TexasDuck

"Must have been something mighty rich to make a fellow like you so gawd-awful sick." Name that Oregon literary reference.

That's what you say when you're still trying to woo Notre Dame.

The USC folks I talk with have the following feelings about the Pac-12, and in no particular order: 1. Scheduling issues. Thursday and Friday night games, when no one east of the Rockies is watching, is a detriment, especially with their desire to be a top-tier program once again. Worse yet when these games are in Corvallis or Pullman. 2. Pac-12 officiating is sub-standard, and not getting any better. 3. The conference did not have their back during the sanctions. The Big 10 did for Ohio St., the ACC did for Miami, and the SEC does for Alabama. The Pac-12 made no such efforts on their behalf. This remains a bitter taste in their mouths. These are their strong feelings. We can do with that what we wish. What I never, ever hear from them is they are trying to get away from playing us. They recognize that we are very strong, and have out-recruited them often in their own back yard. They are looking forward to Lincoln Riley changing that. But they're not afraid of us. I'm going to miss the Oregon-USC games. I grew up with them when John McKay and then John Robinson, both Oregon guys, would return to Eugene every other year. It's a part of our history that will be lost, unless we can somehow get into the Big 10. As for UCLA, I have no idea what the upside is for them, other than the money. I don't have any UCLA buddies to ask, to be honest.

This is what I have believed throughout this discussion. Yes, there are a lot of televisions in the Bay Area - and next to none of them are watching Cal and Stanford. They are all waiting for the 49ers and Raiders to come on the next day. I'd even be willing to say that there are more Duck viewers in the Bay Area than either Cal or Stanford. I lived in the Sacramento region for a lot of years and there were many, many more Duck stickers and plate frames on cars than Cal. The only place you saw a Stanford logo was at the doctors' parking lot at the hospital. The Ducks are a brand that far outdistances the number of TV's in the State of Oregon. As for the Fuskies, I would much prefer that we do not consider them a future league "partner." Let them paddle their own boat.

Actually, my uncle's brother-in-law is a dentist, and one of his patients is a very knowledgeable and well-connected Notre Dame alum. He asked him straight out, "Is Notre Dame going to the Big 10?" The patient said, "tthuuthbettha makethatha zzztheathum." In my mind, that settles it. Where that leaves Ducks, I just can't be certain.

This is about UCLA only. USC is a private institution. This is why I have been saying that if the UC Board of Regents, (the governor is on that board) decides that UCLA is tethered to Cal, then Stanford, private like USC, would likely then be invited to the Big 10. This may ultimately be the question with Oregon/Oregon State, and Washington/Washington State.

It's a fun narrative bu t I honestly don't think that's true. If competition were the primary consideration, I think USC would rather play the Ducks than Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State. It's about the dollars and the future of college football.

It's difficult when a coach leaves. It feels like a bad break-up. If MC had gone to Michigan, for instance, it would have felt different to me than his leaving for Miami. Going back home to be the head coach is very understandable. He has always struck me as a man of integrity, and I wish him the best.

Dennis Dodd has always struck me as a hack sports writer. His columns are often nothing more than surface observations. He doesn’t seem to have credible sources, much less keen insight. It’s as if he surfs the sports pages and summarizes/reorganizes/regurgitates that content. Take him with a grain of salt.

The epic game at the horseshoe was one of the most satisfying wins of all time. It is to be savored over and again, and told to our children and grandchildren. USC and UCLA running from the Ducks? Not so much. Moving to a conference that features Ohio State, Michigan and Michigan St., Penn St. just to get away from Oregon? That's a bridge too far, friends. That's pure fandom talking. We need to be a little more grounded than that. Now, if we recognize that the LA schools are happy to damage Oregon's recruiting footprint in Southern California, we are right about that. The LA schools could recruit against Oregon, pointing out that the Ducks are in a "lesser conference." We'll see if this aspect actually plays out.

The problem with Bay Area media market is that they don't really care about college football.

It may be worth considering that USC and UCLA joined the Big 10 with the understanding, perhaps even stipulation, that Oregon would NOT be invited. When all of this shakes out I wouldn't be surprised if we learn that this was the case all along. Too much Oregon success in recruiting big names in SoCal; this cuts the Ducks off at the knees.

Too bad for Cal. Memorial Stadium in Berkeley is one of the best places to watch college football. Get off BART, walk up the hill to Pappy's for a beer, then on to the stadium. I've visited there many times. The problem is that the Bay Area is fixated on the NFL and doesn't support college football in a significant way. It looks as though Cal, OSU and WSU will be relegated to Mountain West status soon. It must be rough to be fans or alums from those schools and watch all this transpire.

I'm not too worried about Oregon landing in a good conference. UW will be okay as well. I'd be sick to my stomach if I were a Beaver or Wazzu fan/alum. They're going to be relegated to a Mountain West or AAC situation. The only thing that will save either school is if the state boards at Oregon and Washington tether their institutions together. If Notre Dame joins the Big 10, they will bring along Stanford. Cal may also find themselves in the same boat as OSU and WSU.

While the SEC and Big 10 built their brand, television deals and their networks, the PAC 12, led by Larry Scott, did next to nothing. Additionally, USC felt betrayed by their own conference when the draconian sanctions were levied. The other conferences would never allow Ohio State, Alabama et. al. to receive similar outcomes (for infractions that were likely much bigger); that resentment has been seething for a number of years. A lot of USC folks I know have wanted them to leave for a long time, although they never saw the Big 10 as a possibility. Interestingly, this keeps USC and UCLA in the Rose Bowl agreement. We are living in fascinating times.

We could go with the old "Hippies vs. Aggies" as a few called it in the 60's-70's.

I will be more intrigued by Phil Steele’s analysis.

I am optimistic. However, anyone would be an upgrade over Tennis Larry.

They say the same thing about "Uncle Phil." I suppose it depends on whose ox is being gored.

The ESPN focus on USC this weekend is ultimately good for the entire Pac-12. For many years now the narrative has been that the Pac-12 is an also-ran conference, barely better than the Group of Five. With a strong Oregon, a strong USC, and a strong Utah, that narrative will change.

Norman, Palos Verdes...Norman, Palos Verdes...such a difficult decision.

A case can be made that he was the best who ever played the game, in terms of his mastery of every aspect of basketball. One of the great disappointments in sports is that his health did not allow for more than short glimpses of that greatness. As an announcer, he is kind of a nut. He's his own person, that's for sure. He follows the beat of his own (Grateful Dead) drummer.

Tosh may be throwing shade but he has a fairly shady track record. He was famously known as "The Bagman." I'm not sure he needs to draw attention to himself.

USC's O-line was actually fairly good last season, just not a lot of depth. The D-line is the biggest issue at this point, and I'm sure that Riley has a plan. I don't think it's a profound statement to say that more top-tier athletes will now be attracted to USC now, especially with CW being there the next two years.