|
|
Post by Den60 on Oct 19, 2024 22:39:29 GMT -8
Utah lost to TCU at home. Two losses in a row for the "Youth's."
|
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 20, 2024 6:41:55 GMT -8
Nebraska has been a cellar dweller ever since they moved to the BIG, but they aren't going anywhere. They just keep firing coaches every five years, hoping things will be different. Rinse and repeat. USC will be the same. Oklahoma is learning that in the SEC. Those were all big-time schools that now will never sniff the National Championship. They were the big fish in their small pond, but now will enter mediocrity. Money rules, it's how it is. Money is a bigger problem for the California state schools than it is for Nebraska. |
|
|
|
Post by RiffelBooks on Oct 20, 2024 8:36:10 GMT -8
Nebraska has been a cellar dweller ever since they moved to the BIG, but they aren't going anywhere. They just keep firing coaches every five years, hoping things will be different. Rinse and repeat. USC will be the same. Oklahoma is learning that in the SEC. Those were all big-time schools that now will never sniff the National Championship. They were the big fish in their small pond, but now will enter mediocrity. Money rules, it's how it is. Money is a bigger problem for the California state schools than it is for Nebraska. Yet schools like Nebraska still crave the $$$$. |
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Oct 20, 2024 8:39:07 GMT -8
USC - Just fine will now be behind Michigan, OSU, and Penn St most years.
UCLA - the money is good but they are now the B1G west coast version of Maryland / Rutgers.
UU, CU, AZ, ASU - marginalized but survived. Like most of the b12, they will talk all the game but they are nowhere near B1G and SEC level.
Stanford and CAL, dying a slow death.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcljorgenson on Oct 20, 2024 9:16:14 GMT -8
The schools that left the Pac-12 may be making more money, but I can't help but wonder if the fans are happy? Would you be okay having your team get beat up every year, as long as you knew the school was making good money from the conference? Not to mention the additional travel for non-football sports and alumni that enjoy going to away games.
Take a look at the 2023 Pac-12 results compared to this year - Oregon is doing great, every other team not so much (except Colorado and maybe ASU):
2023 Pac-12
Washington 14-1 (9-0)
Oregon 12-2 (8-1)
Arizona 10-3 (7-2)
Oregon State 8-5 (5-4)
USC 8-5 (5-4)
Utah 8-5 (5-4)
UCLA 8-5 (4-5)
California 6-7 (4-5)
Washington State 5-7 (2-7)
Arizona State 3-9 (2-7)
Stanford 3-9 (2-7)
Colorado 4-8 (1-8)
2024 ACC
California 3-4 (0-4)
Stanford 2-5 (1-3)
2024 Big 12
Colorado 5-2 (3-1)
Arizona State 5-2 (2-2)
Arizona 3-4 (1-3)
Utah 4-3 (1-3)
2024 B1G
Oregon 7-0 (4-0)
Washington 4-3 (2-2)
USC 3-4 (1-3)
UCLA 1-4 (2-5)
2024 Pac-12
Washington State 6-1 (0-0)
Oregon State 4-3 (0-0)
So far, the departing Pac-12 schools are a combined 17-29 in new conference play, and the winning percentage may get worse as the season progresses.
|
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Oct 20, 2024 9:23:57 GMT -8
The schools that left the Pac-12 may be making more money, but I can't help but wonder if the fans are happy? Not to mention the additional travel for non-football sports and alumni that enjoy going to away games. Take a look at the 2023 Pac-12 results compared to this year - Oregon is doing great, every other team not so much (except Colorado and maybe ASU): 2023 Pac-12Washington 14-1 (9-0) Oregon 12-2 (8-1) Arizona 10-3 (7-2) Oregon State 8-5 (5-4) USC 8-5 (5-4) Utah 8-5 (5-4) UCLA 8-5 (4-5) California 6-7 (4-5) Washington State 5-7 (2-7) Arizona State 3-9 (2-7) Stanford 3-9 (2-7) Colorado 4-8 (1-8) 2024 ACCCalifornia 3-4 (0-4) Stanford 2-5 (1-3) 2024 Big 12Colorado 5-2 (3-1) Arizona State 5-2 (2-2) Arizona 3-4 (1-3) Utah 4-3 (1-3) 2024 B1GOregon 7-0 (4-0) Washington 4-3 (2-2) USC 3-4 (1-3) UCLA 1-4 (2-5) 2024 Pac-12Washington State 6-1 (0-0) Oregon State 4-3 (0-0) It's association. It does not matter if they win, the B1G wins so they are winners. Outside the obvious money which is what droves all of these moves all the way down to pee wee football. |
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 20, 2024 9:48:10 GMT -8
The schools that left the Pac-12 may be making more money, but I can't help but wonder if the fans are happy? Not to mention the additional travel for non-football sports and alumni that enjoy going to away games. Take a look at the 2023 Pac-12 results compared to this year - Oregon is doing great, every other team not so much (except Colorado and maybe ASU): 2023 Pac-12Washington 14-1 (9-0) Oregon 12-2 (8-1) Arizona 10-3 (7-2) Oregon State 8-5 (5-4) USC 8-5 (5-4) Utah 8-5 (5-4) UCLA 8-5 (4-5) California 6-7 (4-5) Washington State 5-7 (2-7) Arizona State 3-9 (2-7) Stanford 3-9 (2-7) Colorado 4-8 (1-8) 2024 ACCCalifornia 3-4 (0-4) Stanford 2-5 (1-3) 2024 Big 12Colorado 5-2 (3-1) Arizona State 5-2 (2-2) Arizona 3-4 (1-3) Utah 4-3 (1-3) 2024 B1GOregon 7-0 (4-0) Washington 4-3 (2-2) USC 3-4 (1-3) UCLA 1-4 (2-5) 2024 Pac-12Washington State 6-1 (0-0) Oregon State 4-3 (0-0) It's association. It does not matter if they win, the B1G wins so they are winners. Outside the obvious money which is what droves all of these moves all the way down to pee wee football. Fans and boosters/donors will not support last place or next to last place football. Attendance is already in the toilet, and is only going to get worse. Boosters' donations are going to dry up. It will not go well for Cal and UCLA. Stanford is independently wealthy, so they can probably survive it, but when you only get 15k to your home games, what's the point? That's like when we had less than 10k for a few games under Chuck Long. It's unsustainable. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsu2000 on Oct 20, 2024 10:26:56 GMT -8
There’s going to be one or two more shifts in college football and non of those schools are going to do anything. If Congress somehow stepped in and made college athletics again about the student athlete and stopped this silley semi pro stuff it’s clear that Cal, UCLA and Arizona State should be back in the Pac.
|
|
|
|
Post by RiffelBooks on Oct 20, 2024 15:16:05 GMT -8
The schools that left the Pac-12 may be making more money, but I can't help but wonder if the fans are happy? Would you be okay having your team get beat up every year, as long as you knew the school was making good money from the conference? Not to mention the additional travel for non-football sports and alumni that enjoy going to away games. Take a look at the 2023 Pac-12 results compared to this year - Oregon is doing great, every other team not so much (except Colorado and maybe ASU): 2023 Pac-12Washington 14-1 (9-0) Oregon 12-2 (8-1) Arizona 10-3 (7-2) Oregon State 8-5 (5-4) USC 8-5 (5-4) Utah 8-5 (5-4) UCLA 8-5 (4-5) California 6-7 (4-5) Washington State 5-7 (2-7) Arizona State 3-9 (2-7) Stanford 3-9 (2-7) Colorado 4-8 (1-8) 2024 ACCCalifornia 3-4 (0-4) Stanford 2-5 (1-3) 2024 Big 12Colorado 5-2 (3-1) Arizona State 5-2 (2-2) Arizona 3-4 (1-3) Utah 4-3 (1-3) 2024 B1GOregon 7-0 (4-0) Washington 4-3 (2-2) USC 3-4 (1-3) UCLA 1-4 (2-5) 2024 Pac-12Washington State 6-1 (0-0) Oregon State 4-3 (0-0) So far, the departing Pac-12 schools are a combined 17-29 in new conference play, and the winning percentage may get worse as the season progresses. The fans??? Who gives a crap about fans? Seriously, I think this went out the window with the early conference expansions. Since Rutgers joined the Big Ten, they've had two winning records (7-6 and 8-5) and haven't come close to a winning conference record. Maryland has had several winning records overall but their best league mark is 4-4 in the first season. Even worse, I think, is to be one of the original schools in the major conferences that have been, in a sense, recruited over. Mississippi State hasn't had a winning SEC record in 10 years. With Texahoma in the league now, they have zero chance of winning a conference title in the future. Schools like Purdue, Northwestern and even Minnesota have no chance at winning the Big Ten. How'd you like to be a fan of one of those teams? |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuball on Oct 20, 2024 15:33:07 GMT -8
This thread is very close to what MW fans are saying about the PAC 12 bolters. Big difference though is geography and money. CalFord is getting screwed by both. New P-12 isn't. Cal will be forced back, and Stanford will begrudgingly follow them back into the P-12. |
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 20, 2024 15:34:44 GMT -8
The fans??? Who gives a crap about fans? Seriously, I think this went out the window with the early conference expansions. Since Rutgers joined the Big Ten, they've had two winning records (7-6 and 8-5) and haven't come close to a winning conference record. Maryland has had several winning records overall but their best league mark is 4-4 in the first season. Even worse, I think, is to be one of the original schools in the major conferences that have been, in a sense, recruited over. Mississippi State hasn't had a winning SEC record in 10 years. With Texahoma in the league now, they have zero chance of winning a conference title in the future. Schools like Purdue, Northwestern and even Minnesota have no chance at winning the Big Ten. How'd you like to be a fan of one of those teams? Who gives a crap about the fans? Athletic Directors who want to get butts in seats to get ticket money. Athletic Directors who want to get money from merch sales. Athletic Directors who want to get donations from big money boosters. None of that happens when you're perpetually 4-8. Especially not in California! |
|
|
|
Post by RiffelBooks on Oct 20, 2024 16:29:48 GMT -8
The fans??? Who gives a crap about fans? Seriously, I think this went out the window with the early conference expansions. Since Rutgers joined the Big Ten, they've had two winning records (7-6 and 8-5) and haven't come close to a winning conference record. Maryland has had several winning records overall but their best league mark is 4-4 in the first season. Even worse, I think, is to be one of the original schools in the major conferences that have been, in a sense, recruited over. Mississippi State hasn't had a winning SEC record in 10 years. With Texahoma in the league now, they have zero chance of winning a conference title in the future. Schools like Purdue, Northwestern and even Minnesota have no chance at winning the Big Ten. How'd you like to be a fan of one of those teams? ? Athletic Directors who want to get butts in seats to get ticket money. Athletic Directors who want to get money from merch sales. Athletic Directors who want to get donations from big money boosters. None of that happens when you're perpetually 4-8. Especially not in California! Sarcasm. As far as your comments about ADs, in a normal world you would think that would be the case. But they're rolling in TV money, so none of what's happened over the past decade has forced anyone to reverse course. |
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 20, 2024 17:05:12 GMT -8
Who gives a crap about the fans? Athletic Directors who want to get butts in seats to get ticket money. Athletic Directors who want to get money from merch sales. Athletic Directors who want to get donations from big money boosters. None of that happens when you're perpetually 4-8. Especially not in California! Sarcasm. As far as your comments about ADs, in a normal world you would think that would be the case. But they're rolling in TV money, so none of what's happened over the past decade has forced anyone to reverse course. Cal and Stanford are not rolling in huge money. A little more than we'll get in the new PAC, but not enough to offset the additional travel costs and the costs of lost revenue from ticket/merch sales and lost donations from boosters who are pissed off. UCLA is getting big money from the TV deal, but how long they can run as a 4-8, 3-9 type team before the empty stadium and empty bank account for those donations becomes a problem is debatable. |
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Oct 20, 2024 17:13:26 GMT -8
It's association. It does not matter if they win, the B1G wins so they are winners. Outside the obvious money which is what droves all of these moves all the way down to pee wee football. Fans and boosters/donors will not support last place or next to last place football. Attendance is already in the toilet, and is only going to get worse. Boosters' donations are going to dry up. It will not go well for Cal and UCLA. Stanford is independently wealthy, so they can probably survive it, but when you only get 15k to your home games, what's the point? That's like when we had less than 10k for a few games under Chuck Long. It's unsustainable. But even getting the snot kicked out of them, their noses will remain so high that backward appears forward, yes? |
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 20, 2024 17:45:30 GMT -8
Fans and boosters/donors will not support last place or next to last place football. Attendance is already in the toilet, and is only going to get worse. Boosters' donations are going to dry up. It will not go well for Cal and UCLA. Stanford is independently wealthy, so they can probably survive it, but when you only get 15k to your home games, what's the point? That's like when we had less than 10k for a few games under Chuck Long. It's unsustainable. But even getting the snot kicked out of them, their noses will remain so high that backward appears forward, yes? No. When you're 3-9 or 4-8 every year you know you're a loser. |
|
|
|
Post by jcljorgenson on Oct 21, 2024 10:26:25 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Cwag on Oct 21, 2024 11:21:08 GMT -8
He'll fit right in at BYU |
|
|
|
Post by jp92grad on Oct 21, 2024 11:46:15 GMT -8
He'll fit right in at BYU Roomer has it he is already for his "Mission" and will return in 2028 for his "Senior" year at BYU while being eligible for AARP* He is also looking forward to playing his Senior year at BYU with his own kids, while working on that PhD. |
|
|
|
Post by sdmotohead on Oct 21, 2024 11:58:56 GMT -8
I know it's fun to watch the former pac12 schools lose, but they are never coming back. I can assume the remaining MW schools will be doing the same thing with us, laughing every time we lose.
|
|
|
|
Post by laaztec on Oct 26, 2024 6:00:22 GMT -8
|
|
