GatOrlando

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.

College GameDay will be broadcasting from South Bend this Saturday. A top ten matchup of the Buckeyes and Irish. If the Ducks and Trojans continue winning , there is a great chance Lee will be back in Eugene on November 11th. Below is an article on the 88 year old Corso, who started the headgear tradition back in 1996 with Brutus the Buckeye. A team he has picked the most with 39 times. Alabama is second with 36. He has a career 606.00 winning percentage, and just picked his 400th game this past Saturday. I think some of his most iconic moments have been with Puddles. Lee Corso's top headgear picks from 'College GameDay' history - ESPN WWW.ESPN.COM This weekend marks Lee Corso's 400th headgear pick on "College...

The real question is gonna be about divisions. Every major conference is adding at least two teams next year. The B1G made a huge deal of no longer having East/West. The Big 12 eliminated divisions a few years ago. The ACC/SEC still have them. How are you gonna do that flex scheduling with protected rivalries, with such a large conference? Especially if you want every team to play every team ,in a two year window.

It was a great game Saturday night. I thought Colorado was gonna boat race Colorado State. TBH, who has Colorado beaten that is a legitimate threat? TCU? They beat Michigan in the playoffs, got a lot of breaks to get there. They were no match against Georgia though, that looked like a low level G5 school against Georgia. It wasn't like TCU wasn't given a blueprint how to beat Georgia either. They just didn't have the dudes that Ohio State did. Nebraska? Have we not seen what Nebraska looks like against not even teams like Ohio State, but Wisconsin? I hardly call that impressive. Then we have a Colorado State team with a loss already, not many P5 guys on that roster. Also it was a primetime game on ABC at home, and coach prime was "motivated". Colorado is 3-0, most likely saw a 2-1 start. So they're ahead of schedule, but they're about to hit the meat of their schedule. Oregon State, Washington State, Utah, USC, Oregon, and Washington have all looked more impressive to me. I wouldn't look past Colorado, they have speed. But they will get worn down against bigger teams with just as much speed, if not more. Still a good job of coach prime imo. He's made Colorado relevant, excited to see what he does in the coming years if he stays in Boulder. I can see him leaving for a few jobs. I don't see many of them opening up anytime soon though. Maybe Michigan State, maybe.

I get the market value of L.A. I get the history of USC football, and it being the "bedrock" of the PAC. But to say the PAC was dead after last year is false. The league failed because some of the leaders in the room thought they were as valuable as the B1G, because of it's history working with the B1G. Even with USC, the PAC was not as valuable as the B1G or SEC. Texas came to the SEC, not the other way around. USC went to the B1G, not the other way. Those are two of the biggest programs out there. Great academic institutions as well. But they weren't pulling the Big 12 or PAC 12 even with the B1G or SEC. So that goes to show you those "bedrocks" weren't gonna make the difference those fanbases believe. I believe Notre Dame is trying to stay independent to retain their unicorn status. Once they join, a dollar amount gets pinned on them. They become just another huge program in a league. Something is always more valuable when you can't have it. Sooner or later, the Irish are gonna have a sticker price. That's a level of arrogance that trounces even USC or Texas.

Washington looks like a contender. I don't care how bad Michigan State is. It's a road game against a P5 school. They got their first B1G win in a big way. Utah looked good, very physical team. Very disciplined.

Skip to fifteen minutes. It looks like USC fans really look down on everybody in their current/former league. They really don't want Oregon in their new/future league. I would think they'd like having some programs in their region, keep some of their rivals. But from what I've seen, they would have tried to shut Oregon out of the B1G had they had a current vote. Is the bad blood that severe? This is like Texas A&M not wanting Texas in the SEC. Geez man, the guy in the video seems to think that the only programs worthy of their presence is Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State. Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan State, Minnesota, Purdue, Indiana, and Northwestern, already hated their conference adding Penn State, Nebraska, Maryland, and Rutgers because they aren't original members. I can only imagine how they'll feel when this level of arrogance enters their league.

When you have no other options and are backed into the corner of irrelevancy, get as much attention as possible. Two years down the road, nobody is gonna give any attention to this story. Best case scenario is the Beavers or Cougars have UCF, Cincy, Houston, Boise, or TCU(before getting into the Big 12) success. Maybe then the Big 12 might take a second look at them when their next television deal comes up. The Big 12, and ACC will be fighting to stay alive. Both conferences know they are gonna be well below the SEC and B1G conferences. The ACC has members both those leagues may want to round out at 20 teams. Clemson, FSU, North Carolina, Virginia, and Miami are likely targets. It will then be a battle between the ACC/Big 12 for schools like West Virginia, Cincy, Pitt, VT, UCF, GT, NCSU. Then you'll need to fill in for losses to get to 20 teams. Those slots will likely go to teams like Memphis, USF, SDSU, Boise, Oregon State and Washington State. Best case scenario for the sport is four leagues consisting of twenty teams. Plus Notre Dame getting their unicorn spot. Frankly I'm done hearing about Notre Dame joining a league at this point. If they ever do, it will be the B1G. But twenty team leagues are coming, and the B1G will likely only wait for them up to a certain point. Then it's likely they'll just grab UNC and FSU to have teams in every corner of the country. The SEC will grab Clemson, Miami, Virginia and maybe Virginia Tech. Then maybe Oregon State and Washington State can go to the Big 12 or ACC. Depending on whomever gets Pitt, West Virginia, Louisville, Cincy and UCF. The Beavers and Cougars are definitely worthy of being one of the 80 teams in my projection. Then let all this conference alignment stuff go away for a while. All leagues can have 10 game conference slates, and the eventual 16 team playoff can be settled where the P4 champions get top 4 seeds, the G5 can have a representative, and the remaining eleven at large spots can go to primarily B1G/SEC members. The ACC/Big 12 will likely get a couple at large spots as well. Then we can all argue over who should get in, instead of arguing who is gonna go to whatever conference next. A much better discussion imo.

My limited experience with B1G fans has been mixed. I'll just assign a one word association with the top three teams in your new conference. You can guess which word describes which school. The three schools: 1.) The Ohio State 2.) Michigan 3.) Penn State. _-----------------_------------- The three words are: 1.)Arrogant 2.) Obnoxious 3.) Zealots --------_------------_------- There are several good fans, but those three large fanbases exhibit some of the above qualities I would use the above word association.. Especially towards their fellow conference mates, which you will be next year. They will react to you differently than they did when you were out of conference foes .

Yeah, I was in the camp of those Husky fans who looked at team success vs recruiting under Mullen. I was blind, Georgia, Alabama and Ohio State were beating us out for Florida kids. You can only coach up three stars so far. Georgia fans warned us, mocked us, gloated over our failures. They were right. Just as Oregon fans are right about the debate between talent to coach em up philosophy. It's only gonna get tougher next year. No you have USC, Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, and Oregon. All are pulling in far superior recruits. Take it from a former blind fan. IT MATTERS!!!

I get enough politics and b.s discussion whenever I turn on anything. To this day I've never won an argument. In the south we call it slinging mud, but it's really just chest pounding. I enjoy the ability to come on here and learn about different fanbases. Most people wouldn't say half the things in person, that the internet anonymity gives them the "courage" to say behind an alter ego. I meet the nicest people in person. I meet some of the vilest on some message boards. Weird. I thank all my Duck friends here for being so inviting. I know a'lot of people have some preconceptions about SEC fans. Some of it is warranted, but you'll also meet some of the friendliest people on Earth in that region of the country. Hopefully one day I'll find a reason to attend a Ducks game and meet some of you in person. Until then, I'll visit you all here on this great site. Thank you Charles.

They can keep the name, history, branding. They have two years to get to eight I believe. They aren't going to keep autonomy though. I hope they win the lawsuit, but the ACC has similar rules and there were talks of the conference being disbanded if at least 8 schools departed. The ten departing schools want even more money . Cal in particular is going to need it with their new limited income going into the ACC. But isn't the PAC in debt due to it's terrible television network, lavish offices, and paying two terrible commissioners more than a Whopper? If there are any remaining assets, but only two conference members. Is it even a conference at that point? I know they have that two year window, but doesn't that really just freeze the assets in place until the conference proves it is a conference? Just another clusterduck from the PAC I suppose.