And I apologize for doing so. I was extrapolating on your comments on how the P12 managed the football season.
Any new news tidbits on the Ducks.
Dis the Ducks
- Thread starter JM4CY
- Start date
Any new news tidbits on the Ducks.
The Pac-12 is not going to break up, if only due to geographic necessity. Also, no university president is going to abandon being aligned with Stanford, the UC system, USC. Quite the opposite, it’s part of what almost helped break up the Big-12.
People forget that the Pac-12 is the first conference to have their media rights up, and has the oldest one currently. They also own their own network which isn’t successful but still has equity. The new media deal will even the playing field tremendously. I can guarantee that by 2025 the Pac-12 will be making more per school than the Big-12, it’s simple population math.
My guess if there is another round of conference realignment is that it will be a consolidation if anything. The haves, such as Oregon, will be in one of the two or three super conferences. The leftovers will be in some middle tier.
Boise State and BYU are non starters for the Pac. Academics, religion, state laws are the main reasons. Financial is the other, no point in adding duplicate TV markets or small ones.
People forget that the Pac-12 is the first conference to have their media rights up, and has the oldest one currently. They also own their own network which isn’t successful but still has equity. The new media deal will even the playing field tremendously. I can guarantee that by 2025 the Pac-12 will be making more per school than the Big-12, it’s simple population math.
My guess if there is another round of conference realignment is that it will be a consolidation if anything. The haves, such as Oregon, will be in one of the two or three super conferences. The leftovers will be in some middle tier.
Boise State and BYU are non starters for the Pac. Academics, religion, state laws are the main reasons. Financial is the other, no point in adding duplicate TV markets or small ones.
No worries, and I understand where you’re coming from.
Nothing exciting on the Ducks front. They’re still depleted at DB- 6’5” sophomore WR Bryan Addison is playing at corner. He was a top-100 recruit and had 18 catches last year as a freshman but hasn’t had a chance to play much this year. Hopefully we don’t have to see him at CB, but I’d be curious how 6’5” looks out there.
Big 12 and PAC contracts are both up at the same time. The way things are going by 2024 the population will mean much less with cord cutting, and might be much more about which schools/ conferences have fan bases actively willing to seek and pay for sports content. Oregon will certainly more than pull its weight, but not sure about a few of the other schools.
That type of shift makes ISU far more valuable than it did under the old cable and satellite driven model where it was all about population and TV markets. Big 12 also has dead weight in that regard like Baylor and TCU.
If you’re talking about just football, KU is going to have no on pay to see that mess. But they are such a unique little devil in what they do for you as an asset
I left KU out of that designation, assuming basketball is just enough of a bargaining chip to make people pay for their garbage football.
I know it’s not perfect, but I think attendance is a decent proxy for how well a program will do as there is more of a shift toward a la carte sports content.
In 2019 only UW outdrew ISU from the PAC. USC was a little behind ISU. I believe Oregon was 3rd in the PAC, and drew fewer than Texas, Oklahoma, ISU, Okie St, and WVU. I think it was just slightly ahead of TTU.
To show it is not a function of recent success, 2015 was as hopeless a football season ISU has had, and drew over 56k/game. That same year, Oregon went 7-2 in the PAC and drew 57k.
Next year, the Jack is gonna be off... the... chain....
Why did you guys have to lose to Gene Chizik? That's my #1 thing against Oregon. You gave Gene effin Chizik a national title.
Responsibility for Auburn’s national title:
- Cam 50%
-Cam’s Dad’s bagman 30%
- Gus Malzahn 25%
- Nick Fairly 15%
- Chizik (-20%)
Just because something hasn’t been as successful as hoped doesn’t mean it has no financial value. Larry Scott’s proposal to sell a 10% stake at a $2 billion valuation isn’t happening but selling 30% for $300 million would be a nice boost of $23 million for 13 parties.
That was such a great game to watch despite the loss. ~1,000 yards of total offense and the final score was something like 22-19. Both teams had amazing goal line stops. Late game turnover to get Oregon back on track.
Cam Newton was just that good and Coach Kelly got a little too clever with his running game IMO. He revealed a new sort of triple option where a slot receiver would run into the backfield before the snap. We kept running that concept over and over, despite the fact that it never really worked. Nick Fairly was another problem. A couple of times their D line made shoe string tackles when there was nothing but green behind them.
Two other plays stood out that sort of altered the outcome. On one play late in the game our LB (Pleasant I think) gave up on a wheel route and Newton dropped a dime onto his target. The Second was the Auburn RB (Dyer?) spinning across the top of an Oregon defender, not touching the ground, and then bolting for another 20 or so yards. Sometimes a game turns on just a few plays.
I don't have any strong opinions about Auburn or Chizik. Just happy to be able to watch the Ducks in the Championship.
BYU has been and is higher than Oregon and Oregon State academically, and U of U. Given Utah joining, state laws don't seem relevant. BYU also had a better athletic program at the time. I guess that leaves religion.
If population mattered, why wouldn't you have a Big 10 deal already?
I will take the bait.
Athletic profile Oregon > Iowa State
Football players Iowa State > Oregon
It’s really not that hard of concept.
An athletic profile isn’t theoretical. Oregon puts bigger, faster bodies out there (on the composite).
Agree to disagree. Athletic profile certainly makes it more likely someone turns out to be a good football player but it's based on attributes not on actual production. Actually being a good football player is a different conversation.
I can agree that on paper (in theory) Oregon's players in general have a higher ceiling. I think that means very little in this game though. Both teams are well coached and the talent gap on the field isn't very wide at all. Two good teams.
