Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Pac12 Conference Divisions Announced


Rockerbraves
 Share

Recommended Posts

South Division - UCLA, Southern California, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah and Colorado

 

North Division - Stanford, California, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington and Washington State

 

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sports_co...-divisions.html

 

Couple of notes:

 

1. These divsions will only be for football

 

2. Equal revenue sharing - Got to tick off USC and UCLA folks

 

3. Conference Football Championship will be a home game for the team with the best PAC 12 record. Tie breaker will likely be BCS ranking.

Edited by Rockerbraves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

South Division - UCLA, Southern California, Arizona, Arizona State, Utah and Colorado

 

North Division - Stanford, California, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington and Washington State

 

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sports_co...-divisions.html

 

Couple of notes:

 

1. These divsions will only be for football

 

2. Equal revenue sharing - Got to tick off USC and UCLA folks

 

3. Conference Football Championship will be a home game for the team with the best PAC 12 record. Tie breaker will likely be BCS ranking.

There is also a stipulation where if the conference makes under 170 million, UCLA and USC will make more than the other schools.

 

Through my homer glasses, this announcement makes the UW Huskies significantly worse instantly. UW has always recruited some of their most talented players from the Los Angeles area. Now that they won't be traveling there twice every other year, they are going to be a lot less likely to be able to grab the big recruits from the area. This could really have a massive and long-term effect on the UW football program. I may venture to say that until something changes, they will have zero chance to get back to where the program was at 20 years ago. I had really thought they were going to split the LA schools, almost as a necessity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is also a stipulation where if the conference makes under 170 million, UCLA and USC will make more than the other schools.

 

Through my homer glasses, this announcement makes the UW Huskies significantly worse instantly. UW has always recruited some of their most talented players from the Los Angeles area. Now that they won't be traveling there twice every other year, they are going to be a lot less likely to be able to grab the big recruits from the area. This could really have a massive and long-term effect on the UW football program. I may venture to say that until something changes, they will have zero chance to get back to where the program was at 20 years ago. I had really thought they were going to split the LA schools, almost as a necessity.

Thought they said that every year all the teams from the North Division llike Washington would be playing at least one game in LA? Maybe not, but they do plan on playing 9 conference game so maybe it can be accomplished. Or were they only talking about the Northern California teams :wacko:

Edited by Rockerbraves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Equal revenue sharing isn't that bad. I don't know how the numbers breakdown for the Pac 10, but Texas for example would've made more money in the Big Ten (where they split the pie equally as well) than they do in the Big 12 where they get the lions share. Pac 10 is a far superior business model for the Big 12 (hence why Colorado and Neraska are laughing all the way to the bank). To sum it up, I think USC and UCLA will be just fine.

 

Washington will be fine as well. They still have a great tradition, and it just takes a guy that knows how to have stability in the program. It's cyclical. I mean 10 years ago they were in the Rose Bowl and USC was losing to mid majors in the Sega Bowl. Sarkisian seems to have a good grasp of the tradition, and I think has the program going in the right direction. Let's not diminish the scholarships USC lost either. You'll see the effects of that over the next 4-5 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Through my homer glasses, this announcement makes the UW Huskies significantly worse instantly. UW has always recruited some of their most talented players from the Los Angeles area. Now that they won't be traveling there twice every other year, they are going to be a lot less likely to be able to grab the big recruits from the area. This could really have a massive and long-term effect on the UW football program. I may venture to say that until something changes, they will have zero chance to get back to where the program was at 20 years ago. I had really thought they were going to split the LA schools, almost as a necessity.

 

Every Pac-12 school's roster is at least 25% kids from SoCal, so why would it effect Washington any more than it will effect Oregon? And how is geographic proximity doing any good for the likes of UCLA and USC these days, eh?

 

My guess is that it's an obstacle, but nowhere near a bigger obstacle than the rain, the practice facilities compared to Oregon's, or getting drilled by Nebraska the weekend you fly the big recruits up from down south to show things off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought they said that every year all the teams from the North Division llike Washington would be playing at least one game in LA? Maybe not, but they do plan on playing 9 conference game so maybe it can be accomplished. Or were they only talking about the Northern California teams :wacko:

 

Stanford and Cal get to play USC and UCLA every year. The other North teams will get either team once a year, or both teams every other year (yet to be determined).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every Pac-12 school's roster is at least 25% kids from SoCal, so why would it effect Washington any more than it will effect Oregon? And how is geographic proximity doing any good for the likes of UCLA and USC these days, eh?

 

My guess is that it's an obstacle, but nowhere near a bigger obstacle than the rain, the practice facilities compared to Oregon's, or getting drilled by Nebraska the weekend you fly the big recruits up from down south to show things off.

I never said it would effect Washington any more than Oregon. This will ultimately lead to Oregon's demise as well, once they aren't the flavor of the month anymore.

 

USC is still LOADED. LOADED. They simply have a sophomore QB. If UCLA can put together a season or two, you'll see them come back up very quickly being in that area. They're down. It happens, even to USC (see 90's). This isn't good. It is very debatable on how much it will effect teams like WA, but if it even costs say one big-time recruit per year, that is a big deal for a team that is trying to return to glory. That one superstar can go a long way. The talent coming out of the state of WA has been well down for about a decade now, and if we lose some of that California pipeline, it could potentially be devastating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the Big 10,11, 12 whatever they will be called finally do have a confernece championship game where do you think the game will be held? Neutral site or do like the Pac 12 has decided to do and give a home game to the team with the best conference record? :wacko:

It is in Indy next year, and indications are pointing that it will stay there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the Big 10,11, 12 whatever they will be called finally do have a confernece championship game where do you think the game will be held? Neutral site or do like the Pac 12 has decided to do and give a home game to the team with the best conference record? :wacko:

 

Lucas Oil Field in Indy.

 

I undertstand why the Pac 12 did what they did. Geographically speaking, it would be hard finding a neutral site in that region that would satifsy the schools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said it would effect Washington any more than Oregon. This will ultimately lead to Oregon's demise as well, once they aren't the flavor of the month anymore.

 

USC is still LOADED. LOADED. They simply have a sophomore QB. If UCLA can put together a season or two, you'll see them come back up very quickly being in that area. They're down. It happens, even to USC (see 90's). This isn't good. It is very debatable on how much it will effect teams like WA, but if it even costs say one big-time recruit per year, that is a big deal for a team that is trying to return to glory. That one superstar can go a long way. The talent coming out of the state of WA has been well down for about a decade now, and if we lose some of that California pipeline, it could potentially be devastating.

 

a little overdramatic and off the mark here- do you honestly believe in this day and age and with the new Pac 10 tv deal that playing less games in LA would lead to Oregon's demise?? :wacko:

 

Washington will be fine - Sark can and does out-recruit coaches already and has the program headed in the right direction.

 

USC is not as loaded either- what are you talking about? they are going to take a couple years to get back to where they were, if they ever can. They simply have a soph QB? Barkely has 20td and 4 ints, and is looking outstanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a little overdramatic and off the mark here- do you honestly believe in this day and age and with the new Pac 10 tv deal that playing less games in LA would lead to Oregon's demise?? :wacko:

 

Washington will be fine - Sark can and does out-recruit coaches already and has the program headed in the right direction.

 

USC is not as loaded either- what are you talking about? they are going to take a couple years to get back to where they were, if they ever can. They simply have a soph QB? Barkely has 20td and 4 ints, and is looking outstanding.

 

+1

 

People are not being realistic about those scholarship losses either, and effect that will have on them. USC no longer puts fear into opponents before they even take the field as they did in 02-07. But the scholarships are the key. In a major conference, you have little margin for error, and when you can't put a full amount of scholarship players on the field, the question isn't IF it will have an affect, because it absolutely will. Saying it won't isn't giving enough credit to the rest of your conference. The team in the catbirds seat is UCLA imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lucas Oil Field in Indy.

 

I undertstand why the Pac 12 did what they did. Geographically speaking, it would be hard finding a neutral site in that region that would satifsy the schools.

Can't blame the PAC12 for attempting to avoid a lack luster conference championship game like we have seen in the ACC. Let's face it PAC10 fans are a different breed than say SEC, Big 10 and Big 12 fans.

 

Also wonder if a hidden reason for giving homefield advantage to the team with the best conference record might be to give the PAC12 team a better chance of getting a team in the BCS NC game. Gotta figure there will be less upsets playing at home vs a neutral site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't blame the PAC12 for attempting to avoid a lack luster conference championship game like we have seen in the ACC. Let's face it PAC10 fans are a different breed than say SEC, Big 10 and Big 12 fans.

 

Also wonder if a hidden reason for giving homefield advantage to the team with the best conference record might be to give the PAC12 team a better chance of getting a team in the BCS NC game. Gotta figure there will be less upsets playing at home vs a neutral site.

 

 

get outta here with this nonsense - comparing Pac 10 fans to the ACC is ridiculous.

 

Pac 10 fans are as passionate as any in the country - with the exception maybe of the hillbilly SEC fans that have no life.

 

I just was at the UA/UW game and it was outta control and UW had a pretty big contingent of purple pre-game and at the stadium

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also wonder if a hidden reason for giving homefield advantage to the team with the best conference record might be to give the PAC12 team a better chance of getting a team in the BCS NC game. Gotta figure there will be less upsets playing at home vs a neutral site.

 

That's a not-so-hidden factor, but it's not the only one. There is a new TV contract to be negotiated, they are leaving the championship game up to the networks. Also, there's the nasty factor that berths in championship games are often not decided until late November for an early December date. The Pac-10 covers a wide geographic area, much larger than the SEC, Big 12, or Big 10. That makes it very cost ineffective for fans to have to travel to see their team play, especially when there is a bowl game a few weeks later.

 

A game in Glendale, AZ or Los Angeles (or Seattle or Denver or wherever a neutral site game would be held) is very likely to be half-full and not something you want broadcast on TV. Kind of like the basketball tourney held in the Staples Center every year. Full for UCLA and USC games, empty for the rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

get outta here with this nonsense - comparing Pac 10 fans to the ACC is ridiculous.

 

Pac 10 fans are as passionate as any in the country - with the exception maybe of the hillbilly SEC fans that have no life.

 

I just was at the UA/UW game and it was outta control and UW had a pretty big contingent of purple pre-game and at the stadium

Guess my perception of the Pac10 football centers around the two Los Angeles schools. Neither one plays at a University owned stadium. They might have decent crowds but something is missing when your student body has to drive to the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guess my perception of the Pac10 football centers around the two Los Angeles schools. Neither one plays at a University owned stadium. They might have decent crowds but something is missing when your student body has to drive to the game.

Absolutely. Traveling to the two LA schools is widely considered the "easiest" trip in terms opposing crowds and overall decibel level in the conference. Some of this has to do with the open nature of the stadiums themselves, but also the crowds aren't quite as "lubricated".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guess my perception of the Pac10 football centers around the two Los Angeles schools. Neither one plays at a University owned stadium. They might have decent crowds but something is missing when your student body has to drive to the game.

 

 

I guess, but the Pac 10 has something alot of other conferences don't have - major metropolitan cities!!! , makes it a bit tougher than throw up a big campus stadium in greater LA than say Knoxville.......

 

that being said the Rose Bowl is one of the best stadiums in college football.period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess, but the Pac 10 has something alot of other conferences don't have - major metropolitan cities!!! , makes it a bit tougher than throw up a big campus stadium in greater LA than say Knoxville.......

 

that being said the Rose Bowl is one of the best stadiums in college football.period.

 

 

Historically, perhaps. But otherwise it's knida a dump. It's nothing but bleachers with no leg room and if your waist is over 36 you're in trouble. All porta-potties, no plumbing. You are easily impressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Historically, perhaps. But otherwise it's knida a dump. It's nothing but bleachers with no leg room and if your waist is over 36 you're in trouble. All porta-potties, no plumbing. You are easily impressed.

 

 

no kidding, I thought the Rose Bowl was a new, state of the art facility.......

 

thanks, been there a few times, of course it is outdated but there are not many stadiums I would rather watch a college football game in.

 

the setting is awesome, love it there

Edited by wildcat2334
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely. Traveling to the two LA schools is widely considered the "easiest" trip in terms opposing crowds and overall decibel level in the conference. Some of this has to do with the open nature of the stadiums themselves, but also the crowds aren't quite as "lubricated".

Guess it's like comparing the Rose Bowl Parade to the Mardi Gras Parade. Both are nice parades, but the passion among the people attending Mardi Gras parades is unmatched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information