Pac 12... 11... 10... 9... 8... 7...6...5...4... POOF!

The Pac-12 is 114-58 against the MWC all time. Maybe I shouldn't have said "rarely", but the disparity is clearly significant.

https://mcubed.net/ncaaf/tvc/pac12/mountainwest.shtml

 

You lost me at “what a stupid take”…..didn’t read the rest. Had OSU had the opportunity to go elsewhere they would have jumped on it. Plain and simple.

 

You keep holding on to that if you want. See where it gets you. It obviously means absolutely NOTHING to the rest of the NCAA I can promise you. In fact you are seeing first hand how much it means. Am I wrong?

 

because 'stupid' has two syllables?

 

I just got done with the NCAA recruiting game with my daughter 2 years and hundreds of phone calls and Zooms. Was actually helping her friends in their recruiting as well. Everybody’s path is different, but one thing is clear…..you are either a valued commodity or not. They either want you or not. The “offers” to join them are either there or not. Your value is right there in front of you during the process. Can’t even argue it….. If nobody comes a callin’, you aren’t wanted.

 

Yea that run from 13-15 really skews it in the P12's favor. During those three years the P12 was 35-6 against the MW, the rest of the time it's 79-52.

 

You said their lack of athletic success is the reason they're not desirable. Sorry to bring up a few facts. I'm acutely aware that the rest of the NCAA could care less and are more interested in other facts like market size. I guess acting like an arrogant prick is your thing, so keep kicking people when they're down. Enjoy.

 

He deserves it...

 

If it's not about branding or success, then what is it about?

 

How's the CCC football team doing?

 

Great question, you tell me. As far as I can tell it's location (which I referenced at the end of that very post you quoted) or that our 35,000 seat stadium isn't big enough, because it sure as hell isn't about success on the field, eyeballs on the TV or having a recognizable brand, something WSU has over a lot of the schools that are getting a seat at the table.

I really do think it's all about location and the old school thought that Pullman is too difficult to get to, even though the airport there has expanded to be able to take in 757's. Pretty ironic that one of the big reasons WSU is loved by so many is the thing that is probably causing it to be left out of all this. We have a good family friend that was contacted about 15 years ago about donating for a football stadium and athletic facilities to be built in Vancouver and the possibility of them moving the AD to the branch campus but obviously that effort fell flat. Would be fascinating to see how that move could have totally changed the course of WSU athletics.

 

I think it is brand/TV draw and maybe something to do with geography in regards to the BIG12 late adds. Last year, USC/Oregon combined for 65m eyeballs. Oregon St/Wash St combined for 23m. That's a pretty big difference.

If stadium size mattered, the B1G would've taken Arizona St over Oregon. If market size was the #1 factor, the B1G would've taken California over Washington. If it were about airport accessibility, the B1G would've taken Salt Lake City over Eugene.

I feel bad for Oregon St and Washington St, but this isn't some crazy conspiracy. It seems fairly straight forward to me.

 

Feels like we've been told TV viewers rule all but I guess there is an exception when it comes to WSU ... not sure a marketing slogan has ever fit better with my school than the one they have this year.

 

Wonder if there's a way to negotiate a release of contract that's mutually beneficial? Gets Smith a slight raise in a bigger program. Helps the Beavers looming budget disaster.

 

the fine print tells me that survey is partly garbage-in-garbage-out because of this:

"No games against BIG Ten, SEC, USC, UCLA, OU, Texas; no conference championship or bowls"

why exactly are they excluding those games? I'm assuming because they'd claim those games would skew the results because more viewers would tune in to watch BIG/SEC teams than the subject teams. So, in that survey in which Oregon scored so well, it excluded Oregon's games against Tennessee, Michigan State (twice), Nebraska (twice), Auburn, Ohio State, & Georgia. OK

but the thing is, if they are excluding games in which there would clearly be an uneven skew in viewership, why would teams like Cal and Arizona get credit for all the eyeballs when they played Oregon. Conversely, why would Oregon get debited when they played teams like that?

I'd be pretty certain that the linear TV networks who are driving realignments have their own internal algorithms to derive viewing power of D1 programs. I know that in all these surveys and data sets, Oregon always outperforms every D1 program except the elites of the BIG and SEC, and that includes USC. Meaning, surveys like these are relatively useless for the Networks. They have their own calculations

Oregon has been scheduling games against the big boys for a while. And they often end up in the L column (a 49-3 shellacking by Georgia last season tops the list). Now, I used to have a lot more connections to the thinking of Oregon's athletic department and coaches thru the Mike Bellotti days. Even some in the Chip Kelly days. But now I only know one guy who is 'in-the-know', marginally. Mostly big donors.

Anyway I asked him a couple of years ago why Oregon was scheduling these very difficult games, seemingly every year, on the road, against teams like LSU, Michigan State, Nebraska, Auburn, Ohio State, Georgia. His reply was simple "Branding". Having big games early in the season gets tons of media attention and draws millions of eyeballs. I know you don't credit branding as a factor, but it clear that Oregon has been laser-focused on branding for 20 years. Eugene-Springfield has a metro population of 382,000. Spokane, for instance, has a metro population of 593,000. By market size, the UofO would not qualify for a power conference

obviously, winning contributes to branding. Having Chip Kelly's blur offense and lightning tempo, while winning, and wearing fancy uniforms, contributed a lot to branding. Oregon has won 8 Pac-12 championships in football since 2000. They played in 4 Rose Bowls and won 3; three Fiesta Bowls and won 2. In the same period, OSU/WSU combined for one Pac-12 championships, 1 Rose Bowl, and 1 Fiesta Bowl. They were 1-1 in the bowls and the last appearance, like the last championship, was 22 years ago

I know you don't want to credit winning and branding as factors, but it's obvious they were the reason Oregon made it to the Big-10 while OSU/WSU are filing lawsuits

 

I would say 'poor Justin', but a 5-year/267M contract disagrees....still:

 

I know this sucks... and it sucks for a Duck fan to see that happen to him.

But this is largely why football is so much better than the NBA. One player cannot single handedly dominate. Justin can be great and really elevate the offense, but if the defense sucks.......