[2006alum]

I think the PAC-12's major problem is that we've been the 6th best men's basketball conference for most of the past decade and somewhere between the 2nd (briefly) and 5th (this year) best football conference. We lose out on so much New Year's Six bowl money and NCAA tournament money from not getting our teams in those games.

Also, there's basically no national hype because none of our teams are that good. Oregon, the lone PAC-12 MBB team in the Top 25, just got upset by Texas Southern at home. Unless Arizona State somehow squeaks into the Top 25, we'll have no teams in the Top 25 by the first week of December. When the entire conference is irrelevant before conference games start, why does anyone want to watch, or care? I'll be shocked if the conference beats last year's dismal record of 1 team dancing without a play-in game. I'm so much more invested in PAC-12 Women's hoops because those teams are relevant, the coaches are excellent, the players are charismatic and the storylines are engaging. The PAC-12 mens hoops feels like a flaming dumpster fire. Are you shocked that the PAC-12 network gets low ratings when it features three months of basketball games between PAC-12 teams that can't eve eke out a .500 record against a slate of second-tier non-conference teams and collectively lack one single good OOC win? To put it in the parlance of the moment, our entire conference essentially exists in quadrants three and four. No one wants to watch quadrant three and four teams.

So unless someone can explain to me why Scott is responsible for Oregon losing at home to a SWAC team that was 1-4, I think we need to look elsewhere as well. (And Oregon has Nike money and Bol Bol, so it's not because they lack good facilities or lottery picks.)

[2006alum]

I think the PAC-12's major problem is that we've been the 6th best men's basketball conference for most of the past decade and somewhere between the 2nd (briefly) and 5th (this year) best football conference. We lose out on so much New Year's Six bowl money and NCAA tournament money from not getting our teams in those games.

Also, there's basically no national hype because none of our teams are that good. Oregon, the lone PAC-12 MBB team in the Top 25, just got upset by Texas Southern at home. Unless Arizona State somehow squeaks into the Top 25, we'll have no teams in the Top 25 by the first week of December. When the entire conference is irrelevant before conference games start, why does anyone want to watch, or care? I'll be shocked if the conference beats last year's dismal record of 1 team dancing without a play-in game. I'm so much more invested in PAC-12 Women's hoops because those teams are relevant, the coaches are excellent, the players are charismatic and the storylines are engaging. The PAC-12 mens hoops feels like a flaming dumpster fire. Are you shocked that the PAC-12 network gets low ratings when it features three months of basketball games between PAC-12 teams that can't eve eke out a .500 record against a slate of second-tier non-conference teams and collectively lack one single good OOC win? To put it in the parlance of the moment, our entire conference essentially exists in quadrants three and four. No one wants to watch quadrant three and four teams.

So unless someone can explain to me why Scott is responsible for Oregon losing at home to a SWAC team that was 1-4, I think we need to look elsewhere as well. (And Oregon has Nike money and Bol Bol, so it's not because they lack good facilities or lottery picks.)