Realignment talk not going away

[Lonestar88 4,699]

9 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

They don’t want a failed Pac 10, 

Why not? 

 

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

I'll never understand being against another team joining a conference because of recruiting competition. Especially from bluebloods. Comes off as super weak. 

It’s definitely weak, but that’s what’s been reported.

[Chewbacca 7,780]

Just now, Lonestar88 said:

Why not? 

 

It’s definitely weak, but that’s what’s been reported.

I believe it.  Oregon takes a lot of talent out of Southern California.

[Uncle Nate 2,097]

14 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

They don’t want a failed Pac 10, so they are helping to now destabilize the ACC. 

 

They don't want a failed Pac 10?  But isn't that what is exactly playing out now?

Explain it me like I'm five....I am a Tech grad after all.

[Chewbacca 7,780]

6 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

They don't want a failed Pac 10?  But isn't that what is exactly playing out now?

Explain it me like I'm five....I am a Tech grad after all.

Yeah, the Pac is toast.  I don't know if it happens now, or if we have to wait until Oregon and UW leave for the B1G, but it's done.  

[BurntOrange&White 39,942]

Great point…not only exit fees but notice to leave and months requirement

 

 

Edited July 28, 2023 by BurntOrange&White

[TexasGrunt 72]

I really want to see Big12 add UConn as team 14 and stop.  Only reason is, this thread will get really entertaining.  😀

[LTbear 4,171]

1 hour ago, Hurtlocker said:

Interesting twist from Iowa State Media:

Seems mirrored here:

Then there is this:

McMurphy said in an interview that the Big XII has 4 pro-ratas from ESPN and 2 from FOX but they think they could get 4 from FOX with the right group. Which to me just means that the Big XII is looking at either UA, or a group of 3 that must include UO and UW. 

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1,291]

1 hour ago, Sir Ulrich said:

Probably a no for now with a huge buyout to leave the Big 12 for 10-15 years. Oregon just needs a commitment to cover that from Knight and I bet they'll move quickly. With the Big 10 and NBC now in bed that makes ND (who just joined the AAU last month) a real possibility in '31. Oregon would be the best match for them to pair with at that time. 

I don't really see the Big 10 ever wanting Oregon. The ACC isn't in very good shape, and I think they value North Carolina and Virginia over Oregon and Washington.

[Dbeasy 15,077]

25 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

Yeah, the Pac is toast.  I don't know if it happens now, or if we have to wait until Oregon and UW leave for the B1G, but it's done.  

Ya I mis-worded it. They don’t care about Pac10 as a conference, but they care about continuing to make money off of football of west coast schools. They don’t want those schools to drop eyeballs. So they are probably trying to merge acc and Pac 10 or some other plan that’s already on place. 

I agree completely with the earlier poster who said the Big 10 is waiting on acc instability so they can pick up their top targets. 

[USC Traveler 488]

2 hours ago, Vertigo said:

I think the SEC is thinking about things a bit differently. I posted earlier this year that the SEC has essentially locked up the top talent in 4 of the top 6 talent centers in college football. Texas, Florida, Georgia, and Louisiana. Plus, the southeastern states as a whole are the only place you can find those jumbo athletes at scale along the offensive and defensive lines. Not only that, but there is a huge drop off in drafted players by state after Georgia, so on a percentage basis that number is closer to 50% of the top talent in the country being split up between 14 schools geographically, with many of those schools being able to go national and pull highly rated guys out of the west as well. Texas, OU, A&M, Bama, Georgia, and Tennessee all do this on the regular.

We see the impact that joining the SEC is having with Texas' recruiting success in Florida and other southeastern states the last couple of cycles. The SEC has a stranglehold on the hearts and minds of the talent in those areas. They are not going to allow FSU to join the B1G and get a foothold in one of their biggest talent centers. Miami I could see as plausible, and their impact would not be as high. But FSU is the biggest brand in the state for football in many people's minds, and that would create a big problem for the SEC. If I were Sankey, I would be positioning FSU to the SEC as a talent play more than a dollars play, and I would bring them in as full members even if it meant each school earning a couple million less than they otherwise might get annually. 

I agree 100% with your strategic thinking andthat Sankey will want FSU.  Individual SEC schools recruit vs FSU?  I've got real doubts.

More importantly, ESPN won't want to pay 2-3 times more for FSU in the SEC vs ACC over the next 13 years when they're desperate for cash.

The networks are who are driving all of this, and it goes against ESPN's interest to bring in FSU.  Fox will be very motivated though.

[Uncle Nate 2,097]

 

 

 

[Trojan Man 429]

1 hour ago, Rockwell Torrey said:

Berkeley will probably give up football and join the West Coast Conference.

You'd think, but here's the catch.  Cal owes a shit ton of money on their stadium.  10 years ago they took on almost half a billion in debt to renovate their stadium and build a new athletic training center.  If you're wondering why it's so expensive the stadium is built on a fault line and it's designated as a historic site, so those plus being in a pricey ZIP code of a pricey state jacked up the price.  They are only paying interest until 2032, and their interest-only payments are already 20% of their athletic budget.  They are scheduled to make payments on the principal from 2032 through the rest of the century, and payments will jack up once they start paying down the principal.

They need to play football in a major conference to get the revenue necessary to pay this debt off.  Without that the options to pay their debt are praying a wealthy alumni will help them out (unlikely, but maybe Aaron Rodgers wants a stadium named after him), stealing some of UCLA's B1G jackpot or begging the state for a bailout.  Anyways, this is yet another example of why USC and UCLA had to leave the Pac 12.  Members of this conference were making century-long financial commitments on the assumption they would always have the LA schools to subsidize them, yet they refused to ever give the LA schools anything in return.  And you can see why.  Unequal revenue sharing to pay USC and UCLA what they are worth isn't feasible if you already penciled in that revenue for the next century to pay off your stadium debt.

Here's a link if anyone wants to go down the rabbit hole

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1680579-cals-stadium-renovation-debt-shows-schools-need-to-keep-football-in-perspective

46 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I'll never understand being against another team joining a conference because of recruiting competition. Especially from bluebloods. Comes off as super weak. 

With Oregon it's not just that, it's also personal.  They directly contributed to fucking over USC with sanctions.  They had an athletic department employee on the investigation committee and that employee voted for 30 lost scholarships and a two year bowl ban on the basis of "USC should have known what Reggie Bush's parents were up to in San Diego."  They stabbed USC in the back so they could dance atop our corpse.  Why should USC want to bring that kind of bullshit to their new home?  The rest of the Pac 10 cheered on the sanctions because they hated Pete Carroll making them all play for second place for most of the 2000s, which is another reason you don't see too many tears from USC fans about leaving the Pac 12.  Fuck Oregon, even if they recruited like Arizona State I still never want to bring them to the B1G for that reason.  For the 10 years of fun they had at USC's expense they can enjoy a lifetime in purgatory.  There are some other personal reasons for USC and UCLA to not want Oregon in the B1G, but for USC that's the main reason.

That said, I understand Oregon probably will get into the B1G at some point.  If they are on the outside looking in for at least a decade or so I'd be satisfied.  That's enough time to remind them they are not and never were USC's equal, plus after that many years all high school recruits will remember is that USC has played in a top conference their whole life while Oregon has not.  A decade of B1G paydays vs the decade of Pac Whatever or Big 12 paydays Oregon will get is also nice.

[Samson's Wig 3,194]

George Kliavkoff may never be hired for another executive position again.  What a fucking goob.   

 

Outside of USC, Oregon, and to a lesser degree WA and UCLA how much value is there in west coast football?   Who the fuck is watching it if those four have gone to greener pastures?   They'll be selling ads to local car dealers and class action attorneys . . . if they're lucky.   Hard to see a deal that nets the remaining schools anything more than $10-15M a year (maybe).

[Sandman 3,409]

59 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

I believe it.  Oregon takes a lot of talent out of Southern California.

Nobody else in that league seems to be using it, so why not let Oregon have a go?

[LTtxfan 49,326]

4 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

George Kliavkoff... What a fucking goob. Outside USC, Oregon, Wash, UCLA how much value is there in west coast football?  They'll be selling ads to local car dealers and class action attorneys . . . if they're lucky.   Hard to see a deal that nets the remaining schools anything more than $10-15M a year (maybe).

 

[Huckleberry 33,056]

10 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

They had an athletic department employee on the investigation committee and that employee voted for 30 lost scholarships and a two year bowl ban on the basis of "USC should have known what Reggie Bush's parents were up to in San Diego."  They stabbed USC in the back so they could dance atop our corpse.  Why should USC want to bring that kind of bullshit to their new home?

Wait, you think the USC athletic department wasn't aware of what Bush's family was doing but actually thought he was clean? 

[locodos 5,388]

7 minutes ago, Sandman said:

Nobody else in that league seems to be using it, so why not let Oregon have a go?

Because of their uniforms

[Sandman 3,409]

2 minutes ago, locodos said:

Because of their uniforms

As an OSU fan, I must recuse myself from any discussion of modern uniforms and their forward-thinking designs.

[USC_TMB 405]

Oregon State touting their academic value to the PAC …. snicker

https://www.outkick.com/oregon-state-loyalty-pac-12-statement/

[Crockett 491]

1 hour ago, Uncle Nate said:

I don't think Utah brings much to the table.  They don't have a national following, and the Big 12 already has BYU.  Utah looks good right now because they've recently dominated the Pac in football.  But other than that, what do they bring?

Arizona hasn't been good in football for an eternity, but they are the flagship university of a state that the Big 12 is not in currently.  And they are a basketball power.  

I say if it can be done, and granted it's a huge ass if, the Big 12 should get Oregon, Udub, and Arizona and call it done.  Then at the end of the day they will have brought in 4 flagship universities in states they weren't in before.  Two are current football powers, one has shown a remarkable commitment to its football program over the past year, and one who brings a basketball pedigree unrivaled by the rest in the Pac 12 not named UCLA.

Heavy speculation that Whittingham is close to retiring, maybe even as soon as the end of the upcoming season. Utah's last two coaching hires have been exceptional (Urban Meyer and Whittingham), but can they do it again? They may enter a period of mediocrity soon. 

[Uncle Nate 2,097]

6 minutes ago, USC_TMB said:

Oregon State touting their academic value to the PAC …. snicker

https://www.outkick.com/oregon-state-loyalty-pac-12-statement/

 

They are Zack Mayo.  They have no where else to go!  Of course they will remain loyal to the Pac until they have to merge with the MWC.

 

[USC Traveler 488]

2 hours ago, gatormarc said:

Such a crazy thought to me.

Wouldn't they be looking at over a decade of debt service just to break even?

In a worst case, they aren't able to settle it out and have no tv revenue from home games until 2036.  If they come into the BIG at a half share (no home games), they'd still make about the same (at first) and then substantially more (over time) tv money than if they stayed in the ACC.  Home attendance should go up substantially along with donations, merch sales, etc.  

The difference in revenue should be large enough to make it work, especially if they use the excitement of the conference move to get their big cigars writing much bigger checks than usual.  BIG could also help them with a loan the way they helped MD and Rutgers.

It would have been a lot better to do this in the ultra-low interest rate environment we were in for years, but, like most of the ACC and PAC schools, FSU's leaders haven't ever had great forward vision.  

[The Dog 44,073]

 

[LTtxfan 49,326]

16 minutes ago, Crockett said:

Heavy speculation that Whittingham is close to retiring, maybe even as soon as the end of the upcoming season. Utah's last two coaching hires have been exceptional (Urban Meyer and Whittingham), but can they do it again? They may enter a period of mediocrity soon. 

If Utah feels like he's done enough to overcome his scandal, they might make Morgan Scalley their next head coach.

 

2020 Scandal info 

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/29272833/utah-suspends-dc-morgan-scalley-texting-racial-slur-2013

 

They gave Scalley a new contract in 2022

"New contract for Utah DC Morgan Scalley includes $1.4M salary, substantial buyout"

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/34648858/new-contract-utah-dc-morgan-scalley-includes-14m-salary-substantial-buyout

[BachelorTrek 3,055]

2 hours ago, DanTheHorn said:

Yea I made the post in the context of responding to someone saying Cincy and UCF were not worth it. Those of us that witnessed Colorado being competitive in the BIG12 knew it was their ability to recruit Texas. Didn't they also do prop 48 like Nebraska before the BIG12?

If you ask Colorado fans on Twitter they all are thrilled with the prospect of getting more Texas recruits again, just like the first time around in The Dirty Dozen. Lulz.

[USC Traveler 488]

2 hours ago, Sir Ulrich said:

Probably a no for now with a huge buyout to leave the Big 12 for 10-15 years. Oregon just needs a commitment to cover that from Knight and I bet they'll move quickly. With the Big 10 and NBC now in bed that makes ND (who just joined the AAU last month) a real possibility in '31. Oregon would be the best match for them to pair with at that time. 

ND is going to bring Stanford in with them.  There's a reason they play them every year, and the BIG will let ND bring in whoever they want as a partner.

USC and UCLA will strongly support it, whereas they've lobbied against the PNW schools from day 1.

The BIG Presidents would love to add Stanford, and if they come in with ND, they will all still make more money because ND brings so much value.

All the BIG schools want to recruit CA more and engage with their massive alum base in the Bay Area.  

Bay Area will also bring in big $$$ for BTN, and getting Stanford into their research consortium would be a huge coup.

None of those things apply to UO.  It's the exact opposite situation in all those categories- bad recruiting, small market, weak academics, no BIG alums nearby.

And to top it all off, for the lower and mid-tier BIG schools, Stanford is a school they can compete against, whereas most will lose to UO.

And not even the big dogs in the BIG want to deal with Nike-funded hyper-aggressive NIL recruiting as a part of their conference.

[gatormarc 911]

5 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

In a worst case, they aren't able to settle it out and have no tv revenue from home games until 2036.  If they come into the BIG at a half share (no home games), they'd still make about the same (at first) and then substantially more (over time) tv money than if they stayed in the ACC.

I feel like you may be overstating the gap.

The projections that I've seen show a significantly larger payout for the B1G but not to where a half share is more than the ACC.

FSU would be taking a cut for the foreseeable future.

Quote

Home attendance should go up substantially along with donations, merch sales, etc.  

While the ACC schedule isn't thrilling, at this point, they have teams they've been playing for 30 years or longer vs an entire conference that they have no history with.

There will be an initial novelty bump but I'm not sure that having Indiana or Iowa or Rutgers in Doak is going to a big difference in attendance long term.

[Crockett 491]

8 minutes ago, LTtxfan said:

If Utah feels like he's done enough to overcome his scandal, they might make Morgan Scalley their next head coach.

 

2020 Scandal info 

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/29272833/utah-suspends-dc-morgan-scalley-texting-racial-slur-2013

 

They gave Scalley a new contract in 2022

"New contract for Utah DC Morgan Scalley includes $1.4M salary, substantial buyout"

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/34648858/new-contract-utah-dc-morgan-scalley-includes-14m-salary-substantial-buyout

If they feel like Scalley is their best option, they'll deem him rehabilitated, which I think will be the likeliest outcome. 

[Trojan Man 429]

Just now, Huckleberry said:

Wait, you think the USC athletic department wasn't aware of what Bush's family was doing but actually thought he was clean? 

I think a few things.

-"Should have known" is a ridiculous justification to nuke a football program.  The NCAA decided to use that justification by wholeheartedly trusting the word of a spurned felon wannabe agent who provided Bush's family with illegal benefits to get him to leave for the NFL (Bush signed with a real agent once he left for the draft, which pissed off the felon so he squealed).  The NCAA has not used "should have known" in any investigations since then.  Keep in mind this is the same organization that somehow couldn't connect Cam Newton to his own father who was selling him to the highest bidder during his recruitment, yet they believed USC's coaches in LA should know what a player's parents are doing at all times hours away in San Diego.

-To make it even better, the pompous dickhead leading the investigation who coined "should have known" and "high profile athletes need high profile compliance" while wagging his finger at USC was the AD at Miami while booster Nevin Shapiro was gifting their football players hookers and abortions and cocaine.  To my shock neither of those zingers were anywhere to be found in that investigation.  If there was any fairness in the NCAA somebody from USC would have been part of Miami's investigation.

-After 5 years of investigating and grinding their ax the only dirt the NCAA found on any of USC's coaches was the RB coach, and it was weak.  He ended up winning a lawsuit and a settlement vs the NCAA because of the way they railroaded him and effectively ended his college coaching opportunities.

-To bring it back to the topic of this thread, fuck Oregon for voting for sanctions to prop themselves up.  I can think of no better way to get even than cockblocking them out of the B1G.  And fuck all the Pac 12 fans that blame USC's subpar 2010s decade for hurting the value/reputation of the Pac 12, as if the sanctions they loved so much and the parity at all costs they pushed for weren't primarily responsible for that.  USC is a juggernaut and Pac 10 fans whine about USC being too good then applaud the NCAA's sanctions, USC struggles and Pac 12 fans whine that USC isn't performing well enough to carry the conference.  When dealing with people who only put you in lose-lose situations the winning move is to walk away, which is exactly what happened.  I don't think B1G teams and coaches and fans will act like little bitches if USC goes undefeated and waxes Oklahoma's ass in the title game like Pac 10 fans did.

[CustersDoctor 584]

2 hours ago, gatormarc said:

Oregon State doesn't really have much of a choice, do they?

I would figure they are way down on the invite list.

OST's been floating the rumor that they are next. Kinda like the ugly fat chick acting like the Quarterback is gonna take her to the Homecoming Dance. They are the short white dude at Rucker Park trying to get on the court.

[Crockett 491]

3 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

ND is going to bring Stanford in with them.  There's a reason they play them every year, and the BIG will let ND bring in whoever they want as a partner.

USC and UCLA will strongly support it, whereas they've lobbied against the PNW schools from day 1.

The BIG Presidents would love to add Stanford, and if they come in with ND, they will all still make more money because ND brings so much value.

All the BIG schools want to recruit CA more and engage with their massive alum base in the Bay Area.  

Bay Area will also bring in big $$$ for BTN, and getting Stanford into their research consortium would be a huge coup.

None of those things apply to UO.  It's the exact opposite situation in all those categories- bad recruiting, small market, weak academics, no BIG alums nearby.

 

The big question is if UO is clear-eyed enough to see the reality of their situation and recognize that the Big 12 is their best option?

[tx ind 7,013]

10 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

I think a few things.

-"Should have known" is a ridiculous justification to nuke a football program.  The NCAA decided to use that justification by wholeheartedly trusting the word of a spurned felon wannabe agent who provided Bush's family with illegal benefits to get him to leave for the NFL (Bush signed with a real agent once he left for the draft, which pissed off the felon so he squealed).  The NCAA has not used "should have known" in any investigations since then.  Keep in mind this is the same organization that somehow couldn't connect Cam Newton to his own father who was selling him to the highest bidder during his recruitment, yet they believed USC's coaches in LA should know what a player's parents are doing at all times hours away in San Diego.

-To make it even better, the pompous dickhead leading the investigation who coined "should have known" and "high profile athletes need high profile compliance" while wagging his finger at USC was the AD at Miami while booster Nevin Shapiro was gifting their football players hookers and abortions and cocaine.  To my shock neither of those zingers were anywhere to be found in that investigation.  If there was any fairness in the NCAA somebody from USC would have been part of Miami's investigation.

-After 5 years of investigating and grinding their ax the only dirt the NCAA found on any of USC's coaches was the RB coach, and it was weak.  He ended up winning a lawsuit and a settlement vs the NCAA because of the way they railroaded him and effectively ended his college coaching opportunities.

-To bring it back to the topic of this thread, fuck Oregon for voting for sanctions to prop themselves up.  I can think of no better way to get even than cockblocking them out of the B1G.  And fuck all the Pac 12 fans that blame USC's subpar 2010s decade for hurting the value/reputation of the Pac 12, as if the sanctions they loved so much and the parity at all costs they pushed for weren't primarily responsible for that.  USC is a juggernaut and Pac 10 fans whine about USC being too good then applaud the NCAA's sanctions, USC struggles and Pac 12 fans whine that USC isn't performing well enough to carry the conference.  When dealing with people who only put you in lose-lose situations the winning move is to walk away, which is exactly what happened.  I don't think B1G teams and coaches and fans will act like little bitches if USC goes undefeated and waxes Oklahoma's ass in the title game like Pac 10 fans did.

i missed the memo that we were discussing fucking USC and Reggie Bush

[Trey3216 15,350]

21 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

I think a few things.

-"Should have known" is a ridiculous justification to nuke a football program.  The NCAA decided to use that justification by wholeheartedly trusting the word of a spurned felon wannabe agent who provided Bush's family with illegal benefits to get him to leave for the NFL (Bush signed with a real agent once he left for the draft, which pissed off the felon so he squealed).  The NCAA has not used "should have known" in any investigations since then.  Keep in mind this is the same organization that somehow couldn't connect Cam Newton to his own father who was selling him to the highest bidder during his recruitment, yet they believed USC's coaches in LA should know what a player's parents are doing at all times hours away in San Diego.

-To make it even better, the pompous dickhead leading the investigation who coined "should have known" and "high profile athletes need high profile compliance" while wagging his finger at USC was the AD at Miami while booster Nevin Shapiro was gifting their football players hookers and abortions and cocaine.  To my shock neither of those zingers were anywhere to be found in that investigation.  If there was any fairness in the NCAA somebody from USC would have been part of Miami's investigation.

-After 5 years of investigating and grinding their ax the only dirt the NCAA found on any of USC's coaches was the RB coach, and it was weak.  He ended up winning a lawsuit and a settlement vs the NCAA because of the way they railroaded him and effectively ended his college coaching opportunities.

-To bring it back to the topic of this thread, fuck Oregon for voting for sanctions to prop themselves up.  I can think of no better way to get even than cockblocking them out of the B1G.  And fuck all the Pac 12 fans that blame USC's subpar 2010s decade for hurting the value/reputation of the Pac 12, as if the sanctions they loved so much and the parity at all costs they pushed for weren't primarily responsible for that.  USC is a juggernaut and Pac 10 fans whine about USC being too good then applaud the NCAA's sanctions, USC struggles and Pac 12 fans whine that USC isn't performing well enough to carry the conference.  When dealing with people who only put you in lose-lose situations the winning move is to walk away, which is exactly what happened.  I don't think B1G teams and coaches and fans will act like little bitches if USC goes undefeated and waxes Oklahoma's ass in the title game like Pac 10 fans did.

C’mon breh.   Nobody gives two fucks about all of USC’s grievances.   NOBODY!!!!!!!

 

[BurntOrange&White 39,942]

Yeah seriously stfu usc you stupid dumb fuck

[USC Traveler 488]

2 hours ago, 'stache said:

I'll never understand being against another team joining a conference because of recruiting competition. Especially from bluebloods. Comes off as super weak. 

USC isn't worried about the Eugene Zeros beating them on the field.  It's about beating Bama and UGA.

USC can do that when dominant.  We saw it in the '70s and the 2000s.  

But with the talent more concentrated in the Southeast and TX now, in order to consistently compete with the top of the SEC, USC needs to get almost every bluechip player from CA and the Rockies, then supplement with some players from TX, FL, GA, etc, and maybe some midwestern linemen.

Every player that goes to the Zeros is one less player that will be on the roster for USC.

It's about winning national titles, which is a zero sum game.  You do whatever you need to do to compete at the very top.

//

 

Also- it's personal with UO.  USC big cigars wants to obliterate the Zeros program the way Rome obliterated Carthage after the Third Punic War.

The Zeros had a rep on the NZAA kangaroo court who voted to crush USC because Reggie Bush's family got a rent-free house from a wannabe agent who was trying to get him to leave school early.  It was the opposite of pay for play- it was pay to leave.  The Zeros voted to try to kill SC's program to boost their own program, and it worked for a while, with a huge assist from USC ineptitude and self-sanctioning.  Those days are over.

Also #2- UO and UW led the charge to force equal revenue-sharing on USC and UCLA, which also led to UT, OU, OSU, Tech not coming to the PAC b/c of LHN.

Once USC left, UO and UW have been pushing for........unequal revenue sharing.  

I speak for a lot of USC folks when I say Fuck the Zeros.

 

 

[Josef Pwag 1,741]

21 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

I think a few things.

-"Should have known" is a ridiculous justification to nuke a football program.  The NCAA decided to use that justification by wholeheartedly trusting the word of a spurned felon wannabe agent who provided Bush's family with illegal benefits to get him to leave for the NFL (Bush signed with a real agent once he left for the draft, which pissed off the felon so he squealed).  The NCAA has not used "should have known" in any investigations since then.  Keep in mind this is the same organization that somehow couldn't connect Cam Newton to his own father who was selling him to the highest bidder during his recruitment, yet they believed USC's coaches in LA should know what a player's parents are doing at all times hours away in San Diego.

-To make it even better, the pompous dickhead leading the investigation who coined "should have known" and "high profile athletes need high profile compliance" while wagging his finger at USC was the AD at Miami while booster Nevin Shapiro was gifting their football players hookers and abortions and cocaine.  To my shock neither of those zingers were anywhere to be found in that investigation.  If there was any fairness in the NCAA somebody from USC would have been part of Miami's investigation.

-After 5 years of investigating and grinding their ax the only dirt the NCAA found on any of USC's coaches was the RB coach, and it was weak.  He ended up winning a lawsuit and a settlement vs the NCAA because of the way they railroaded him and effectively ended his college coaching opportunities.

-To bring it back to the topic of this thread, fuck Oregon for voting for sanctions to prop themselves up.  I can think of no better way to get even than cockblocking them out of the B1G.  And fuck all the Pac 12 fans that blame USC's subpar 2010s decade for hurting the value/reputation of the Pac 12, as if the sanctions they loved so much and the parity at all costs they pushed for weren't primarily responsible for that.  USC is a juggernaut and Pac 10 fans whine about USC being too good then applaud the NCAA's sanctions, USC struggles and Pac 12 fans whine that USC isn't performing well enough to carry the conference.  When dealing with people who only put you in lose-lose situations the winning move is to walk away, which is exactly what happened.  I don't think B1G teams and coaches and fans will act like little bitches if USC goes undefeated and waxes Oklahoma's ass in the title game like Pac 10 fans did.

So basically, your argument is, "Of course we cheated. Of course Reggie was given a house. I'm just furious that a group of intelligent, wise, experienced adults, who spent dozens of hours a week with Reggie, and were very close to him personally, were thought to have known about the improper and illegal benefits we arranged for him to have." 

You cheated like holy fuck and still got your ass handed to you by VY.

Be gone.  

[DanTheHorn 4,939]

30 minutes ago, BachelorTrek said:

If you ask Colorado fans on Twitter they all are thrilled with the prospect of getting more Texas recruits again, just like the first time around in The Dirty Dozen. Lulz.

During their pre-BIG12 run in which they were ranked no lower than 20 when they played Texas teams they knew the value of being in the state every year. Then they got shut out because they left the conference. After joining the PAC 12 they played Texas State in 2017 so that is one Texas opponent between 2011 and 2019 and it was on the PAC12 Network.

September 4, 1989 5:30 pm Texas* No. 14 Folsom Field Boulder, Colorado ESPN W 27–6 47,269
September 22, 1990 5:30 pm at No. 22 Texas* No. 20 Texas Memorial Stadium Austin, TX ESPN W 29–22 77,373
September 14, 1991 12:00 pm No. 23 Baylor* No. 12 Folsom Field Boulder, Colorado KCNC L 14–16 50,754
September 12, 1992 11:00 am at Baylor* No. 12 Floyd Casey Stadium Waco, TX KCNC W 57–38 34,202
September 4, 1993 5:30 pm Texas* No. 11    Folsom Field Boulder, Colorado ESPN W 36–14 52,125
September 11, 1993 12:00 pm No. 24 Baylor* No. 10 Folsom Field Boulder, Colorado KCNC W 45–21 50,281
October 1, 1994    1:30 pm    at No. 16 Texas* No. 5 Texas Memorial Stadium Austin, TX ABC W 34–31 77,809
September 23, 1995 1:30 pm No. 3 Texas A&M* No. 7 Folsom Field Boulder, Colorado (College GameDay) ABC W 29–21 53,849 (Poooor Aggggy)

In addition to playing in Texas they were playing Notre Dame and Michigan with lots of national exposure. The above run is why us olds remember Colorado as a really good program instead of the garbage they are today.

[Samson's Wig 3,194]

28 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

I think a few things.

-"Should have known" is a ridiculous justification to nuke a football program.  The NCAA decided to use that justification by wholeheartedly trusting the word of a spurned felon wannabe agent who provided Bush's family with illegal benefits to get him to leave for the NFL (Bush signed with a real agent once he left for the draft, which pissed off the felon so he squealed).  The NCAA has not used "should have known" in any investigations since then.  Keep in mind this is the same organization that somehow couldn't connect Cam Newton to his own father who was selling him to the highest bidder during his recruitment, yet they believed USC's coaches in LA should know what a player's parents are doing at all times hours away in San Diego.

-To make it even better, the pompous dickhead leading the investigation who coined "should have known" and "high profile athletes need high profile compliance" while wagging his finger at USC was the AD at Miami while booster Nevin Shapiro was gifting their football players hookers and abortions and cocaine.  To my shock neither of those zingers were anywhere to be found in that investigation.  If there was any fairness in the NCAA somebody from USC would have been part of Miami's investigation.

-After 5 years of investigating and grinding their ax the only dirt the NCAA found on any of USC's coaches was the RB coach, and it was weak.  He ended up winning a lawsuit and a settlement vs the NCAA because of the way they railroaded him and effectively ended his college coaching opportunities.

-To bring it back to the topic of this thread, fuck Oregon for voting for sanctions to prop themselves up.  I can think of no better way to get even than cockblocking them out of the B1G.  And fuck all the Pac 12 fans that blame USC's subpar 2010s decade for hurting the value/reputation of the Pac 12, as if the sanctions they loved so much and the parity at all costs they pushed for weren't primarily responsible for that.  USC is a juggernaut and Pac 10 fans whine about USC being too good then applaud the NCAA's sanctions, USC struggles and Pac 12 fans whine that USC isn't performing well enough to carry the conference.  When dealing with people who only put you in lose-lose situations the winning move is to walk away, which is exactly what happened.  I don't think B1G teams and coaches and fans will act like little bitches if USC goes undefeated and waxes Oklahoma's ass in the title game like Pac 10 fans did.

Still hurts.  Sorry.  Kinda.

[LTtxfan 49,326]

33 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

I think a few things.

-"Should have known" is a ridiculous justification to nuke a football program.  The NCAA decided to use that justification by wholeheartedly trusting the word of a spurned felon wannabe agent who provided Bush's family with illegal benefits to get him to leave for the NFL (Bush signed with a real agent once he left for the draft, which pissed off the felon so he squealed).  The NCAA has not used "should have known" in any investigations since then.  Keep in mind this is the same organization that somehow couldn't connect Cam Newton to his own father who was selling him to the highest bidder during his recruitment, yet they believed USC's coaches in LA should know what a player's parents are doing at all times hours away in San Diego.

-To make it even better, the pompous dickhead leading the investigation who coined "should have known" and "high profile athletes need high profile compliance" while wagging his finger at USC was the AD at Miami while booster Nevin Shapiro was gifting their football players hookers and abortions and cocaine.  To my shock neither of those zingers were anywhere to be found in that investigation.  If there was any fairness in the NCAA somebody from USC would have been part of Miami's investigation.

-After 5 years of investigating and grinding their ax the only dirt the NCAA found on any of USC's coaches was the RB coach, and it was weak.  He ended up winning a lawsuit and a settlement vs the NCAA because of the way they railroaded him and effectively ended his college coaching opportunities.

-To bring it back to the topic of this thread, fuck Oregon for voting for sanctions to prop themselves up.  I can think of no better way to get even than cockblocking them out of the B1G.  And fuck all the Pac 12 fans that blame USC's subpar 2010s decade for hurting the value/reputation of the Pac 12, as if the sanctions they loved so much and the parity at all costs they pushed for weren't primarily responsible for that.  USC is a juggernaut and Pac 10 fans whine about USC being too good then applaud the NCAA's sanctions, USC struggles and Pac 12 fans whine that USC isn't performing well enough to carry the conference.  When dealing with people who only put you in lose-lose situations the winning move is to walk away, which is exactly what happened.  I don't think B1G teams and coaches and fans will act like little bitches if USC goes undefeated and waxes Oklahoma's ass in the title game like Pac 10 fans did.

[Samson's Wig 3,194]

6 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

Also #2- UO and UW led the charge to force equal revenue-sharing on USC and UCLA, which also led to UT, OU, OSU, Tech not coming to the PAC b/c of LHN.

Once USC left, UO and UW have been pushing for........unequal revenue sharing.  

 

 

 

It's funny though, isn't it, that the conferences that either had unequal revenue sharing or argued over it significantly are falling apart while those that have been staunchly equal in their revenue for years are the two premiere conferences?  

['stache 21,826]

34 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

I think a few things.

-"Should have known" is a ridiculous justification to nuke a football program.  The NCAA decided to use that justification by wholeheartedly trusting the word of a spurned felon wannabe agent who provided Bush's family with illegal benefits to get him to leave for the NFL (Bush signed with a real agent once he left for the draft, which pissed off the felon so he squealed).  The NCAA has not used "should have known" in any investigations since then.  Keep in mind this is the same organization that somehow couldn't connect Cam Newton to his own father who was selling him to the highest bidder during his recruitment, yet they believed USC's coaches in LA should know what a player's parents are doing at all times hours away in San Diego.

-To make it even better, the pompous dickhead leading the investigation who coined "should have known" and "high profile athletes need high profile compliance" while wagging his finger at USC was the AD at Miami while booster Nevin Shapiro was gifting their football players hookers and abortions and cocaine.  To my shock neither of those zingers were anywhere to be found in that investigation.  If there was any fairness in the NCAA somebody from USC would have been part of Miami's investigation.

-After 5 years of investigating and grinding their ax the only dirt the NCAA found on any of USC's coaches was the RB coach, and it was weak.  He ended up winning a lawsuit and a settlement vs the NCAA because of the way they railroaded him and effectively ended his college coaching opportunities.

-To bring it back to the topic of this thread, fuck Oregon for voting for sanctions to prop themselves up.  I can think of no better way to get even than cockblocking them out of the B1G.  And fuck all the Pac 12 fans that blame USC's subpar 2010s decade for hurting the value/reputation of the Pac 12, as if the sanctions they loved so much and the parity at all costs they pushed for weren't primarily responsible for that.  USC is a juggernaut and Pac 10 fans whine about USC being too good then applaud the NCAA's sanctions, USC struggles and Pac 12 fans whine that USC isn't performing well enough to carry the conference.  When dealing with people who only put you in lose-lose situations the winning move is to walk away, which is exactly what happened.  I don't think B1G teams and coaches and fans will act like little bitches if USC goes undefeated and waxes Oklahoma's ass in the title game like Pac 10 fans did.

“Knew or should have known” is a really common legal standard. Also OKST basketball got nuked with a postseason ban because an assistant coach personally enriched himself by taking bribes and is now in jail, providing no competitive advantage to the program whatsoever. Cry me a fucking river. I never knew USC was so butthurt over some ducks. Get over it, shit.

[Trojan Man 429]

7 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

C’mon breh.   Nobody gives two fucks about all of USC’s grievances.   NOBODY!!!!!!!

 

 

6 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Yeah seriously stfu usc you stupid dumb fuck

I was asked what I thought and I elaborated.  It's relevant to this thread because Oregon played a part in the sanctions, Oregon is angling for a B1G invitation and USC has a say on whether or not Oregon gets in.  Therefore, USC's grievances with Oregon are likely affecting realignment.

5 minutes ago, Josef Pwag said:

So basically, your argument is, "Of course we cheated. Of course Reggie was given a house. I'm just furious that a group of intelligent, wise, experienced adults, who spent dozens of hours a week with Reggie, and were very close to him personally, were thought to have known about the improper and illegal benefits we arranged for him to have." 

You cheated like holy fuck and still got your ass handed to you by VY.

Be gone.  

People act like Pete Carroll gave Bush a mansion in Beverly Hills and a Ferrari to get him to sign with USC.  Bush's parents had a few rent-free months of housing hours away from campus and Bush received a used car (it was a Jeep Cherokee or something similar, not a real fancy car).  All benefits were from a felon with zero affiliation to USC and whose primary motivation was to get him to leave USC for the NFL.  It's a goddamn joke USC was hammered for that while other schools, mainly SEC schools, get a slap on the wrist for far worse.  Just like it's a goddamn joke people are still clutching their pearls over what would nowadays be a mediocre NIL deal.  Players who couldn't hold Bush's jockstrap are now getting more money and nicer cars than he did.

['stache 21,826]

2 hours ago, TexasGrunt said:

I really want to see Big12 add UConn as team 14 and stop.  Only reason is, this thread will get really entertaining.  😀

They wouldn't be a 14th. I'm really coming around to them if UO and UW join too. That would add football strength to counter UConn's likely football weakness. It also makes for some nice symmetry. Four teams out west, four teams out east, four teams in Texas, and four Big 8 plains schools. 

[Kwix 2,192]

I think the real problem with your argument is that Bush never deserved that Heisman in the first place.

[BB65 480]

5 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

 

I was asked what I thought and I elaborated.  It's relevant to this thread because Oregon played a part in the sanctions, Oregon is angling for a B1G invitation and USC has a say on whether or not Oregon gets in.  Therefore, USC's grievances with Oregon are likely affecting realignment.

People act like Pete Carroll gave Bush a mansion in Beverly Hills and a Ferrari to get him to sign with USC.  Bush's parents had a few rent-free months of housing hours away from campus and Bush received a used car (it was a Jeep Cherokee or something similar, not a real fancy car).  All benefits were from a felon with zero affiliation to USC and whose primary motivation was to get him to leave USC for the NFL.  It's a goddamn joke USC was hammered for that while other schools, mainly SEC schools, get a slap on the wrist for far worse.  Just like it's a goddamn joke people are still clutching their pearls over what would nowadays be a mediocre NIL deal.  Players who couldn't hold Bush's jockstrap are now getting more money and nicer cars than he did.

Yeah Bush was so good that on the biggest play of the game in the biggest game of the year his ass was on the sideline next to Pete Carroll

[Trojan Man 429]

7 minutes ago, 'stache said:

“Knew or should have known” is a really common legal standard. Also OKST basketball got nuked with a postseason ban because an assistant coach personally enriched himself by taking bribes and is now in jail, providing no competitive advantage to the program whatsoever. Cry me a fucking river. I never knew USC was so butthurt over some ducks. Get over it, shit.

The NCAA isn't a court of law.  And like I said, when this matter was taken to a court of law they lost and ended up owing a settlement to the coach they said "should have known."  If the NCAA wants to act like a court of law they should bring in other legal standards, like precedent.  Then they couldn't play favorites where they hammer Pac 12 and Big 12 schools that should have known everything going on while conveniently forgetting about that precedent when Cam Newton's eligibility is under investigation.

['stache 21,826]

So at USC, the buck stops . . . nowhere. 

[Trojan Man 429]

1 minute ago, BB65 said:

Yeah Bush was so good that on the biggest play of the game in the biggest game of the year his ass was on the sideline next to Pete Carroll

That was a big time coaching fuck up.  I was at the game and I immediately freaked out about Bush not being on the field as soon as I saw it.  The play call could have been exactly the same (handoff up the middle to Lendale White) but if they just lined up Bush out wide, or motioned him from the backfield to the slot, he would have taken two defenders with him.  Maybe that opens up enough space to get the first down.

4 minutes ago, 'stache said:

So at USC, the buck stops . . . nowhere. 

I'll agree it was a fair penalty when a similar football program gets hit with 30 lost scholarships and a 2 year bowl ban for 1 ineligible player.

[Texas Wahoo 3,403]

4 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

The NCAA isn't a court of law.  And like I said, when this matter was taken to a court of law they lost and ended up owing a settlement to the coach they said "should have known."  If the NCAA wants to act like a court of law they should bring in other legal standards, like precedent.  Then they couldn't play favorites where they hammer Pac 12 and Big 12 schools that should have known everything going on while conveniently forgetting about that precedent when Cam Newton's eligibility is under investigation.

['stache 21,826]

Just now, Trojan Man said:

That was a big time coaching fuck up.  I was at the game and I immediately freaked out about Bush not being on the field as soon as I saw it.  The play call could have been exactly the same (handoff up the middle to Lendale White) but if they just lined up Bush out wide, or motioned him from the backfield to the slot, he would have taken two defenders with him.  Maybe that opens up enough space to get the first down.

I'll agree it was a fair penalty when a similar football program gets hit with 30 lost scholarships and a 2 year bowl ban for 1 ineligible player.

I don't think anyone here is gonna take the NCAA's side on anything. I just think its bizarre to claim that it wasn't that bad and that Oregon is at fault for the punishment. At the end of the day, if the networks say that UO brings value and makes everyone richer, USC ain't gonna be given veto power. If UO doesn't get in its because they don't bring enough value, not because of a 20 year old beef with USC fans.

Edited July 28, 2023 by 'stache