GatOrlando

Does UCLA have to pay Cal now that they are ACC bound? Could Oregone State be angling an Oregon payment? Especially if the coffers of the PAC aren't full.

Was that a rush the field type upset? Was it even truly an upset? What was the line? Once Oregon State got to 21 points, the game was over. Utah needs Rising back, they don't have the ability to matchup with the great QB's if they don't. Maybe USC. Although I think the Trojans will put up 70 on them if presented the chance. They really feel like losing twice to them last year was unacceptable. If they feel Oregon is a never was, I can imagine how they feel about Utah.

I can see Lou Holtz having a field day when his Irish play USC later this year. If he thinks Ohio State under Ryan Day has lost because of a lack of toughness. Look at Lincoln Riley's team in Norman and now L.A. That defense has been exposed. Gotta give Deion a'lot of credit though. After last week and the first half today. Deion's son has outplayed Caleb by a wide margin in the second . To the Big 12, you better get them early next year.

Luckily for them , it may get a'lot easier if Clemson, FSU, and UNC have found a way out. I'll buy Miami for real when they actually finish a season strong. Until then it's just glitz and glamor.

I think "back" in terms of how most see it is National Titles Contenders. Playing in, if not winning the conference title game. USC last won a National Title in '04. Texas in '05, and Miami in '01. Miami has never won the ACC, think about that. They've played in one ACC Title Game, one!! As you can probably see, I don't have much desire to see them "back". But the odds are that Mario is building them up pretty well. He's got Miami High School connections. That's the key to their success. Much like USC and Los Angeles.

No, you were right. I edited it after you commented. The word surprising can mean anything. I did have success there originally, but again that can have different narratives as well. Colorado won one game a year ago. They are about to have their third straight nationally televised matchup.

Miami has what looks like a good win. I just can't label them as back yet. I also can't call them a surprise either. It's Miami, much like Texas or USC. They have a ton of talent, and for the first time in their history, they are investing money into their infrastructure.

I actually have grown to appreciate Deion's honesty. It's not false bravado. But I can't put them up there a week after getting beaten down. It wasn't close, I don't like their chances today. Kansas has their shot at Texas today. Duke has theirs against Notre Dame, and Syracuse has Clemson. We'll find out a lot about all three. Washington State has already beaten Wisconsin and Oregon State.

I gotta agree with Washington at the top. The meat of the schedule is coming up, so we'll get to see how good they really are. Florida State looked good week one, but very shaky the last two weeks. That kind of knocks them down imo. I would say Texas is my number two, Oregon is my number three, Washington State is four, Ohio State is five. That's based off how they've looked, who've they beaten, and who they've got. Obviously Washington State doesn't have who Georgia does, but they've beaten Wisconsin and Oregon State. Ohio State hasn't looked great offensively, but they have NFL guys everywhere, and won at Notre Dame , playing "tough". Texas, Washington, and Oregon are top three. All have first round QB's, play physically tough on both sides, and have beaten down everything in their path. Georgia,USC, Penn State, Michigan, Oklahoma, Florida State, and Miami are just behind the five I noted.

We are heading into October my friends. Anything and everything is still on the table. The Heisman, conference titles, playoff births. But like every year there have been pleasant surprises. I ask you who has surpassed the expectations so far. I always love an underdog, as long as it isn't playing my team. *Edited the title, to include surprising successes. As pointed out below, how the vague the word surprising can be interpreted.

Oregon State and Washington State are blaming the wrong people. If there was any sort of leadership, the PAC would be alive. That Apple deal was just the latest bad choice in a series of many. The Washington President worded it perfectly in her press conference announcing their move. " When the greatest benefit of the media deal with Apple is that you can get out of it in a couple years. That's very telling". Clemson and FSU aren't happy with 39 million a year. Oregon would have stayed in a PAC with that sort of guarantee imo. They are settling for less than that for the remainder of the current B1G deal. But they'll get full shares in the next deal, and with the B1G being what it is, there will be a better deal. Rutgers, Maryland and Nebraska are now getting full shares. Think they're happy to not be in the ACC or Big 12 now? Utah still wants a B1G invite.

It's at Oregon State? I'd take them simply due to that, and a better QB. Wouldn't shock me to see Utah make it a low scoring affair, which I would pick them in. Oregon State scores under three touchdowns, Utah wins. Otherwise Oregon State keeps their PAC Two title hopes alive.

He didn't even need to use dynamite, he's that explosive.

It's like a thinly veiled slap at Oregon. " We aren't like you greedy Ducks. We Beavers , build our dams pro bono".

Pretty telling that it wasn't a med student( I guess she could be), or an engineering major doing the narration. Rather a Student-Athlete, and the video showed their football stadium imploding, only to be shown being built back up. With the line they build success, rather than buying it. Then she said they don't follow trends, they set them. Kind of a big lie, since they've engaged in talks(allegedly) to join other conferences. They've only landed on the relegation PAC 2 model because it's the only one they see as keeping a P5 membership. They would jump at a Big 12 invite tomorrow. Like I said, I like Washington State's hype video more. They simply said they are a powerful University, with great support. But I get it. They know that this is the height of their position of attention right now. They have a nationally relevant football team, they are still in a power league. They have games coming up against Washington, Oregon, and USC, and an outside shot of still making the playoffs. The college football world is sympathetic to them. They'll be put on the back burner next year, and as this conference realignment story goes away from a PAC oriented situation. They will be forgotten, as will Washington State. Schools like Boston College, Wake Forest, and North Carolina State will be thrust into the spotlight. If the ACC implodes, those three will be left in the wilderness. Best case scenario? The ACC adds Oregon State and Washington State to buffer their numbers. Keep that ESPN deal in place. 39 million a year for it's existing members, if they stay above 15 members. Can Oregon State survive at a reduced revenue stream , like Stanford or Cal? Lot's of travel expenses incoming.

I laughed at the line "We believe in building success, not buying it". What does that mean? So those renovations to the stadium were built freely by the sons and daughters of Oregonians? They don't need the money from the PAC's corpse? I liked Washington State's hype video more.

Anybody see this video from the Beavs?

One has to wonder the formula for Stanford football to succeed. Harbaugh gave them the formula, Caldwell maintained for a while. Is it lack of investment? Fan interaction? I know Trojan, Husky, Duck, Beaver, Cougar, Wildcat fans can be rowdy. If Stanford just didn't care at all, I think they would just go independent. Forget about playing in the ACC. They have the endowment big enough to fund some countries. I just don't get what their aim is. Or that creepy tree.

https://youtu.be/PB7r5-qOvvI?si=XMenfyltKr5-ovBr That 2007 upset of USC by Stanford signaled Stanford was not a joke. But hearing the announcer saying that the Pac 10 was the best conference prior to the 2009 game. He wasn't far off, but it feels weird hearing it. Pac10 sounds weird. If we only knew what would be 14 years later.

I know Stanford hasn't been the greatest football program the last few years. But I do remember when I first moved out to Arizona in 2012 that Oregon, and Stanford were two of the strongest programs in the PAC 12. It was one of the few games that the Nation tuned into to watch two left coast squads. Jim Harbaugh, and Chip Kelly both had departed to the NFL. But Caldwell, and Helfrich maintained the standard for a few years. Being that Stanford is going to the ACC, and Oregon to the B1G. This may be the last game for a while? I recall the 2013 and '14 matchups. What is your favorite memory? Are you gonna miss playing those creepy Trees?

This and their supposed relegation model is nothing but smoke. We all found out who the true power brokers are in college football. No way they allow a PAC Two, plus a bunch of G5 schools, have any say. The lawsuit, talks of keeping a seat at the table is a power play to ESPN. "Get us into the Big 12". They should be added regardless, not out of pity. They are the best two options the Big 12 could get if they want to grow. It's about the collective in the Big 12. They don't have a premier brand, and they won't get one. Clemson, FSU, or North Carolina aren't joining. Whittingham keeps insinuating Utah is headed for the B1G in the future. I don't know why,

Why is the PAC breaking up? That ten million was because ABC was carrying it as one of their premier games. The PAC failed to secure a deal with linear television. The PAC network would never deliver a number that big, nor would Apple. The PAC failed because it couldn't create a functioning business model. It couldn't get USC the revenue stream the B1G could. How could PAC leadership be so inept? That question may never be answered John.

I think there is a stigma around PAC programs being soft. Maybe that was the truth, but there is nothing soft about Utah. Colorado found out how soft Oregon was. Michigan State found out how soft Washington was in East Lansing. Still waiting to see if a Lincoln Riley coached team can ever be as tough as they are talented. Lou Holtz may think the PAC is soft, and Notre Dame is still the best team in the land. It's a false premise though. Four top ten teams is no joke. Three potential first round QB's in the PAC. I think the media is giving the PAC more credit this year, one silly reason may be that four of them are future B1G teams. The SEC and B1G carry cache. You may be getting more respect and eyeballs due to your future allegiance, as much as the on field success.

Four weeks in, and I'm convinced Oregon and Washington may be the two best teams thus far. The SEC is at it's weakest right now due to QB play. Outside of LSU, who already has a loss. I'm convinced there isn't a guy that is a first round talent. USC and Utah are both impressive, but they aren't as dynamic on both sides as Oregon and Washington imo. As far as my possible scenario goes. Is there a possibility that the PAC and B1G gets two teams in a piece. Say Washington loses to Oregon, but then wins out. Oregon goes undefeated and USC only has two losses. Then over in the B1G, you have Ohio State go undefeated, Michigan only has one loss, and Penn State has 2. I see FSU losing, and the ACC is pretty weak. I can see Georgia taking a couple losses. Imagine a playoff with two PAC teams, but they are gonna be B1G teams next year. Pretty slim chance, I know. But an interesting one. Edit: Actually scratch that, the PAC doesn't do divisions anymore. So my premise is not realistic

This is the week we find out if Colorado is legit. Even a loss wouldn't discredit them, barring it being a blowout. I expect good numbers. It will be interesting to see what the numbers look like in comparison to Notre Dame-Ohio State. Two of the richest programs in the sport, with nationwide interest. Does Colorado traditionally travel well? Maybe that question would be easier to answer from a Big 12 fan. Colorado hasn't been great in their PAC tenure.