offers one path. With the exception of the B10, there probably is not another conference in the country who would be capable of being a leader in this regard. Ask yourself this: if the B10 announced that they were going to be the leaders in terms of CTE going forward, and had a real plan to do so, wouldn't you ask yourself why the PAC had not already done this? I would...