Note to Larry Scott: when you bluff Texas cattle wranglers you get them hotter than a nanny goat in a pepper patch, and they send you home in two shakes of a lamb’s tail.
Sorry, chap.
The good news is that the conference is better off without the Big-12 south. Did anyone else have the feeling it was a mismatch we were trying to force for the wrong reasons? I feel relief it’s over, and I’m content with the outcome, since I was only for expansion if Scott could land two specific teams.
Okay, so he landed one. Awkward, but not unworkable.
This is what Larry Scott should do:
1. Poll fans of the PAC-10. Ask what they want. I think the answer would be parity (i.e. fairness), revenue, round robin format (for recruiting purposes), rivalries, excitement (e.g. championship game anyone?), and academics.
2. Achieve all the above. How? Just say “no” to Utah. Go to the NCAA and say, “Listen, we have 11 teams and we’re capping it there. If we play a round robin and remove a creampuff from our schedule, change the bylaw and give us a championship game.”
This would give the fan everything they want.
For Oregon State, it would be especially good. 2/11 = 18% chance of reaching championship game. This gives the “have nots” (Oregon State, Washington State, AZ schools) better odds of something to play for. That is, there is at least an 18% of their last game of the season being meaningful. Once in the game, that is another story: the odds are the same as if there were no championship game–the aforementioned .18*.5 or 9% . The positive thing about a championship game, besides revenue, is it acts as a wild card, giving each team better odds of at least playing in a meaningful game. That is good for the league, even if it means the national embarrassment of an occasional 8-3 team beating a 10-1.
Larry Scott seems intent to etch his legacy in college football. He can still do that by being the first commissioner to get an 11-team conference a championship game. By keeping rivalries and the round robin format intact while increasing revenue via the Denver TV market and a title game, Scott will appease Pac-10 fans while also making his mark in college football history.
Your post and the comments a couple of weeks back turned out to remain quite relevant. I don’t really see the attempt by the Pac 10 to grab Texas, et al, as an embarrassment. Like a home run hitter, they swung for the fences and missed. I appreciate the effort. Scott seems to be getting most of the credit and blame, though to me it seems most likely the idea came from Weiberg, with his inside knowledge of the Big 12.
This post sums up the impact of the actions pretty well in the college football world: http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sports_college/2010/06/conference-expansion-texas-big-winner-pac-10-big-loser.html. I don’t disagree with any of it, though I wish I could. As a Pac fan and a Utah fan, I would like to see the U stay in the MWC and see what they can do with the addition of Boise State.
Also, lots of people promote the idea of a Pac 10 TV network, citing the success of the Big 10 Network. The MWC also has a TV network, the Mountain, which remains rather obscure. So conference networks aren’t always a homerun.
I chimed in on the comments for that Orlando Sentinel article. The comments there are indicative of a lot of blogs and articles.
The public perception is that the Pac 10 is now in the spotlight, and the Big XII is way overvalued and on life support.
The SEC is breathing a sigh of relief because they were caught with their pants down. It’s only natural for them to huff at Larry Scott for being the new kingpin. But they’re not going to be able to put him in the corner. He’s no Tom Hansen.
I think the most enticing part of Scott’s plan was that the Pac 8 would be intact.
I’m pretty sure Utah will be invited and accept membership.
Initial journalistic estimates are in agreement with you. But there’s a huge backlash on message boards and the comment sections of many of these articles which suggests that Larry Scott won the round in a split decision. The public perception is that the Pac 10 and the Big 10 are the drivers in this race, the SEC is stuck in the pits, and the Big XII just went in the wall.
That’s a very different perception than two weeks ago.
And Dan Beebe and ESPN have taken a huge gamble by overvaluing the Longhorn League by more than 40%. From a business standpoint, I am now looking at divesting my assets in ESPN/ABC/Disney/Hearst. They moved irrationally based on emotion, and now they’re going to have to figure out how seriously Texas played them.
On the flip side, Larry Scott gets to point at that overvaluation and ask for the world in his next TV negotiation. He will most likely pull in a deal that resembles what the Big Televen have now. That will bring $18m per year to each of the Pac 12 schools–assuming there are 12.
The only way I see a loss is in the new schedules. If there’s a split which puts LA all in one division, the other division loses. Maybe the revenue alleviates that loss, but we’re going to have to find that out for ourselves.
This is absolutely hilarious.
http://www.cougcenter.com/2010/6/15/1519245/pac-10-expansion-big-12-is-theater
Poach TTech and Mizzou… add UNM and Air Force or the two Kansas schools… or just do nothing. It took the whole of the forces of evil to stave off Larry Scott’s advances. What if he flanks them and gets some very good academic schools instead?
Utah, CU, ASU, UA, UNM, AFA, and TTech, Mizzou or Kansas in the east? With revenue and exposure, they could all become formidable athletically. TTech, KU and Mizzou are outside the Pac 10 as cultural fits, but not as much as the Okie schools are.
It would never happen, but I would love to see the dropped jaws in this world if something like it did.
Hell, I wouldn’t mind adding AFA and UNM in the east and having two 7 team divisions. Since LA would be the midpoint between east and west, we split the LA schools between divisions.
I really hate the split idea. I think most fans do.
I worry about recruiting if we split into divisions. The one unique benefit of this conference is two teams play in LA, so theoretically you can stagger scheduling them so you play in that area yearly. I guess that’s an option if we add Utah and split divisions. I think Scott has a great case for a championship game if he says “each team removed a cream puff, they play a round robin, now let the 1 and 2 teams go at it.”
I’d have to see compelling evidence that Utah adds significant revenue. Splitting what they appear to add a 12th way seems like a wash.
Yes, but it’s a wash with more potential than 11 teams. And that’s not considering the damage done to the MWC’s hopes to become a BCS school.
As someone said in the morass of comments out there:
Maybe Utah joining the Pac 10 will finally make Orrin Hatch shut up.
This is by far the best comment of the day. It’s on an SB*Nation blog about the new Longhorn League’s fantasy financials.
http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/2010/6/15/1519066/the-dan-beebe-pyramid-scheme
It’s a three step process
Step 1: Collect the Underpants
Step 2:
Step 3: Make Profit!
by Kerwin4two on Jun 15, 2010 1:49 PM EDT
Dan Beebe is making Oregon’s recent sports business genius seem like actual sports business genius. And PK’s jet gets to be involved again.
Remind me never to step foot on that plane.
Maybe someone smarter than me can shed some light on this, but how would all teams have an 18% chance at getting to the championship game? I understand the basic math, but that’s considering each team is either equal or we’re flipping coins to qualify for the game. It sure seems to me that OSU has a better chance than WSU to get the game…
There are many ways to look at this, but those are the pure odds given that we don’t know the outcome of the event. Many would argue the percent for each team is either 100% or 0%, meaning they will make it to the championship game or not. It’s semi-valid to look at things that way, but there’s an inherent ex post facto (i.e. sure it’s 100/0%, once it’s over) in the logic, too.
I’m sure Vegas would handicap Washington State in order to get people to wager, but all things being equal, 18% is their mathematical probability. I understand what you’re saying, and you can find probabilities of each event (injuries, schedule, etc) leading up to the championship game and from that find the odds of a given team in a given year. I’m talking any random year (e.g. in 2030, what is the probability OSU wins the conference? answer: 1/11).
Wrap your head around this one:
http://polymathematics.typepad.com/polymath/2006/06/no_im_sorry_it_.html
I don’t think anything comes of it, but you never know.
http://lubbockonline.com/red-raiders/2010-06-15/linehan-tech-deserves-chance-leave-uts-shadow
What happens if TTech sees the value in front of them and flips Daddy Texas the bird?
What Texa’ want, Texa’ get. They played everyone like the proverbial dildo fiddle. Most here in Huskerland don’t mind leaving the USC Central school to run things (just handle Oklahoma, and the rest are their bitches).
I’ve always despised the Big 10, but it’s better for NU. I think Colorado will be somewhat happy in the Pac. They need to add that one more, I think most will not like only getting 2 Non-Conf. games due to having 10 conference games. I DO NOT want to see it like they used to have it, where one team just plain doesn’t play another. The Duckies made out good one year (can’t remember which) as they didn’t have to play USC when they were in the title hunt. The Big 10 have been doing this for a while. If you are going to skip teams, then splitting 6 and 6 at least allows for that final game between North and South. Someone will have to play USC when another doesn’t in the North, but so be it. It’s time for a change.
I just think it would be too bad that a Team that has made some waves would leave the MWC just as Boise joins the likes of TCU and BYU. It’s like the have nots get together and said we might beat each other up, but will get some attention now!
Money aside of course. Otherwise I’d like to see the Yankees join the Pac 10, somehow, as it would make sense financially…
“I think most will not like only getting 2 Non-Conf. games due to having 10 conference games”
Well, they can schedule Hawaii and get a 13th game.
I think most wouldn’t care, since OOC games are generally cream puffs.
They’d probably just add TCU or BYU.
Texas showed one me one thing: they are the worst.
But Scott would have been lashed if he didn’t try. I’m sure he knew what the answer would be in the end.
Larry Scott did a couple things in the last two weeks. He demolished the Big XII and sent them scrambling to glue the pieces back together. He smacked the SEC around with all the “Texas snubs SEC academics” talk… and he beat them to the Texas offer. And he managed to get the Longhorn league to so vastly overvalue themselves that not only does the SEC take a back seat to Texas, it gets to watch as Larry Scott gets similar numbers without trying.
Meanwhile… no word from TTech. Reading their blogs, they are one really really pissed off bunch. I can’t tell if they’re more peeved that aTm (never mind UT and OU) gets a disproportionate share of the new revenue scheme or if they really don’t like that Bill Powers spoke for them yesterday.
I don’t think they have the huevos to pull stakes and leave, but this is Texas. Crazier things happen there every day.
And Texas is a bunch of morons if they think their TV network will outpace revenues derived from any conference network. Collective bargaining would bring them probably twice the revenue.
I just don’t see the money being mentioned in this deal. It’s going to be awfully hard to convince shareholders that more than $130m per year is a value to any network. Where are they going to get the other $40m?
I’m sure they’ll get the entire 10 mil from the Buffaloes for leaving…
Texas, share? Yeaah right.
I’m gonna go get some popcorn.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/406551-hold-everything-texas-tech-oklahoma-state-not-signing-new-big-12-deal
Why are they so angry? Didn’t they agree to and sign this deal?
Nope. TTech is the lone holdout until their regents meet this afternoon.
But Texas went and told them what they were going to do and how much they were going to get for it.
I don’t know why the author of that post said Okie State might be with TTech. They did sign on, and they would never leave OU.
Good! Now I can go back to pulling at the strings of Beebe’s so-called plan.
http://www.kcbd.com/Global/story.asp?S=12653986
I didn’t think they had guts to try. I’m somewhat surprised they didn’t wait until Friday to see if they could leverage more equity from the Longhorn League.
There’s some real hatred between TTech and aTm fans going on right now.
I did learn one interesting fact. TTech is the only Big XII football team to have a winning record in every year since the Big XII was formed. That’s rather fascinating.
Ok… here’s what the ‘penalties’ are for NU and Cu leaving the Longhorn League.
If they give two years’ notice, 50% of their expected revenue share for their remaining time in the conference is withheld. If they give 18-24 months, it’s 70%. If they give 12-18 months, it’s 80%.
The rules also stipulate that two years is the expected notice to be given by any breaching member. So two years worth of revenue are what are to be taken at the time the breaching member leaves.
NU has already said it will leave in 2011, so they will have 80% of next year’s share withheld, and they will pay back 80% of what they received last year. CU has yet to announce their intentions.
The numbers break down this way:
NU received $9.73m and CU received $9.77m for the last year. So it’s no great jump to assume the same or thereabouts for next year. That means that they both would have to pay $16m upon leaving. If they receive larger numbers next year then their ‘buyout’ cost diminishes since the 80% from this last year is less the 20% earned and withheld from next year.
So, for simplicity, we say that both NU and CU would have made $22m over the next two years. I’m assuming there would have been a sound valuation of the Big XII when one of their TV contracts would have been renewed in 2011. Add in the $10m from last year, and we have about $32m over a three year span.
Now they will earn $40m over the same span, and they will give the Big XII $16m in return, for a net of $24m. But the net loss of $8m will quickly be recouped in their new conferences at the pace of about $5m per year if we are to believe the outstandingly stupid valuation Dan Beebe would have us believe.
I’ve heard someone say that they would have to repay 80% of the ‘expected’ revenues over the next two years. Since there would be no way to put a number on their revenues if they weren’t a part of the conference itself, and since the language is very vague in this respect, that doesn’t seem to be an option for the Big XII to pursue. I’m sure NU and CU have lawyers who know the contract laws of Delaware better than the rest of the Big XII schools do at the moment.
From what I hear, fans of both schools think it’s more than worth the jump. Not only will both schools be able to recoup that money within the first year of participation in their new conferences, but they also get out of the Longhorn League’s grasp.
Yeah it can’t be out of expected revenue.
I heard the figure will be 10 million, and lawyers are currently working to have it reduced.
What is impossible to find is any estimate how much Utah/CO markets will add to the conference. i.e. revenue over and above what was already expected from a new TV deal.
The 16th market = how much more?
The 30th market = how much more?
Simple questions that nobody has an answer to, yet Larry Scott is throwing invitations around. Hope this has those answers and they simply aren’t public.
The amounts I’ve seen are approximately $11 per household. Denver brings 1.54 households, and SLC bring 944K households.
I’ve seen numbers which say that ticket sales were 11.4% of the Big XII’s revenue last year while their championship game yielded about 18%. I have to look for the breakdown on that one to believe it.
The extreme overvaluation of the Longhorn League should make $11 per household a foregone conclusion. If Utah were to be added, their marginal value is increased due to the opportunity for a championship game. From a fan standpoint, I don’t really like it. But from a business standpoint, it makes great sense.
The SEC thought they were top of the heap because they were the first to receive a new TV contract, and the numbers were gaudy at the time. Now that the Big Televen has far surpassed them, and the Longhorn League is poised to smash their per unit value, what are they going to think when Larry Scott walks away from TV talks with a contract which also dwarfs the SEC’s?
One could argue that because of the distances involved within the Pac 10, the TV audiences are almost captive. Therefore, the some 19m households within the conference DMA’s would more likely see the ads placed on sporting events, making that space more valuable per household.
There’s a reason Pac 10 teams don’t travel as well as the rest of the world. We have a lot farther to travel.
And if anyone buys the ‘schedule more quality games, get on national TV more, and you get more revenue’ argument floated by the Big XII…
Texas managed to make their first four games of 2010 guaranteed national broadcasts. Those four games are Rice (ESPN), Wyoming (FSN), TTech and UCLA (ABC). They also have aTm guaranteed (ESPN) on Thanksgiving.
Nebraska has three games guaranteed. @UW (ABC), vs.KSt (ESPN) and vs.CU (ABC).
I’ve only watched about 30 minutes of all Texas’ games since the 2005 Rose Bowl. I’ve seen probably 10-15 NU games over that span. I can’t tell you why it’s been that way. But I’ve seen more footage in replays than I have actual game time. I guess I’m not that interested in Big XII football.
“I’ve only watched about 30 minutes of all Texas’ games since the 2005 Rose Bowl.”
Same here. That game was fantastic, but much of the enjoyment was watching Vince Young since his projections at the next level were so polarizing.
Texas hasn’t had a good villain or intriguing prospect since then. Colt McCoy bored the piss out of me.
I like watching Nebraska because I love their uniforms. I realize that’s shallow or whatever, but I love those colors and the classic look.
http://www.csnbayarea.com/06/15/10/FONT-COLORFF0000EXCLUSIVEfont-Pac-10-to-/landing.html?blockID=254335&feedID=2478
If those numbers you mentioned above ($11 per household) are true, I don’t see how this makes sense.
Also, Utah better get new uniforms–those things are horrible even by P-10 standards.
hmmmm?
http://ballhype.com/story/larry-scott-denies-report-that-utah-is-heading-to-pac/
Thankfully we have Oregon and Washington in the PNW. Without those teams’ clout OSU would get screwed…but both have enough power to make sure recruiting LA remains. Don’t know how they’ll do it, but they will find a way. Sucks that Colorado was guaranteed a slot in the southern division–I’d much rather them in the north.
ps. Did I mention this is going to suck? Thanks for destroying the conference, Larry.
$11 per household is what the Big Televen gets. They now add Nebraska, and I would guess they get to up that money with a championship game.
With the valuation of the Longhorn League being promised by their commissioner to be set at just under $15 per household, I think Larry Scott can be conservative and ask for whatever the Big Televen gets.
The problem is that we already include the Sacramento-Stockton-Modesto and the San Diego DMA’s in our coverage areas. So SLC is the next market that might have been targeted by another conference raider. Western markets which remain are Las Vegas (42), Albuquerque-Santa Fe (44), Fresno-Visalia (55), Honolulu (71), Colorado Springs-Pueblo (92), El Paso-Las Cruces (98), Reno (108) and Boise (112).
I’ll stop there. The point is that SLC provides a block on conference expansion from the East. And you can see the schools left who might fill out a MWC.
I’m surprised Vegas is lower than SLC. Vegas has 3 times the population. Guess they’re all at the slots?
Las Vegas is locked in on all sides by other dominant DMA’s, so their market doesn’t extend beyond Nye, Lincoln and Clark Counties. SLC has the whole of Utah, SE Idaho, NE Nevada, and a lot of Western Wyoming. That doesn’t seem like much, but the Utah population alone is 1m more than Vegas Metro… and growing.
If further expansion were to take place based on markets, UNLV, UNM, Fresno, Hawai’i, Air Force, UTEP, Nevada and Boise would be next… in that order. If we drop the schools which don’t match the Pac 10 profile for academics, then UNLV, Fresno, UTEP, Nevada and Boise are gone.
That leaves UNM, Hawai’i and Air Force. And I only add AFA because of their stringent undergrad academic rules and high rate of science baccalaureates. Their lack of graduate studies may knock them off this list as well.
I learned from the University of British Columbia’s study of NCAA membership viability that the correct term is ‘academic comparators’. UNM and Hawai’i lack only the prestige of a BCS conference affiliation to make them such. But together they add only as many households as does Denver… well, a little less.
So the greatest ‘NCAA untapped’ market on the West Coast remains the Vancouver-Victoria DMA. That one ain’t gonna happen too quick since Simon Fraser just joined D-II, and UBC is working on it. They’re 10-15 years away from joining D-IAA. But they are at the forefront of Canadian Universities moving toward the NCAA. And the breakneck speed of conference realignment these past two weeks are not common at all.
The other university which is absolutely an academic and cultural fit is UC Davis. Oregon State would actually greatly benefit from their inclusion since they are the brains behind the UC system’s ag/vet/earth sciences studies. They’ve been D-IAA for about ten years now, so they could be considered much like UCONN was ten years ago.
Utah invite is “confirmed.” It’s Ted Miller and we all knew it was coming anyway…
I’ll be interested to see if they (CU and UU) move in early for the 2011 season and what the divisions will be. Thoughts?
http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/10532/utah-invited-to-become-pac-10s-12th-member
Pac-10 link.
http://www.pac-10.org/genrel/061610aaa.html
It depends how they split the divisions. This has the potential to be super crappy. Actually, I can’t think of a single way to split that benefits the Beavs. No idea where they are going to recruit now that LA isn’t in the picture…maybe they go north to Canada.
Since there are two LA schools it might be workable that you play one per year. Meh.
They’ll be richer, I’m told. Still haven’t seen any solid figures that make sense.
The numbers should pan out to be about the same as what the Big Twelven get. We might make a little less in our national TV deal, but per unit earnings for a Pac 10 network should recoup that money.
If you’ve ever seen the Big Ten Network, you would have seen some of the worst sports programming available. If I’m an ad man watching that network, I figure out how to make an ad which sells my product while muted.
With the marketing and media schools we have within the Pac 12–not to mention the professional resources within the region–there will be no such crap on our airwaves. We may get some announcers who are obviously homers for someone, but they won’t be as bad as they are on the BTN.
Besides, the network will cover non-revenue sports as well. We’re the conference of champions for a reason, and it’s not just football and hoops. School, and even conference, pride turns a lot of TV sets on for some events.
Maybe we get some more baseball games on TV?
It looks like a minimum of 14 mil (pre-expansion) with a possibility of 17 mil per team. Utah and CO add between 2 and 3 mil per team. ~500k of that coming from a championship game.
If they get 17 mil or greater expansion has to be considered a success. If it’s closer to 14 mil…that was the number before expansion, so it should be considered a failure.
At some point you have to weigh the trade off of that extra 2 or 3 mil versus the possible recruiting hit. NW teams get less benefit from the addition of these two teams for that reason. CO signed and were guaranteed a spot in the southern division…so we can conclude that’s how the conference will be broken up.
I don’t think we lose much ground in recruiting. One thing Riley does well is form relationships with HS coaches. And those relationship will not be lost. That’s why the long term (and slight) improvement of this team is somewhat acceptable to me.
I agree with your assessment of the numbers if we’re talking just national TV revenues. The Pac 12 Network should add another $5-8m per school.
The BTN brought in $6.5m per school last year. I don’t see the guy who secured more revenue for the WTA failing when his product is Pac 12 sports.
So your estimates would be conservative in my mind. If it was Tom Hansen negotiating, I would say we might be lucky to get that money. But it ain’t Tom.
I might add, Big Ten network got available in the two top cable companies in Canada. It might contributed in the “bump” in revenues the Big Ten teams got from their network
I’m not as worried about recruiting in SoCal as I am about the location of the championship game if it were to occur. There are three ‘southern’ and two ‘northern’ locations available. But I suspect LA will do the same crap they did to the hoops tourney.
I also worry that we end up playing @USC three times out of four. THAT would suck.
Other than those two concerns, I see the Beavs and Ducks fighting each other for a trip to the championship every year. Then again, we may just have to see how the stars align every year.
I think Washington will be a pain. They’ve had some very good recruiting classes of late.
Utah…who knows. I guess we’ll finally see how these non-bcs teams fair with weekly competition.
UW will be a pain, but I see their defense as a big liability regardless of their talent. If Nick Holt ever leaves, then I get scared.
One could argue that Utah has pretty much played a Pac 10 schedule every year. Their non-con schedule is pretty much Pac 10, and they still have some good teams to play at the top of the MWC. The bottom-feeders in the MWC are no different than most Pac 10 non-con schedules.
As soundly as they just destroyed Alabama in the 2009 Sugar Bowl, I’d say they can field some good teams. If the SEC wants to argue that Alabama was simply uninspired, then the 2010 Sugar Bowl (Fla over Cincy) was an even bigger fluke than when Utah OWNED Alabama.
What do you think?
Utah vs. Oregon State for the inaugural Pac 12 Championship game in 2011?
You have to admit, that would be too funny considering all this talk about DMA households and revenue.
Just for some fun reading on the academic side.
http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/archives/2010/may/osu-announces-plans-add-faculty-build-endowment-retain-top-professors
A ‘top ten’ land grant school is pretty haughty stuff. I’m glad we’re finally targeting the artsy-fartsy side for improvement. If we were a tech school, we could get away without those disciplines. But we’re not. A land grant institution has to provide a service to all customers.
Then again, I think MIT might be a land grant school. I’m going to have to check that.
MIT is in fact a land, sea and space grant private institution.
A top ten land grant school means being a top 25 US school.
I think fans are a bit short-sighted if they say they aren’t worried about losing out in recruiting with a north/south split.
1. Mike Riley will not always be our coach. If you believe he finds hidden gems…what about the next coach who doesn’t have that talent and needs to recruit LA?
2. The other schools in the NW (minus WSU) have excellent recruiters on staff. The reason those schools aren’t concerned is because they can go to LA and grab players no matter what division they’re in. The Ducks are recruiting nationally, Washington has regained a stranglehold on their state, etc.
Even a couple fewer visits to LA could cripple the Beavs. It gives other universities major negative recruiting ammo.
I can’t help but think that the Beavs got screwed majorly in this deal. I can only hope we do some weird zipper split. This will make us like the ACC though, most people can’t remember which team is in which division. Honestly, I think all expansion leaves the Beavs irrelevant in the long run. I thought the Pac-16 was intriguing but couldn’t help but think that we would be Kansas State in 15 years (low man on the totem pole and about to be left behind). I also don’t see how we prevail in a conference championship game (we blew the last two years in the civil war, de facto championship games…).
If you haven’t seen it yet…
http://gazettetimes.com/sports/beavers-sports/article_205dc0da-7987-11df-af01-001cc4c03286.html
Hey Angry,
After perusing other boards and seeing discussion about expansion and I wonder if this version of a Pac-16 is viable.
Arizona
Arizona St.
Cal
Colorado
Colorado St.
Stanford
Nevada
Oregon
Oregon St.
UCLA
UNLV
USC
Utah
Utah St.
Washington
Washington State
With Pac-10 East and West
Arizona | Arizona State
Cal | Stanford
Colorado | Colorado St
Oregon | Oregon St
Nevada | UNLV
Utah | Utah St.
USC | UCLA
Washington | Washington St
I’m not sure about the academics about some of the schools, but I did this to provide our newcomers with a rivalry and add the Nevada schools because Nevada plays pretty decent ball and with our trips to play UNLV we could resume our pipelines there…this would force a mingling of divisions with the rivalry games (at least one game).
I’m not sure if I beat a dead horse with this set up..but I wanted to see what you think about this, Angry.
Teams like Co State, UNLV, Nevada, and Utah State are not P-10 caliber, don’t offer much in terms of tv markets, and would spread recruiting thin (there are only so many D1 players in the west). To split revenue 16 ways with teams that contribute almost nothing would be a terrible idea. Sorry.
Ken Goe seems to have the same take as Angry. I can see how this looks bad but I think we need to wait to see what type of TV deal we can actually get since most of us are just armchair financial analysts.
I have to think that if this was one of the scenarios Larry Scott was given permission to pursue then that means there is going to be a financial benefit for the entire Pac-12.
That’s just the financial side financial though. I do think recruiting will take a hit so hopefully when organizing the divisions (or apparently lack of divisions according to Larry Scott at the Utah press conference) they’ll work it out in a way that maximized our exposure in LA.
http://blog.oregonlive.com/pac10/2010/06/pac-10_insider_addition_of_uta.html
I say we have a lottery every year to establish the divisions. Use ping pong balls, and televise the lottery. Once the divisions are set, each school is seeded according to last year’s top to bottom standings. Schedules are then made according to these seeds.
There will be three inter-divisional games, and there are many standard tables used for this method. If after all this some schools miss out on their natural rivalry, they each drop their lowest seeded inter-divisional game and add the rivalry.
And why would anyone doubt Larry Scott’s marketing and negotiating skills?
Read the last four paragraphs:
http://www.onthebaseline.com/2008/04/18/eastern-tennis-hall-of-fame-honors-tour-ceo-larry-scott/
Am I missing something here?
2012–@UCLA/USC @ Corvallis
2013–@USC/UCLA @ Corvallis
2014–@UCLA/USC @ Corvallis
2015–@USC/UCLA @ Corvallis
Er, just make it mandatory that NW schools play in LA every year, then stagger it as above. Beavs get a game in LA each year. I wrote in return games in Corvallis but those don’t need to happen.
What am I missing???
That would require four inter-divisional home games for UCLA/USC and no games for the Bay Area teams who would have to play the Az, Ut and Co schools. There would be no travel for the LA teams outside their division.
I like the zipper concept.
OT: What happened to the idea of upgrading to a different website?
I couldn’t find a domain name that I liked. Angrybeavers.com was taken.
If someone has a good idea I’d revisit it.
http://theangrybeavers.com/ ?
there is the issue of the TV show that you guys might have been too old to watch…
.net, .us, .org or the others didn’t appeal to you?
.net et al are kind of ghetto.
i really do want to make a better site. if you find a good name that’s not registered let me know. i couldn’t find one.
JackBeav, Sam Thompson has the Beavs in his final 5. Where do you think he winds up?
Here.
He’s been hinting for a while that OSU, tOSU, Fla, KU and G’town were going to get his officials during the summer. I wrote it out last week.
I can’t be sure of course. But I think his relationship with Coach Rob is too long and important for him to pass on us. I guess more importantly than that is that his parents’ relationship with Coach Rob is long and important to this process. Like Ahmad Starks, Sam’s a really smart kid who knows the value of hard work in the classroom as well as on the floor. And he has quietly taken a back seat throughout high school until it is now his turn to be the star. So I see those values instilled in him, and I have to believe that his parents put them there.
I’m sure he wants to be his own man, but I think his mind will be influenced by his parents. He’s listened to them thus far, and he is where he is because of that influence.
And why would he want to leave Ahmad alone in a foreign land? Come on! They’ve been best friends for five or six years now.
Besides, he needs to see what life is like when hoops is king in Oregon. When Gill gets to rockin’ it’s just nuts.
So, since all that makes sense, I’m going to go ahead and change my answer to Kentucky. He’s going to go to Kentucky even though Gilchrist has already committed.
It’s just a Coach Cal thing.
it sounds like it will come down to what type of offense and temp he wants to play more than anything. the same thing happened with carson. thompson seems like a much better and much more thoughtful human being, though.
He has three grinding offensive sets on his list. I think what makes us appealing more than the others is that our defense is stifling. And it’s only going to get better with more athletic, smarter ballers.
If we have a team capable of taking the ball, scoring in transition then resetting on defense before the opponent knows what hit them, then their game-plan is shot to hell. You can prepare for the OSU that shoots 30% on a good night and still manages to be close at the end because their defense holds you to 60. You don’t have a prayer when that team scores 75 a night.
When you think about it, some better shooting gets us most of the way there. Lessening turnovers works too. We could be at 75 ppg without the transition game.
If you’re looking for names, how about:
thebeaverstate.com (too boring?)
thebeavercleaver.com (too funny?)
Ibeaver.com (title the blog ‘I, Beaver’)
iratuscanadensis.com (then translate for your title)
how about angrycastors.com
I read somewhere a comment from someone who thought the zipper concept of division alignment was terrible for a conference because the two rivals could end up playing a meaningless game during rivals week because they both have it wrapped up. It would essentially be the Indianapolis Colts in the last week of the season.
I thought it actually made some sense. Then I thought this guy must have a terrible rivalry game. I thought of the pride, the hype of the game, the exposure, the championship implications. I knew right then he was wrong.
If they don’t try to put the opponents six feet under, then there was never a rivalry.
Ahmad Starks went to the same school as Thompson, so that could also help.
It would also help that Coach Rob is good friends with both Starks’ and Thompson’s parents, and that Starks and Thomson have been best friends since grade school.
Still, I would never guarantee anything in the world of NCAA hoops recruiting… let alone recruiting in any sport.
Hey angry,
You can use an alternate domain suffix to your advantage.
How about a page titled ‘Beavs Like Us’?
beavslike.us
Ha!
Carpe Season Beavers…Seize the season. While it may sound weak in some regards, there is no better time for the Beavs to make the Rose Bowl. My rationale as follows:
1) USC banned from post-season play;
2) Loss of Masoli weakens Ducks in-terms of their season, even if they develop over the course of the season and post another formidable CW challenge;
3) Toughest in-conference games at Reser;
4) Last year Rodger’s brothers are together.
The first two reasons might tarnish the potential accomplishment of OSU achieving the Rose Bowl in the eyes of some, but if Riley couldn’t get to the Rose Bowl the last two years, this is a somewhat fortuitous alignment of factors that may give him his best shot.
I think the future of the Pac-10 or 12 is NOT in the Beavers favor. The north/south split bodes ill for the long-term health of OSU’s recruiting and future potential for conference champion contention.
I agree with every word of this.
I would consider it slightly tarnished, too, but I’ll take tarnished over not at all.
I’m tired of the ‘tarnished’ label, and I finally figured out why.
The team that ends up on the field and facing us is the best team that school can present at that time. We’re not sitting here whining about how LB after LB went down in the Civil War, and that’s why a S had to try to stop Masoli on a fourth down play but just got trucked. Ducks fans are still whining about being on their fourth or fifth string QB seven games into the 2007 season.
We get what we get, and we face who we face. The only thing that would tarnish a victory is if the best team that is available does not play.
http://blog.oregonlive.com/pac10/2010/06/pac-10_insider_addition_of_uta.html
Adding Utah will be the downfall of this conference. Should have left it at 10 and just renegotiated a good TV deal. This article sums up my fears all along about Utah.
There’s a lot to think about, but I think people are being a little too melodramatic.
Anyone who thinks the Big XII is happy to lose their championship game also thinks they lose zero value when the second highest rated game in NCAA sports in 2009 disappears.
“”Colorado and Utah don’t add that much,” said A.J. Maestas, president of Chicago-based Navigate Marketing, which helps schools assess their market value. “At the end of the day, it’s about households, ratings, the total market that you reach. Although they’re great markets, because there are some real strong markets in the Pac-10 like Los Angeles, you really don’t add to the total average market.
“A little bit, but not a ton.””
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700041720/Bargaining-for-Pac-10-TV-rights-should-be-huge.html
Notice his analysis had the Big XII valued less per unit than the Pac 12.
It appears the world’s common sense has not failed them. I’ll take the word of a professional. Now all those who said Beebe was a hero can go jump out a window.
Link exchange is nothing else except it is only placing the
other person’s web site link on your page at suitable place and other person will also do similar in favor of you.