The point is USC and UCLA have nothing to say about the Pac 12 TV contract so I am not sure why you are making any comments at all. USC is irrelevant to this converation. You are as irrelevant to me as Rutgers, which I never watch. I won't be watching USC either in the future since I have limited time and I prefer watching PAC 12 foot…
The point is USC and UCLA have nothing to say about the Pac 12 TV contract so I am not sure why you are making any comments at all. USC is irrelevant to this converation. You are as irrelevant to me as Rutgers, which I never watch. I won't be watching USC either in the future since I have limited time and I prefer watching PAC 12 football which features the two universities I attended, Oregon State and Arizona State. I only cared about USC when they played my teams. No longer. Get used to watching Northwestern and Indiana football games. That is the decision your AD and regents made for you
They acted out of their own interest, yes, because Larry Scott wasn't acting at all! They acted out of their own interest just like Oregon and Washington did when they petitioned the B1G. They acted out of their own interest because NONE of the Pac-12 members acted for their defense when the NCAA came hunting, especially Scott. They acted out of their own interest when ALL of the Pac-12 favored revenue sharing while fully aware of its injustice. This Conference Band of Brothers thing you're trying sell has no substance in reality.
They're fucking cowards. They did their own share to create the Pac 12 mess, and then cut and ran. The very definition of a coward. They burned bridges
Scott smith, why didn't you say from the get go, that you were an arrogant USC elitist? That would have spared everyone having to wade through your whiney BS. Tulane says hello...LOLOL.
"They acted out of their own interest when ALL of the Pac-12 favored revenue sharing while fully aware of its injustice." What arrogant BS... ALL of the conference favored revenue sharing because it made the conference stronger as a whole. There was no injustice done, You're over playing the USC/UCLA card. Yes losing both hurts because of the 'RECRUITING FOOTPRINT', AND to a much lesser extent viewerships...I say that because those same viewers are not going to get up early to watch USC Rutgers, or USC Minnesota, at 9 am. Ain't gonna happen...they will record those games and still turn to Oregon vs UW, Or Stanford vs ASU at 1pm pacific time live. They grew up watching the Pac 10-12 live and will continue as always unless usc or ucla are at home. What you're trying to sell is a bunch of whiney BS.
I hope the PAC 12 sticks it to USC and UCLA. They will need non conference games in every sport, and I hope Pac 12 decines to even play them and makes it harder on them
and it will be fun seeing all that baseball and softball travel - and golf, and other sports - for nothing really.
Maybe it helps out Big 10 baseball because they can start the season in LA rather then Minneapolis.
I kind of agree, but it may make even less sense for USC and UCLA to play Pac-10 teams than vice versa, since they will have their hands full already in the B12. Pac-10 programs will still want to play in LA occasionally if they can for recruiting and to engage with their alumni, which are all large, in that market.
Wait, you're upset that SC/UCLA left because you loved the tradition of playing those teams, but because they're in a different conference now, you don't want to play them. Got it. Makes sense...to no one.
Btw, all those sports you mentioned travel no matter what conference, and they all do it "for nothing." They're non-revenue sports.
Makes sense to me! The only time I watched USC was when they were playing an opponent out of the conference BECAUSE they were a P12 team - NOT because they were USC. Let's be real for a second...USC hasn't been anything better than a mediocre mid-level disappointment for the P12 since Pete Carroll was here.
Chris, I know the "underhanded" or "misled" narrative has been spun, but none of us know enough information to make that judgment. You assume USC had an offer in hand from the B1G for some time and withheld it. But none of us know the timing. You also assume USC voted against expansion to purposely hurt the Pac-12, but again, none of us know the reasons, one of which may have been the proposal wasn't advantageous for the conference as a whole. Finally, why would USC, if they had an offer in hand, tell the other Pac-12 members before accepting? To leverage them for something? First, it's a bad look. Secondly, the Pac-12 had nothing close to counter offer and they knew it. So, you accept your invitation and dramatically improve your revenue. No evil conspiracy here...just a sound business decision.
No, not purposely. But they acted without regard for anyone else. If they wanted to leave, so be it.
Again, there's an 80 year relationship here .
The Pac 12 is the members. USC was part of the decision to hire and retain Larry Scott.
The Pac 12 members learned of USC's departure from the news. These cowards couldn't even tell their members.
USC has underperformed on the field for the last 12 years so that's all.part of the whole Pac 12's issue. USC was part of the issue. They failed to step up in any sport
$C's move was very on brand for the University of Spoiled Children. After a 100 years of the rest of us in the conference putting up with them and their constant cheating/finagling/boasting, they finally took their ball and went to a different playground. Really only mildly surprising. happy to see them go.
I think you are in the minority there, most of "us" watch our own teams, but also important games involving high ranked teams, ie, Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State, and USC
The point is USC and UCLA have nothing to say about the Pac 12 TV contract so I am not sure why you are making any comments at all. USC is irrelevant to this converation. You are as irrelevant to me as Rutgers, which I never watch. I won't be watching USC either in the future since I have limited time and I prefer watching PAC 12 football which features the two universities I attended, Oregon State and Arizona State. I only cared about USC when they played my teams. No longer. Get used to watching Northwestern and Indiana football games. That is the decision your AD and regents made for you
They acted out of their own interest, yes, because Larry Scott wasn't acting at all! They acted out of their own interest just like Oregon and Washington did when they petitioned the B1G. They acted out of their own interest because NONE of the Pac-12 members acted for their defense when the NCAA came hunting, especially Scott. They acted out of their own interest when ALL of the Pac-12 favored revenue sharing while fully aware of its injustice. This Conference Band of Brothers thing you're trying sell has no substance in reality.
They also created Larry Scott. Come on man
They're fucking cowards. They did their own share to create the Pac 12 mess, and then cut and ran. The very definition of a coward. They burned bridges
Why didn't you just say at the beginning of this that you're an SC hater? You could have spared me trying to reason with you.
I never hated USC. they were a rival.
Now, yeah. Their conduct in hosing the Pac 12 started 12 months before. They plotted. They lied. They screwed the league that they helped create.
And the textbook definition of coward is exactly what USC is. You know the shoe fits. Clearly fits
And what's sad, these NIL deals will actually help USC. they'll just buy the players.
No doubt they'll struggle in Big 10. They are 1 of 16.
The Pac teams will make the playoffs while USC doesn't, with their huge payroll
Scott smith, why didn't you say from the get go, that you were an arrogant USC elitist? That would have spared everyone having to wade through your whiney BS. Tulane says hello...LOLOL.
"They acted out of their own interest when ALL of the Pac-12 favored revenue sharing while fully aware of its injustice." What arrogant BS... ALL of the conference favored revenue sharing because it made the conference stronger as a whole. There was no injustice done, You're over playing the USC/UCLA card. Yes losing both hurts because of the 'RECRUITING FOOTPRINT', AND to a much lesser extent viewerships...I say that because those same viewers are not going to get up early to watch USC Rutgers, or USC Minnesota, at 9 am. Ain't gonna happen...they will record those games and still turn to Oregon vs UW, Or Stanford vs ASU at 1pm pacific time live. They grew up watching the Pac 10-12 live and will continue as always unless usc or ucla are at home. What you're trying to sell is a bunch of whiney BS.
I hope the PAC 12 sticks it to USC and UCLA. They will need non conference games in every sport, and I hope Pac 12 decines to even play them and makes it harder on them
and it will be fun seeing all that baseball and softball travel - and golf, and other sports - for nothing really.
Maybe it helps out Big 10 baseball because they can start the season in LA rather then Minneapolis.
I kind of agree, but it may make even less sense for USC and UCLA to play Pac-10 teams than vice versa, since they will have their hands full already in the B12. Pac-10 programs will still want to play in LA occasionally if they can for recruiting and to engage with their alumni, which are all large, in that market.
Wait, you're upset that SC/UCLA left because you loved the tradition of playing those teams, but because they're in a different conference now, you don't want to play them. Got it. Makes sense...to no one.
Btw, all those sports you mentioned travel no matter what conference, and they all do it "for nothing." They're non-revenue sports.
Makes sense to me! The only time I watched USC was when they were playing an opponent out of the conference BECAUSE they were a P12 team - NOT because they were USC. Let's be real for a second...USC hasn't been anything better than a mediocre mid-level disappointment for the P12 since Pete Carroll was here.
Yep, exactly right. And USC hired Larry too. And USC hired Steve Sarkisan, knowing full well he was a drunk. They hired Clay Helton.
They underperformed
I think the way they did it was underhanded.
Last year the P12 saw value in some of the B12, but USC was not on board and misled.
Look, these are people/schools who have been in the same conference, (or related) of 80, 100 years.
If they were looking around, be honest.
Chris, I know the "underhanded" or "misled" narrative has been spun, but none of us know enough information to make that judgment. You assume USC had an offer in hand from the B1G for some time and withheld it. But none of us know the timing. You also assume USC voted against expansion to purposely hurt the Pac-12, but again, none of us know the reasons, one of which may have been the proposal wasn't advantageous for the conference as a whole. Finally, why would USC, if they had an offer in hand, tell the other Pac-12 members before accepting? To leverage them for something? First, it's a bad look. Secondly, the Pac-12 had nothing close to counter offer and they knew it. So, you accept your invitation and dramatically improve your revenue. No evil conspiracy here...just a sound business decision.
No, not purposely. But they acted without regard for anyone else. If they wanted to leave, so be it.
Again, there's an 80 year relationship here .
The Pac 12 is the members. USC was part of the decision to hire and retain Larry Scott.
The Pac 12 members learned of USC's departure from the news. These cowards couldn't even tell their members.
USC has underperformed on the field for the last 12 years so that's all.part of the whole Pac 12's issue. USC was part of the issue. They failed to step up in any sport
$C's move was very on brand for the University of Spoiled Children. After a 100 years of the rest of us in the conference putting up with them and their constant cheating/finagling/boasting, they finally took their ball and went to a different playground. Really only mildly surprising. happy to see them go.
I think you are in the minority there, most of "us" watch our own teams, but also important games involving high ranked teams, ie, Alabama, Georgia, Ohio State, and USC