All good reads!

 

But Arizona #4? Get serious. Maybe if they were status quo and building upon last year I could see them sneaking into the playoff at #12. Utah is the one to beat in that conference.

On 3/3/2024 at 12:39 PM, HDuck said:

Former Fox executive Bob Thompson yesterday tweet:  "If anyone thinks that any distributor is going to carry Pac 12 Networks after July 1 please give me a call. I have some land I would like to talk to you about.  Could continue as a production house for third parties, and the two remaining schools, but beyond that???"

 

Me...one issue would be how much is WSU and OSU willing to spend to keep the "production house" going?  That is going to have to come out of the bag they are keeping from the 10 escapees.  Where would the "production house" be?  Still in the Bay Area?  Still paying the lease?  How many employees?  How much would the MtWest or WCC be willing to fork over?  And, if no network is willing to pay for content generated, how will the content be used?   If nobody wants to pay for the content, what value do the old game films of USC vs Washington have to the Pac2?  And, so on...

Oh yeah, I called it a potential glorified podcast earlier in the thread. Can’t imagine anyone wanting to carry it. Direct streaming only with the voice of the Beavs and Cougs being the talent. 
 

Since the conference failed at successfully implementing the network at full strength, very good chance this will be a huge money loser for them as their pirated treasure dries up quickly.

Another angle that gets me, in addition to all the above, the rules for A MEMBER OR TWO leaving were not designed for 10 members leaving at once. Again, terrible leadership.There should have been a clause as to what constitutes the conference dissolving. Arrogance did not allow for this as a possibility, which is just foolish and incompetent.

 

More? Despite this, they still could have argued this point, and to my knowledge did not.

 

Finally. Their fanbase referring to us as “Whoregone” when they were also trying to leave, and would join the ACC today if they were invited, is just flat out annoying. Throw in us giving up a home game to give them a home game to sell (featuring us) and it makes me not wish them well.

 

All that being said, they’re about to become irrelevant in my mind-space after we pound them in September. 

On 3/2/2024 at 1:57 PM, GeotechDuck said:

This is a good discussion.  It will probably work out most years.  But let's look at an extreme example:

 

1) Team A is 7-2 in the BIG and finishes in third place.

Team A beats: Illinois (17), Indiana (18), Maryland (12), Minnesota (13), Northwestern (16), Purdue (14), Rutgers (15) and gets destroyed by Wisconsin (8) and UCLA (9).  Team A has zero ranked wins and didn't play tOSU (1); Oregon (2); Michigan (4); Washington (5); PSU (6); USC (7).      

 

2) Team B is 8-1 in the ACC, but finishes in third place because of a tiebreaker.

Team B beats: North Carolina (4), Florida State (5), Louisville (6), VA Tech (7), NC State (8), Duke (9), Syracuse (10), Boston College (11) and loses to Miami (2).  Team B didn't play Clemson (1), but has ranked wins against UNC (4) and FSU (5) and loses a close game to Miami (2) in OT, which costs them the tiebreaker.

 

Why should Team A get an auto bid over Team B just because of conference afflation?  That seems completely ridiculous, especially with the unbalanced schedules.  

 

3) Then add this twist to the scenario.  What if Michigan, Washington, and PSU all finish tied for 4th in the BIG at 6-3, but they each played tOSU, Oregon and each of the other two teams they are tied with? 

 

Is Team A better than any of them??  No chance

Is Team B better than any of them??  Maybe not

 

We have not even discussed OOC games.   

 

IMO, they need to stay with the at-large format and make teams that don't win their conference prove it on the field.      

 

 

  

 

There are all kinds of whacky scenarios that are possible. You could have the B12 second best team (or champ) be 7-5 and make the playoff.

 

On average though, the big 2 are each going to have 3+ teams that win 10+ games, these teams will no doubt all be in the top 14. SEC/B1G will organically have at least 3 teams in the top 14 whether or not the word “guaranteed” is used, can’t say the same for the B12/ACC.
 

I think on average, the lesser two conferences come out ahead with these guarantees.

 

They have this completely backwards. Anything that guarantees multiple conference bids outside the big 2 should be grabbed without question. Just look at the 2024 top 25 recruiting classes, 20 are from the SEC/B1G. If the PAC had continued sans the LA schools, I would have been very happy taking a guarantee of at least two teams every year.
 

Not hard to see where this is going.

On 3/1/2024 at 4:26 PM, Jon Joseph said:

The 3rd place team in the B1G is unlikely to finish with more than 3 losses in any given season. The top teams do not play each other enough intra-conference for this to happen and the majority of B1G and SEC teams do not schedule more than 1 P4 opponent out-of-conference.

 

With 16 teams in the B12, I don't believe the runner-up would have more than 3 losses. 

 

As to Notre Dame. the gig should have been up long ago. The ACC loses its top teams and ND will join a conference.

 

I think come 2026 we will end up with a 16-team PO field with some manner of assurances for the B1G and the SEC. The Power 2 should not leave everything up to a 13-member committee that operates with no disclosure as to how it made its choices and with B1G and SEC committee members not being in the room when teams from their conference are discussed. 

All true, but one conference has 5+ “blue bloods” and the other has zero, Not equal schedules so not all losses are equal. I’d go as far to say that 9-3 in the new B1G is the equal to 11-1 in the new B12.

On 3/1/2024 at 1:25 PM, Krsmqn said:

Gonna be a whole lot of reruns. 

What "continuing" means actually remains to be seen. Glorified WSU/OSU podcast? High potential for them to screw that up and cost some serious $$.

On a side note, I've been wondering when the time to unsubscribe from all things PAC would arrive, and it's starting to feel like the time has arrived.

On 3/1/2024 at 12:33 PM, GeotechDuck said:

I don't understand this.  While it benefits the Ducks, having multiple auto bids from a single conference is going to end up letting in some 8-5 team in a down conference year that has no business being in the field. 

 

As the posted above noted, this will most likely happen in the ACC or Big-12, but could happen less frequently in the BIG or SEC as well.  In 2012, are you letting in 8-5 Michigan as the third place team?  How about letting in 9-4 Wisconsin in 2013?  I know there are more teams now and an unbalanced schedule, but that doesn't mean there won't be a 4- or 5-loss team in a down year.  Why not just stick with the at-large bids, so the best teams are invited? 

 

Notre Dame gets a vote in all of this even though they are not in a conference?  I think they should implement a requirement that you should have to be in a conference OR have won a major Bowl Game since 1994 to have a vote.  That would knock immediately them out of the discussion.  

Agree that this is stupid logic for all conferences, but the reality with the new membership in the SEC and B1G is that it stretches the imagination to think these two conferences won't have at least 3 teams in the top 14 every year.

 

Most of what I've seen with ND is they are in if they are in the top 14, which is true for nearly anyone. So I'm not in a huge twist on that one.

 

For fun, I reviewed the historical ACC standings...about every 3 years, the team with the second best record had 4+ losses, the frequency gets much worse if they are taking division champs. The B12 no longer having Texas and Oklahoma is bound to have it's second best team have 3+ losses just about every year.

 

Format really should be 4 conference champs, 1 best mid, rest completely at large.

 

Also just read they’re “continuing” the P12 network through 2025. Just let that sink in.

My biggest issue would actually be the guarantee of two teams for the ACC and B12. SEC and B1G are pretty much guaranteed getting 3 each with a field that simply takes the top 14. Two spots reserved for the ACC and B12 will result in some 8-5 team making the field one day soon, which is just stupid.

 

On 2/29/2024 at 3:27 PM, Augduck said:

Some have speculated it will be on the BIG network- nothing definitive though

I would guess we’re pac12 until we aren’t. Maybe the remaining 2 will sell the rights for whatever they can scrounge up.

So I assume spring games will still be on the P12 network? Awkward.

Yeah same. I loved them when I was a kid in the 70s and 80s. After seeing the mini-documentary during the SB I remembered why I liked them and decided to go back. 

Given I pledged to return to being a Raiders fan again this year no matter what, this would please me! 

On 2/28/2024 at 1:02 PM, spartan2785 said:

The calls for Altman are ridiculous, he's by far the most successful basketball coach Oregon has ever had, a down year for him is around 20 wins with a NIT invite, he's had decimating injuries the last three years, let's see how he does if has any semblance of an off-season where he isn't scrambling to put together 10 players together in order to scrimmage, or completely having to change his style mid-season.  

 

Graves has had injuries this season, but it's a completely different situation where players are leaving in droves (players that are wanted), his teams have also seemed to regress in basic knowledge of the game, and they don't even play hard.  It's turned into a garbage fire of a season. 

 I don’t think calling for Altman is completely ridiculous. For me, this was the year to make the top 68 and look the other way on the past two seasons because of injuries. How many years of ridiculous injuries does it take before we start to chalk it up to more than bad luck?

 

I wouldn’t fire him yet, but I hope that he retires after this year. A 4th year of no tourney, regardless of why, would be the breaking point for me. Making the field is a minimal bar for success.
 

EK was great, until he wasn’t.

Worst thing that can happen is a return to apathy.
 

I was really into the team when they were good, was actually going out of my way to watch every game I could, even when it involved a terrible streaming situation. 
 

Now I’ve completely quit paying attention. Stay the course if you’re cool with back-burner women’s hoops.

I would guess that a practice facility is the priority because it helps with recruiting which provides an immediate return on investment. This was also in the works prior to conference transition. Takes a pretty long time for a 9 figure expansion by 12,000 seats to turn a profit, and I’m not sure how much recruits care if the capacity is 66k instead of 54k.

All about amateur status no longer being a concern for college or Olympic athletes. 

Can’t wait!
 

Though confirming participation when the release states everyone that plays FBS football will be participating makes it seem like not much of an additional release.

All this pac2 nonsense about access is hilarious.
 

Neither have ever been remotely close to making the playoff to date, their real concern is continued access to unearned money. Those future earnings are about to dry up unless they actually succeed on the field in a sustained fashion.

 

Pound sand pac2.

On 2/18/2024 at 10:22 PM, Nevada Dawg said:

I was one who sharply criticized some of his in-game decisions (not always publicly) the first year I started following Duck football more closely. Some were dreadful to be sure. He doesn't seem to learn from mistakes but I'm thinking maybe it is time for us to FINALLY put this guy in the rear-view mirror.

Good call. Worked out better in every way and it’s not like he left after 10 months. 

Fun stuff!

 

UCLA - Over - That seems very low. They actually played very solid D last year and would be surprised if they didn’t have a decent spring portal

USC - Over - Ditto on being low, if the D was exactly the same as last year that’s a good number, don’t think it will be

tOSU - exactly right. I think they’ll go 10-2, but wouldn’t bet money on that number, total coin flip at 10.5 

On 2/18/2024 at 2:28 PM, Mudslide said:

Given the enormous number of injuries and players lost for the season, I think the Ducks, AND DA, have done as well as could be expected. 

 

I was with some of you regarding the bad idea of the use of the "prevent offense" last night (and other nights).  But I've come to change my mind.  The lads worked really hard on the defensive side of the ball last night.  That just might be the reason DA had them slow it down.  The short-handed team was pretty gassed in the second half.

 

Anyway, happily, another beaver dam crumbles and cascades down the McKenzie R.

I hear you, but three straight years of the exact same scenario makes me question talent identification, development of players, conditioning program, and questionable “4th quarter” adjustments.
 

We shot 10% from three against a terrible team last night. We only won because they shot 11%. 

We shall see.
 

I know they have a history together, but this is a total role-reversal of that relationship. Coaching chemistry and relations with players matter more than ever, and they have disrupted themselves twice. I would call it a direct reaction to losing to Michigan 3 straight years and Day is feeling the heat. 

tOSU was one TD away from 12-0 and they’re letting Michigan live in their head rent-free. Be exactly like us making changes directly because of losing to UW 3 straight.