Annie

I've been to Austin, and I agree!

I love college football, but rarely watch NFL except to check in on games now and then to see how Ducks in the pros are doing. College football has tradition, history, and regionalism that makes it fun for me to watch. But with the transfer portal, NIL, and the development of ever-larger mega-conferences, college football is turning into NFL 2.0.

Sounds as if, other than the big buck$, usc and ucla are moving to the Big 10 in order to escape having to play Oregon.

That's my favorite win, but my second-favorite win is the Ducks beating the longhorns when Oregon played Texas in the 2000 Holiday Bowl. 95% of the Texans were insufferable, so sure they were going to win. But the Ducks beat them 35-30 with Joey Harrington throwing for a touch down, running for a touchdown and catching a pass for a touchdown.

If there's a new PAC with current members plus additional teams that are west of the Mississippi, I worry that all PAC games will be night games, since the mega-conferences could suck up all the day-game hours for Fox and ESPN.

Yep. It might as well be the NFL. History, tradition, regionalism--gone. Soon a loss or two or three in a season won't be such a big deal, because there will probably be a 16-team playoff, leading to a college "super bowl." I like the differences between college football and the NFL, but soon there will not be any.

Well, although Oregon covers 90% of its expenses and the state only 10%, the state owns the campus, buildings, etc.

That's certainly possible. We need a "sad" emoji.

It will be interesting to see if the PAC does that. But in some women's sport, such as acrobatics & tumbling, they have to scramble to find opponents as it it.

This is all beginning to sound like the soap opera "predictions" where Finn might come out his coma and search for Steffy or Li could have survived her burning SUV sailing off the road into the ocean. All we can do is just wait and see what really will happen.

I keep myself sane by reminding myself that I have absolutely no control over any of it, by remembering there actually more important things in life to be concerned about (yes, really!), and I'll sleep better just keeping those two factors in mind.

While I think the other sports matter, yes, the presidents and ADs are considering only football (although I believe USC is somehow leaving beach volleyball in the PAC). The travel expenses for all sports will go up, and thus the non-revenue sports will cost a school more than they do now to continue them.

Exactly! I got so tired of hearing that the PAC-12 was "down" because USC wasn't winning! Never mind that Oregon played in two national championship games and clobbered Florida State in the first championship playoff game when the PAC was supposedly down!

Just last night I heard a radio guy (Cody somebody) saying that USC was making a good move because they had no big games against PAC-12 teams, except maybe UCLA and the Bruins are going to the Big 10 too. He pooh-pooh USC vs. Oregon games, not seeming to realize that Oregon is 11-6 over USC since 1998.

Yes, history and tradition have been a major part of college sports and they are both disappearing/being dismantled by NIL, portal, and creation of mega-leagues. One thing that stood out to me in the article was the possibility that the mega-conferences might start jettisoning the teams with lesser earnings and poorer W-L records. If they do, they haven't thought it through. Sure, that would supposedly leave only "big" games each week, but with no easy wins the "better" teams would start finding themselves with fewer wins and possibly everyone ending up with a so-so records. Not the mention it would be a rotten thing to boot the "lesser" teams from the conferences.

Here’s hoping this USC/UCLA-Big Ten merger careens off the track, crashes and burns | Jones WWW.PENNLIVE.COM The more I think about it, the more I hope this acquisition engineered by the bloodless weasels at FOX Sports derails and...

Saw this mentioned in one of the I-don't-know-how-many articles I've read about conference changes, but it does kind up sum things up: "Lincoln Riley is affiliated with his fourth conference since losing to Oklahoma State last November."

Thing is about adding school such as Boise State or Nevada, if the conference presidents still have influence as to what schools join, they want schools that academically (program wise, admissions wise) are in the same realm as PAC schools. Maybe those schools are, but I'm not sure.

You reported on and said a lot more important stuff, but this made me laugh out loud: In addition to all of her other necessary attributes, Taylor brings one more: lip gloss. Lots of it. So much lip gloss, in fact, that you could wax your Chevy Blazer with it and still have enough left over to polish the coffee table in your living room. Interesting how ESPN and FOX applaud what their money helps to achieve.

Well, it's fun/not fun to speculate on what might happen conference wise, but I'm glad that I don't actually have to try to do anything about it. I'm hoping that the powers that be that do have to try to do something will come up with something that will pleasantly surprise us all. Fingers crossed.

Perhaps USC will get their revenge on Oregon this way, but the Trojans may very well not do any better in the expanded Big 10, maybe will struggle even more.

Well, except I don't think TX and OK were on board with that idea.

I wonder how that would work, as SEC schools seem reluctant to cross the Rockies.

and maybe basketball, but what will all the conference hopping that's happened and is to come do to the non-revenue sports? Football and men's basketball can afford (at least at present) to go all over the country to play, but what will having to travel to the Midwest and East Coast on a regular basis do to non-revenue teams on the West Coast? Hopping down to the Bay area or up to Seattle is one thing, but traveling to Iowa, Ohio, New Jersey every year? That's a lot more $$$. Will athletic departments be will to spend to keep non-revenue sports going?