09.Jun.2010 USC Ruling & Pac-10 Expansion

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)

USC will be hit with a “Failure to Monitor” penalty. The fact that agents (rather than boosters) provided gifts and money is going to be the difference. My feeling is the NCAA had their decision back in February, but likely felt they didn’t have enough evidence to go with the harsher “Lack of institutional control” penalty, so they figured they’d make USC sweat and receive negative media attention as additional punishment.

The negative publicity hasn’t seemed to hurt recruiting this year. Though, I’d be surprised if there isn’t a wrist slap on scholarship numbers–expect a small reduction.

Are these penalties fair? No. I’m of the opinion that USC should get the SMU death sentence, but hey, I am harsh. Sanctions will probably wind up being a milder form of what happened in Alabama. An admonition if you will. Keep in mind that barring USC from post season play hurts the Beavers. Conference revenue is shared. So, again, we have to deal with the question of what is ethical or fair versus what is good for us as Beaver fans. It’s difficult.

My problem with USC is that when you look at the product on the field, it wreaks of shadiness, from the coaches they hire to the players they produce (e.g. was anyone surprised to see Brian Cushing test positive? Did anyone ever wonder why he and his fellow LBs were twice as big and jacked as the opponents’ linebackers?). When you look at them, something just looks wrong. This is not grass fed cattle we’re dealing with, boys. That’s the best way to put it. The NCAA has a golden opportunity to put an end to that and level the playing field. Think of the John Robinson (II) era, when USC was good but not a machine. That is normal. What we see now is abnormal. Something is amiss.

As far as PAC-10 expansion, I am growing a bit tired of it, but it looks like the chips will fall into place within the next week. I expect the PAC-16, and this is why: If Nebraska announces an intent to move to the Big-10, Missouri will then follow so as not to be left out. That signals the end of the Big-12. It also puts the Big-10 at 13 teams, which means they will pluck 2 teams from the Big East, likely Pitt and Syracuse, and force Notre Dame’s hand (note: the Big East is Notre Dame’s conference for every sport but football). Notre Dame wants to remain independent so as to manipulate their schedule and hoard revenue, so they will not be proactive and make a jump to the Big-10. If they did this, the Big-10 would be content and everything would remain status quo. However, they won’t, because they could always rejoin the league later as the 16th team. Therefore, despite what the Irish want you to believe, everything revolves around Nebraska, and since they loathe Texas’s influence over the Big-12, the Cornhuskers likely bolt for the Big-10. Expect the PAC-10 to vulture the tasty scraps.

While I dislike the likely scenario for competitive purposes (kiss goodbye realistic hope of a BCS bowl game), it would be nice to have an operating budget, facility upgrades, etc.  Essentially what you wind up with is a de facto playoff system via the “super conference’s” championship game winner moving on to the title game. Could little Oregon State compete in such a scenario? I’ll leave that answer up to you guys.

Jump to Bottom
  • angrybeaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    On a side note, Masoli was kicked off the Ducks:

    http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindducksbeat/2010/06/oregon_quarterback_jeremiah_ma.html

    Expect another Olander issue. I am telling you, people do not change. Or if they do, it’s really really really infrequent.

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    First off, here’s a look at our APR:
    http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/apr2009/528_2009_apr.pdf
    Football is moving up, and look at that nice 1000 for hoops. I don’t want to see the women’s hoops APR next year. The 923 they got this year is bad enough.

    Masoli gone… at least they don’t have that distraction anymore.

    Olander will streak across the MU quad one drunk night, and the police will beat him to a pulp while he screams, “Don’t taze me bro!” Then he’ll be charged with multiple counts of first degree felony assault of a police officer’s knuckles with a rib.

  • CastorNation says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I don’t see the difference with playing this upcoming season and competing in a new Pac 16. We have two top five OOC games this year and the PAC 10 round robin. Presumably we would have a western division round robin of seven games. Then two to four out of division games and one to three OOC games. Looks a lot like this season. If the Beavers want to go to the next level they need to be able to play with Texas, Oklahoma and USC. I don’t remember any games with any of those Big 12 teams. Except a few years ago OU came to Eugene. And USC was in the NC game with Texas ( I was cheering for Texas ). Maybe as a result we could drop the crappy weekly polls. We could have the same polls they have in the pros. No rankings, winner take all playoff. I think OSU has shown they have a large pair in the OOC games they schedule, but they are still a little fish in a big pond. In a Pac 16 they would still be a little fish, except they would get more exposure. And possibly more talent.
    On another level is the 5 rivalries of the Pac 10. What would that look like for the new teams. OU and OSU, the Texas schools and where does that leave Colorado? It makes more sense from a rivalry standpoint to take four Tesas schools and two Oklahoma schools. CU could join MWC with CO state and Air Force. It is nice to have all this mess while waiting for kick off.

    • JackBeav says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Screw Baylor. I’ve been to Whacko, and I’m never going back. I’m having a hard enough time accepting Lubbock as a destination of any sort.

      I would much rather have Rice join from an academic standpoint. Inclusion would necessitate facility upgrades, but they can afford it after they see a revenue stream. And Houston is easy to get to.

      I may be a little partial on that one, but I’ve seen all the old Southwest Conference rivalries. Baylor and TTech were irrelevant for a long time. Rice was and still pretty much is, but the tradition and respect between them, UT and aTm are not matched by either of them… not even close.

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Colorado = Denver TV market
      Waco=same TV market you get with the 3 other TX schools.

      It’s no contest. Plus CO has a storied history and the right academics.

      • Beavker Beavker says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        Of course they just got hit with some sanctions of their own…I believe for academics.

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    USC being banned from postseason play wouldn’t really hurt us. It might hurt the Pac 10 as a whole, but OSU would be fine. Our chance to go to a BCS game goes through USC. If we’re beating USC, so are other schools. Our best bet to ever play in a BCS bowl has to be a better scenario than the 2000 season. We have to win the conference. If there’s a one loss team behind us, they better be another top five program’s only loss or they aren’t going to a BCS bowl.

    So there’s the USC one loss BCS scenario which goes out the door, but that’s about it.

    Keeping the four charter members together in a division within a conference should be important. Wazzu and Stanford joined one and two years after formation due to rivalry, so they have to remain as well. And none of those six schools wants to lose the LA Metro area as a part of the conference, so USC and UCLA are must haves.

    That would leave the proposed Big XII teams with the Zonies. I’m not a big fan of TTech or OkSt in these rumors, but I understand that they want to include rivalries. The only reason I’m somewhat of a fan of OU being included is because they’ll just be in trouble half the time, and highly competitive the rest of the time.

    That being said, I don’t think it diminishes our chances at a BCS bowl. It might actually help a late starting team like ours. Add our slowly (very slowly, but slowly nonetheless) progressing football program to facility upgrades which would be available due to the influx of money, and we could be very competitive year in and year out.

    And I love the expansion on the hoops side… especially if the Big East and ACC are torn apart because of football. UO and UW have had their days as conference powers, and they have been underwhelming at best. We’re poised to take it all away from them and sit back on the hoops throne. If that happens, only UCLA would stand in our way on an annual basis. Arizona would most likely take over in the other division, though the jury is still out on Sean Miller. Only Texas really poses any threat on an annual basis.

    But perception would increase the conference’s power rankings, and being the second or third best team every year means nice seeds in the Tourney. Again facility upgrades would mean that success would be sustainable.

    The conference’s baseball RPI goes beyond #1 immediately. This expansion could have us hosting half the regionals in any given year.

    Now all we need is a track and field team. Maybe then we could pass ourselves off as a legitimate athletic program.

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      “But perception would increase the conference’s power rankings”

      Very true. We’d be SEC, west.

      How has that helped a school like Mississippi State, though? My feeling is we’ll be the Mississippi State of said hypothetical conference.

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      “USC being banned from postseason play wouldn’t really hurt us. It might hurt the Pac 10 as a whole, but OSU would be fine.”

      This doesn’t make sense to me, Jack. You acknowledge it might hurt the pac-10 as a whole, of which OSU belongs, but then say it won’t hurt OSU.

      • JackBeav says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        In a revenue sense, we would all be hurt slightly. But that’s only with the consideration that we put two teams in BCS games every year. That hasn’t happened enough to warrant any real concern. So it’s not like we’re missing any revenues because of their potential ban.

        We still have to beat them to go to the BCS, or at least make our case. So it could aid us a little more than it hurts us. That may not be the case with other programs around the conference, so the good doesn’t necessarily outweigh the bad in their cases.

      • angrybeaver says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        Gotcha, yeah I agree with that. But even if USC goes to a lower bowl like this past year, that’s still $100,000 we’d miss out on after it’s split 10 ways. That’s a handful of scholarships paid for…

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    And just like that… Nebraska is gone.

    Buh-bye Big XII.

  • angrybeaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Kansas is interesting. They’re going to wind up in the MWC. I’d rather have them over Texas Tech…just saying. Not that I want any of those teams. I’d rather have Utah or Boise over both, and that’s saying a lot because I can’t stand the WAC or MWC. I’d also rather have TCU, though I don’t see how adding more TX schools helps with markets. Wouldn’t Utah make more sense than a 3rd or 4th TX school? I realize the Longhorns want them in for whatever reason (politics?), but why wouldn’t they want more money in the SLC TV market over ties to a crappy school?

    To me Texas Tech is the worst of the 6 schools. Gotta figure a way to snub Baylor (I think they’ll use the religious angle) and Texas Tech.

    Utah, Boise St, Kansas, and TCU are all better choices than Texas Tech.

    Also, I wonder if it’s possible Notre Dame tries to join the Big 12 and ride Texas’s coattails by taking the spot vacated by Nebraska. Weird scenario and bad match all around, but now that the dominoes are falling we’re going to see ND panic. Couldn’t happen to a worse group of guys.

  • angrybeaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Another real concern of mine is how much clout Texas would have in the Pac-10. In two years time, would we get demands such as “We don’t like Oregon State or Washington State, replace them with school x or we’re leaving the conference.”?? Texas seems unable to get along with anyone. It’s college football version of a hot girl dating an average guy…the latter is so happy to have the former they’ll do irrational things to maintain the former.

    I hope Larry Scott realizes what he is getting into here. I hope he’s thinking about what could go wrong and writes in provisions that keep Texas in line. The joining members, should this happen, need to understand there is a rich tradition amongst the eight teams in the western division.

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I would rather have Kansas as well. And I’m disappointed we didn’t push earlier to try for Nebraska.

    I think TTech is much better academically than either Okie school, but that’s not saying much. CU, UT and aTm are the better schools by far. I think Kansas is slightly better than TTech, but it is perceived as better for whatever reason. I’m guessing its regional dominance in hoops has something to do with it.

    New Mexico and Rice would both be better than TTech and the Okies… by far. But UNM doesn’t bring a big market, and Rice only brings a huge endowment. Utah is on par with UNM with a slightly bigger market.

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      “And I’m disappointed we didn’t push earlier to try for Nebraska”

      I think that’s a bad match. They’re made for the Big-10. Same football mindset with focus on Midwest hogs rather than the skill positions. Teams of good ol’ boys built for bad weather, basically. The only good thing about getting Nebraska is it would mean one less Texas school and a natural rivalry with Colorado.

      I’m ecstatic about Colorado. Love that state, and that is a town I’d actually travel to in order to watch a game. Such a good match.

      “TTech is much better academically than either Okie school, but that’s not saying much”

      Yeah, I guess we’re selling out on our image as a classy high brow conference. Is that worth 15 mil? I guess. I like the image as it is, though, to be honest. I wish the schools involved understood the PAC-10s history and worked together to find the best matches. As much as I hate Utah, they are a better match than Texas Tech. With their ski team, they’d help maintain the erudite/privileged sport reputation.

    • JackBeav says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Yeah, I like Boulder too. Other than the southwestern part of the state, it’s the only town I can like more than just stomach. They fit the Pac 10 mould well.

      I threw UNM in there because I think they fit our mould much better than does Utah.

      I still think schools like UC Davis, Hawai’i Manoa and Britich Columbia would be excellent academic and cultural fits as well. They also bring with them under-served markets. Maybe when Texas eventually destroys this coalition we can add those schools, keep CU and add Utah and UNM as well.

      But that would be years down the road, and the mid-major development of their athletic programs would have to be accelerated in order to warrant their inclusion… though Utah has made its case over the past several years.

      I’m thinking that Boise State is feeling a little stung about being snubbed by the MWC again. I wonder if the WAC should make a play for the remaining Big XII schools in order to gain some power before the MWC tries to make a move to which they feel entitled.

      • angrybeaver says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        What would any of those schools gain by going to the WAC, though? All small time markets and schools. At least the MWC has TCU and the Utah schools. Much better revenue I’d imagine, and also more respectable. The MWC would get a BCS birth if they add the Big XII scraps. It’s hard to imagine schools like Kansas, with such pride, would “stoop” to playing in the MWC. Maybe they try to form a new conference or team up with some Big East schools, though geography would be a major problem. What happens to Kansas is one of the more fascinating sub plots in the story.

        All of this goes into effect in 2012 as far as I can tell, so we’d have two more shots at the Rose Bowl. Has anyone read otherwise? I really hope the Beavs can pull that off before expansion.

  • angrybeaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I’m seeing reports all around the net that the six Big 12 schools have accepted the PAC-10s invite. Not sure if any of it is true.

    Nebraska to the Big 10 is confirmed.

    According to beat writer Mitch Sherman, Nebraska moved for two reasons:

    1. Texas manipulated the Big 12 into moving the conference championship game permanently to Texas Stadium.

    2. The Big 12 commissioner gave Nebraska an ultimatum to make a decision by the end of this week, but no ultimatum was given to Texas to make a decision on the Pac 10.

    This is the kind of clout I feared earlier when discussing Texas. They’re going to try to run the PAC-10 now. Beaver beware. Yeah, 15 mil extra is very very nice, but we’re going to be their bitches for it.

    • Beavker Beavker says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      As a Husker fan as well, I immediately thought about these things as I saw the ‘ultimatum’ given to Nebraska. Who outwardly shot down the idea of the Big 10 for a while now, as it was Mizzou that started that move idea. Then Texas with the Pac 16 stuff…then Nebraska is the lynch pin in this whole mess. I’m fairly new to the area, so I don’t have the deep Big 12/Big 8 roots like a lot of folks have. I’m just as happy to see Michigan, Ohio State or Notre Dame come to town.

      Colorado though…fans are not the greatest. Just a few years ago (and not the first time this has happened I’m told) they had to clear the student section at half time.

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Beavker, where are you living now and if it’s Big-12 country what is the sentiment? Are Nebraska fans relieved of their divorce with Texas? I can’t shake the feeling that getting involved with Texas is like an Aries dating a Leo…

      In other words, not a good thing.

      • Beavker Beavker says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        I live in Omaha. A lot of people have an affity towards the Big 12, but I think it’s mostly with Oklahoma as an original 8 team. I think that people would truly be pleased to get rid of Texas. Of course we may get a Notre Dame that would replace them. I think the Pac will find they get USC part II when the Longhorns are in town. Privilege.

        Of course the same folks whining about leaving the Big 12 are probably the same ones that complained about getting a new, state of the art, downtown facility to replace Rosenblatt. I was not one of those. Things change, you move on. I would be excited to get the chance to see the Huskers every game without paying $30 (PPV). Especially since the stadium has sold out since Kennedy was President. Same with the Beavers. I get to see most as I have a sports tier with Dish that gets most of the Fox Sports stations (West, NW, SW), and others (Like the Sun Network that showed the Beavers/Gators Baseball debacle).

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I read that the Big XII by-laws require nine of the 12 schools to sign off on dismantling the conference. I don’t know if that’s true or not. But if it is, it leaves KU, KSU, BU and ISU In something of a power position still.

    They could conceivably add TCU, Boise, Utah, BYU, and UNM.

    Since it sounds like Mizzou may get left out in the cold as well, they could still have a very viable football/hoops conference.

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      I don’t think that is true, since the penalty for leaving the conference is about 10 million dollars. If every team just paid the penalty and withdrew (a) who would they pay it to, a conference that doesn’t exist? and (b) the fact that you can buy your way out suggests you don’t need a voting system. Also, if 9 of 12 teams are needed and you now only have 11 teams that goes out the window, too. Not sure how all that works, but those are my first thoughts.

    • JackBeav says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      OK… looking at their by-laws I can see where the article came up with nine to dissolve. It takes a vote of 75% of existing members to add/remove/dissolve. So when it’s down to five or four remaining members, it would take a vote of four or three to dissolve. If they remain, the Big XII remains intact.

      But here’s the kicker…

      In order to be a conference in the NCAA, you must have six members who have competed against each other for the past five years.

      • angrybeaver says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        Here’s an article on it.

        http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1092612

        Basically, if nobody is left to collect it it’s not paid. So my first thought was the Big 12 would stay intact and invite Mountain West teams to join their conference. The members who are left behind aren’t going to leave all that buyout money on the table. Right? But if what you are saying is true and they need six members who have competed against one another for five years, then the Big 12 cannot exist, because with Nebraska’s defection and the Pac-10 taking six, they’d only have five schools remaining, falling one short.

        Baylor, Kansas, Iowa State, Kansas State, Missouri.

        This should be a lesson to the bullies out there. Nebraska totally hosed the conference that pushed them around. Wish I were a Cornhusker fan as that kind of vindictive redemption has to feel good.

      • JackBeav says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        The NCAA rule that stipulates that condition does not rule out the formation of a new conference with the addition of at least six members from another conference. It was originally drafted out of a fear that the big revenue schools could gather together in their own special conference and take all the TV revenue with them.

        So the five remaining could conceivably add the whole MWC to it instead of the other way around.

        I’m not absolutely sure about that, but it’s what I understand thus far.

        • JackBeav says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          If that understanding is true, then we’re talking about a $5m entry reward for each new member of the new Big XIV. Plus, the TV contract remains intact… though I’m sure there must be a gazillion outs for just such an occasion. But we would be talking about a new conference that still has a footprint in Texas and California as well as The whole of the inter-mountain west. Throw in Boise and Nevada a couple years down the road, and we have a party.

          Though I must admit that I would really just enjoy seeing Kansas play in a real hoops conference. It’s just a stroke of luck that the four best hoops programs in the Big XII are left out to dry while the football guys run away.

          In fact, KU, KSU, Baylor, Mizzou, Utah, BYU, UNM, SDSU and UNLV just sounds like a line-up I would never want to face in hoops.

      • angrybeaver says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        If they can do that I am sure they will and collect 70 million dollars in the process. The more I read about Texas destroying their past conferences the less I want this to happen. It would be cool if Texas were rational, grounded people, but they aren’t…at some point they’re going to say “why are we giving Oregon State 20 million dollars?” because essentially they would be…

        • JackBeav says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          I don’t feel bad about using them. We’ll give it about 10 to 15 years, then we can jettison the five eastern schools for some who can appreciate the Western culture.

          Poor Texas is so stuck on themselves that they can’t relate to the West, the Midwest or the South. The best description I’ve read was on an SEC blog:

          “In the end they’re just Texas, peremptory and parochial.”

  • angrybeaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Notre Dame to Big-10.

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/403805-breaking-news-notre-dame-and-four-others-to-join-big-ten-conference

    Unconfirmed but reported on Fox Sports so it’s probably a solid source.

    WOW.
    I figured they’d join as the 16th team AT SOME POINT, but not today. It’s about time they have to play a real schedule, though. Weird that they took Syracuse and Maryland over Pitt. Pitt is so solid across every front. Guess they want the NY market and a footprint in ACC land. Sad that this entire sport is becoming about “markets” rather than athletics/academics and history. Human meddling. How long before players are paid and the entire thing is ruined? I’d guess we have ten more years of watchable college athletics.

    • ObjCritic says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      That’s my fear right there. The more this becomes about big money, the less watchable it will become over time.

      I quit watching the NFL and NBA years ago; the NFL because it got so vanilla and boring (it has diversified offenses and improved recently though I think) and the NBA for the ridiculous WWF-style officiating that treats “superstars” different from veterans different from journeymen different from rookies. NCAA football was/is my last holdout. However, the downward spiral seems inevitable to me; witness USC the last several years — big bowls, big money, Pete gone before the sanctions kick in….I know every school has its abuses, but when it becomes programmatic that just sucks.

      The advertisers won’t mourn my lack of viewership, there’s plenty out there who watch a lot more t.v than me.

      I’ll enjoy my OSU season tickets though, and catching the last year of the Rodgers together….

  • angrybeaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Ted Miller says it’s going to happen.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5270048

    Brace me.

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Though, this would be awesome:

      “The Pac-16 would push for two automatic bids to the BCS, one for each division champion. That potential bonanza could open the possibility of the two division champs from one league playing for the national title, and it would eliminate the need for a conference championship game.”

      “The Pac-10 doesn’t believe in a championship game,” the coach said. “And coaches in the Big 12 don’t like it anyway.””

      • angrybeaver says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        That is, two automatic bids. It makes sense…it’s too hard otherwise. The odds of a BCS birth would actually increase to 1/8 if indeed the conference is granted two automatic BCS births.

  • angrybeaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    USC two year bowl ban. OSU’s path to the Rose/BCS bowl just became easier. The conference as a whole is worse off because of this, but it’s the right thing. I have no issue with the decision. The severity surprises me a bit. Still no word on how many (if any) scholarships were yanked.

    Wonder what effect this will have on recruiting. Probably see quite a few guys reconsider.

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Wow, 20 scholies yanked. Amazing. Love the NCAA.

      http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-usc-20100610,0,7548894.story

      Darn, I really wanted to see the toothless celebration.

    • CastorNation says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      20 Football scholarships. I think it’s all good. Like you said earlier, something is not right with them. I’m sure that this was the tip of the iceberg.

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      It’s pretty incredible, Castor. They’re talking about vacating the 2004 national title.

      If OSU were smart they’d target some of these kids and talk about how sound the program has been with the NCAA. Lane Kiffin is known for bosky recruiting, so life will get worse before better for the condoms.

      • JackBeav says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        Not that those wins and seasons didn’t mean anything, but no future sanctions would have been a travesty. What’s the point of a punishment if all it consists of is telling the child he just needs to forget his birthday three years ago, and all will be good to go?

        Vacated wins or not, USC still kept others from participating to their fullest potential, and they still get to wink and nod and say they were the best team in the nation anyway.

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I don’t understand. What’s the time period for the scholarship loss? Is it two years in conjunction with the postseason ban?

  • ximiank says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I believe Alabama loss scholarship spread for 4-5 years

    so it is possible the scholarship loss would be spread to 4-5 years.

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Colorado will officially be announced as the newest member of the Pac 10… er… Televen… in 15 minutes.

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Love it. I’ve always had a weird man-crush on the Buffs…grew up watching Kordell/Westbrook and dreamed of moving to Colorado. Never happened but the crush remains. Great state/city.

      • Beavker Beavker says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        I think you’re in love with Colorado 1990’s, but being here in Huskerland, they’re not the cherished school I think they were. Bad fans, teams that have not been good lately, no baseball team, recent sanction by the NCAA:

        http://www.denverpost.com/colleges/ci_15264782

        I’m not sold yet. They’ll be in the “East Confernce” so the Beavs and Ducks (since they have a bit of a history) won’t see each other every year I’m guessing.

        But…whatever. Their in.

        • Beavker Beavker says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          …and didn’t we just finally get rid of Hawkins! He’s killing me (as Linfield fan (Willamette), Beavers fan (Boise State) and now Huskers fan (Colorado)!

      • JackBeav says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        Colorado is a beautiful state, but the population has a schism between West Coast transplants and natives who cherish their individuality. It’s a little like Oregon in that sense, except they have no cultural ties to the ocean.

        The population pockets which accept an open culture are pretty much just Durango and Boulder. Denver has become a little more cosmopolitan over the years, so a West Coast connection may push them into that category as well. Fort Collins reminds me a lot of a larger version of Corvallis with it’s conservative living and somewhat open mind, but on a bad day it still smells like Greeley.

        And I loved the geography of Colorado Springs, but it was like living in Fresno with a heavy military influence.

        Hawkins is going to have to be lucky to make it to the Pac 16 as something other than an O-coordinator on the West Coast.

  • angrybeaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    This was enjoyable. Good stuff on how/why OSU (and the other small schools) won’t be able to compete.

    http://ucla.freedomblogging.com/2010/06/09/talking-points-debating-pac-10-expansion/16255/

    • JackBeav says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Cute… and a little correct.

      The problem with traditional powers gaining more power is that parity is like water. It will seep into the cracks and break up what was once thought to be rock solid.

      Take the SWC and the Big XII for example. Arkansas left the SWC because it was tired of the Texas-centric attitude within the conference. Despite their success at that time, Arkansas just could not level the field in terms of credibility and revenue. The SWC realized that their structure had become a little bit of cream and a whole lot of non-fat milk.

      Baylor and TTech really lucked into the Big XII inclusion due to politics, and they made the most of it with facility and program upgrades. Kansas, K State, Ok State and Mizzou did well for themselves also. The programs who suffered the most were Colorado and aTm. Even Nebraska had some tough times, but I chalk that up to the same reason UCLA is constantly down… coaching.

      Maybe CU and aTm are responsible for their own demise through poor coaching as well, but they are the two who were at the top of the game 15 years ago, and they’re middling to poor now… with nothing in between.

      But there was distrust and inequity within the Big XII. What benefited some irked others. And parity found its way into the cracks by providing better revenue sources to those who felt maligned.

      Your worries about UT eventually busting the new Pac 16 to pieces are justified due to history. But they are accepting an invitation to something bigger than they are for once. By doing so, they can lead the way forward. If anyone thinks (beyond worry) that the immense monied interests behind the California schools will take a back seat to Texas in any way, they are just fools.

      There will be an equality within the new system which assures all involved a fair shake. The new revenues will highly benefit the workmanlike schools named State. And the leader will be the richest of them all… Stanford.

      Don’t forget that these schools are also aligning their academic sides with each other. And, for better or worse, the academic side has money in it that puts athletics to shame.

      Just look at OSU versus UO on the academic side. We rule the roost by far because our operating budget is 20% greater than it is at UO. But their athletic budget is 20% greater than ours. So our revenues will rise to their level in a couple years. How much more in facility upgrades needs to happen before our team takes the parity stick to the traditional (and hyped) powers?

      Unless they increase the size of the football field, then the difference in athletic ability will soon be diminished to the point that we’re in an ‘any given Saturday’ league. Recruiting will have more to do with luck and development than it will with putting proven quantities on the field. The major powers will have a consistent life at the top of the food chain due to their not having to rely so much on that luck, but one or two players with chips on their shoulders could tip the balance for the second level teams in the future.

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    UT and aTm are meeting right now, and they’re expected to accept an offer to join the Pac (#?). Apparently aTm has been talking to the SEC about joining them, but it’s hard to believe that they would part with UT. And it seems very unlikely that UT would move to the SEC. Their own sense of self worth as an academic institution makes them wont for an association with a conference dedicated to a high level of research.

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Little guys beware. That’s all I can say. I see Beavers rejoicing on all the forums. There are things I love about this idea, but there are also things to be very very scared about. Leave it to Beavers to think only of the former.

      • Beavker Beavker says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        The interesting part to me is if they will play the other 7 schools in the ‘West’, who and how many will they play of the other 8.

        Nebraska plays the 5 others in the North, and plays 3 of the 6 in the South. For them though, they get either OU or UT every year. Some teams however have to play both which kills them, or two years later they play neither (as I believe that Orange Bowl winning KU team benefited from that year).

        So does NU play 4 of the 8? Well, that gives them ONE non-conference tune up. Or do they cut it to two? Gives them 3 NC games. If it’s two…who? Maybe they base it on finish the previous year? #1 and #2 play #1 and #2 of the other conference? That’s the trick in my book. Who from the East do they play? Or NOT play. Hate to play OU and UT in the same year while someone else plays CU and TTech (no Mike Leach TTech that is).

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      I’d love to read the final legal agreement. There needs to be protection for the smaller schools. And a voluntary out if the dynamics/politics become overwhelming. Hopefully it will be made public.

      • Beavker Beavker says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        Now I hear a rumor that Texas and aTm may be going to the Big 10 instead, with Oklahoma looking into the SEC.

        Interesting but useless I suppose. I guess we’re going to find out tomorrow for the most part, huh?

        • JackBeav says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          I don’t know how viable these rumors are. TTech and Ok State are reported to already be in. The Texas politics already made a play for Baylor to be included, would they accept TTech to be left behind by UT and aTm?

          Why would the Pac 10 offer Ok St or TTech when we wouldn’t get UT or OU with them? That’s like offering Utah State or Colorado State after Utah or CU turns us down.

          • JackBeav says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            Besides that, the rumor was started by a Kansas City TV station. There’s no motive for a TV station on the Mizzou/Kansas border to make up something like this. Is there?

          • JackBeav says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            Chip Brown, the guy who started all these rumors in the first place, said he asked about the Big 10/SEC rumor, and the OU/UT/aTm sources looked at him with a funny face and said, “Huh?”

          • JackBeav says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            http://twitter.com/ChipBrownOB

          • blazerbeav blazerbeav says:
            VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
            Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

            More from Chip Brown. I don’t see how A&M and UT could separate…

            “Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State and Oklahoma are waiting for a formal announcement by Nebraska about joining the Big Ten before announcing that they, too, are headed west to the Pac-10.

            But sources say Texas A&M is still seriously exploring joining the Southeastern Conference. That charge is being led by A&M regent Gene Stallings, who, of course, won a national title in 1992 at Alabama as head coach.

            Schools that could possibly be considered for invitation to the Pac-10 in place of Texas A&M would include Utah and Kansas, among others, the sources said.”

            http://www.texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1093010

            He also tweeted that “Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech appear to be in lock step to the Pac-10 but will wait til next week to announce anything.”

        • angrybeaver says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          I think what happens is that people want to be the first to break a story, so they make things up and hope they comes true. I wouldn’t believe any rumors at this point. Logic and the bits and pieces from valid sources will get you further.

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I like what one of the reporters in Stillwater called the new Pac 16…

    The Wild West Conference

    Pac 8 and Big 8 divisions?

  • Warren says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    30 scholarships yanked over the next 3 years. Nice!

  • Alex says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    On the Beavers’ level of competition in the PAC-16:

    I think it really comes down to how good as a whole you view the Big 12. Texas and Oklahoma are solid powerhouses but across the board, I don’t think it’s radically different than the PAC-10.

    Yeah we might end up with an ugly schedule, potentially with TX AND OK on it. But geez, have you noticed our OOC lately? The 20 mill payout would EASILY give us the leeway to trade our away games at powerhouses to home games vs cream puffs.

    And if the Beavers have proved anything over the years, it’s
    a) They can win big games late in the season and
    b) They can’t win big games early in the season.

    So I think loading your difficulty later on is a very good move for us. And besides, without heavyweights to beat later on, it’s awfully hard to dig out of the hole the pollsters dig you. I think this improves our shot at a BCS bowl.

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I’ll take Kansas over aTm. I don’t think people understand how steeped in tradition aTm really is… but not always in a good way. They are so peer minded that they would make even the most free spirit go all Holden Caulfield.

    I’m exaggerating of course, but you should get the idea.

    I mean, where else would you find a marching band dressed up like Ranger Smith with a pair of ugly women’s riding boots on? Seriously guys… riding boots for marching? Where are you going to find cheer boys with jar heads who grab themselves and each other during games?

    They are so steeped in tradition, they borrowed the service academies’ tradition of marching in and seating the corps. And it just annoys the hell out of everyone who is not/was never a cadet… especially the student section who has their own tradition of standing, well, swaying in a drunken stupor the whole game.

    And their campus is about as architecturally inspired as the whole of SE Texas. It’s just a jumble of mis-matched buildings on a flat scrape of land. They wanted to give the University such a pastoral setting, they put an airport next to it.

    At least the airport is on the other side of the university from the polo grounds.

    Now that I’ve said something negative about aTm, watch as they go ahead and join the Pac West Big whatever.

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Another school forgotten in all this is Houston. They’re about even with TTech in terms of academics, and they’re in the process of upgrading their facilities. Their athletic achievements were at one time considerable. And they land the conference in the Houston market.

    I would still rather have Kansas, and Utah is a better fit academically. But UH is a better fit than TTech or the Okies. And athletics will get a boost from inclusion in such a conference.

  • angrybeaver says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Mike Garrett is delusional.
    http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-0611-usc-coaches-20100611,0,1745152.story

    Pretty amazing read if you find mental disease interesting.

    • JackBeav says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Thaaaat’s right… flip the bird at the NCAA while you appeal their decision.

      Dad, you’re just jealous of me. That’s the real reason you grounded me… not for wrecking your car. Now how about we just forget this whole ‘grounding’ business and move on like real adults?

      • JackBeav says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        Next will be, “GAWD!!! You’re so unfair! I hate you!!!”

        • Beavker Beavker says:
          VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          Sort of the norm for big $$ sports and politics (by politics I mean actual politicians). No one appologizes for anything anymore. Morals and conscience drop inversely to income and power.

          Not surprised. Really not even worth getting an opinions anymore it seems from the accused.

      • angrybeaver says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        I actually think Garrett might kill himself. After reality has it’s way and the delusion wears off, he’ll be left with a legacy of failure, and his narcissism will not be able to cope with that. It’s the same thing that happened to Hitler and many other narcissists who played the style of substance game.

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Just announced on ESPN…

    Boise State will be the next member of the MWC.

    • Beavker Beavker says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      For reals? I think that’s a good fit. Gives them 10. Maybe they become 12 someday (Fresno State…Nevada?). Almost starts to warrant being a BCS conference? Better than the Big East a few years ago.

      Missouri may be looksing for home! (They started this whole mess in my book).

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Wonder if they went to 10 so they can absorb the 6 teams left behind by the Big 12 and become a superconference.

      edit: oops, forgot Nebraska bolted. 5 teams left behind. They’d still have to find one more.

      • JackBeav says:
        VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        Mizzou might be a good fit with the SEC if aTm goes there as well. I don’t think there’s much love left for them with the remaining Big XII schools.

        I could see aTm and Mizzou going to the SEC. Ga Tech, Va Tech, FSU and/or Miami might find their ways there as well.

        If that happens, I would expect the Pac X to also invite Kansas… though Utah remains a good possibility as well. And I mentioned Houston or Rice earlier, but they seem to be way off anyone’s radar. And to be fair they put themselves off the radar.

        UNM is also a great fit academically, but their football team can just never get it together. I think their central campus is absolutely gorgeous, and their facilities are not bad for where they’ve been over the last 40 years–think Parker in the 90’s with a bigger, better Valley Center. A boost in revenue and a commitment to facility upgrades similar to the one they gave the Pit could make them very desirable.

  • Beavker Beavker says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Here’s an article JackBeav might like, as their is notes regarding the academics and Nebraska’s move. The auther is a one of my favorite writers, he’s cerebral and fair (in my book). Sorry, it’s not about Texas for us Pac 10 people, but it’s all part of the puzzle. Especially since I feel the Donghorns through NU under the bus.

    http://nebraska.statepaper.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2010/06/11/4c111f5278629

    Let me add the thought of not having to decide to get or not get or go to a bar to watch the usual 3 to 4 Pay-per-view games that are usually shown each year is great. I just hope my Tier in Dish will get the Big 10 Network (all channels that is). Though it seems most all the Big 10 games are on anyway.

    • Beavker Beavker says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Man, I need to be able to edit my posts…yikes. Typos and grammer train wrecks.

    • JackBeav says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      I would say that the Big Televen+ will become the premier conference as far as academics is concerned. They have a better vision, in my opinion, of how an academic alliance should be structured. I think they’re second only to the University of California system.

      While Nebraska is usually ranked somewhere around the UO in academics (120-250 depending on the scope), they do have great pride and tradition in actually teaching and graduating their student athletes. Unfortunately for the Pac Whatever, Oklahoma and Arizona combined barely equals NU’s rate in football.

      There’s a commitment from the OSU administration to expand enrollment by 70-100% over the next several years. The major hit that we take in some rankings is the entrance requirements for incoming frosh. But while we try to expand enrollment, we need to allow ourselves to be seen as a viable option from markets other than Oregon’s population. Tuition decreases could do this, but when was the last time you heard of a university doing this? Wait, I think WOU did it last year maybe… I can’t remember exactly who it is.

      Regardless, a greater student body population will allow the late bloomers to blossom at OSU, and we will still provide the service of educating our own kids.

      When taken as a whole, we could do some things better… like business school. The new Reser facility should help with that. Not having a law school hurts us with membership in politically exclusive societies like the AAU. When you look at the list of schools in the AAU, you wonder how half of them received an invitation in the first place.

      What will help us in the end is the OUS’s commitment to Oregon Tech. The medical studies facility upgrades need to be matched on the engineering and pure sciences side. And that needs to become the premier location for science undergrads. I say that because the shared resources within the OUS will raise the level of study at both UO and OSU, but mostly OSU. Having an elite pool of undergrads from which we can both export to other syastems and transfer to OSU for graduate studies would be an immense step in the forward march for perceived respect.

      The CIC is also an interesting concept. We do share resources with the rest of the Pac 10, and we’ve been working with Cornell quite a bit recently. But there has been no real concentrated push from the group as a whole for the benefit of the whole. Look at what happened when the chancellors got off their collective butts and asked their new commissioner to be pro-active.

      Why don’t they think to do something like this on the academic side?

  • JackBeav says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    I’m going to start a rumor right now.

    In related news, Chip Brown will be leaving Rivals and going to ESPN.

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Actually he just tweeted that he’s going to write for angrybeavers.wordpress.com

  • Not a Crime says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Angry, a little off topic but not sure where to fit the question in:

    Being so quick to slam Oreolover (like the nickname) for Golf-Cart-gate.
    What is your thought on Ducks’ Thomas being with Masoli, and the pot being found in front of him in the glovebox? Also vehichle did not belong to Masoli. How in your mind does that compare. And do you think Masoli took the heat on the posession for Thomas?

    • angrybeaver says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Hard to say because I didn’t read much about that case. From what you wrote, it sounds like Thomas probably knew about the dope, but maybe he didn’t. There’s reasonable doubt. It’s not like the golf cart incident where OreoLover was on the cart and everyone saw him. I don’t know enough about Masoli to know if he’d take the heat for a teammate. Maybe, since he knew he was gone. Chip Kelly did the right thing and did it swiftly. I’m sure I/you have been in cars that had pot in the glovebox, and we genuinely didn’t know. Probably didn’t happen that way in this case given the driver’s reputation, but it’s not unreasonable to consider it may have.

      By surrounding himself with a known criminal, we can deduce Thomas has bad judgment and will likely repeat his behavior. My thought is Masoli got what he deserved, and Thomas will mess up again and the next time not be so lucky.

  • Recruiting Updates

  • Categories

  • Archives