Is this the end of the pac?
- Thread starter CPHawk
- Start date
RiverDog
Well-known member
The end came when USC and UCLA decided to leave for the Big 10.
The Pac 12 has essentially been a mid-major conference for the past 10-12 years. It's too bad for schools like Washington State and Oregon State as they'll wind up in a conference like the Mountain West or WAC. And the real casualty might be Eastern Washington as with less revenue coming in from TV, the state is going to have to make some tough decisions on which programs to subsidize and which ones to fold.
The Pac 12 has essentially been a mid-major conference for the past 10-12 years. It's too bad for schools like Washington State and Oregon State as they'll wind up in a conference like the Mountain West or WAC. And the real casualty might be Eastern Washington as with less revenue coming in from TV, the state is going to have to make some tough decisions on which programs to subsidize and which ones to fold.
toffee
Well-known member
May be the end of Pac 12, as one of the 12 is leaving.
Yeah, as much as I hate to hear myself say it, USC is the flagship football program of the Pac 12, and along with UCLA corner the LA and Southern California market. Huge loss. It's really sad and almost enraging if you're a Pac 12 fan how the heads of these schools in conjunction with the governing body of the conference could have let such a great conference, most specifically on the football front, slip year after year into a second tier one.
I don't know in any kind of depth how it happened. But almost every informed Pac 12 fan knows that the conference was playing tee-ball when the other top conferences were playing major league hardball when it came to milking the media cash cow. Then there's the almost abusive treatment of the fan bases with horrible game times and re-schedulings.
Other things...
--Moving the Pac 12 offices to one the most expensive real estate locales
--Putting on the Pac 12 championship game in SF
--The consistently below par officiating
--Why couldn't we poach another storied program like Texas or Oklahoma when it might have been possible
--etc...
It's just sad. Bill Walton must be going crazy about it. I just hope UW does what it must to keep themselves relevant.
RiverDog
Well-known member
The west coast, particularly California, is not a football hotbed like it is in the southeast and midwest. Just take a look at all the NFL teams that have played musical chairs over the past 50 years: Raiders to from Oakland to LA, Raiders from LA to Oakland, Raiders from Oakland to Las Vegas, Rams from LA to St. Louis, Chargers from San Diego to LA.
And yes, it is sad. I used to be a huge college football fan, but since I don't really have a horse in that race as I'm an EWU grad, over the course of the past 20 years, I've lost interest. I don't think I'm alone in that regard.
We voted to add OU and Texas in 2012, but those idiots at Utah and CU voted against it.
I agree with you up to a point. USC is one of the most storied football programs in all college football. When they've got it going, like during the PC years, there's a big national buzz around that program. And look at Oregon when Phil Knight stepped in. Packed houses, great facilities, wild uniforms, national buzz, players wanting to go there because of how cool it was. When UW had it going under Don James and Chris Petersen, they were a powerhouse of their own, with a pretty wide and dedicated fan base. Even look at Utah. Somewhat quietly a consistently ranked team with a pretty dedicated and rabid fan base. And not to mention that California ranks right up there with Texas, Florida, Ohio/Pennsylvania as a recruiting hotbed.
Point being, the powers that be HAD something to work with. You bring in a couple more quality programs to the conference, bring in a lot more revenue from media deals so schools had more money to compete with, do all sorts of cool and innovative shyt to bring more attention to the conference and you never know what the conference might have been.
College football is all about recruiting. Period. End of story. You had to make the conference a cool and desirable place for recruits to go. The ball was dropped.
RiverDog
Well-known member
Ain't nothing compared to the SEC and Big 10.
Like I said, up to a point.
RiverDog
Well-known member
Sure, USC has had a few spurts of interest, but they have never been able to sustain it. People in LA will only watch a NC contender. They're not going to support a 2nd place Pac 12 team. UCLA doesn't have an on-campus stadium. Neither Cal or Stanford have had sustained interest, nor have the Arizona schools. Oregon, and to a lesser degree Washington, are outliers, which is why I qualified my remarks by saying in particular California.
Take a look at the attendance rankings in college football. There isn't a single school west of the Rockies that is ranked in the top 20. Iowa State outdraws USC. Arkansas hasn't had a top 10 team in I don't know how long, yet they're ranked above every single Pac 12 school. So is South Carolina. How long has it been since Auburn has done anything? They're ranked 10th, yet their W/L record last year was 5-7. Texas A&M is ranked 3rd in attendance, and what was their W/L record last year? Same as Auburn, 5-7.
And you can't blame it all on stadium capacity, like Oregon playing in a relatively small venue. Washington's 5 year percent of capacity is just 75%. Auburn's 5 year average in a 87K plus venue is 82%. Last season, the Tigers filled their huge stadium to 97% of capacity to watch a 5-7 team. The Pac-12 has been downsizing their stadiums so they don't have to play in echo chambers.
Like I said, the west coast, with a couple of exceptions like Oregon and occasionally Washington, is not a football hotbed.
Last edited:
Chapow
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2010
- Messages
- 5,355
- Reaction score
- 1,273
This.
Losing USC and UCLA was a far, FAR, bigger blow to the PAC than losing Colorado.
You're absolutely right when it comes to overall attendance figures and fan rabidity when comparing, say, the SEC or the majority of Big Ten schools with the Pac 12. No argument whatsoever there. There's all sorts of reasons for this, like a deeper cultural obsession with football at the youth levels in certain regions of the country, the fact that certain colleges have little competition from pro sports teams in their states and locales for fan interest, some difficulties arising from being two to three times zones behind most of the rest of the country, the sheer geographic separation of most Pac 12 schools from where most of the US population resides, and the like.
I'm just of the opinion the Pac 12 didn't necessarily have to drop down to the second tier level in college football as passively as it it did. Like I said, college football is about recruiting first and foremost. California is one of the biggest regions in the country for recruiting college football talent. There's all sorts of reasons why a young recruit might want to remain in the west, or even why a recruit might want to head west to one of the Pac 12 colleges. I just think the Pac 12 kept giving them fewer and fewer reasons to do so. If the Pac 12 had been more innovative and forward looking, and with an expanding college playoff system on the horizon, I just don't believe its plummet into increasing irrelevancy was necessarily a fait accompli. Just my two-bit opinion.
But it's water under the bridge now. As a UW football fan, I'm a bit at loss about what's best for them now. They've got some real thinking and tough decisions to make.
Last edited:
RiverDog
Well-known member
A lot of those SEC schools don't have the NFL to compete with. Alabama, Auburn Mississippi, MSU, Kentucky, South Carolina, and Clemson don't have an NFL team within their state, or for that matter, MLB, NBA, or NHL. They're the only game in town.
sc85sis
Well-known member
The beginning of the end, in hindsight, was the hiring of Larry Scott. What a sad excuse for a conference commissioner.
Mix
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 31, 2020
- Messages
- 2,567
- Reaction score
- 749
Huskies and Cougs might as well join the Mountain West at this point.
Sounds like the ACC has reached out to UO/UW as well as the Big 12. Obviously both want to go to the big 10, but at least there is options. I’m guessing WSU/OSU/Cal/Utah add a bunch of MWC and AAC teams and call it the pac 12
RiverDog
Well-known member
More rumors about conference realignment:
Jack McGuire of Barstool Sports shared on Sunday that he's hearing the Big Ten will add Clemson, Florida State, Oregon and Washington.
"Scoop City has received a serious rumor that the Big Ten will add Washington, Oregon, FSU, and Clemson this week," he reported.
If that happens, expect Cal and Stanford to join the ACC.
Rumor Swirling That Big Ten Will Be Adding 4 New Schools This Week
Jack McGuire of Barstool Sports shared on Sunday that he's hearing the Big Ten will add Clemson, Florida State, Oregon and Washington.
"Scoop City has received a serious rumor that the Big Ten will add Washington, Oregon, FSU, and Clemson this week," he reported.
If that happens, expect Cal and Stanford to join the ACC.
Last edited:
