The lede: “I (Schulz) had somebody on my staff who said, ‘Hey, Kirk, don't you dare put Anne in let her do all the tough work, and then go hire somebody from the outside that comes in after somebody’s made the really hard decisions.’ And I thought that was just a really good piece of advice.”
I worked for/with nine presidents and several others (Provosts, etc) who later became presidents. Only a few a) were secure enough to truly welcome critical input or advice b) admitted that others’ input informed their decisions c) appreciated the strategic importance of wading into and keeping an eye on athletics.
Schulz appears to be all three. And whatever animus exists (and no president worth their salt is without some) in Cougar Nation, be careful what you wish for. This guy appears to be someone I would have loved to work for.
I worked in academia for 9 years on the administrative support side, specifically introducing technology and distance learning into the curriculum. It was so often a frustrating experience in dealing with the faculty, department chairs, etc who wanted nothing to do with it, despite the fact that embracing it was crucial for enrollment.
It seems like a field that generally attracts people who are very set in their ways and not open to other points of view or learning new things (ironic, isn't it?). But like anywhere else there was the occasional rare bird who, relative to the others, would be a joy to work with and made it a worthwhile endeavor.
So many interviews with conference presidents and athletic directors that are brain-numbingly mundane and vacuous and scripted. Until now. This guy really seems to get the relationship between the presidency of a university and the athletic department. He understands the extreme value of high-visibility college athletics. Man, WSU has a tough task replacing Kirk Schulz.
I came here to say the same thing. It is refreshing to get actual answers to questions where I feel more knowledgeable and more at ease with his leadership
Hear great things about Anne McCoy… the people I respect think she is the perfect choice for WSU AD at this time. I’m hopeful the same choice will be made when the new President is named there have to be some good ones out there who will have a strong academic background, will enjoy living in Pullman responsive to faculty and students and work closely with new AD. (WOW- a full plate for sure) hope you will be able to interview Anne McCoy sometime soon!
Kirk has done a decent job stabilizing this change although many still aren't happy with him. Love the interview and questions but the one answer he is completely tone deaf and still defies what the alumni wants is anything to do with UW. Two schools couldn't be more different and UW is everything WSU is not. No one wants to continue the series with them in anything and the fact he suggests other wise means he doesn't care about those opinions. Hopefully his replacement has better hearing.
I think he's done a good job overall and has been unfairly criticized at times. But I'm one of the WSU alumns who will forever say I want nothing to do with UW. We should never play them again. I'll be driving to Pullman this fall for a game, but I won't attend the Apple Cup even though I live in the Seattle area.
Same Brad...Ive seen the preliminary sales numbers for tickets for the OOC UW game this year(no longer an Apple Cup) and WSU alums are staying away. Ticket prices are too high and no one wants anything to do with it. Many will watch on TV but the days of supporting WSU in Seattle or at UW will no longer fly.
"It’s like, where were you a year ago?!?" Bingo. I am glad Mr Schulz understands we all think the PAC12 Presidents were all asleep at the wheel of one of their most important responsibilities, to manage their athletic programs, which really are the public face of Div 1 universities. It would be nice to see more of this candor, though it won't put the genie back in the bottle. FBS football should just leave the universities and go on its professional way as an adjunct to the NFL. Let university sports return to as close to amateur as we can get in 2024 and beyond.
Kirk is a good man that needs a well-deserved break
PAC observations:
You take lots of turnover at the top, individual entities put on a pedestal with too much power, burn-out across the board, short-term vision coupled with the loss of long-term employees with great expertise and you end up with failure and collapse
I’ve seen many established, viable businesses go down the tubes from these symptoms, no different than an organization like the former PAC12
I think Schulz is delusional and out of touch on the Apple Cup. He acts like the 2 teams are going to have the same resources.. Let's see how much excitement there is in offices around the state of Washington after 3 or 4 consecutive 72-7 games.
There will not be a $100 million difference in revenues now, either, since UW is only getting about $30 million a year from the Big Ten for the foreseeable future.
That's media deal money only. Plus CFP money, plus Big 10 network money, plus ticket sales to Big 10 games vs ticket sales to MWC games, plus other Big 10 money. The $30 mil is only their share of mega media deal. You're leaving out so much more.
CFP money. UW $21 mil, WSU $3 mil. Media money. UW $30 mil to start, increasing to full share after 5 years, projected to be $80 -$100 mil per year. WSU, projected $1 mil per football game but has to pay MWC $1 mil per game, even to play away games; projected income, nothing. Additional income? Even the Big 10 conference conference championship game sells out Lucus Oil Stadium every year and average ticket prices are around $500 or higher, and that's IF you can even get them, plus corporate sponsorship dollars. The conference makes well over $50 mil on that one game a year. Same with the men's conference basketball tournament. Last year a little more than 35% of conference pay out to Big 10 teams came from money in addition to media payouts. That equates to about $21 mil per school, of which UW will get a full share. So even at its very least next year UW will get $30 mil from media, $21 mil from CFP and $21 mil additional conference money. That's $72 mil right off the top. WSU gets about zero dollars in media money, $3 mil in CFP money and will have to decide how much of the war chest they want to use, but has to get agreement from OSU. Then you factor in the difference between making game day money from a Big 10 schedule in Husky stadium and Hec Edmunsen vs a MWC football schedule and WCC conference basketball schedule for WSU. So yes, even next year the revenue difference will be around $80 mil and over the next 5 years will easily exceed $100 mil and probably more. I haven't even added in the extra recruiting benefits that will now come with UW recruiting to a power 2 conference and WSU recruiting to no conference, NIL, transfer portal advantages,etc. The difference between UW and WSU, same goes for Oregon and OSU, will the same as it used to be between WSU and Eastern Washington, or OSU and Portlamd State. There's a reason those aren't rivalries and the same principles will now apply to the Apple Cup and Civil War. I know you want to ignore it and continue to pretend nothing has happened that will change anything, but that's not stopping reality.
I don't think he's delusional on it, it's just that this is the only one of his answers from this interview that dips back into PR-ish "let's put the rosiest hue we can on this" speak. If he just spoke the truth and said "It sucks, but our players want to keep playing the Huskies, and we desperately need the money," I'd be fine with it.
As he stated, once the ACC falls apart later this year you will see movement. At the end of the day we most likely will see 3 major conferences. B1G, SEC and whatever the Big 12 decides to call itself after selling naming rights. Stanford and Cal will have some serious thinking to do and realize you cant afford to be snooty anymore in college athletics and they either drop down a level or associate with others. Splitting up also may be an option once conferences realized Cal atheletics doesn't move the needle. The next six months are going to be interesting for sure.
I definitely can see Stanford somehow landing in the B1G. The B1G only needs one Bay Area school to cover that sports tv market. It gives UW, Oregon, USC, and UCLA another west coast team to add onto the schedule and also Stanford has an annual matchup with Notre Dame. It won't need Cal.
Go Wazzu! I am def rooting for the Cougs this year. And the Beavs. I know Kirk spoke about "partnership" as opposed to being a robber-baron of the MWC, but I still think the latter is what will happen. Prioritize Colorado State, San Diego State, along with say, UNLV + Boise...and you have good brands and/or good markets. Then see what Rice, Tulane, + UTSA are up to. And lastly pray for the comet to hit the ACC which would kick loose Stanford, Cal, SMU, + potentially Georgia Tech + Wake Forest. At that point you have a quasi formidable conference! I know this is all "ifs + buts", "unicorns + rainbows"...but it also has some sense + realistic potential...
OSU, Wazzu, Cal, Stanford, Rice, UTSA, Colorado State, San Diego State, UNLV, Boise State, Tulane, SMU, Georgia Tech, + Wake Forest? Could do worse.
Kirk Schulz: "...when I was in the Big 12 and we watched Texas and Texas A&M go different directions, and Missouri, and Kansas, and these others... everybody was angry after a year But two or three years later, people are like, ‘Man, I miss those rivalries. That used to be such a big deal for us..."
BIG DIFFERENCE was that both Texas A&M and Texas remained in Power Conferences after one of them moved.
The situation with WSU/OSU and UW/UO are a different story...
Excellent point, Dylan. The disparity of resources will be staggering. Not anywhere approaching an even playing field. It will be a joke and an embarrassment. I want nothing to do with it.
If we merge with the MWC, there will not be a "staggering disparity." Actually we will be one of the halves instead of being a perennial have-not in the Pac-12.
Kirk Schulz has always impressed me. He's whip smart with a ton of common sense. This interview just solidified my view. I wish Oregon had a comparable president but it's not the case - Jon Karl Scholz is just the opposite of Schulz - Oregon's president is manipulative, deceitful, book smart and zero common sense. Typical academician who will never be held accountable like those in the real world. Washington State has been very fortunate to find a president with integrity, sense of urgency, smart but with plenty of common sense. I wish him well in his next endeavor.
For starters - and there's more - his lack of integrity when he told the remaining Pac-12 schools the night before the fateful Friday chancellors/AD's meeting that he would support the Apple media deal and would vote the next morning to have Oregon remain in the Pac-12. The next morning, he didn't even show up, but cowardly had Mullens tell the remaining schools Oregon had decided to join the Big Ten. Washington followed suit minutes later and it was the final nail in the coffin for the conference.
He's a typical academician protected by tenure and will never be held accountable. Amazing how Oregon has burned through incompetent presidents in recent years, including all those carrying the "interim" tag.
You're right, Quack...I despise Washington and would love to blame them for dropping the final nail. I rely on Canzano's reporting and he has written that Oregon shocked the shit out of the other schools, with Washington quickly following suit. Washington jumped so quickly it's not hard to imagine they were tipped off or - more likely - had a back-up plan when Mullens (filling in for the coward, Scholz) made the announcement.
Rich, how do you know Scholz didn't fully intend to stay in the Pac-12, and mean every word he said? Problem for him is he wasn't the Alpha dog in that decision--Phil Knight was. I don't think lack of integrity fits here. Just relinquishing his power to someone who understood the CFB landscape better...and paid the bills for it. No shame.
Disagree, Scott. He made a commitment to the remaining AD's, chancellors and presidents (USC, UCLA and Colorado had already left) that Oregon would remain in the Big Ten and he would sign the media rights agreement the next morning (the fateful Friday) at their scheduled meeting. Not only did he not show up - cowardly - but he told Mullens to break the news to the others that Oregon was joining the Big Ten.
I've always felt a reverse merger with the MWC, in which OSU and WSU keep all of the Pac-12 revenue (and possibly share some with the merged teams) and the historic, instantly recognizable conference name brand is the best approach.
Regional, competitive competition against schools with similar academic and athletic profiles and reasonably similar athletic budgets. No flying all the way across the country for a volleyball or soccer game, or conference track/cross country meet.
A rebuilt 13-team Pac (WSU, OSU, 11 full-time MWC) should be able to get a decent TV contract. Programs in Seattle, Portland, Denver, Bay Area, Fresno, SLC, Albuquerque, Las Vegas and San Diego markets, which are not insignificant.
Chasing after the Ohio States, Alabamas and Georgias of the college football world is folly. Play a 9-game conference schedule, maybe Oregon or another P4 team, a Big Sky opponent and maybe a MAC foe.
Will it be the Pac-12 of old? No. But that ship has sailed. It will be a very solid, competitive, regional league that will generally rank # 5 or #6 and regularly compete for the fifth automatic CFP berth, and get 3-4 teams into the NCAA basketball tournament every year.
I also think after losing millions and millions in the ACC, Cal might be willing to return to West Coast-based competition. I'd take them in a heartbeat. Arrogant Stanford and their snobby academic pinheads can GFT.
If all OSU and WSU can do is "merge" with the Mountain West, it will be the end of athletics as we have known them at both schools. OSU would have to cut 35% or more from its current athletic budget. Programs would be cut, coaches would leave, coaching staffs would shrink, recruiting budgets would drop, etc., etc. I like the idea of a regional conference, but there is no money in it for OSU (or WSU) to join the MWC via a merger or reverse merger. It's already been reported that such a league would only get $7 million to $10 million tops per school for its TV deal. Not good for the future of OSU as an athletic program or as a university.
Once you equate Oregon State University with the same academic profiles as the Mountain West schools, you've lost all credibility. Ditto with the athletic budgets and athletic profiles. How many of the MWC football schools cracked the AP Top 10 recently? OSU did it in November 2023. Nice try, but no.
And OSU dropped from the top 10 like a stone. We were overrated at the time.
Utah State, Colorado State, Wyoming, Nevada and Washington State are all land-grant universities with a similar academic profile to OSU. USAFA is an outstanding engineering school. like OSU.
There won't be a full merger w/MW. There's not enough revenue there across the entire conference base. But good chance you will see SDSU, CSU, then some of UNLV, Boise State, Tulane, UT San Antonio, Memphis
I do think Utah is also in play. I think Stanford ends up in Big 10. Cal won't be in the Big 10
I also see a shot at OSU/WSU in the Big12. Big 12 is going to get killed in tv on the west coast unless there are teams.
Yes, President Schultz is a breath of fresh air. It would be tempting to say candor is easy when you've already announced your resignation - but Shultz has been That Guy all along. Wazzu needs to get the hire right.
The lede: “I (Schulz) had somebody on my staff who said, ‘Hey, Kirk, don't you dare put Anne in let her do all the tough work, and then go hire somebody from the outside that comes in after somebody’s made the really hard decisions.’ And I thought that was just a really good piece of advice.”
I worked for/with nine presidents and several others (Provosts, etc) who later became presidents. Only a few a) were secure enough to truly welcome critical input or advice b) admitted that others’ input informed their decisions c) appreciated the strategic importance of wading into and keeping an eye on athletics.
Schulz appears to be all three. And whatever animus exists (and no president worth their salt is without some) in Cougar Nation, be careful what you wish for. This guy appears to be someone I would have loved to work for.
I worked in academia for 9 years on the administrative support side, specifically introducing technology and distance learning into the curriculum. It was so often a frustrating experience in dealing with the faculty, department chairs, etc who wanted nothing to do with it, despite the fact that embracing it was crucial for enrollment.
It seems like a field that generally attracts people who are very set in their ways and not open to other points of view or learning new things (ironic, isn't it?). But like anywhere else there was the occasional rare bird who, relative to the others, would be a joy to work with and made it a worthwhile endeavor.
No one with higher Ed experience would call it “entrepreneurial.” 😊
Thank you for sharing this.
So many interviews with conference presidents and athletic directors that are brain-numbingly mundane and vacuous and scripted. Until now. This guy really seems to get the relationship between the presidency of a university and the athletic department. He understands the extreme value of high-visibility college athletics. Man, WSU has a tough task replacing Kirk Schulz.
I came here to say the same thing. It is refreshing to get actual answers to questions where I feel more knowledgeable and more at ease with his leadership
Hear great things about Anne McCoy… the people I respect think she is the perfect choice for WSU AD at this time. I’m hopeful the same choice will be made when the new President is named there have to be some good ones out there who will have a strong academic background, will enjoy living in Pullman responsive to faculty and students and work closely with new AD. (WOW- a full plate for sure) hope you will be able to interview Anne McCoy sometime soon!
Kirk has done a decent job stabilizing this change although many still aren't happy with him. Love the interview and questions but the one answer he is completely tone deaf and still defies what the alumni wants is anything to do with UW. Two schools couldn't be more different and UW is everything WSU is not. No one wants to continue the series with them in anything and the fact he suggests other wise means he doesn't care about those opinions. Hopefully his replacement has better hearing.
Kirk has done a good job, but you are correct about the relationship with UW.
If anyone thought I disliked them before, they could not imagine how much I dislike them now.
Dave Peterson '67
"No one wants to continue the series with them in anything"
The players do. That should count for something.
I think he's done a good job overall and has been unfairly criticized at times. But I'm one of the WSU alumns who will forever say I want nothing to do with UW. We should never play them again. I'll be driving to Pullman this fall for a game, but I won't attend the Apple Cup even though I live in the Seattle area.
Same Brad...Ive seen the preliminary sales numbers for tickets for the OOC UW game this year(no longer an Apple Cup) and WSU alums are staying away. Ticket prices are too high and no one wants anything to do with it. Many will watch on TV but the days of supporting WSU in Seattle or at UW will no longer fly.
They say every cloud has a silver lining, it’s just the lightning you gotta watch out for. 🤷♂️ Good luck to him, and hopefully the Cougs.
I wish Schulz had more influence among the presidents when it really mattered.
"It’s like, where were you a year ago?!?" Bingo. I am glad Mr Schulz understands we all think the PAC12 Presidents were all asleep at the wheel of one of their most important responsibilities, to manage their athletic programs, which really are the public face of Div 1 universities. It would be nice to see more of this candor, though it won't put the genie back in the bottle. FBS football should just leave the universities and go on its professional way as an adjunct to the NFL. Let university sports return to as close to amateur as we can get in 2024 and beyond.
Kirk is a good man that needs a well-deserved break
PAC observations:
You take lots of turnover at the top, individual entities put on a pedestal with too much power, burn-out across the board, short-term vision coupled with the loss of long-term employees with great expertise and you end up with failure and collapse
I’ve seen many established, viable businesses go down the tubes from these symptoms, no different than an organization like the former PAC12
All that being said, let’s play some football!
GO DAWGS
😉
I think Schulz is delusional and out of touch on the Apple Cup. He acts like the 2 teams are going to have the same resources.. Let's see how much excitement there is in offices around the state of Washington after 3 or 4 consecutive 72-7 games.
When have UW and WSU EVER had the same resources?
They might not have always been equal but there was never an $80-$100 mil a year difference in revenue BEFORE Tyee Club donations. Huge difference.
There will not be a $100 million difference in revenues now, either, since UW is only getting about $30 million a year from the Big Ten for the foreseeable future.
That's media deal money only. Plus CFP money, plus Big 10 network money, plus ticket sales to Big 10 games vs ticket sales to MWC games, plus other Big 10 money. The $30 mil is only their share of mega media deal. You're leaving out so much more.
And you are acting as if WSU will have no other income. WSU gets CFP money. It will sell tickets. It will get other Pac-2 money.
You think the Weber State, Northwestern and Eastern Michigan games will sell out Husky Stadium?
Yes, there will be a difference. Not disputing that. It won't be $100 million.
CFP money. UW $21 mil, WSU $3 mil. Media money. UW $30 mil to start, increasing to full share after 5 years, projected to be $80 -$100 mil per year. WSU, projected $1 mil per football game but has to pay MWC $1 mil per game, even to play away games; projected income, nothing. Additional income? Even the Big 10 conference conference championship game sells out Lucus Oil Stadium every year and average ticket prices are around $500 or higher, and that's IF you can even get them, plus corporate sponsorship dollars. The conference makes well over $50 mil on that one game a year. Same with the men's conference basketball tournament. Last year a little more than 35% of conference pay out to Big 10 teams came from money in addition to media payouts. That equates to about $21 mil per school, of which UW will get a full share. So even at its very least next year UW will get $30 mil from media, $21 mil from CFP and $21 mil additional conference money. That's $72 mil right off the top. WSU gets about zero dollars in media money, $3 mil in CFP money and will have to decide how much of the war chest they want to use, but has to get agreement from OSU. Then you factor in the difference between making game day money from a Big 10 schedule in Husky stadium and Hec Edmunsen vs a MWC football schedule and WCC conference basketball schedule for WSU. So yes, even next year the revenue difference will be around $80 mil and over the next 5 years will easily exceed $100 mil and probably more. I haven't even added in the extra recruiting benefits that will now come with UW recruiting to a power 2 conference and WSU recruiting to no conference, NIL, transfer portal advantages,etc. The difference between UW and WSU, same goes for Oregon and OSU, will the same as it used to be between WSU and Eastern Washington, or OSU and Portlamd State. There's a reason those aren't rivalries and the same principles will now apply to the Apple Cup and Civil War. I know you want to ignore it and continue to pretend nothing has happened that will change anything, but that's not stopping reality.
I don't think he's delusional on it, it's just that this is the only one of his answers from this interview that dips back into PR-ish "let's put the rosiest hue we can on this" speak. If he just spoke the truth and said "It sucks, but our players want to keep playing the Huskies, and we desperately need the money," I'd be fine with it.
I agree, much better and accurate answer.
The only 70 spot the Huskies will ever lay on any of the 3 teams in the PNW will be the 70 pointer they laid on the ducks in 2016. 70-21. Ouch.
UW is always only a Jimmy Lake or TW away from 0-11
Hmm, west coast conference. Sadly, it sounds like settling for some sort of MW merger.
As he stated, once the ACC falls apart later this year you will see movement. At the end of the day we most likely will see 3 major conferences. B1G, SEC and whatever the Big 12 decides to call itself after selling naming rights. Stanford and Cal will have some serious thinking to do and realize you cant afford to be snooty anymore in college athletics and they either drop down a level or associate with others. Splitting up also may be an option once conferences realized Cal atheletics doesn't move the needle. The next six months are going to be interesting for sure.
I definitely can see Stanford somehow landing in the B1G. The B1G only needs one Bay Area school to cover that sports tv market. It gives UW, Oregon, USC, and UCLA another west coast team to add onto the schedule and also Stanford has an annual matchup with Notre Dame. It won't need Cal.
And we will still be stuck with some sort of merger with MW as a G5 or whatever league
Go Wazzu! I am def rooting for the Cougs this year. And the Beavs. I know Kirk spoke about "partnership" as opposed to being a robber-baron of the MWC, but I still think the latter is what will happen. Prioritize Colorado State, San Diego State, along with say, UNLV + Boise...and you have good brands and/or good markets. Then see what Rice, Tulane, + UTSA are up to. And lastly pray for the comet to hit the ACC which would kick loose Stanford, Cal, SMU, + potentially Georgia Tech + Wake Forest. At that point you have a quasi formidable conference! I know this is all "ifs + buts", "unicorns + rainbows"...but it also has some sense + realistic potential...
OSU, Wazzu, Cal, Stanford, Rice, UTSA, Colorado State, San Diego State, UNLV, Boise State, Tulane, SMU, Georgia Tech, + Wake Forest? Could do worse.
Kirk Schulz: "...when I was in the Big 12 and we watched Texas and Texas A&M go different directions, and Missouri, and Kansas, and these others... everybody was angry after a year But two or three years later, people are like, ‘Man, I miss those rivalries. That used to be such a big deal for us..."
BIG DIFFERENCE was that both Texas A&M and Texas remained in Power Conferences after one of them moved.
The situation with WSU/OSU and UW/UO are a different story...
He said they missed the rivalries. That remains true, no matter which conference they fled to.
SEC or not, many, many Oklahoma fans will miss Bedlam.
Excellent point, Dylan. The disparity of resources will be staggering. Not anywhere approaching an even playing field. It will be a joke and an embarrassment. I want nothing to do with it.
If we merge with the MWC, there will not be a "staggering disparity." Actually we will be one of the halves instead of being a perennial have-not in the Pac-12.
Kirk Schulz has always impressed me. He's whip smart with a ton of common sense. This interview just solidified my view. I wish Oregon had a comparable president but it's not the case - Jon Karl Scholz is just the opposite of Schulz - Oregon's president is manipulative, deceitful, book smart and zero common sense. Typical academician who will never be held accountable like those in the real world. Washington State has been very fortunate to find a president with integrity, sense of urgency, smart but with plenty of common sense. I wish him well in his next endeavor.
What is the basis of your characterization of Scholz?
For starters - and there's more - his lack of integrity when he told the remaining Pac-12 schools the night before the fateful Friday chancellors/AD's meeting that he would support the Apple media deal and would vote the next morning to have Oregon remain in the Pac-12. The next morning, he didn't even show up, but cowardly had Mullens tell the remaining schools Oregon had decided to join the Big Ten. Washington followed suit minutes later and it was the final nail in the coffin for the conference.
Scholz is a coward without integrity.
Absolutely. The guy is a jerk. Someone needs to look at his own bank account and see what payoff he got to make this move
He's a typical academician protected by tenure and will never be held accountable. Amazing how Oregon has burned through incompetent presidents in recent years, including all those carrying the "interim" tag.
Yes - he's a jerk, to net it out.
I read sources that say Washington decided first and Oregon followed. But whatever, the end result is the same.
You're right, Quack...I despise Washington and would love to blame them for dropping the final nail. I rely on Canzano's reporting and he has written that Oregon shocked the shit out of the other schools, with Washington quickly following suit. Washington jumped so quickly it's not hard to imagine they were tipped off or - more likely - had a back-up plan when Mullens (filling in for the coward, Scholz) made the announcement.
Rich, how do you know Scholz didn't fully intend to stay in the Pac-12, and mean every word he said? Problem for him is he wasn't the Alpha dog in that decision--Phil Knight was. I don't think lack of integrity fits here. Just relinquishing his power to someone who understood the CFB landscape better...and paid the bills for it. No shame.
Disagree, Scott. He made a commitment to the remaining AD's, chancellors and presidents (USC, UCLA and Colorado had already left) that Oregon would remain in the Big Ten and he would sign the media rights agreement the next morning (the fateful Friday) at their scheduled meeting. Not only did he not show up - cowardly - but he told Mullens to break the news to the others that Oregon was joining the Big Ten.
No integrity issue here?
I've always felt a reverse merger with the MWC, in which OSU and WSU keep all of the Pac-12 revenue (and possibly share some with the merged teams) and the historic, instantly recognizable conference name brand is the best approach.
Regional, competitive competition against schools with similar academic and athletic profiles and reasonably similar athletic budgets. No flying all the way across the country for a volleyball or soccer game, or conference track/cross country meet.
A rebuilt 13-team Pac (WSU, OSU, 11 full-time MWC) should be able to get a decent TV contract. Programs in Seattle, Portland, Denver, Bay Area, Fresno, SLC, Albuquerque, Las Vegas and San Diego markets, which are not insignificant.
Chasing after the Ohio States, Alabamas and Georgias of the college football world is folly. Play a 9-game conference schedule, maybe Oregon or another P4 team, a Big Sky opponent and maybe a MAC foe.
Will it be the Pac-12 of old? No. But that ship has sailed. It will be a very solid, competitive, regional league that will generally rank # 5 or #6 and regularly compete for the fifth automatic CFP berth, and get 3-4 teams into the NCAA basketball tournament every year.
I also think after losing millions and millions in the ACC, Cal might be willing to return to West Coast-based competition. I'd take them in a heartbeat. Arrogant Stanford and their snobby academic pinheads can GFT.
If all OSU and WSU can do is "merge" with the Mountain West, it will be the end of athletics as we have known them at both schools. OSU would have to cut 35% or more from its current athletic budget. Programs would be cut, coaches would leave, coaching staffs would shrink, recruiting budgets would drop, etc., etc. I like the idea of a regional conference, but there is no money in it for OSU (or WSU) to join the MWC via a merger or reverse merger. It's already been reported that such a league would only get $7 million to $10 million tops per school for its TV deal. Not good for the future of OSU as an athletic program or as a university.
Viable alternative, please. I'm waiting.
Once you equate Oregon State University with the same academic profiles as the Mountain West schools, you've lost all credibility. Ditto with the athletic budgets and athletic profiles. How many of the MWC football schools cracked the AP Top 10 recently? OSU did it in November 2023. Nice try, but no.
Viable alternative, please. I'm waiting.
And OSU dropped from the top 10 like a stone. We were overrated at the time.
Utah State, Colorado State, Wyoming, Nevada and Washington State are all land-grant universities with a similar academic profile to OSU. USAFA is an outstanding engineering school. like OSU.
There won't be a full merger w/MW. There's not enough revenue there across the entire conference base. But good chance you will see SDSU, CSU, then some of UNLV, Boise State, Tulane, UT San Antonio, Memphis
I do think Utah is also in play. I think Stanford ends up in Big 10. Cal won't be in the Big 10
I also see a shot at OSU/WSU in the Big12. Big 12 is going to get killed in tv on the west coast unless there are teams.
There's still dominos to fall
God, no! Just, no!
Viable alternative, please.
There isn't one. Some people don't like that, but their preferred vision is an unrealistic fantasy.
Yes, President Schultz is a breath of fresh air. It would be tempting to say candor is easy when you've already announced your resignation - but Shultz has been That Guy all along. Wazzu needs to get the hire right.