2002duck

I went to fact check this, because I recall an issue with Texas wanting to remain on the Longhorn Network and not share money, along with ESPN and FOX not wanting to pay anything regarding a future PAC Network. Anyway, asking ChatGPT to recall when OU and UT considered coming to the PAC did not go so well: "Yes, I am aware of the discussions that occurred in the early 2010s regarding the University of Oklahoma and the University of Texas potentially joining the Pac-10 conference. In fact, these discussions ultimately led to the formation of the current Pac-12 conference, which includes both Oklahoma and Texas's longtime rival, Texas A&M, as well as several other universities from the former Pac-10 conference. The addition of Oklahoma and Texas to the conference was seen as a major boost to the Pac-10's national profile and revenue streams, and has had a significant impact on the college sports landscape as a whole." Ouch, ChatGPT! "I apologize for the confusion in my previous response. The talks ultimately fell through, and the Pac-12 ended up adding Colorado and Utah instead. I apologize for any confusion my previous response may have caused."

I agree, UO and UW got outFOXed in this mess. The B1G and FOX probably really wanted USC, and taking UCLA was necessary. Not that UCLA can't be really successful someday. Personally, I don't see the streaming transition to be as great as people think. The PAC has been left at the alter. My older brother has been a streaming rights executive/negotiator/facilitator in the film industry for about 15 years- pretty much when it started. While he is not at all connected to TV or sports, his general attitude and opinion about media and profits/financing is that it's always bad. He's not exactly paid to be a pessimist (he's one in real life), but for every motivational speech he gives at a conference or meeting, or whatever deal he facilitates- he always says the whole industry is a house of cards. "There's just not a lot of profit to be made in streaming or for theatrical releases. If you are not a super hero or franchise player, you're out of luck."

If Oregon and Washington were offered by the B1G we would have been gone in a heartbeat. I highly, highly doubt UO and UW do not go to the B1G when the next PAC media deal ends (if they even make it to the end of the deal). Keep that in mind when calling schools traitors. USC and UCLA were one part smart and one part lucky.

Fivethirtyeight.com did an in-depth article on the most likely teams to go to the B1G (this was after USC and UCLA left). Notre Dame was the only school in the slam dunk "no-brainer" tier 1 category. Oregon was ranked as the third best fit/most likely to go, and in was in Tier 2 along with UNC, FSU, and UW. Tier 3 was Clemson, Utah, Miami, Stanford, and Cal. Tier 4 rankings had a ton of teams, and Arizona was about half way down. The article said: "For the most part, the universities in this tier fall into the “good fit, mediocre sports and market” category. Virginia, Missouri, Pitt, Colorado, Arizona, Georgia Tech and Kansas all meet this description, for instance." Keep in mind that this was before Deion Sanders went to CU. The B1G is not going to take Arizona because it has a good basketball program. Also, it would make a ton more sense for Arizona to go to the BIG-12, and the kicker is that the BIG-12 is better at basketball than the B1G right now. Where Should The Big Ten Expand Next? We Crunched The Numbers. | FiveThirtyEight FIVETHIRTYEIGHT.COM Which schools should the Big Ten poach next?

I agree. I look forward to the Ducks joining the B1G. It's the only way we can become a Blue Blood in the future.

It seems like Canzano never gets good scoops on Oregon Football and the Blazers, the two biggest teams in Oregon by a mile. It probably does not help that he is indifferent to the programs.

We've already been begging. The only thing I could think of that we have not told them is that we'll accept $0.00 for a year or two!

I watched his highlights in the Les Schwab Invitational, and mostly the full highlights where West Linn beat Bronny James's team. I'll say that he seems to be better than Bronny- but if you have not watched Bronny play either than that won't help you! Just look it up on youtube. On 247, Shelsted is ranked #31 and James is ranked #33. It lists Shelsted as a 6' PG and James as a 6'3'' Guard. That said, I do not expect either of those players to start as freshman, especially not Bronny James. I would be surprised if he ever gets drafted, so the whole story about Lebron playing with his son is just hype.

That's what I think- just for ad money. I mean, people could just visit their school's athletic department website like goducks.com, and it will tell you where the game is being streamed. I don't see them monetizing it in anyway other than for ads. It's basically freely available info.

The junior hockey leagues are the two feeder leagues for the NHL in North America. There are two junior hockey leagues, the United States Hockey League (USHL) and the Canadian Hockey League (CHL). The Portland Winterhawks are in the Western Division for the CHL, for reference. The age range for players is 15-20 years-old. Players can get an exemption to play at 21, but that's rare. 15 year-old players have to get an exemption, and that's more common. If you live in the US or Canada and you turn 21 without being drafted to the NFL- you are essentially washed up if you didn't go the college route. The 15, 16, and some 17 year-olds live with host families in the cities where they are signed with their junior team- and yes, a 16 year-old kid can be traded to a different city. So, what's so special about a 6' tall, 180 lb 14 year-old American QB (he's not 13 anymore)? If hockey players are hitting hard, and getting hit hard at age 15- and not even living with their parents, this kid can handle a recruitment letter. Junior hockey young teens are a phone call away from playing in the NHL! Just some perspective.

Apple has been on a mission to buy back shares for a while, and has also been very kind to investors, paying about $15B in dividends last year. Apple is not frivolous with their spending. While they just spent a large chunk of change to have all of the MLS games (except subleasing one or two games a week to networks), it was a *10* year deal! Not exactly something that would work for for college football. Especially the PAC. Also, I watched the Portland Timbers game on Apple last night for their first game of the season, and the broadcast was not great. Something else to note: Apple didn't have their own play-by-play team. Apple made the (former) regional broadcast teams do all the work. When you watch the game you have to select if you want to listen to Portland's play-by-play guys or the other team's play-by-play guys. Seems like with the PAC they might want the same? Anyway, I am very against having the PAC or any CFB on Apple TV, or Amazon for that matter. I'm sorry, but it's not time for streaming sports in college football *or* the NFL. The future is not now.

I think the ideal plan for GK & the Pac is to move all of the games that were aired on the PAC-12 Network to Amazon or Apple. GK has been crystal clear that whatever happens there will be streaming, because hardly anybody can watch the Pac-12 Network games. It appears that Amazon has inferred that they only want the big games (the ones that are currently on ESPN, ABC, and FS1), and do not want to pay for the rights for the crappy games. This is a problem, because the PAC-12 wants the opposite (obviously), and wants the big games on regular TV and the crap games streamed. So, I'm guessing that's why AppleTV is getting talked about- because Amazon is turning out to be a bust. I'm not sure what to do about the PAC-12 network- I suppose the league could see if they could charge Comcast half of what they pay now, and get DirectTV/Dish to pay the same??? So we'd be getting the same money but more viewers??? I'm very much against streaming. Also, I'm not even mad at USC or UCLA for bolting to the B1G- I'm just jealous we didn't get invited at the same time. If the B1G told us to keep a secret, and we bolted with USC instead of UCLA I would have been ecstatic.

Except the PAC-12 has counted Apple among it's suitors from the beginning. The only difference in the Post article is a hypothetical scenario of Apple buying all rights. Apple was right there with Amazon, and then Amazon (apparently) said they only wanted the few big games. Which is the opposite of what the PAC-10 needs. We need to give streamers the crap games (think PAC-10 Network) and have the good games on TV. The problem is that the streamers are balking at that. And why wouldn't they? Most of these streaming companies are not making a profit. As much as Americans think the Streaming Era is upon us, the reality is that that is not really true for mainstream live sports. And streamers are losing money elsewhere, like I said. Streamers aren't charging enough to make money, and there are too many of them. I do not see live sports working out for another 15 years, whether younger generations call foul or not. The answer is to take less money and go to the B1G like Charles said- heck- pay them to take us for the first year!

I don't like the BIG-12 brand at all, but I'd be willing to do a 2 year deal (along with Washington) to bolt to them rather have an all streaming package- let alone an Apple TV package! Let the 4-Corner schools sign longer GOR contracts. Not our problem. I'd rather have Netflix try live TV than going with Apple. Hardly anyone has Apple TV. How many families of our future recruits are paying for Apple TV? This isn't about die hard Duck fans who can't watch the PAC-12 Network, that's hardly a factor- it's about national eyeballs and brand building.

It should be noted that universities and various businesses are allowed to ban guns in certain circumstances. Things such as classrooms (or campus in general), at football stadiums, and in Oregon where alcohol is served (with some exceptions). I'd be interested to know what went down. Did Holden have the gun on him when the argument was taking place, and then put it back where he keeps it in his apartment when the dust cleared? Reports say the cops went to get the gun in the apartment, but they could have done that even if he never brandished the gun, and simply threatened to use it. It would be evidence against his "threat".

Refer to the Register Guard article Charles posted above. It says the incident happened outside of the Gordon Lofts, which is a fancy condo/apartment building downtown next to 5th St. Market. So, it was definitely not on campus. As a public school, I am unsure if the Football Team or UO Athletic Department could make team rules against athletes owning firearms for self-protection off campus. I am not a lawyer, but that could enter troubled waters because of 2nd Amendment rights. I'm not making political opinions here at all- just speculating on Holden's return. Seems to me that if he's posting Duck stuff he's coming back. I hope he does, and I hope he plays well!

That's interesting. I'm not sure I believe him when he infers that he simply forgot to write am or pm. I hope our recruits at DB/S are so good that he would never be missed.

I see. Well, I hope Oregon goes to the B1G tomorrow. I don't want any Duck games to be stream-only. If the conference collapses Oregon could join the Big 12 for a few years for a reduced payout (because we would not sign a long-term contract), or we could go Independent with UW. Then it would make sense to play UW or any other independents. I just don't see any former Pac 10 team scheduling us if they were in the Big-12 unless OSU I suppose.

Yes. Why would they schedule the Ducks? They only have three non-conference games, and they're generally not going to schedule someone they might lose to. Also, spite is 100% a thing. No Pac 10 team should *ever* schedule USC or UCLA for a non-conference game in the future. The same thing would go for an independent Oregon. If you want to play OSU and UW, you might as well stay in the Pac 10.

The only way the conference collapses is if UO/UW leave for the B1G. So, I guess it "wouldn't matter". UA & ASU would be making a huge mistake to go to the BIG 12 if UO and UW and the Pac are still intact. Who knows, maybe the Ducks never go to the B1G. In that case, the PAC is not so bad as constructed, and allows for several paths to the Playoffs.

UTSA isn't even specifically ranked academically. It just falls into a grouping. So, it's in something like the 350-400 range. I'm not saying Oregon and Washington are like fiduciaries for the PAC 10, but before in the interim before we go to the B1G, we can't let our old friends make these poor decisions. It will just result in teams going to the BIG-12.

Notre Dame home games are cold Midwestern games in late October, November, and December. Notre Dame is basically a Big 10 team. I'd like Oregon to go independent in a best case scenario, but what if nobody wants to play us? Schedules are already made for many years out.

First of all, I'm sure some of you may have noticed that I keep hammering home that Oregon and UW need to go to the B1G as soon as possible. And that remains the same. Until that day comes (in 3 or 4 years?), I think it may be worth adding Boise St. to the Pac, but only for football and basketball. Either way, the goose is cooked. UO and UW are going to the B1G and AZ/ASU are going to the Big-12. When? I don't know. I'm curious if UO and UW will accept a very short rental contract in the Big-12 until the B1G wakes up from their slumber. The Big-12 will surely accept us for a short GOR. Right?

But those are not lucrative West coast schools. The BIG-12 is just waiting for Oregon and Washington to go to the B1G so that they can get ASU/AZ, Colorado, and Utah.

Your scenarios are predicated on programs like TCU and Texas Tech leaving the BIG 12. Why would they leave the BIG 12, especially if Oregon and Washington are going to bail to the B1G the first chance they get- no matter what GOR penalty they may have to pay?