Mike West

If we were truly righteous about our lives, this world would look a whole lot different right now. But as the saying goes, put your money where your mouth is. If you feel strongly about the Saudis, stop buying gasoline that comes from the Middle East. I don't see that happening anytime soon. So if the Saudis mind their own business, let's use their finances until we can replace them. I actually care about Oregon State and WSU. Despite being the snob I am, I prefer to have a West Coast football identity as part of the college football landscape. Of course I don't want OBD thriving in a suspect conference- that just stinks on all kinds of levels. Until an AMERICAN COMPANY steps up to make the numbers work, let's keep our options open. Make the PAC12 Great Again...damn it.

This better be a good deal. And if we go to streaming I expect a replay on demand feature. I don't want to fix my midweek schedule to do a programmer ever again. So, if I want to watch the replay of my beloved ducks at 3:30 in the morning, it better be available. That is what makes streaming attractive after all. Otherwise, I'm done with this conference. I'll pack my figurative bags and root for the LA schools (at least they're getting paid for the risk they take). Michael Crow. Can't say anything positive about the guy, so I'll keep it to myself. I sure hope he didn't have his fingers in the negotiation.

Because Coaches are responsible for THE WHOLE WORLD Dan Altman: "I've got 9 billion kids to feed". At least one of them is going to get mad before I get them a meal...sheesh.

It sure would be nice to add teams like SMU and SDSU. My reservations are how the heck are we going to draw $50-60M like we should given our brand. That was going to be tough WITH USC AND UCLA in the conference. Are we really going to continue yielding $100M plus when the dust settles next year? This really is about money. No money no life as they say, and it will certainly effect recruiting long term. Not to mention Utah and UW are not going to lay down for us and give us easy titles. We're assuming quite a bit expecting easy titles in a very, very diminished conference. I'd take my chances having better access to recruiting in The Big- even against the likes of tOSU and Michigan (the only teams I feel are high caliber enough we'd always face the prospects of losing on a regular basis). Where's the 50-60 million? That's my question. We can Garner that AND compete for playoffs in the BIG. Why risk "sitting on the beach" in our own conference when we can certainly compete in recruiting AND playing in the money conference? Show me the money. Especially the way Tom Cruise said it. LOL.

I believe this failed network has been the canary in the coal mine for nearly a decade. It is difficult to justify spending 40 million a year per team when the most popular matchup meets 11 million fewer eyeballs than the most popular matchup in the game, much less only a million more for an average game in the SEspnC. I believe the Fusky game at home this year was also a PAC12 night game ( correct me if I'm wrong) that had CFP implications as well as OBD needed to win out, and those foul Dawgs had already defeated Utah. Obviously the nation is hypnotized by tOSU v. Michigan games, but their Rose Bowl cousins have a very difficult time drawing interest even when the playoffs are on the line (on an exclusive broadcast with no competition at that). Untill the conference can demonstrate it can attract Five million plus eyeballs mid day, I don't see much value the teams can present to TV executives ( that's the average for also rans in the SEC like Florida and Tennessee each year. I wonder if Penn State and Michigan State get a many or more eyeball a week than even UCLA and USC). That's the crux of it in my eyes- the PAC12 Network couldn't compete on any level at any time with the Big Two conferences the past decade. Why would any business reduce their revenue for the sake of tradition? Why would a valuable brand like USC effectively destroy their brand for that matter? Competing at an elite level is expensive. We all know this. It makes perfect sense as far as I'm concerned to maximize your revenue in order to maintain your brand and the status that brand provides. I don't believe ethics is a part of USC's decision. It's good business sense. It's sound decision making, and while it affected competitors, it is supposed to. Self preservation after all is natural. I recognize this disturbs lots of West Coast fans, but heck, we've certainly not shown the conference much love when it comes to watching the brand if we're truly honest about it. Action talks and you know what walks. The West Coast isn't as interested as the South and Midwest in football. That is a deal killer. It's the elephant in the room we refuse to acknowledge quite frankly and no amount of tradition can change that. Does anyone remember when Sears was king of the hill? Well they died, and so did it's tradition. That's life unfortunately. Unfortunately, the Conference of Champions are champs in the wrong sports. And now those very sports are in danger of losing necessary funding to carry on ( most unfortunately). The thing that hurts most about this is we're only twenty years outside of dominant football Nationwide as a conference. Worse, at the beginning of the year it appeared we might have a shot at acquiring a fairly decent TV deal.

Some thoughts here: 1) Expansion as Jon suggests. I like the idea of adding inventory Eastward. In addition, if the schools collaborate on truly developing teams the way Utah did in the MWC, in order to develop Boise State credibility (most especially a few upsets of the Blue Bloods), AND a very short term deal ( I'm talking four years tops) with a very serious effort from Utah,UW and Oregon to bolster the additions by any means necessary ( to bolster the Brand of the conference in football). I'm for that. Given the prestige hit the conference will definitely take, serious collaboration at nailing playoff contenders is essential. The aim being enhancing the Brand and doing everything to get two conference teams in the playoffs. This requires some serious thinking out of the box and commitment to athletic excellence. Given that the current Presidents want the Research Funding- a WRITTEN Agreement with penalty clauses (am I dreaming here or what?) may entice Tulane and SMU to bite. Nothing would be more awesome than to go after the second tier of the SEC - say an up and coming Tennessee or better yet FULLY FUNDED A&M - and ruin their rise while bolstering the conference. Especially at Noon Eastern or 4:30 Eastern while a Blue Blood is on( I can see the highlight reels interrupting those games lol). Given that thought, THIS YEAR IS A MAJOR YEAR FOR THE REMAINING TEAMS. Upsets this year are an absolute must. Same for any teams joining the fray. Nothing can bolster a conference better than what UW did to MSU last year, and OBD did to tOSU recently. Another option for OBD to stay, and negotiate its own Network, with some sort of revenue sharing once the deal is inked. The 7th most popular brand in football should be able to Garner an extra 10-25 million on its own ( and yes playoff appearances would truly help). If course, this requires an extreme amount of trust, and forward thinking. But heck, the only other thing I can think of is flat out calling the other conferences chicken for not inking home and home deals with the conference ( tOSU bailing out anyone- especially after talk of keeping OBD out of the BIG). I would be relentless about it too, and seriously prepare in collaboration to seal upsets. Unfortunately, the focus has been so academic centric, we might see our schools morphing into Ivy League West. Not a bad thought Jon. Maybe some WWE style tactics can keep the conference relevant with an upset or two. Perhaps all those brilliant minds in the conference can learn some marketing and sports management.

Awesome take as usual my friend. I do believe the schematic advantage was handled well by Auburn ( the coaching in the SEC is superior to other conferences), but they did not handle OBD passing game well, which Chip failed to exploit enough. There lies the rub, because Chip's team was also equally matched against the Tigers, and Chip's team was unfazed at the fact the Tigers neutralized that schematic advantage. Hence the kind of mental toughness and fierceness to climb back into the game despite all the obstacles the team faced. In the Ohio State title game, our injuries nullified an opportunity to match some of that NFL clad talent, and some truly poor linebacker play wasted a tie game at the start of the fourth quarter. Not to mention a failed opportunity to force a safety to convert tOSU's series back to OBD early in the game after we took the early lead. Talent absolutely matters. Talented Depth matters more. But I do believe the size of the fight in the dog matters as much as the size of the dog in the fight. For instance, I didn't see any ferocity last September in Atlanta, like an outburst or two or a scrap or two to let the Bulldogs know they were going home sore that night. I would have rather seen lots of Bulldogs on the ground no matter the score. Teams respect that kind of effort, even in a rout. We saw OBD had talent, as the season progressed. As a coach or a fan, I know I would fear a team that punches a more talented team in the face no matter the score. That commands everyone's attention because you KNOW you better being your A game .

Can OBD go undefeated? If so yes. Duh? Yes, but any PAC12 team that goes unbeaten will really have a shot at winning the whole thing. More so than the year OBD ran the table in 2010. I don't see the talent, or the killer instinct in this year's team ( Chip's boys were assassins - point blank). Chip's team had talent, but they were monsters through and through. Tough, tenacious, focused, and flat out hungry. I haven't seen that since. Did you see the way Georgia opened and closed last year? They left no doubt who was superior. That is what's missing. Heck, that type of intensity usually produces victory. I'd rather see my team make mistakes with that intensity level because eventually, improvement leads to butt whuppings. You know, like Georgia did often last year (and Chip's Natty team did all year). Chip's team didn't have near the talent level we've seen throughout the playoff era, but that beast mode effort matched every single one of them. So, with that effort and intensity, then yes, I say they will perform well enough to run the table. I don't think it will happen, but the defense alone will dramatically improve if they play like a team possessed. One can dream that OBD plug themselves into that machine in the Matrix movie to teach them to be rabid dogs. But I'll accept their best effort nonetheless.

I'm sure football junkies would JUMP at the prospect of seeing conference games in the all-22 format. High School coaches, and position coaches in general (as well as dedicated football players) would be all over that product. Not sure about the casual fan, but I would totally find time in my limited schedule to watch plenty of all-22 action. The NFL has provided that be option for years, and they even show the all-22 from the lineman perspective, so I find it highly valuable for people serious about studying football. I hope that is an option being discussed. I think Netflix is a better option for streaming, but if Amazon can add value to the conference, and from what I hear, CBS gets the Utah v. UW, OBD v. Utah, and all the other high profile games, maybe the conference came make out and stay relevant.

Interesting comments. I have some concerns about streaming. Actually it's about the conference's brand as a whole. Content is desired when it is valuable. That requires value last year's football teams brought to the table, and like the years UW, Cal, WSU and Oregon were top ten powerhouses before USC reclaimed it's throne as the West Coast premier football program. I do believe streaming will augment, if not replace cable as a revenue source. Live sports tops all programming by far (especially compared to current TV programming), and avid college football fans thirst for top tier games to watch each weekend outside their favorite conference. The prospect of watching a game (over) again several times is also attractive- especially if the audience gets to pick when they want to watch a replay. That does require top shelf football however, which until last year was seriously lacking out West. With playoff expansion on the horizon, the prospect that say OBD goes to Tennessee when the Volunteers are ranked 7th or 8th, and pull an upset- that is a game changer. Hopefully, the SEC will lay off their guarded reputation and schedule teams that can actually defeat them down South. Regardless, excellent football is an absolute must from now on ( not to mention excellent basketball). Now if I were GK, I'd negotiate a short term deal with the option for extensions ( say a four year deal with an option to renegotiate). I'd also bury games after 5 pm Pacific, especially for the top ranked football teams ( whom can compete with Bama, Georgia and Ohio State as long as they stay undefeated AND they drop 45 ON EVERYBODY). That's my take on things. Force the Deal Makers to risk losing a possible up and comer conference ( no more deals like the ACC got suckered into). Risk the product and force ADs and football coaches to develop elite teams. 2024 is really the deadline. If the Fuskies can beat the blue bloods ( anathema to almost all of you), that means OBD become part of the REAL conversation in CFB because we are the heated rivals of our "punks" to the North. Of course if we do so as well, or Utah (any conference team really), that is all the better. Streaming is a moot point to me if we don't duplicate last year and match the drama last year brought as the season closed. To me, three 10-2 teams and one 11-1 ( or say an undefeated team and an 11-1 team with at least one other 10 win team) should be the goal of the conference ( and creaming non conference teams along the way). Elite football draws eyeballs. Not just audience numbers. I'm sure plenty of people East of the Mississippi will watch the conference at 8 EST if they KNOW they're going to see top tier football. That is how streaming might help the conference. Value. From the conference itself. Just my opinion.

I discovered an interesting bit of news that explains why the PAC12 and the BIG10 are going after the academic schools so vigorously. Apparently, Research draws hundreds of millions of dollars to the degree the sports aspect is overlooked. If that is the case, it explains why the conference hasn't been as concerned about it's football or basketball reputation. Research income dwarfs athletic income. Apparently, schools like SMU and Rice would be very good additions according to the strategy the conference is following. SDSU will add a solid media market, so geography for the two Texas schools would then be the challenge. That would allow the conference an opportunity to attract Kansas, the best candidate in that region. Then maybe a school like Tulane could round out a very good group of academic schools that hopefully would then contribute the tens of millions necessary to finance their athletic departments properly ( if they so inclined to, because CLEARLY ESPN, the only prospect for Tier 1 revenue, IS NOT going to budge on their obvious advantage). Of course SDSU could enhance their academic reputation in the process, which would bolster the conference's academia reputation and it's media market prospects. How's that for those of you that want to maintain our historic conference alignment? Snagging Kansas would be a dramatic coup. But with academic strength from the Texas schools, and being close enough proximity to those two, Utah, Colorado and Tulane, that might be an attractive incentive for Kansas to join Arizona as conference powerhouse basketball rivals. Of course, being the sport elitist I am, I'm not as attracted to the idea, but if there is a way to budget the football powers in the conference ( in order for them to truly attract elite football players ), I'm for it because it will give Utah, the Fuskies and OBD and authentic shot at a national football title. I care about titles, and as most of you know I'm not fond of the product (students) ANY of the schools have churned out for at least a decade ( hypocritical if you ask me since it seems to me students don't matter, the money does). Maybe that satisfies both constituents: academic oriented fans and elitists like me who want more than just a brand ( hence a REAL football power) at Oregon.

I think Georgia showed us Class and sportsmanship doesn't matter. Bury them. Early, often, leave no doubt, make others worry. It will take an act of God to beat us if you want a Natty. Obliterate them. Make an unforgettable statement. You think everyone fears Georgia now? I do.

That's about the same benefit the NFL players receive sans the "education"( which is inflation related in my opinion - the education didn't increase in value, but the charges did. In other words the kids get the same "value" of education that that we paid $20 K over four years).

While I agree with you- this issue was a sore point with the players all the way back to the early eighties. I knew several Fusky players that openly complained of the work they had to put in order to excel. It was a full time job even then. Not to mention the NCAA was quite aware the players felt that way, long ago. Rumbling stared well before the organization got sued, and it was evident strategies like the current NIL environment was already in practice at "approved" schools. They didn't put 000 on the jerseys and sell them to the public (instead of let's say Troy Aikman and Barry Sanders)- which netted the Universities tens of millions of dollars. I've had this argument for decades. But I always felt other programs should be funded too ( I still feel that way). We all know this is professional football. Kids aren't setting up plan B, and the schools don't really make sure they graduate. That's been the case for decades. It's just blatant and in our face now. We can no longer deny it.

If coaches get to sit out one year, and coaches get NFL coaches money, I'm behind you. I'm resigned to the fact most college athletes aren't investing in their future outside of football and it's been a business for them at least a decade. When a Mario Cristobal and a Willie Taggart can leverage Oregon the way they did, and kids are told " well kid, you'll get your chance to live in the real world when you graduate"- I don't support that kind of exploitation And I really started to feel that way when a decent Colorado football player at the turn of the century was forced to quit playing football because he was getting endorsement money as a World Class Skier. The hypocrisy was a major turnoff for me because there was little difference from scholarship athletes getting MLB contracts. It was blatant in your face " we control you as a college student" attitude. We get the revenue you generate as a star, we have a great setup with the NFL to force you to stay in college. There is nothing American in that set up. And I loathe the fact that teenagers can generate a the type of followings they've garnered in the social media era. But THAT IS what America is truly about: opportunity for EVERYONE that generates value in life. Now if we could manufacture artificial value for our teachers...

Hayek and Vin Mises are going to smiling a lot more when the crack up boom actually materializes (because the Fed isn't getting out of this conundrum they put us in in 1987). And we STILL will pay market value for CFP tickets lol.

There's nothing that solves playoff berths better than having championship caliber football teams.

I'm not sure anyone would promote Sewell based on this year's performance. Disappointed is an understatement. Not to mention he's truly been the soul of the defense (even when Thibs was here). The team usually matched his intensity level and used to play tough, hard-nosed football. I say Sewell was the heart of the defense because when he started here, he was a beast, and the defense played like that. Where that fire has been the last two years is a mystery. Sewell used to be a sideline to sideline LB. He's not a speedball, but his instincts and intensity were attributes he had - which is why we used to see him by the ball at the end of nearly every play. I'm not sure what happened. But the defense looked so horrible overall, there was reason to really think about just Sewell. It sure didn't help not having help at defensive tackle the past two years ( which is why I always questioned Dorlus trying to replace Thibs instead remaining the best HE was inside). But I'm just a scrub giving my take. I've coached defense once, and I'm built differently when it comes to scheme, and clearly I'm not coaching present day. So all I can give is an opinion. I hope Noah Sewell reverts back to his freshman and sophomore years and earns accolades at the next level. Who cares where he's drafted.

It's always best to remain classy when criticizing players. SOMETIMES THOUGH, you just want to be in first grade again...

Went to both schools as an undergrad. Oregon was more cozy, but UW wasn't as cold and uninviting as people say. Academically, I got challenged as an undergrad day one at UW. You had to be excellent to advance to your school of choice. They fostered chilling competition ( maybe that's where the large and cold reputation comes from). I didn't get pushed like that at Oregon until I was a Junior. But I did get pressed from that point on. I enjoyed both schools and met very excellent people at both Universities. I do believe you had to be serious at UW immediately, unlike the fun atmosphere in Eugene, or you wouldn't graduate in Seattle.

Hutson didn't do a damn thing when he caught that pass. It was routine. And he acted like he was superb. Pee Wee kids catch passes for first downs. I can't tell how much money kids like Kris Hutson cost my company this year. That's why I applaud Cristobal's meltdown. Kids are a huge liability these days. Because of behavior and attitudes like Hutson's. I don't know when it started. Don't care. Until it stops, I'm going to be firing dozens of kids like Kris Hutson.

Had the defense been just solid all year, we're talking 11-1 hands down. A playoff beth, and a shot at redemption at the team that showed OBD what it takes the be a contender, and a champion.

I feel your pain. And it always seems like we're always going to be on the cusp, only to be forsaken. Winning a Natty is harder than winning a Super Bowl in my eyes. Despite the hard landing, we did better than I expected after watching Georgia mop us up like the dirtiest of floors. Think of it like this, our defense was worst than the Oregon defenses of the seventies at times, and we still were lucky bounces away from reaching the playoffs. Every year is going to feel like this. Until we win a Natty. Then the angst and fear will start all over again (but it sure would be nice to have a Natty lol).

Who would you have picked? Not a slam question either. I really had no idea who would be interested enough to deal with the challenge Oregon truly is. We are a tweener program. Not blue blood like Tennessee or Penn State, but in their very position. Taken seriously by opponents, but blue bloods always expect to beat us. Tucked away in what seems like Alaska or Hawaii. Still slighted and threatened by the Fuskies. Who always loom as the team players may go to (besides USC) to keep us where we are. We always have talent, but building talented depth is what kills us. How many coaches want that problem, than say revitalizing the Fuskies, USC, Penn State or Tennessee? Look at this year's team. A talented bunch that has the ability, but just can't seem to muster the chops to be a blue blood. Finally, how many Phil Knight type boosters do we need to sustain this? Quite honesty, that is the biggest challenge the Oregon program faces. How many established coaches want to take up that challenge? So, I'm asking honestly and with as much respect as I can put on paper, what established coaches do you think would take on the Oregon challenge?

I thought the defense would be dramatically better. Someone asked last night if Mario should still be blamed for this year ( awesome question). I can't say yes totally, but the defense , which is mostly Mario's players, was so up and down ( completely a Mario trait) that I want to blame him. I thought the defense would be a huge plus this year. Isn't it awesome we don't get penalized financially for being wrong? LOL I did believe Nix would be much better with an OL and WR set. I was more impressed than I imagined. I expected this team to be a playoff contender. They were, then they weren't. Then they were. Then they weren't. I do wonder what would have happened if Nix waited oh so little longer before he took off for the first down/ end zone at the end of the Fusky game. I know people are frustrated about Lanning going for it on that fourth down miss. Does anyone really believe our defense would have stopped Oregon State after a punt instead? I certainly don't. I repeat my fuming post from a couple of weeks ago: I'd be pretty mad if I was an opponent on offense against OBD and I didn't have a career performance. That OBD held Utah to 17 points is a bloody miracle.