dunstvangeet
Bench Warmer
Posts: 145
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Oregon State
Location:
|
RE: Berry Tramel: Would the Big Ten welcome OU?
(05-10-2017 12:14 AM)clpp01 Wrote: (05-09-2017 09:37 PM)ArQ Wrote: (05-09-2017 09:20 PM)PGEMF Wrote: (05-09-2017 09:16 PM)ArQ Wrote: (05-09-2017 04:27 PM)Kittonhead Wrote: I like these PAC-14 divisions.
North: Stanford, USC, Oregon, OSU, Washington, WSU, Utah
South: USC, UCLA, Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Oklahoma, Kansas
OU and USC would be a big national game. Colorado gets OU and KU back on the schedule rivals from the Big 8.
UCLA-Arizona-Kansas would be epic for men's basketball.
Kansas and its 24,000 football crowds is not as much of an issue from the PAC perspective when you've got half empty stadiums around the conference. Oklahoma can more than make up for it because they can deliver fans (in the stands and bring fans out) across the league.
In the B1G you'll be permanent second fiddle to Michiagn-Ohio St playing in that conference, IMO.
Four California schools want to stay in the same division. If they are not happy, PAC-XX will not stay together long.
They're not in the same division right now
Right now it is slightly acceptable.
It is one thing to travel to Colorado. It is the other to travel to Kansas.
When PAC-XX grows to include three time zones, it has to be West-East.
East/West isn't possible either. With 14 teams that requires either the Cal schools to drop their mandate to play each other annually or for one of the northwest schools to be placed into the eastern division and neither of those would ever be approved.
At 16 while geographically it would work, in reality the mountain schools would simply veto expansion up front without a guarantee that they wouldn't be shipped off to the incoming Big-12 division.
That's the thing. A 14-team conference doesn't work. First off, why is USC listed twice? I'm presuming that the northern one is going supposed to be Cal.
So, you have two dynamics there. First off, the Northwest four (Oregon, Oregon St., Washington, Washington St.) took the bullet to make the PAC-12 work with a North-South alignment. They were the four that gave up the most access to the Southern California recruiting market in order to get it to work. Right now, they only play one game down there every 2 years. Presuming that the schedule doesn't change (still a 9-game conference schedule), The Northwest 4, and the PAC-12 would all of a sudden only play in Southern California every 4 years instead, unless you removed the guarentees between the 4 California schools. So, the proposed split that you have would either have 4 votes against it (USC, UCLA, Cal, and Stanford) if you removed the California guarenteed games. Or you have 5 votes against it (Utah, Oregon, Oregon St., Washington, Washington St.) if you leave those guarentees in there. So, either way, at least a third of the conference would vote against the proposed split.
Now, onto an east-west split. You have to have a balanced conference. The only State to balance out California, in both terms of population and recruiting, is Texas. An East-West proposal would work in the that regard, if you included Texas in that east-west. That would be the only way to get Arizona, Arizona St., Utah and Colorado on board.
Now, the fact is that the PAC-12 had an opportunity to do roughly the same outline that you have right there. The PAC-12 said "No" to that proposal. I don't see how substituting Kansas for Oklahoma St. gets the PAC-12 to say yes.
|
|