Is the Pac-12 Irrelevant ??

[BigDucksFan]

Check out what some are saying about the Pac-12 here. Could it be true ??

 ...this conference has rendered itself irrelevant. That’s what happens when you allow a two-loss team to backdoor their way into a conference championship game and then they actually win.”

 

[Notalot]

In the minds of many in the other 46 states. Irrelevant has become the common descriptor. The teams in the league must win respect back.

[BigDucksFan]

1 minute ago, Notalot said:

In the minds of many in the other 46 states. Irrelevant has become the common descriptor. The teams in the league must win respect back.

And it starts with cleaning house on Larry Scott and his pals that keep in in office. 

[30Duck]

I was amazed last night, when on ESPN, Pawl of all people, thought that this season convinced him that the Playoffs NEEDED to expand to 8 teams. He was worried that the emphasis on The Playoffs was already creating a "Win it or Bust" situation for teams, and that having only 4, and the same 4, every year, is bad for the sport overall.

 I couldn't believe  that I was hearing this on ESPN and from Mr SEC, but if he knows it, everybody does, and there could be an expanded playoff sooner than we thought. 

[David Marsh]

49 minutes ago, BigDucksFan said:

Check out what some are saying about the Pac-12 here. Could it be true ??

 ...this conference has rendered itself irrelevant. That’s what happens when you allow a two-loss team to backdoor their way into a conference championship game and then they actually win.”

 

I wouldn't say Oregon got in through the backdoor... They didn't get the chance to play for the rightful PAC-12 North.

Though it is a major embarrassment for usc to lose to lowly two loss Oregon. That is a greater embarrassment to usc than Oregon.

Is it a blemish on the pac-12... In any other year probably ... This year the Pac-12 is forgotten more than usual. Mostly due to the late starting season. 

Yes... The PAC will have to earn it's respect back and Oregon is going to be the team to do it. 

Oregon grabbed a micron of respectibilty back last year by winning the Rose Bowl last year and this year a Fiesta Bowl win would be just another brick in rebuilding the conference. 

[David Marsh]

26 minutes ago, Jon Joseph said:

Only in basketball and football; so, it's all good in Larry Land?

And... Oregon is carrying the PAC on both of these fronts. 

Remember the last NCAA men's basketball tournament... The 2019 one... Lowly Oregon won the the Pac-12 tournament when they "had no right to" according to Husky fans. 

Then Oregon was placed as a 16 seed as they had an automatic bid and made it much much further in the tournament than any of the other pac-12 teams and only to lose to the eventual national champions. 

Yeah... Oregon is carrying this conference right now in the two money making sports. 

Women's basketball is pretty healthy in the pac-12 though... Granted it Oregon is dominating that as well. 

[C J]

Funny this guy is saying this about Oregon but he has nothing to say about 3 loss N. Carolina who lost to Virginia and Florida State? How about 3 loss Florida with one of them to LSU or 2 loss Oklahoma....one of their losses was against Kansas State?

They are looking to pile on......looking for any excuse to make it seem worse than it is so they can justify their future actions of continuing to snub the west coast and keep the money rolling into their coffers.

Edited December 27, 2020 by C J

[30Duck]

1 hour ago, Jon Joseph said:

David, and carrying the conference financially. Why associate in CFB with a school like Arizona? $1.8M salary for its new head football coach? CU also got Karl Dorrell on the cheap. Worked out in 2020 with SDS as the OOC opponent, missing playing at A+M OOC and not having to play USC. But 2021?

Many of Oregon's Pac-12 'partners' are unable and/or unwilling to to pay the freight to compete at the P5 level. Including AZ, WSU, + OR ST. And the administration and fans at CAL,  UCLA,  Stanford? If football disappeared would they notice? THIS is a no-win situation for Oregon. How can you be the 'Clemson of the West' if the nation isn't watching; or, if watching, believes the AAC (especially if Boise joins the AAC) to be a better conference? And before anyone disses on the ACC, the ACC finished 2020 with 5 teams ranked in the committee's top 25; the SEC, 4.

 Some great points here, Jon. We know the geographical, time zone issues that make it hard for the Pac-12. Now we add the apathy of Cal, UCLA & Stanford. U of A isn't apathetic, more just pathetic, as their football struggles to stay above water, their once proud basketball team is going under.

 The Cougars are pretty much resigned to be the Novelty Act, Oregon State, bless their hearts, are trying as hard they can, and I'll say it again, the Beavs will finish above the Pups, in basketball this season and football next season.

 Oregon and USC, seriously have to get out of the Pac-12.

[Triphibius]

In my view, the term "irrelevant" has become a cliche and an obstacle to thought. That said, I have third observations about Joel Klatt's statement. 

First, Klatt is a Colorado alumnus. I understand why Colorado people would be frustrated that their undefeated  squad was passed over in favor of a two-loss Oregon team. However, Oregon did win the game, as the northern division representative nearly always has. The game's outcome surely provides some evidence that the powers that be were not wrong to include the best available team from the northern division. If Klatt things that Colorado would have been selected for the playoff if the Buffalos had defeated USC in the championship game, I think he is delusional. 

Second, the Covid-19 virus was a far important cause of the league's "irrelevance" that aforementioned issue. Before the virus, Oregon had many promising young players and few established stars. Once Covid-19 hit and practices were curtailed, the young players lost the chance to develop and most of the stars and leaders opted out. As a result, Oregon had no realistic chance of competing for a playoff spot. 

Third, the Pac-12's response to the Covid-19 virus was to delay the season, costing Oregon and all the members the chance to round into form against weaker opponents. The shortened and disrupted season diminished the quality of play, making it even more diffcult for Pac-12 teams to pass the "eye test," which would quite reasonably be applied in comparing a team playing a six or seven game season to one playing a full season. That decision, as I understand it, was made by the Presidents, not by Larry Scott. It may or may not have been the right decision, but there is no reason to think it was done for dubious motives. 

This has been an unusual if not unprecedented year. It may be premature at this stage to draw sweeping conclusions about the future of the Pac-12 and Oregon's role in it. 

Edited December 28, 2020 by BigDucksFan
To remove inappropriate words that are considered racist

[30Duck]

1 hour ago, Jon Joseph said:

 

IMO, the Pac-12 might be better off with the old BCS, with the Rose Bowl out of the rota, instead of an expansion to 8? With its 8 game  conference schedules, the ACC and SEC are far more likely to send 2 teams to an 8 team field than any other conference

 

 This is absolutely right, Jon. If the ESPN Invitational expands to 8, it will just be twice as corrupt as it is now. The only way to actually have a Playoffs is for it to be filled with the  Power of 5 champions, and 3 wildcards including at least 1 G5. With this, only minor "eye test" is needed.

[Tandaian]

Voting is pretty much a self fulling prophecy even with the AP poll. 

ACC's ranked teams (AP) #2 Clemson, #4 ND, #14 UNC, #18 Miami, and #24 NC St.  Clemson beat ND and two 6-5 teams.  ND beat a depleted Clemson team, UNC and two 6-5 teams.  UNC beat Miami and NC St and one 6-5 team.  Miami beat NC St and one 6-5 team. 

Look at the mess the SEC was this year, when they actually had to play each other.  Texas A&M beat FL and Auburn and that is it for teams with winning records..  Florida beat UGA and that is it.  UGA beat Auburn. 

There are 7 G5 teams in the final AP poll.  The average for the last 10 years is around 4. 

Lazy Larry isn't helping the Pac 12 by any means, but there is a ton of group think when it comes to rankings.  I remember not too long ago, the BIG TEN was the laughing stock of P5 leagues.  When USC was king under Pete, nobody said the Pac 12 was weak.  Exactly, like the ACC isn't viewed as weak since Clemson has dominated that league.

BIG 12, well really Oklahoma, is 0-4 in the playoffs.  The financial gain is huge, but BIG 12 isn't any more relevant than the PAC 12 in regards to play on the field concerning the playoffs.

How I would change the playoffs, is go to 8 teams.  All P5 champs get an auto bid, the top G5 team gets and bid if the team is in the top 12 and/or a the team has 12 wins.  In the last 10 years only 1 year a G5 team wouldn't be in the playoffs.  Each league is only allowed 2 teams to make the playoffs.  The committee is limited to 1 coach per league and must include a representative from all 10 FBS leagues.  I know that is a dream, but if you don't shoot for the stars, you can't even get the moon.

[ICamel]

Anybody know what it would cost a Pac12 program to leave and join another conference? I don't, so that is why I pose the question.