JabbaNoBargain

I think he left because we kept on recruiting 4 and 5 star 7-footers, and he may have been the apparent 4th option at the time.

Why unsure? DB rated in top 50 nationally that rates out higher than our #1 CB from last year.

Like anyone is deeply pondering sticking it to Oklahoma. I can just see all the top marketers deep in the offices at Nike, all our best people on it for three days straight… just finding the perfect way to stick it to Oklahoma because their grad transfer QB left. Eureka! Let’s twist their logo and use it at the Fiesta Bowl! Why stop there? Let’s dedicate the upcoming season to sticking it to Oklahoma. Brace yourselves Norman, a storm of bizarro world twisted “OU” themes is coming your way!

Cool pic they used. Rest of it written by a total knob. (Yes knob)

B1G network is pretty impressive, though my bar isn’t really high after the last 10+ years.

247 recruiting already has PAC2 for football

This is so true. Beav fans seem to the think the only reason they lost anyone this year was strictly NIL. Definitely a factor, but playing time and looking good for the NFL because of playing time are the biggest factors for most I think.

USCs bowl QB looked good

Link?

Nope, them wining a title doesn’t help us at all, beyond lifting us a bit for this year. Long term it’s a huge negative on every front. I could almost accept the argument of it helping the PAC, but that’s moot and in fact a negative moving forward. The Beavers/PAC2 would claim some kind of ownership of a title, don’t want that.

I agree that would have been awesome to add Texas and OU in hindsight. But the real blame falls squarely on 3 California schools not called Stanford. They all relatively sucked the last 10 years with zero playoff appearances, especially the LA schools, but I don’t let Cal off the hook…that’s a program with history and they were terrible. The two LA schools being non-factors in any significant way neutered the conference. Imagine if Michigan and tOSU had performed similarly, or Georgia and Alabama. USC specifically floundered and blamed the conference. Talk about pointing fingers, if they had acted like a true blue-blood the conference reputation would have been just fine, but nope, they sucked and failed up.

Solution? Expand to 16 and ditch bowls. If for some reason we’re clinging to keeping the “LA Bowl Hosted By Gronk” alive, then just accept them for what they are, winter friendlies with unique rosters.

AKA the original WAC with OSU/WSU instead of BYU/Air Force,…prefer the original WAC

I initially felt this way until their fan base started vacillating between being a victim and being arrogant on an hourly basis. They’re complete hypocrites that try to operate exactly the same way we do, but fail at it over and over and refer to us as “Whore-gon”. Nope, no empathy.

Exactly, and I’d add to look at it this way…11 of the final top 12 this year will be in the SEC and B1G next year, and 5 of those teams had 2 losses this year. With them all playing each other more, probably 8 of the top 12 will have an additional loss. I don’t see anyway there are not multiple teams with 3 losses making the field

Cracks me up that not increasing the price for an inferior package is a positive. They should be knocking 25% off…not sure how well San Jose State would draw if they’re 2-2 with home losses to Oregon and Purdue.

Right on, good stuff. I think the number of losses that constitute a playoff worthy year with a 12 team playoff, and 2 super conferences is going to take a recalibration of everyone’s brain. What happens if the top 3-4 teams in the SEC and B1G all have 2-3 losses? Does a 2 loss runner up in the Big12 make it over a 3 loss third place team from the SEC? Will be fun to watch it unfold, but I think there’s a decent chance the winners of the new super conferences have 2 losses, those schedules are seriously upgrading.

Those future Pac2 shares for hoops not looking too good

Of course, if the top 3 in the new conference all get decapitated by the SEC, it’s moot. No one is hanging their hat on Rutgers.

Good points, bowl records will be marketed.

Turnovers. Liberty can only win if they’re +3 or more. I think Oregon wins by at least 30 if they don’t turn it over.

I think Alabama is gong to crush all it pains me to say. One inconsistency I’m seeing in here and everywhere else is to selectively use bowl results to draw sweeping conclusions. I tend to be leaning towards you can have takeaways at the micro level (OSU depth isn’t up to snuff with the big boys for instance), but you can’t draw conclusions that one conference is better than another because of overall bowl records at the macro. Bowl season has become an individual game depth measurement.

Lot of political pressures to play this game and we should hand them their butt when we’re at full strength in good weather…no matter how much they posture they’re a team with MWC level depth that just had their starters gutted. They’ll be lucky to win 8 games next year, I’d predict 7-5. Them getting more money is annoying but doesn’t really impact us at all. Bottom line, are the top 5 donors happy with the leadership or not?

Vintage clock management, ends 7 point loss with 2 unused timeouts

Not possible, has to be in Hawaii to have a 13th game exemption