[Leftcoast]

The press conference isn\'t over but the widely anticipated compromise won out.   Stanford and Cal will be in the North division but the intra-California yearly games are protected.  

Some interesting stuff from the briefing over how the championship game location will be determined (top seed\'s home stadium) and revenue sharing (USC/UCLA guaranteed $2M bonus until they receive double the old number).

Here\'s the live press conference link - the QA session is still going on.

http://www.kmtr.com/news/local/story/WAT...w6bEA.cspx

[Leftcoast]

The press conference isn\'t over but the widely anticipated compromise won out.   Stanford and Cal will be in the North division but the intra-California yearly games are protected.  

Some interesting stuff from the briefing over how the championship game location will be determined (top seed\'s home stadium) and revenue sharing (USC/UCLA guaranteed $2M bonus until they receive double the old number).

Here\'s the live press conference link - the QA session is still going on.

http://www.kmtr.com/news/local/story/WAT...w6bEA.cspx

[Farm93]

Time to place that call out to Boise State, Wyoming, Colorado State & BYU to join the Pac-16.  The best of the 2009 WAC and the MWC are still available.  With 4 more true Mountain teams, the conference could have 8 in the Pacific division and 8 in the Mountain division.

Going back is not an option, but the equivalent of going back can be achieved by going forward...to 16!

As it stands, Oregon and UW will feast on Utah, Colorado and the historically weak AZ schools.  That will help elevate the already powerful UCLA and USC.  The stronger So Cal 2 will then have a recruiting edge that should make it easier for them to exploit their historic advantage over Stanford and C.al.  And multi-loss Stanford and C.a.l teams will be even easier for Oregon and UW to beat.  And that in turn will give them a winning tradition and recruiting edge that will help them really kill their annual South division opponents.

It is a virtuous cycle..if you are UW, Oregon, UCLA or USC.  Utah was a nothing AD, so they come out OK.  Colorado was already in a similar virtuous/downward cycle in the Big 12, so they are used to the game.  

But it will be new for Stanford & C.al!  Oh joy!

Good news though, while Stanford and C.a.l are losing and getting comfortable with their Iowa State-like existence, each will get an extra few million dollars from the Pac-12 more than bottom feeders with lousy records deserve.

Oh goodie!

[Farm93]

Time to place that call out to Boise State, Wyoming, Colorado State & BYU to join the Pac-16.  The best of the 2009 WAC and the MWC are still available.  With 4 more true Mountain teams, the conference could have 8 in the Pacific division and 8 in the Mountain division.

Going back is not an option, but the equivalent of going back can be achieved by going forward...to 16!

As it stands, Oregon and UW will feast on Utah, Colorado and the historically weak AZ schools.  That will help elevate the already powerful UCLA and USC.  The stronger So Cal 2 will then have a recruiting edge that should make it easier for them to exploit their historic advantage over Stanford and C.al.  And multi-loss Stanford and C.a.l teams will be even easier for Oregon and UW to beat.  And that in turn will give them a winning tradition and recruiting edge that will help them really kill their annual South division opponents.

It is a virtuous cycle..if you are UW, Oregon, UCLA or USC.  Utah was a nothing AD, so they come out OK.  Colorado was already in a similar virtuous/downward cycle in the Big 12, so they are used to the game.  

But it will be new for Stanford & C.al!  Oh joy!

Good news though, while Stanford and C.a.l are losing and getting comfortable with their Iowa State-like existence, each will get an extra few million dollars from the Pac-12 more than bottom feeders with lousy records deserve.

Oh goodie!

[Robbie]

No need to think about this long term - it is not a long-term solution. It is better to think about this for 2011 and 2012 - my bet is that by 2013 there will be a different structure in place.

[Robbie]

No need to think about this long term - it is not a long-term solution. It is better to think about this for 2011 and 2012 - my bet is that by 2013 there will be a different structure in place.

[Spiny_Norman]

Boise State, Wyoming, Colorado State & BYU do nothing to improve the conference to the networks.  The conference realignment is about one thing - tv money.  

The only way to expand is to bring in major tv markets not covered otherwise.  Seems to me that there is only one way to go - schools from Texas.  The closer to Austin, Houston and Dallas, the better.

[Spiny_Norman]

Boise State, Wyoming, Colorado State & BYU do nothing to improve the conference to the networks.  The conference realignment is about one thing - tv money.  

The only way to expand is to bring in major tv markets not covered otherwise.  Seems to me that there is only one way to go - schools from Texas.  The closer to Austin, Houston and Dallas, the better.

[jacketree]

I think Utah will do more eating than feeding others, and both Arizona schools are capable of being strong over long stretches. Colorado used to be pretty good, and now they have an even more direct tap into the LA pipeline. Angst over relative divisional competitiveness is misplaced in my opinion.

[jacketree]

I think Utah will do more eating than feeding others, and both Arizona schools are capable of being strong over long stretches. Colorado used to be pretty good, and now they have an even more direct tap into the LA pipeline. Angst over relative divisional competitiveness is misplaced in my opinion.

[dabigv13]

Going off this year, it\'s slightly skewed towards the North for competitiveness.

Oregon and Stanford are the top 2, in the North

Arizona looks like number 3, tossup between Or St, UW, and USC for number 4 spot.

Az St, Cal, UCLA probably the next tier, then Wazzu.

I think Utah would likely be 3-4 in the Pac this year (though they are ranked higher), and Colorado would probably be 8 or 9.

I think it will settle out for sure, and I\'m hopeful that Stanford will be able to stay near the top of Pac as long as we can hold onto Harbaugh.

[dabigv13]

Going off this year, it\'s slightly skewed towards the North for competitiveness.

Oregon and Stanford are the top 2, in the North

Arizona looks like number 3, tossup between Or St, UW, and USC for number 4 spot.

Az St, Cal, UCLA probably the next tier, then Wazzu.

I think Utah would likely be 3-4 in the Pac this year (though they are ranked higher), and Colorado would probably be 8 or 9.

I think it will settle out for sure, and I\'m hopeful that Stanford will be able to stay near the top of Pac as long as we can hold onto Harbaugh.

[Leftcoast]

Ted Miller on Expansion\'s winners, loser and unintended consequences

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/...new-pac-12

His point on lingering bitterness over revenue sharing should Scott not be able to "show everyone the money" is a good one.   What might Scott sacrifice in order to hit his revenue target?  

And, what might he believe is untouchable or holy?   (My guess, not much!)

[Leftcoast]

Ted Miller on Expansion\'s winners, loser and unintended consequences

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/...new-pac-12

His point on lingering bitterness over revenue sharing should Scott not be able to "show everyone the money" is a good one.   What might Scott sacrifice in order to hit his revenue target?  

And, what might he believe is untouchable or holy?   (My guess, not much!)

[Farm93]

I agree that once the upcoming TV contract is close to the end, the Pac-12 will seek new teams, new divisions or something.  I can only hope that the upcoming contract will be super short.

There are lots of opinions about possible "winners" but I am not seeing anyone putting Stanford on their winner list.

[Farm93]

I agree that once the upcoming TV contract is close to the end, the Pac-12 will seek new teams, new divisions or something.  I can only hope that the upcoming contract will be super short.

There are lots of opinions about possible "winners" but I am not seeing anyone putting Stanford on their winner list.

[terry]

Time to place that call out to Boise State, Wyoming, Colorado State & BYU to join the Pac-16.  The best of the 2009 WAC and the MWC are still available.  With 4 more true Mountain teams, the conference could have 8 in the Pacific division and 8 in the Mountain division.

Going back is not an option, but the equivalent of going back can be achieved by going forward...to 16!

As it stands, Oregon and UW will feast on Utah, Colorado and the historically weak AZ schools.  That will help elevate the already powerful UCLA and USC.  The stronger So kal 2 will then have a recruiting edge that should make it easier for them to exploit their historic advantage over Stanford and  kal.  And multi-loss Stanford and C.a.l teams will be even easier for Oregon and UW to beat.  And that in turn will give them a winning tradition and recruiting edge that will help them really kill their annual South division opponents.

It is a virtuous cycle..if you are UW, Oregon, UCLA or USC.  Utah was a nothing AD, so they come out OK.  Colorado was already in a similar virtuous/downward cycle in the Big 12, so they are used to the game.  

But it will be new for Stanford &  kal!  Oh joy!

Good news though, while Stanford and C.a.l are losing and getting comfortable with their Iowa State-like existence, each will get an extra few million dollars from the Pac-12 more than bottom feeders with lousy records deserve.

Oh goodie!

I don\'t think I agree with this post. Or maybe I just don\'t understand it.  

For example, you seem to think UCLA and UW are powerful, but I don\'t see it. They\'re lower-tier teams. Utah, Arizona, and ASU are better. You say UW will feast on Colorado, Utah, and the AZ schools, but the oddsmakers would have UW going 1-3 against that group. You seem to think it\'s a disadvantage for Stanford to play UCLA every year, but based on what we have seen for the last few years, it would seem Stanford is better off playing UCLA than playing Arizona, ASU, or Utah. You say the Arizona schools are historically weak, but I would say they have been at least middle of the road historically -- stronger than WSU, for instance. You seem to think Oregon and UW will have much easier schedules than Stanford, but in reality, their schedules will be largely similar to Stanford\'s. The difference between Oregon\'s or Washington\'s schedule and Stanford\'s schedule amounts to this -- Stanford will play one extra game against USC and one extra game against UCLA every two years, while Oregon and UW play someone else in the South division instead. That may turn out to be an advantage or a disadvantage, depending on how it shakes out. Right now, I\'d rather have that extra game against UCLA and let Washington play Utah or Arizona. And of course, Stanford owns USC, so that game is not a problem for us.  :)

Can you explain in a little more detail why this new arrangement such a disaster for Stanford?

P.S. I can only assume the suggestion of adding Boise St., Wyoming, Colorado St., and BYU was intended to be sarcastic, because if it were serious, it would be the worst idea in this entire expansion mess!

[terry]

Time to place that call out to Boise State, Wyoming, Colorado State & BYU to join the Pac-16.  The best of the 2009 WAC and the MWC are still available.  With 4 more true Mountain teams, the conference could have 8 in the Pacific division and 8 in the Mountain division.

Going back is not an option, but the equivalent of going back can be achieved by going forward...to 16!

As it stands, Oregon and UW will feast on Utah, Colorado and the historically weak AZ schools.  That will help elevate the already powerful UCLA and USC.  The stronger So kal 2 will then have a recruiting edge that should make it easier for them to exploit their historic advantage over Stanford and  kal.  And multi-loss Stanford and C.a.l teams will be even easier for Oregon and UW to beat.  And that in turn will give them a winning tradition and recruiting edge that will help them really kill their annual South division opponents.

It is a virtuous cycle..if you are UW, Oregon, UCLA or USC.  Utah was a nothing AD, so they come out OK.  Colorado was already in a similar virtuous/downward cycle in the Big 12, so they are used to the game.  

But it will be new for Stanford &  kal!  Oh joy!

Good news though, while Stanford and C.a.l are losing and getting comfortable with their Iowa State-like existence, each will get an extra few million dollars from the Pac-12 more than bottom feeders with lousy records deserve.

Oh goodie!

I don\'t think I agree with this post. Or maybe I just don\'t understand it.  

For example, you seem to think UCLA and UW are powerful, but I don\'t see it. They\'re lower-tier teams. Utah, Arizona, and ASU are better. You say UW will feast on Colorado, Utah, and the AZ schools, but the oddsmakers would have UW going 1-3 against that group. You seem to think it\'s a disadvantage for Stanford to play UCLA every year, but based on what we have seen for the last few years, it would seem Stanford is better off playing UCLA than playing Arizona, ASU, or Utah. You say the Arizona schools are historically weak, but I would say they have been at least middle of the road historically -- stronger than WSU, for instance. You seem to think Oregon and UW will have much easier schedules than Stanford, but in reality, their schedules will be largely similar to Stanford\'s. The difference between Oregon\'s or Washington\'s schedule and Stanford\'s schedule amounts to this -- Stanford will play one extra game against USC and one extra game against UCLA every two years, while Oregon and UW play someone else in the South division instead. That may turn out to be an advantage or a disadvantage, depending on how it shakes out. Right now, I\'d rather have that extra game against UCLA and let Washington play Utah or Arizona. And of course, Stanford owns USC, so that game is not a problem for us.  :)

Can you explain in a little more detail why this new arrangement such a disaster for Stanford?

P.S. I can only assume the suggestion of adding Boise St., Wyoming, Colorado St., and BYU was intended to be sarcastic, because if it were serious, it would be the worst idea in this entire expansion mess!