28.Jul.2010 The Beavers’ Future in the New PAC-12

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 5.0/5 (3 votes cast)

A good decision is based on knowledge and not on numbers. -Plato

And so here we are, late July, 2010, on the verge of a new epoch in college football: the era of "TV markets", stadium attendance, and recruiting violations. And the questions must be asked: who is to blame and who wins and who loses?

Many in PAC-10 land are embracing Larry Scott as a boy wonder. A marketing genius from Harvard who has come west to save the pariah conference from…gasp…irrelevance. As if the conference would ever be irrelevant to an Oregon State alum, or a Stanford grad, or a Condom driving daddy's Hummer to a Lindsay Lohan intervention. In other words, to the people who matter (i.e. actual fans of the conference) it is and always will be relevant. The story should end there. But it doesn't.

In humanity's perpetual desire to expand until we explode, Scott is pushing sacred boundaries in the name of good capitalism. "But each school will receive x-million more!" a happy Beaver cries. "Larry Scott has saved Washington State!" dreams a Cougar on his Palouse farm. "Eureka!" shrikes a Ute, so loud Archimedies furrows his brow before croaking a second time. In their new-found worship of the money god, what fans fail to ponder is the cost.

When I was studying at OSU, we learned of something called "existence value" of open spaces. In short, it was the value gained by, let's call him "human being xyz", in simply knowing something exists. For example, I may never go to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, but the pleasure gained in my knowing it is there (and I could go) is enough to justify preserving its purity.

I know I can't be the only person who, despite the millions of dollars gained, feels something more valuable has been lost. Larry Scott has puddled with a prideful conference's history, rivalries, and essence. Larry Scott has chipped away yet another piece of my youth, innocence, and ideals. What is the tipping point where the product is so sterile and contrived that I cannot watch at all? How many years off is it? And all for what? Ego? Larry Scott pasted his face on the new PAC-10 website. Larry Scott got his name out there. "He's doing what he was hired to do", some will argue. Sure. And that goes back to my original question: who is to blame? Fans cried for Tom Hansen's head. Now we have Larry Scott's face…everywhere…and Larry Scott's hands…meddling in…everything. Might we not look back, as people often do, and regret what we wished for? Utah and Colorado. Is that what we wanted? Much like Midas and gold, everything smart, middle-aged, white men touch turns to shit. They've now infected College Football in unprecedented numbers, and the outcome will be no different. How long before student athletes are paid salaries? You're already hearing rumblings, fellows.

And one final thought: where will all these executive decisions leave the Beavers? If you've been on this earth longer than fifteen years, you know executive decisions always favor the rich and oppress the poor. Right off the bat you can see the conference will have the same number of D1 recruits to select from, only split 12 ways. Just look to MLB pitching staffs to see the detrimental effects of watering down a product. The Beavers will not be able to compete in this conference. And don't think the conference is done at 12. Just like Karl Marx wrote, capitalism will thrive until there are no markets into which it can expand. I foresee a day, in the next fifteen years, when the Beavers seriously consider an invite to the Mountain West Conference. Due to the academic reputation of the PAC-10 and OSU's priority on research, they'd never leave (though it would be a wise football move). Which answers my final question: who are the losers? The losers, of course, are the Cougars and the Beavers. In other words, when the rich get richer, the poor get poorer. Cheers to a job…done, Larry Scott.

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

    The Beavs are going to have to step it up for sure. A straight North/South split is possible, and it gives the Beavs that shot of winning the league title, as the Big 12 North has had for the last several years (despite frankly having teams that would finish in the 4th and lower spot in the South).

    Maybe that helps them a bit. But I don’t know. It’s going to be tough. I think Utah could have had a nice little conference with the likes of TCU, Boises State, BYU, and themselves. That lure of the automatic BCS pot o’ gold is very attractive, but not always the best thing.

    I don’t know. It will be interesting, and the Beavs will need to step up and get it done. I think they can surprise some people.

    • angry angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

      The fact that you said, “The Beavs are going to have to step it up” means you agree Larry Scott hosed the Beavs (and likely you agree he hosed the Cougs, too).

      They’ll be fine this year and next. It’s probably not until 2014 that you’re going to notice the affects of expansion (i.e. diluted recruiting, decreased footprint in California, etc).

  • angry angry says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    What bothers me most is that you go to the pac-10 website and see Larry Scott’s mug. It confirmed once and for all this is a big power/ego play. It might as well be renamed the Larry Scott-12 or “The Conference of Larry Scott”.

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

      Yeah, it’s a bit rediculous. It’s hard to believe how much clout the “League” President can have. Beebe is about the same for the Big 12. He blows.

  • angry angry says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    And for the record, I do think the Beavs can compete, but they’re going to have to pour the added revenue into facilities and come up with a waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better marketing department. The reason I am so down on their future in this expanded conference is because the marketing department has no clue how to sell the team. If they continue to linger behind they’re going to be left behind. It’s that simple. If you’re commish is all about marketing and glitz (and he is) then you have to get on board.

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

      Yeah, the fans and alumni really will need to step it up. You either support the team, or ditch it. The Fair Weather fans (and that’s not good being in Oregon!) just don’t cut it anymore. I guess you can take your cut (now 1/12th) and just field whatever you can field, letting the USC’s and Oregon’s of the conference supply your payroll so to speak (thinking of MLB, where some teams basically field a AAA club supported mostly by that revenue sharing cap so often paid out by the Yankees, et. al).

      • angry angry says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        That’s what I think is going to happen. Beavs will be happy to pocket the extra cash, but won’t know how to reinvest it, so they’ll be the conference “cupcakes” being paid to bump Oregon, USC, and Cal’s records.

        If they use that money to hire people who actually know how to market (are they student interns right now??) then at least they’ll remain viable.

        Even with no marketing, Utah and Colorado have better reputations nationally. People still remember Kordell Stewart and the Buffs good history, and of course people (and recruits) know of Utah’s recent success.

        Maybe that’s why the Beavs are trying to open new pipelines in Oklahoma and North Carolina–places the new schools likely won’t look.

        There are ways to do this and make it work, but the Beavs tend to be dinosaurs with technology and marketing and that’s what it’s going to take.

        Honestly, they should hire me.

        😉

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

      “…come up with a waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better marketing department”

      C’mon, really? We have “I am Orange.” How do you improve on that?

      *vigorously rolling eyes*

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

        The worse thing too about that is they keep rolling with it!… And push it fairly prominently when it is something that is so unoriginal. Quite frankly, it’s also unmemorable and just pretty lame. “really?”

        • angry angry says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          I’m convinced the “marketing department” is a 15 year old Asian kid hanging out on Facebook and tinkering with an illegal copy of Photoshop that he downloaded off Piratebay.

          Just saying…

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

    Angry, several thoughts:

    1. Love the line “In humanity’s perpetual desire to expand until we explode”. As sophisticated as we think we are, we still adhere to many of the biological principles of life. I think we are pretty much at our carrying capacity, and technological innovations can prevent the crash for only so long. Off topic, sorry.

    2. Good god, that is a ridiculous mug shot of Scott on the Pac website, the whole thing looks pretty tacky.

    3. A very good post by Wilner on Scott. One big take-away, the Pac 16 was not his first attempt at a mega-merger. He tried to engineer a consolidation of men’s and women’s tennis, with himself as the head, of course. http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2010/07/26/larry-scott-the-driving-force-behind-the-new-pac-10/

    4. He’s an ego-maniac, but I like the aggressive nature he has given the Pac 10. He has east coast journalists writing about the west coast conference.

    5. The Beavers program needs to heed your warning. But its also a lot of doom and gloom talk for a program that has finished in the top 3 in football several years in a row, and won baseball national championships. And the television money will help them balance their budget.

    6. Very much agree about the dilution of talent in the west. There’s not a ton to begin with.

    7. I could see Utah becoming the Virginia Tech of the west in football. Which is bad news for any non-elite program (i.e. everyone but USC).

    • angry angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Yeah, I am not sure why people constantly want to tinker with good things. The results seem to always be worse. They ruined the NCAA tourny with another expansion–I probably won’t even watch next year unless the Beavs are in.

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

    Just thought I’d say that Blake Renaud’s final 2 are us and Boise State. He is visiting both next week. Dylan Wynn’s final 3 are Oklahoma State, Oregon, and us. I think we have a legit shot at picking both up.

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

      Well I hope signing Terron Ward really helps getting some of that De La Salle talent. I’m thinking it will.

      Saint Baptist De La Salle
      Pray for us!

      Live in our heats
      Forever!

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

        We got Ward and Tyler Anderson out of the deal. I’m absolutely giddy that we get a DB the quality of Anderson as a gray shirt walk-on. Though I think he’ll be on scholarship by his second or third year.

        If we also get Wynn and Renaud, then half our 2011 Class will be from two schools.

        I’ve heard that Marable is in, but Thompson is having problems. Anyone got a story?

        • angry angry says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          To get Tyler Anderson on the roster without having to use a scholarship was a steal.

    • angry angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      I think Dylan Wynn is going to end up a Duck. The Beavers could really use him. Just don’t think his heart is there.

    • Ri val Fan says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Wynn is undersized and has put on muscle and gotten ripped in a very short amount of time. He is a great player, but he will shrink during the season to his natural weight of 215 pounds. He is too scrawny to play with the big boys. Big heart, huge engine – just a V4 and not a V8.

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

        You’re right. He has grown wider at an accelerated rate, which isn’t really normal. His aggression level has grown at the same time. I’d be interested to know his diet and supplement routine? Watched him vs. Crenshaw last year……..he is a 210-215 normal weight type guy. He will shrink and will be a disapointment in D1 since he cannot play the LB position [agility] and is too small for DE.

        • angry angry says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          When I hear the phrases “which isn’t normal” and “ripped in short time” and then you wonder about his “supplements”…well, I think steroids. Is this what you guys are implying?

          He lists his height and weight as 6’2 230. That doesn’t seem too small or scrawny for DE. When I watch his film (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuMk7K4UBNA) I see a guy relentless player, good motor, who is maybe slightly undersized. Looks a lot like Slade Norris his junior year to me.

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

        I’m not really sure what an ‘accelerated rate’ is. He’s put on 25 pounds and two inches over the last two years. That’s not really spectacular. In fact, he should be widening and has the potential to put on another 20-30 pounds with ease. All this stuff kinda happens to adolescent males from ages 14 to 24.

        He’s always been aggressive on the field. That’s why he started and was all everything as a sophomore.

        It’s not as if he’s Igor Olshansky.

  • Mud&Sticks Mud&Sticks says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Being one who is not encouraged with the financial condition of city, state and federal governments AND on top of that the people I’m in the camp which thinks we have a good chance of seeing the economy implode. That said I hope to heck OSU allocates a large amount of this upcoming windfall towards paying down their debt. If they don’t……..

    Is it possible that the University of Oregon Beavers might be the result of the 2 schools being forced to combine? Would the combination save the Oregon taxpayers a ton of money? That kind of thinking has me wondering what the heck is wrong with me.

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

      Ummm…. ok?

      OSU’s debt is only $4m, and it’s not going to grow. The AD presented a plan to the OUS which was accepted. It did include a projection for considerable revenue increases from both conference TV rights and OSU’s endorsement contract.

      If there were to be any real concern in Oregon about an athletic department who will be a drain on the state, it will be UO. Their hoops arena will be complete this year, and they will start making payments upwards of $15m per year for some 15 years. They’re barely breaking even without that bill.

      OSU was caught making a plan that was uncharacteristically rosy, and they got stuck with the bill. UO traditionally gambles with their financial outlook, and they’re going to seriously take the hit starting next year. I’m less inclined to go to the hoops Civil War in Eugene next year because of the ticket prices. If I’m less enthusiastic about the new arena than I am about Mac Court, then others probably feel the same. When that honeymoon ends, the marriage won’t be far behind.

    • angry angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      haha@mud&sticks

  • Mud&Sticks Mud&Sticks says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    So you’re saying that except for $4M the cost of phase 1 & 2 of Raising Reser has been paid off in full?

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

      Um… yeah. Have you been hiding under a rock or something? The funds were 100% privately financed and secured before construction. THAT is how conservative OSU usually plays with their athletic money.

      But they let someone talk them into projecting too high an increase in attendance, and the budget spending reflected that expected increase in revenues over the honeymoon period of the stadium upgrade… three or four years.

      Everything that could go wrong did go wrong, and an OSU who normally follows Murphy’s Law to a tee got burned as a result.

      This is all why Phase 3 is still in the fundraising stage. We don’t get the luxury of using state money to build our facilities like our little sister to the south. Imagine what we could do with all that state money. We could build out Phase 3, build a hoops practice facility, build a track & field facility and have enough left over to give $100m back to the state.

      Daddy’s little girl gets the shiny new pink car to replace the one she wrecked, and we get a firm handshake and a congratulations.

      • angry angry says:
        VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
        Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

        The budget deficit sucks and all, but that should be balanced in two years if not sooner.

        I’d be more interested in hearing what OSU’s plan is for reinvesting this newfound TV money (once the debt is paid off).

        Also, have guys like DA, Ellsbury, Moore given back to the school or do they have Gary Payton syndrome? We need new/major donors since all 12 teams are getting the same tv money (actually, bigger markets teams whose games are on tv more often get more if you read the fine print).

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

          I read an article a couple weeks back that discussed the TV revenue sharing scheme, and it sounded a bit like what the Big Xii does with their sharing. Each school gets 40% of the revenue for every TV appearance, and the league pools the other 60%. So in reality the school gets 46% of the revenue… 45% with 12 teams.

          The article stated that it takes a 75% vote to change that structure to make it a complete pool as just about every other conference does. But the LA schools have always been against changing it for obvious reasons. And apparently UW has always gone along with them, giving them the numbers to beat the 75% mark in a 10 team conference.

          In the new conference, however, UW would not only need to remain steadfast in their support for LA’s TV dominance. All three schools would need to convince one of the incoming schools to join them in order to keep 75% from voting against them.

          People always mumble about USC threatening to break away if this ever happens, but that was in the days when Tom Hansen ruled with a weenie fist. I’d like to see how they do against the new Pac 12 ego during their years of near death and disprespect.

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

          Suh gave $2.6M to UNL before he was even drafted. Sure he knew he was going high, and probably his agent had some contact with Detroit on possible figures…but that’s getting it done.

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

        “Um… yeah. Have you been hiding under a rock or something?”

        I’m renaming you JerkBeav.

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

          What do you want? Even if the answer to your question wasn’t obvious and widely known by many who aren’t even fans of OSU, my response gives you the benefit of the doubt in assuming you were just somewhere other than on the West Coast for the last 10 years.

          It happened to me in the 90’s. The only internet experience I had while I lived in Hawai’i was using NetScape to talk to people in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and Hong Kong. There wasn’t much Beav news in those discussions.

          If you don’t like obvious answers, don’t ask obvious questions.

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

    I didn’t realize we made Hobbi’s list of 7 over schools like Alabama, Notre Dame, and Oklahoma.

  • Mud&Sticks Mud&Sticks says:
    VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    ummm Jack I’m over here. Your reply to Mel Gibson sounds like you think you’re talking to me when in fact you’re not.

    That’s assuming (there’s that word again) I interpreted your post correctly.

    You say “…The funds were 100% privately financed and secured before construction.…”

    To me that sounds like OSU owes somebody some money. Perhaps something more than the $4M you referred to?

    Am I correct in assuming that if attendance falls off big time OSU could have problems paying off what they owe?

    And yes, while I don’t have the luxury of living in HI I do live in another state.

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

      Sorry about that. You know what they say. You’ll go blind if you do that too much.

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

      Attendance did fall off big time. It’s sounding like it’s back in greater numbers than ever for the coming season, and it should increase beyond that unless the economy starts getting run into the ground by the Republicans again.

      Disclaimer: I am a Green Party member.

      No, the OSU AD does not owe more than $4m. That’s been well established over the last six months. If the Pac 10 does not increase revenues beyond what was expected before expansion, then the OSU AD will have a difficult time paying back OSU the $4m they borrowed.

      If I remember correctly, Raising Reser was so successful that the fund repaid the OSU Student Association double what it borrowed only a couple years previous, per their agreement.

      And all you have to do to have the luxury of living in Hawai’i is do what I did… join the Navy.

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

    I thought the P-10 had a nice balance and tradition and now that is a thing of the past and for what a football championship game that will further confuse the BCS?

    • angry angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      The Pac-1o is trying too hard to gain the approval of the east coast, and the Pac-10’s commissioner is an egomaniac. Despite all his effort, I still feel the conference has a bit of an identity crisis. It should be focusing on promoting the STYLE of play, not the individual teams, players, coaches, etc. What gives the Big 10 and SEC great reputation is that when you say their respective names you conjure up a style of football.

      For someone like me who is a fan of the actual game, history, tradition this change is a really hard thing to accept. I’m trying to remain positive about the $ and 1/6 odds of reaching a championship game. I’m trying.

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

        It is interesting that you bring up the style of play identity crisis so to speak. It seems like the p-10 did have an identity as a qb/passing league in the 70s/80s, but were not really able to lock that in. I just remember the excitement when a Stanford was able to beat Oklahoma because their secondary had never been tested by someone like Elway. I guess USC kind of controlled the overall perception and they were never a great passing team back then.

        • angry angry says:
          VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
          Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

          I know. I was thinking QB league, but that’s not completely accurate of late. Maybe fast/wide open play. Oregon and Cal seem to epitomize the league’s style right now. I think what’s keeping the league down is defense. You can market the positives all you want, but when the Pac-10 goes against the corn-fed hogs of the SEC, BIG 10, and BIG 12 they are frequently over-matched. What little I saw of the Rose Bowl showed Oregon defenders being mauled and Ohio State defenders blowing up Oregon blockers. I’d love to see OSU grabbing linemen from the Midwest.

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

    Angry, I understand your point regarding more dilution in So Cal recruiting, and I know they play a lot of good football there.

    But just a cursory look at the past few years….are we getting significant talent there now? The 2011 class so far as only one recruit (Josh Williams), and he looks like one of the weakest. 2010…Sapolu and Molesi (who is MIA,right?) I understand more recruiting dilution won’t help, but it can’t kill if the program if we didn’t have significant LA recruiting in the first place.

    On the plus side, don’t you think there’s some upside in expanded Utah exposure? Lots of Samoans and Pacific Islanders, and THOSE are the guys (and probably the only guys) attracted to the ubiquitous “family friendly” moniker. Ask Stephen Paea.

    • angry angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Historically we’ve done pretty well in So Cal, though. Good point, though, regarding the past few years.

      In regard to Utah–they scare me because it’s (a) a beautiful landscape and (b) an up and coming city. This is just empirical, but cities seem to attract the high end recruits and even many of the good mid-range recruits. The guys who seem to be okay with living in Corvallis seem to be guys without many options. Hate to say it.

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

    I used to live in SLC and it is a very beautiful city. Some people do not realize that the city is much more cosmopolitan that the suburbs and Provo/Orem. Great dining, arts and sports (especially skiing).

    I also think that the football program has been able to attract better and better skill players as the offense has opened up. Ron McBride (although a good coach) was a defense guy and three yards and a cloud on offense. Kyle Whittingham has been smart enough to keep Urban Meyers offense going.

    • angry angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      I thought SLC was beautiful and the food was fantastic…all this positive feeling despite the fact that I didn’t really like being there. Not sure why…it was probably more about me than the city. I just felt out of place.

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

        I felt that way too at first. Kind of like if you lived in Israel and were not Jewish! But I grew to really like it there, great food as you say, plenty to do and you can keep religious discussions out of your life if you choose to do so.

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

          The air quality can be horrible, though, especially during the winter inversions. I remember driving to work on the east side of I-215, and looking across the valley- the air looked like blue oil smoke.

  • angry angry says:
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

    Another day, another Larry Scott blunder. This “visionary” is destroying this conference.

    Read this: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5415175

    Is he serious? Rivalry games midway through the year? It makes you wonder if he watched last year’s Civil War. This can’t possibly happen, can it? The schools can’t approve this, can they??

    • angry angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      I’m starting to think they should split the zipper by “have” and “have nots”…put the six poorest/worst recruiting schools in one division so they’re on a level playing field and at least have a fair chance to win their side of the conference.

      OSU, WSU, Utah, AZ, ASU, CO

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

    I don’t like the idea of half of the conference being irrelevent (see Big 12 North last several years). You would also end up with a horrible Pac 12 Championship game almost guaranteed. You could get a OSU/UO championship, or UCLA/USC…

    I say split each pair into #1 and #2 based on their previous year’s rankings or a point system (as they won’t play all 11 other teams after they split).

    Example:
    Oregon (1), OSU (2)
    USC (1), UCLA (2)
    Washington (1), WSU (2)…
    Utah (1), Colorado (2)
    Arizona (1), ASU (2)
    Stanfor (1), Cal (2)

    Put them in divisions starting with the 1st and 2nd place teams, and stagger the 1’s and 2’s based as close as possible to a highest and lowest points from the previous year. Put’s the Champion in the league with the last place team, which then sticks the #1 from that state (Washington, lets face it) in with the #2, ans so forth. Sort of ‘seeding’ them as you would for a tourney, but tweeking so you keep the paired teams split.

    Something like that. I like the teams switching each year. You would of course play 3 teams from the other division each year also. But each year your division could change.

    • JackBeav says:
      VA:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

      I’ve suggested a dynamic divisional split which would be set by a lottery system much like the NBA uses. Weight each school as they finished the previous season and select their slots for seedings.
      An eight game (nine game) schedule would yield an inter-divisional schedule like this:
      1 – 2, 3, 11 (8)
      2 – 1, 4, 12 (7)
      3 – 1, 4, 6 (9)
      4 – 2, 3, 5 (10)
      5 – 4, 6, 7 (12)
      6 – 3, 5, 8 (11)
      7 – 5, 8, 10 (2)
      8 – 6, 7, 9 (1)
      9 – 8, 10, 11 (3)
      10 – 7, 9, 12 (4)
      11 – 1, 9, 12 (6)
      12 – 2, 10, 11 (5)

      If your main rival is one of the 3 (2) teams left off your schedule after all this seeding/scheduling is done, then just tweak the schedule to allow the game. I don’t care if rivals are or are not in the same division. I couldn’t care less about static divisional rivalries or any ancillary rivalries. What I want is a mix-up at the top every year so no one division runs away with the power structure. I feel that blaming ping pong balls is better than blaming men with agendas.

      To go along with the new spectacle that is our conference, we could televise the lottery selection (also like the NBA) in the time between the bowl season and signing day.

      I think the idea is a little too complex for many fans, because I get little to no response when I suggest it.

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

    Spectacle aside, my only comment is that I hate the NBA Lottery system. I’m not an NBA fan anyway, and that has always made it worse for me. I don’t like Men or their balls determining anything unless they are the players…that sounded bad.

    But some sort of system, and making it an event in and of itself, could be interesting.

    Now I’m going to shoot myself in my contradictory foot, but what if the points counted things like returning starters, or the coaches/media preseason ranking as a means to get them aligned on real time situation (as one team can go from top to bottom real quick if they lose 20 starters).

    I like keeping rivalries, I like setting it up so that these rivalries could be in the Championship game, and I like the resorting based on basically any kind of system that would create more parity and some intrique at the same time.

    If it’s complicated…well, so be it. Bottom line is that at some point, a schedule will be miraculously unveiled, like a mini March Madness bracket before each season.

    Scheduling could be tough for logistics with short notice like that, but I think it could be done.

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

      The lottery would only be for seeding purposes. That way a tie in the conference–like we had at second and fifth place last year–would equally weight those teams going into the process. Maybe some extra considerations can be given for non-con strength of schedule/results and/or final poll rankings as well, but I wouldn’t want to give too much chance or reason for anyone to sandbag any games for the sake of the next year’s seedings.

      I wondered about the possibility that the window might be too short for schedule/travel purposes. So maybe it could be done a year prior–set it for 2012 if done in January of 2011. It would remain dynamic and give teams an impetus to play for more than just the current year’s schedule.

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

        I agree, I think the short notice on the scheduling would be the monkey wrench. Maybe if you could preschedule which pair you are going to play ahead of time? Like you schedule the trip to Arizona, but you don’t know if it will be UA or ASU depending on who gets put in your league?

        Maybe that doesn’t even matter. Not as big a deal when scheduling UCLA or USC, but if you end up going to Pullman instead of Seattle, that changes your plans quite a bit. Just making it a “Washintgon” trip on the schedule may not be enough?

        Then you could have set “Inter Divisional” games, which could be somone from any state, but that only leaves about 3 games.

        Oregon State didn’t know about Penn State too early a few years ago did they? Or LSU…or even TCU this year. But they got it hashed out.

        I just think if you know you are traveling to one of two places, you just implement Plan A or Plan B.

        Then there is the fact that I don’t know shit.

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

    What irritates me most is that Washington State and Oregon State seem completely unaware of their precarious position…I would imagine that they should at least be fighting, rigorously, for a zipper division of teams, They should get all of the Northwest teams in on it, too.

    That’s about the only way to save either school…otherwise, North/South is just going to screw us even worse than we’ve got it so far. And if the other schools down south who benefit- and the two schools that somehow deserve to make demands (Colorado and Utah)- get their way, we should join the WAC or Mountain West and have our way with them.

    At least we could be one of those bubble teams that the media fixates on- that plan worked pretty well for Boise State, right?

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

    Larry Scott also quietly changed something about the bowl structure last season that can have very negative implications for the Beavers. Beginning this year the bowls (other than the Rose Bowl) are not contractually bound to take any team in their bowl game. For instance, if the Beavers finish in second place this season they will not necessarily go to the Alamo Bowl (#2 bowl). The Alamo Bowl may choose to take USC even if they finish #3 or #4 because they are a “sexier” team and may attract better ratings. I see a strong possibility of us being 8-4 (7-2 in Pac-10 play and only one non-con win). The Alamo Bowl will probably want a team with more than 8 wins.

    Our early games matter in the sense that wins provide a higher ranking and more likely get us placed into a higher bowl. Just thought I might point this out, can be disaster for OSU.

    • angry angry says:
      VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

      Yep. The Beavers may as well buy a timeshare in El Paso.

      The good thing is that USC will likely be tied up in a BCS bowl most years. But they still have to contend with a handful of other “sexier” schools.

      College football is making a mockery of itself imo. I’ve got five years (max) of watching if it keeps going in this direction.

  • Recruiting Updates

  • Categories

  • Archives