RealGM

I grew up as a kid loving the old Southwest Conference which no longer exist. I've always wanted NCAA to improve post season play but I'm not sure breaking up conferences is such a good thing. Seems the traditions are going away.

bluejerseyjinx wrote:I grew up as a kid loving the old Southwest Conference which no longer exist. I've always wanted NCAA to improve post season play but I'm not sure breaking up conferences is such a good thing. Seems the traditions are going away.

The Apple Cup & Civil War have been around forever. But both are one-sided rivalries. Oregon is our biggest rival.

It sucks for Wazzu & Oregon State. It's likely going to kill the athletic program. But Wazzu is probably better off competing in the Mountain West.

hermes wrote:pac12 only has 2 playoff appearances, oregon in 2014-15 and washington in 2016-17

The Pac has been on a steady decline since Pete left SC & we're put on probation.

It took UW several years to recover from the Tyrone Willingham era. Chris Petersen basically saved the program.

Oregon is really the only school that has had any consistency over the last couple of decades. Utah has had a nice run as of late.

Cactus Jack wrote:

bluejerseyjinx wrote:I grew up as a kid loving the old Southwest Conference which no longer exist. I've always wanted NCAA to improve post season play but I'm not sure breaking up conferences is such a good thing. Seems the traditions are going away.

The Apple Cup & Civil War have been around forever. But both are one-sided rivalries. Oregon is our biggest rival.

It sucks for Wazzu & Oregon State. It's likely going to kill the athletic program. But Wazzu is probably better off competing in the Mountain West.

Just seems to me the college football landscape has changed so much since I was a kid growing up in the 70's. Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Notre Dame where the constant big boys back them. We hardly hear from them anymore.

Cactus Jack wrote:

bluejerseyjinx wrote:I grew up as a kid loving the old Southwest Conference which no longer exist. I've always wanted NCAA to improve post season play but I'm not sure breaking up conferences is such a good thing. Seems the traditions are going away.

The Apple Cup & Civil War have been around forever. But both are one-sided rivalries. Oregon is our biggest rival.

It sucks for Wazzu & Oregon State. It's likely going to kill the athletic program. But Wazzu is probably better off competing in the Mountain West.

The old Southwest conference included, Texas, SMU, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Baylor, Rice, Houston, TCU, Arkansas and at various times Oklahoma. Ever since the break up all these schools play in different conferences.

Thing about Cal and Stanford is that they're feeder schools for Olympics, often strong in sports like swimming, water polo, track and field.

And usually football funds a lot of these other sports.

So they need that football money.

But neither are huge TV draws. Certainly they couldn't get a TV contract like Notre Dame.

So they need to join a conference with a big TV deal.

Supposedly if they joined the ACC they'd get about $30 million a year, though ACC may have long-term competitive problems because they are locked into a deal until 2036 -- Pac 12 got into trouble signing a long TV deal, over a decade long.

The Apple TV deal was like $25 million per school with the chance to be worth more if they got more subscribers to sign up. I don't think the Pac 12 schools individually are huge ratings draws either.

But the bigger problem is that they wanted to be on cable TV, not streaming. They want to be seen by potential and future recruits and their families. So everyone has cable TV but not necessarily a lot of people have streaming, at least not Apple TV + streaming.

I have Apple TV + but I don't watch MLS or baseball games. Nor would I pay extra for Pac 12 college sports. Again I'm a Cal alum.

I would pay extra for NFL, NBA and PL games though especially if Apple TV + put them in 4K.

bluejerseyjinx wrote:

Cactus Jack wrote:

bluejerseyjinx wrote:I grew up as a kid loving the old Southwest Conference which no longer exist. I've always wanted NCAA to improve post season play but I'm not sure breaking up conferences is such a good thing. Seems the traditions are going away.

The Apple Cup & Civil War have been around forever. But both are one-sided rivalries. Oregon is our biggest rival.

It sucks for Wazzu & Oregon State. It's likely going to kill the athletic program. But Wazzu is probably better off competing in the Mountain West.

Just seems to me the college football landscape has changed so much since I was a kid growing up in the 70's. Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Notre Dame where the constant big boys back them. We hardly hear from them anymore.

it has changed a ton. did you expect the same handful of teams to be elite forever? minnesota was really dominate a hundred years ago but they haven't been in decades

iowa was dreadful in the 70s, i'm glad things aren't static

wco81 wrote:Thing about Cal and Stanford is that they're feeder schools for Olympics, often strong in sports like swimming, water polo, track and field.

And usually football funds a lot of these other sports.

So they need that football money.

But neither are huge TV draws. Certainly they couldn't get a TV contract like Notre Dame.

So they need to join a conference with a big TV deal.

Supposedly if they joined the ACC they'd get about $30 million a year, though ACC may have long-term competitive problems because they are locked into a deal until 2036 -- Pac 12 got into trouble signing a long TV deal, over a decade long.

The Apple TV deal was like $25 million per school with the chance to be worth more if they got more subscribers to sign up. I don't think the Pac 12 schools individually are huge ratings draws either.

But the bigger problem is that they wanted to be on cable TV, not streaming. They want to be seen by potential and future recruits and their families. So everyone has cable TV but not necessarily a lot of people have streaming, at least not Apple TV + streaming.

I have Apple TV + but I don't watch MLS or baseball games. Nor would I pay extra for Pac 12 college sports. Again I'm a Cal alum.

I would pay extra for NFL, NBA and PL games though especially if Apple TV + put them in 4K.

Had they signed off on the Apple deal, it would have led to the end of the conference anyway. But just delayed it.

You have folks like Bjj who don't use streaming. People over 60 that only know linear TV. That's the problem. Having a streaming subscription service only is a horrendous move.

Cactus Jack wrote:

wco81 wrote:Thing about Cal and Stanford is that they're feeder schools for Olympics, often strong in sports like swimming, water polo, track and field.

And usually football funds a lot of these other sports.

So they need that football money.

But neither are huge TV draws. Certainly they couldn't get a TV contract like Notre Dame.

So they need to join a conference with a big TV deal.

Supposedly if they joined the ACC they'd get about $30 million a year, though ACC may have long-term competitive problems because they are locked into a deal until 2036 -- Pac 12 got into trouble signing a long TV deal, over a decade long.

The Apple TV deal was like $25 million per school with the chance to be worth more if they got more subscribers to sign up. I don't think the Pac 12 schools individually are huge ratings draws either.

But the bigger problem is that they wanted to be on cable TV, not streaming. They want to be seen by potential and future recruits and their families. So everyone has cable TV but not necessarily a lot of people have streaming, at least not Apple TV + streaming.

I have Apple TV + but I don't watch MLS or baseball games. Nor would I pay extra for Pac 12 college sports. Again I'm a Cal alum.

I would pay extra for NFL, NBA and PL games though especially if Apple TV + put them in 4K.

Had they signed off on the Apple deal, it would have led to the end of the conference anyway. But just delayed it.

You have folks like Bjj who don't use streaming. People over 60 that only know linear TV. That's the problem. Having a streaming subscription service only is a horrendous move.

So people like me are a problem? Gee, thanks a lot.

bluejerseyjinx wrote:

Cactus Jack wrote:

wco81 wrote:Thing about Cal and Stanford is that they're feeder schools for Olympics, often strong in sports like swimming, water polo, track and field.

And usually football funds a lot of these other sports.

So they need that football money.

But neither are huge TV draws. Certainly they couldn't get a TV contract like Notre Dame.

So they need to join a conference with a big TV deal.

Supposedly if they joined the ACC they'd get about $30 million a year, though ACC may have long-term competitive problems because they are locked into a deal until 2036 -- Pac 12 got into trouble signing a long TV deal, over a decade long.

The Apple TV deal was like $25 million per school with the chance to be worth more if they got more subscribers to sign up. I don't think the Pac 12 schools individually are huge ratings draws either.

But the bigger problem is that they wanted to be on cable TV, not streaming. They want to be seen by potential and future recruits and their families. So everyone has cable TV but not necessarily a lot of people have streaming, at least not Apple TV + streaming.

I have Apple TV + but I don't watch MLS or baseball games. Nor would I pay extra for Pac 12 college sports. Again I'm a Cal alum.

I would pay extra for NFL, NBA and PL games though especially if Apple TV + put them in 4K.

Had they signed off on the Apple deal, it would have led to the end of the conference anyway. But just delayed it.

You have folks like Bjj who don't use streaming. People over 60 that only know linear TV. That's the problem. Having a streaming subscription service only is a horrendous move.

So people like me are a problem? Gee, thanks a lot.

Precisely.

Folks like you won't watch. You're basically significantly reducing your audience.

Cactus Jack wrote:

bluejerseyjinx wrote:

Cactus Jack wrote:Had they signed off on the Apple deal, it would have led to the end of the conference anyway. But just delayed it.

You have folks like Bjj who don't use streaming. People over 60 that only know linear TV. That's the problem. Having a streaming subscription service only is a horrendous move.

So people like me are a problem? Gee, thanks a lot.

Precisely.

Folks like you won't watch. You're basically significantly shrinking your audience.

We just want to turn the damn t.v. on and watch the friggin game. Stream this, download that, sign in here. Get out of here with this fu....g crap. Just tell us how much it cost and what channel.

Well ESPN will be one of the biggest sources of income for college football and their future is streaming as well.

Disney CEO Robert Iger just said so, the ad market for linear TV is weak, while the ad market for streaming is better.

ESPN has made Disney billions on cable TV but as cord-cutting continues, ESPN will transition to a streaming model.


Which is fine, I would subscribe to ESPN + if they put NFL and NBA games on, with 4K streams.

As a huge fan of college sports, I think its time that they just pause for a year and really take some time to figure everything out. All of this realignment has gotten so out of hand. I mean there are talks of Stanford joining the ACC...

I honestly have no clue what the fix is for this, but the way it is currently going clearly isnt the way. I dont know if you go with two major conferences just for football and more local based conferences for the other sports. I honestly have no clue. But I do know some big time college football fans that are just checking out. With the combo of the transfer portal and NIL, then with all of these major realignments, college football doesnt even look anything like it used to back in the day.

i don't think there is any slowing down/stopping the train. it probably needs to go to far and get to unwieldly and blow up - then we might settle back into a regional focus

or separate out football from the remaining sports. the olympic sports can have regional conferences (since they are most harmed by all the new travel) and football can have their own super conferences.

FSU, Clemson, UNC and maybe Duke all voted against taking in Stanford and Cal into the ACC.

Probably don't want to share any future TV deals with more schools. Nor have to travel all across the country.

i think i read it was ncst not duke, but it probably doesn't make much difference

i wonder if they voted no because they have aspirations for one of the big10 or sec. although at this point the earliest that will happen is 2037, so i don't know what the harm would be in adding schools to the acc.

i'm not sure what the appeal of the acc is, especially if they have to sign the grant of rights. i suppose they are desperate to be in any major conference and the big12 either isn't taking them or they don't want to go there.

Cactus Jack wrote:

Read on Twitter

Wow !!! My Tar Heels in the top 25 of college football. I think I'm going to pass out.