I'd like to see Cal and Stanford in the B10 but not sure they move the needle for their revenue generating sports for B10 media rights and don't think the B10 would be even able to support half share + I think there will be resistance from UCLA and USC cuz they want to own the state of CA for recruitingThere is no way that Cal and Stanford end up in the MWC. They probably end up in the BIG with UW and OU as a half share package deal. Failing that, they would park their Olympic sports in the Big West and go Indy for football. That at least puts them in a conference with other UC AAU schools.
That might be right. But scheduling games would be easier for UCLA/USC if there are more Pacific Coast teams -- if there aren't more, then UCLA and USC's teams have to travel at least two time zones for almost every road game or competition/meet, including Olympic sports.I'd like to see Cal and Stanford in the B10 but not sure they move the needle for their revenue generating sports for B10 media rights and don't think the B10 would be even able to support half share + I think there will be resistance from UCLA and USC cuz they want to own the state of CA for recruiting
I agree with you that MWC will get the bulk of the Pac12 teams.
B10
Oregon
Washington
B12
Arizona
ASU
Utah
MWC
WSU
OSU
Cal
Stanford
1947 was the first Rose Bowl played under an agreement between the Big Nine (as they then were) and the Pacific Coast Conference (the forerunner of today's Pac-12). The bowl was already being played (except during World War I and World War II) between the PCC champion and a team from the East (e.g. Notre Dame and Alabama). This persisted until the BCS era arrived in 1998.How long have the Big 10/PAC-10 been Rose Bowl partners? Since the 50s?
Crazy that the Big 10 will essentially be responsible for the PAC disbanding by taking UCLA/USC.
If PAC teams go to the MWC does the Rose Bowl become Big 10 v. MWC??? Ha
It's funny that you say that. A dozen years ago when Colorado bolted from the B12 (largely to escape from Texas, who was a difficult conference-mate), people said that they would be a better cultural fit in the Pac12 than in a conference with 2 Kansas schools, 2 Oklahoma schools, ISU, TT, and Baylor. I really think that they are still a better cultural fit in the Pac 12 and that this move back to the B12 is purely financial and that the Pac 12's terrible leadership that has brought that about.I think this is a better fit for Colorado. I never thought they fit in with the PAC12 culturally.
Having first-hand experience and knowledge, CU is a fit for both conferences. CU has many Big 12 (Big 8/Big 7) traits but has a lot of Pac 12 habits too. There was a push back in the 70s to get CU to the Pac 10 ahead of Arizona and Arizona State.It's funny that you say that. A dozen years ago when Colorado bolted from the B12 (largely to escape from Texas, who was a difficult conference-mate), people said that they would be a better cultural fit in the Pac12 than in a conference with 2 Kansas schools, 2 Oklahoma schools, ISU, TT, and Baylor. I really think that they are still a better cultural fit in the Pac 12 and that this move back to the B12 is purely financial and that the Pac 12's terrible leadership that has brought that about.
I live in Tucson, where the big question right now is "what will the UofA do? The wait for a Pac12 media deal has been excruciatingly long, with no end in sight. Few people here seem to want the UofA to leave the Pac12. The school has more alumni in CA than in any state outside of AZ so a California presence is highly desirable.
It's funny that you say that. A dozen years ago when Colorado bolted from the B12 (largely to escape from Texas, who was a difficult conference-mate), people said that they would be a better cultural fit in the Pac12 than in a conference with 2 Kansas schools, 2 Oklahoma schools, ISU, TT, and Baylor. I really think that they are still a better cultural fit in the Pac 12 and that this move back to the B12 is purely financial and that the Pac 12's terrible leadership that has brought that about.
I live in Tucson, where the big question right now is "what will the UofA do? The wait for a Pac12 media deal has been excruciatingly long, with no end in sight. Few people here seem to want the UofA to leave the Pac12. The school has more alumni in CA than in any state outside of AZ so a California presence is highly desirable.
If this piece is right, it is indeed conceivable that U of A could leave the conference but that ASU would not. But that is not the first choice. https://arizonasports.com/story/3529478/fallout-asu-arizona-in-pac-12-realignment/I have a question.
Could U of A leave the conference and have ASU hung out to dry or be forced to join the Mountain West ?
What I mean is it feasible politically within the state ?
Yup, the ACC destroyed the Big East and now only the PAC 12’s incredible ineptitude is saving the ACC from being the dumbest conference in realignment.When USC and UCLA left , it was the end of the Pac 12. Losing your biggest brands in the LA area is a killer.
Now let’s pick off UNC / UVA etc in due time while SEC gets Clemson / FSU and destroy the conference that I will glee over - the ACC.
You've expressed very well the issue facing the Pac-12. It has lost the equivalent of Texas and OU -- does it accept a number of lesser institutions to stay alive? But it doesn't, there's no hope for it.Picking up BYU , Cincy , Houston , UCF and Colorado is well played after losing Texas and OU ?
Let's not forget that ESPN was directing teams from the Big East to the ACC after the Big East rejected their media rights deal, which essentially was the end of the BE. This is a quote from Pete Thamel from the NY Times.When USC and UCLA left , it was the end of the Pac 12. Losing your biggest brands in the LA area is a killer.
Now let’s pick off UNC / UVA etc in due time while SEC gets Clemson / FSU and destroy the conference that I will glee over irs demise - the ACC.
No. However, after losing Texas and Oklahoma, they added teams to become the 3rd best conference, when they could have lost teams to the PAC 12 and ACC. The PAC 12 and ACC stood idle and fell behind the Big 12. Given the cards they were dealt, and relative to the passive Pac12 and ACC…well played.Picking up BYU , Cincy , Houston , UCF and Colorado is well played after losing Texas and OU ?
Losing Texas and OU after losing Texas A&M, Missouri, Nebraska, and Colorado originally. They did the best they could but all they've really done is add Big East/AAC programs plus BYU while losing 3, maybe 3.5 legendary programs.Picking up BYU , Cincy , Houston , UCF and Colorado is well played after losing Texas and OU ?