End of Pac12? - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: End of Pac12? (/thread-23271.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: End of Pac12? (/thread-23271.html)
RE: End of Pac12? - Spiny_Norman - 08-01-2022
(08-01-2022, 01:07 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: You guys are right, Larry Scott is terrible at his job.
https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status/1554114729521594368
Oh, wait, he's not in charge anymore you say? Was he in charge when the Pac-12 voted against expanding the CFP? Nope, wasn't on the job then either.
MAYBE, and work with me here, those who oversee the Commissioner are the real reason the Pac-12 has imploded.
Larry Scott made plenty of bad decisions, mostly around the media contract. Why 12 years?!!? Other conferences will have a chance to negotiate new contracts twice before the P12 can cash in again. And we all know the risky decisions he made re: the P12N that did not pan out. All of these combined have helped to put the conference schools in a weaker financial state than they might have been in otherwise.
But I do agree that the P12 presidents have not helped matters by pushing back against every opportunity for change. It will now be forced on them, one way or another.
RE: End of Pac12? - 2006alum - 08-01-2022
Don't worry - they're listening these days.
RE: End of Pac12? - Giants - 08-01-2022
(08-01-2022, 01:07 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: You guys are right, Larry Scott is terrible at his job.
https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status/1554114729521594368
Oh, wait, he's not in charge anymore you say? Was he in charge when the Pac-12 voted against expanding the CFP? Nope, wasn't on the job then either.
MAYBE, and work with me here, those who oversee the Commissioner are the real reason the Pac-12 has imploded.
Forget the P12 network disaster, forget the 12 year contract, forget the lavish spending. The #1 mistake Scott made was not taking ESPN up on their offer several years ago to bail the conference out of the P12N mess. Had Scott done that, the conference would still be a viable entity. Instead, the foundation is now very shaky.
RE: End of Pac12? - Jskass - 08-01-2022
Interesting that 2023 WBB Jada Williams just swapped UCLA for AZ. Been wondering if athletes would start voting w their feet!
RE: End of Pac12? - FarmTeam - 08-01-2022
(07-24-2022, 12:12 PM)msqueri Wrote: It's an exceedingly minor inconvenience in my life and really not a big deal at all so I of course will "roll with it" but I'm one who thinks all these autocorrects are stupid. I think it's poor internet etiquette to edit somebody's words without their consent. Obviously these particular autocorrects are silly/inconsequential and don't change the substantive meaning of posts (well, unless somebody views the H.e.i.s.m.a.n as a venerated award that shouldn't be compared to Voldemort). Back in the Bootleg days it would drive me crazy when Jim Rutter would use his editor privileges to add editorial postscripts to other peoples' posts. This board's autocorrect is less of a violation than that but I view it as the same general category of somebody abusing their editorial powers to high-handedly dictate words somebody else can say without being altered with somebody else's words. Personally, I don't give a shit that we got blown out by Texas in 1999 and, in fact, think the embarrassment supercharged one of the greatest Stanford seasons ever up until that point. Yes, I know this board exists because of the stewardship of long-timers who are entitled to inside jokes. I'm not disputing their right to code their software how they want. Don't have to like it though.
Agreed. It's stupid. The men (presumably mostly men) who have been active on this board a long time seem to think it's exceedingly clever. It's not.
RE: End of Pac12? - dabigv13 - 08-01-2022
I'll let Yvonne chime in if she cares to, but I appreciate the charm and Stanford nerdiness of it. It's an extremely minor inconvenience to do a 30 sec quick edit if I forget and care enough to change. And she's admin and has kept this place running all these years so if you don't like it you're welcome to make your own board!
RE: End of Pac12? - BostonCard - 08-01-2022
(08-01-2022, 01:07 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: You guys are right, Larry Scott is terrible at his job.
https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status/1554114729521594368
Oh, wait, he's not in charge anymore you say? Was he in charge when the Pac-12 voted against expanding the CFP? Nope, wasn't on the job then either.
MAYBE, and work with me here, those who oversee the Commissioner are the real reason the Pac-12 has imploded.
What does the tweet you posted have anything to do with whether Scott was or was not a good commissioner?
BC
RE: End of Pac12? - OutsiderFan - 08-02-2022
(08-01-2022, 10:06 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(08-01-2022, 01:07 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: You guys are right, Larry Scott is terrible at his job.
https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status/1554114729521594368
Oh, wait, he's not in charge anymore you say? Was he in charge when the Pac-12 voted against expanding the CFP? Nope, wasn't on the job then either.
MAYBE, and work with me here, those who oversee the Commissioner are the real reason the Pac-12 has imploded.
What does the tweet you posted have anything to do with whether Scott was or was not a good commissioner?
BC
It's more about how Kliavkoff is not exactly Jim Delany, Roy Kramer, or even Bob Bowlsby.
My greater point is Tom Hansen, Larry Scott, and George Kliavkoff have all made disastrous choices and the common denominator is their bosses.
RE: End of Pac12? - 2006alum - 08-02-2022
(08-02-2022, 05:04 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:(08-01-2022, 10:06 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(08-01-2022, 01:07 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: You guys are right, Larry Scott is terrible at his job.
https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status/1554114729521594368
Oh, wait, he's not in charge anymore you say? Was he in charge when the Pac-12 voted against expanding the CFP? Nope, wasn't on the job then either.
MAYBE, and work with me here, those who oversee the Commissioner are the real reason the Pac-12 has imploded.
What does the tweet you posted have anything to do with whether Scott was or was not a good commissioner?
BC
It's more about how Kliavkoff is not exactly Jim Delany, Roy Kramer, or even Bob Bowlsby.
My greater point is Tom Hansen, Larry Scott, and George Kliavkoff have all made disastrous choices and the common denominator is their bosses.
What are Kliavkoff's "disastrous choices"? Hiring a head of DEI? With all due respect, to quote a former boss, that take displays more heat than light.
RE: End of Pac12? - OutsiderFan - 08-02-2022
(08-02-2022, 06:12 AM)2006alum Wrote:(08-02-2022, 05:04 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:(08-01-2022, 10:06 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(08-01-2022, 01:07 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: You guys are right, Larry Scott is terrible at his job.
https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status/1554114729521594368
Oh, wait, he's not in charge anymore you say? Was he in charge when the Pac-12 voted against expanding the CFP? Nope, wasn't on the job then either.
MAYBE, and work with me here, those who oversee the Commissioner are the real reason the Pac-12 has imploded.
What does the tweet you posted have anything to do with whether Scott was or was not a good commissioner?
BC
It's more about how Kliavkoff is not exactly Jim Delany, Roy Kramer, or even Bob Bowlsby.
My greater point is Tom Hansen, Larry Scott, and George Kliavkoff have all made disastrous choices and the common denominator is their bosses.
What are Kliavkoff's "disastrous choices"? Hiring a head of DEI? With all due respect, to quote a former boss, that take displays more heat than light.
Voting against CFP expansion was arguably the worst decision any of those three I cited made. It was the final straw for USC that led to them bolting for the B1G.
RE: End of Pac12? - JohnR34231 - 08-02-2022
(08-01-2022, 09:57 PM)dabigv13 Wrote: I'll let Yvonne chime in if she cares to, but I appreciate the charm and Stanford nerdiness of it. It's an extremely minor inconvenience to do a 30 sec quick edit if I forget and care enough to change. And she's admin and has kept this place running all these years so if you don't like it you're welcome to make your own board!
That's the way I feel. Originally I found it mildly amusing, now I find it mildly annoying.
However, if the people who give their time to run this board like it, so be it.
RE: End of Pac12? - Jskass - 08-02-2022
(08-02-2022, 06:20 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:The USC President is the one who ended the conversation on conference expansion. They cannot have it both ways - blaming their departure on not expanding is ludicrous if they are the ones who said no.(08-02-2022, 06:12 AM)2006alum Wrote:(08-02-2022, 05:04 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:(08-01-2022, 10:06 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(08-01-2022, 01:07 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: You guys are right, Larry Scott is terrible at his job.
https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status/1554114729521594368
Oh, wait, he's not in charge anymore you say? Was he in charge when the Pac-12 voted against expanding the CFP? Nope, wasn't on the job then either.
MAYBE, and work with me here, those who oversee the Commissioner are the real reason the Pac-12 has imploded.
What does the tweet you posted have anything to do with whether Scott was or was not a good commissioner?
BC
It's more about how Kliavkoff is not exactly Jim Delany, Roy Kramer, or even Bob Bowlsby.
My greater point is Tom Hansen, Larry Scott, and George Kliavkoff have all made disastrous choices and the common denominator is their bosses.
What are Kliavkoff's "disastrous choices"? Hiring a head of DEI? With all due respect, to quote a former boss, that take displays more heat than light.
Voting against CFP expansion was arguably the worst decision any of those three I cited made. It was the final straw for USC that led to them bolting for the B1G.
RE: End of Pac12? - OutsiderFan - 08-02-2022
(08-02-2022, 07:14 AM)Jskass Wrote:(08-02-2022, 06:20 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:The USC President is the one who ended the conversation on conference expansion. They cannot have it both ways - blaming their departure on not expanding is ludicrous if they are the ones who said no.(08-02-2022, 06:12 AM)2006alum Wrote:(08-02-2022, 05:04 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:(08-01-2022, 10:06 PM)BostonCard Wrote: What does the tweet you posted have anything to do with whether Scott was or was not a good commissioner?
BC
It's more about how Kliavkoff is not exactly Jim Delany, Roy Kramer, or even Bob Bowlsby.
My greater point is Tom Hansen, Larry Scott, and George Kliavkoff have all made disastrous choices and the common denominator is their bosses.
What are Kliavkoff's "disastrous choices"? Hiring a head of DEI? With all due respect, to quote a former boss, that take displays more heat than light.
Voting against CFP expansion was arguably the worst decision any of those three I cited made. It was the final straw for USC that led to them bolting for the B1G.
I said CFP (College Football Playoff) expansion, NOT conference expansion. Kliavkoff voted against CFP expansion and that set the ball rolling on USC leaving the Pac. Conference expansion was not needed, but USC did want a double share of conference revenue.
And that topic - revenue sharing - needs to get a lot more attention than it has, in a larger discussion about college football.
RE: End of Pac12? - 81alum - 08-02-2022
(08-02-2022, 07:14 AM)Jskass Wrote: .Good point. It is called "projection." Made all too popular in American the last few years.
The USC President is the one who ended the conversation on conference expansion. They cannot have it both ways - blaming their departure on not expanding is ludicrous if they are the ones who said no.
RE: End of Pac12? - Leftcoast - 08-02-2022
(08-01-2022, 09:57 PM)dabigv13 Wrote: I'll let Yvonne chime in if she cares to, but I appreciate the charm and Stanford nerdiness of it. It's an extremely minor inconvenience to do a 30 sec quick edit if I forget and care enough to change. And she's admin and has kept this place running all these years so if you don't like it you're welcome to make your own board!
Oh boy, some here would have HATED the old days when Notre Dame was University of Dead, Fake, Girlfriends; Berkeley was University Next to a Bart station; an Ex Coach was "Ted's Buddy" and another was "Ted's Other Buddy". UC Davis was the University that can't be named. A certain USC QB was Draco Malfoy. The few remaining substitutions in 2022 are only a minor annoyance and mostly a call back to a more playful time when sports wasn't quite so serious (or at least we hoped it wasn't). The programmers even went after those of us who used to skirt the rules by using "H.uge" (with a period) by adding that usage and other common variants to the substitution list.
As to it only being older MEN (shameful!) who came up with these - No, many of these were made and supported by women who were a pretty big component of the older Cardboard and certainly made up our tech team. Part of the original attraction of the Cardboard then and now was it's free-flowing discussion of women's sports as opposed to the alternatives available and that showed in the founders and early posters. I do notice that most of those complaining appear to be men - but it's the internet so who really knows.
My advice, just roll with it ... We're discussing games played by 18-22 year olds and a certain light-heartedness is implied. We don't require the rigorous word parsing and passion of an exegetical discussion of the Old Testament and/or Talmudic ethics. Our posts are not scripture and the "harm" is minimal. Plus it's always funny when a newcomer falls prey to "H-U-G-E" for the first time - and I smile each time in a slightly evil way.
RE: End of Pac12? - 2006alum - 08-02-2022
(08-02-2022, 05:01 PM)Leftcoast Wrote:(08-01-2022, 09:57 PM)dabigv13 Wrote: I'll let Yvonne chime in if she cares to, but I appreciate the charm and Stanford nerdiness of it. It's an extremely minor inconvenience to do a 30 sec quick edit if I forget and care enough to change. And she's admin and has kept this place running all these years so if you don't like it you're welcome to make your own board!
Oh boy, some here would have HATED the old days when Notre Dame was University of Dead, Fake, Girlfriends; Berkeley was University Next to a Bart station; an Ex Coach was "Ted's Buddy" and another was "Ted's Other Buddy". UC Davis was the University that can't be named. A certain USC QB was Draco Malfoy. The few remaining substitutions in 2022 are only a minor annoyance and mostly a call back to a more playful time when sports wasn't quite so serious (or at least we hoped it wasn't). The programmers even went after those of us who used to skirt the rules by using "H.uge" (with a period) by adding that usage and other common variants to the substitution list.
As to it only being older MEN (shameful!) who came up with these - No, many of these were made and supported by women who were a pretty big component of the older Cardboard and certainly made up our tech team. Part of the original attraction of the Cardboard then and now was it's free-flowing discussion of women's sports as opposed to the alternatives available and that showed in the founders and early posters. I do notice that most of those complaining appear to be men - but it's the internet so who really knows.
My advice, just roll with it ... We're discussing games played by 18-22 year olds and a certain light-heartedness is implied. We don't require the rigorous word parsing and passion of an exegetical discussion of the Old Testament and/or Talmudic ethics. Our posts are not scripture and the "harm" is minimal. Plus it's always funny when a newcomer falls prey to "H-U-G-E" for the first time - and I smile each time in a slightly evil way.
Well said. "My advice, just roll with it ..." is a good admonition for internet forums generally. =)
RE: End of Pac12? - BostonCard - 08-02-2022
The vote was 8-3; it would have taken a unanimous vote for it to happen.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/33319948/college-football-playoff-remain-4-teams-12-year-contract-expires-2025-season
Per the article, it was ACC President Jim Phillips that first spoke up against it (back in January). The Big Ten and PAC-12 also voted against the expansion. Some things the PAC-12 would have had to give up included the Rose Bowl, revenue distribution (which likely would have further enriched the SEC), the lack of automatic bids for the Power 5 conference champ (which the Big Ten insisted on), and the fact that the format that was rejected would have likely featured 4 SEC teams, 3 Big Ten teams, and Notre Dane every year in the playoffs. Ugh.
honestly, the playoffs have no business expanding. Right now, national championship teams will likely have played 12 regular season games, a conference championship, and a playoff game; under the new system, that could have risen by another two games. In what universe is that athlete friendly? It’s just another money grab, and I, for one, am sick of it.
Go back to 11 games with a handful of conference tied bowls.
BC
RE: End of Pac12? - fullmetal - 08-03-2022
It's *all* just a money grab, but what we're seeing these days is that it takes more and more money to succeed at football...and so everyone has to grab successfully where they can :(
RE: End of Pac12? - CowboyIndian - 08-03-2022
(08-03-2022, 10:31 AM)fullmetal Wrote: It's *all* just a money grab, but what we're seeing these days is that it takes more and more money to succeed at football...and so everyone has to grab successfully where they can :(
It's not just football. ADs are looking at funding Title IX requirements and their entire athletic departments.
RE: End of Pac12? - CTcard - 08-03-2022
(08-03-2022, 10:34 AM)CowboyIndian Wrote:(08-03-2022, 10:31 AM)fullmetal Wrote: It's *all* just a money grab, but what we're seeing these days is that it takes more and more money to succeed at football...and so everyone has to grab successfully where they can :(
It's not just football. ADs are looking at funding Title IX requirements and their entire athletic departments.
While true, the ADs at the biggest places are mainly funding Title IX and other sports after they pay their football coaches whatever sums the coaches' can dream up.
I have been wondering a bit whether the nature of the money required to be good at football might be changing. Money mostly buys two things: coaches and recruiting advantages.
With the latter, the source of money it takes may be changing now that paying players to join your team has become allowed as long as you dress it up in a NIL frock. It may be that fancy facilities and lux treatment may soon matter less than cold hard cash. The curious thing about NIL money is that it still cannot come directly from the institute (at least by the rules). So, extra TV money, extra playoff money, or anything else that goes to the institution may be relatively less valuable in recruiting kids than deep pockets of crazed fans. While that tends to be tied to the overall media profile of a program, it isn't necessarily so.
So, Phil Knight could give all the Oregon players a NIL contract to promote Nike.
The descendants of T. Boone Pickens could give all the Ok State players a NIL gig discussing how much they love natural gas.
Etc. for other wealthy fans.
If its big enough, those teams could become awfully good even out of the ACC, Pac or Big 12.