Keeping the PAC for the other sports is a no brainer and it wouldn't take much to pilot this for 2025 in two sports that they are not doing in the WCC: baseball and track & field. Why not the 4 Big10 schools work with the Big10 to keep baseball & T&F in the Pac and have Stanford/Cal to work with the ACC to do the same. Bring the Pac8 bac…
Keeping the PAC for the other sports is a no brainer and it wouldn't take much to pilot this for 2025 in two sports that they are not doing in the WCC: baseball and track & field. Why not the 4 Big10 schools work with the Big10 to keep baseball & T&F in the Pac and have Stanford/Cal to work with the ACC to do the same. Bring the Pac8 back for those sports to start, they don't move the needle on TV. It makes a lot more sense for travel and even competitiveness. As you say we just need leadership.
It could work.....The non-revenue sports from the 10 teams that left the Pac-12 could join the Pac-2 as non-voting members for just the non-revenue generating sports. The 10 would pay $10m a year each, $100m total each year split between WSU and OSU (for you math challenged ducks that's $50m per year each for WSU and OSU). Regionalism stays intact for the non-revenue sports, Cougars and Beavers get to fund their programs like the other backstabbers (teams that left the Pac-12).
The 10 are not going to pay to provide OSU and WSU a Power 4 level schedule. Why would they pay anything if their motivation is to reduce travel cost? Pay $10M to save $7M?
The escapees that left will follow their new conferences in football, mens and womens basketball. For the men: golf, tennis, cross country, track will travel very little just as they traveled little in the Pac12. Baseball? They will probably play West Coast teams in the pre-season, then half their conference games will be travel, half won't. There just won't be as much travel as some people think. The women have volleyball and softball which will probably travel more than any mens minor sport, but still the conferences will schedule so volleyball will play two opponents per road trip. Softball could be an issue.
So, most of the travel dollars will be football and basketball and there is no chance either will return to a quasi-Pac conference. There just isn't much additional travel expenses to save in other sports that would make a "payment to the Pac2" worthwhile in lieu of travel. Certainly not $10M per year.
If you put Oregon State and Wazzu in the Big 12 for football, Stanford and Cal in the Big Ten for football, and moved all other sports back to the Pac 12 as a non-football conference with all 12 as members it would be ideal.
I just don't think what's ideal is the same thing as what has a clear path to happen contractually.
The former PAC-12 teams that left should not be rewarded by the surviving PAC-12 teams by helping their non-football sports reduce travel costs and wear and tear on their athletes. The leavers picked up the handle. The baggage comes with it.
Keeping the PAC for the other sports is a no brainer and it wouldn't take much to pilot this for 2025 in two sports that they are not doing in the WCC: baseball and track & field. Why not the 4 Big10 schools work with the Big10 to keep baseball & T&F in the Pac and have Stanford/Cal to work with the ACC to do the same. Bring the Pac8 back for those sports to start, they don't move the needle on TV. It makes a lot more sense for travel and even competitiveness. As you say we just need leadership.
It could work.....The non-revenue sports from the 10 teams that left the Pac-12 could join the Pac-2 as non-voting members for just the non-revenue generating sports. The 10 would pay $10m a year each, $100m total each year split between WSU and OSU (for you math challenged ducks that's $50m per year each for WSU and OSU). Regionalism stays intact for the non-revenue sports, Cougars and Beavers get to fund their programs like the other backstabbers (teams that left the Pac-12).
The 10 are not going to pay to provide OSU and WSU a Power 4 level schedule. Why would they pay anything if their motivation is to reduce travel cost? Pay $10M to save $7M?
It’s the Pac12 contract. They don’t have a choice.
??. Not sure you understood the context.
The escapees that left will follow their new conferences in football, mens and womens basketball. For the men: golf, tennis, cross country, track will travel very little just as they traveled little in the Pac12. Baseball? They will probably play West Coast teams in the pre-season, then half their conference games will be travel, half won't. There just won't be as much travel as some people think. The women have volleyball and softball which will probably travel more than any mens minor sport, but still the conferences will schedule so volleyball will play two opponents per road trip. Softball could be an issue.
So, most of the travel dollars will be football and basketball and there is no chance either will return to a quasi-Pac conference. There just isn't much additional travel expenses to save in other sports that would make a "payment to the Pac2" worthwhile in lieu of travel. Certainly not $10M per year.
If you put Oregon State and Wazzu in the Big 12 for football, Stanford and Cal in the Big Ten for football, and moved all other sports back to the Pac 12 as a non-football conference with all 12 as members it would be ideal.
I just don't think what's ideal is the same thing as what has a clear path to happen contractually.
The former PAC-12 teams that left should not be rewarded by the surviving PAC-12 teams by helping their non-football sports reduce travel costs and wear and tear on their athletes. The leavers picked up the handle. The baggage comes with it.
If you can't see past your grievances and do what's best for your program than you shouldn't be anywhere near decision making.
Refusing to play good teams is cutting off your nose to spite your face.
There are plenty of good teams other than hole to play. Don't care about hole, Don't dig hole deeper. Stay away from hole. No hole is the best hole.
Ftd.