Tray Dub wrote:If we win out and either UCLA also wins out or ASU loses a game, we get the 1-seed in the conference tournament
Here's why: if all three teams win out, we win the tiebreaker because we're 2-1 against UCLA and ASU, ASU is 2-2 against UO and UCLA, and UCLA is 1-2 against UO and ASU. If only UO and UCLA win out, we win because we beat them head-to-head.
However, if UO and ASU win out and UCLA doesn't, it's hard to predict who wins the tiebreaker. It'll go to each team's record against the team(s) immediately below them, and it's hard to say who might occupy that position.
ASU @ USC, 5:00, ESPNU Go Trojans!
Arizona @ UCLA, 7:00, ESPN Go Wildcats
UCLA takes their first lead, 64-62, in the 2nd half with 54 seconds left, Arizona gets it, loses the ball out of bounds. Bruins make two free throws, lead, 66-62. Arizona attempts a 3, misses, UCLA gets the rebound, Arizona fouls, UCLA makes 1 of 2, 67-62. UCLA wins, 69-64.
UCLA 12-5 @ USC 7 W's in a row
Oregon 11-5, (H) Cal, Stanford (Ducks have tie breaker over the Bruins) 2 W's in a row
Arizona St. 10-6 (H) WSU, Washington 2 L's in a row
Colorado 10-7 @ Utah 3 L's in a row
USC 10-7 (H) UCLA 2 W's in a row
Arizona 9-7 (H) Washington, WSU 3 L's in a row
Oregon now the only ranked Pac-12 team. UCLA is de facto #27, and is joined by Colorado, Arizona, Stanford, Arizona State and USC as others receiving votes.
StevensTechU wrote:Oregon now the only ranked Pac-12 team. UCLA is de facto #27, and is joined by Colorado, Arizona, Stanford, Arizona State and USC as others receiving votes.
As usual, the Pac-12 has managed to cannabalize itself by beating up on each other. Somehow, that knocked all of the Pac-12 teams out, but the Big 10 represents basically the entire second half of the Top 25 with their 9+ Loss teams. Incredible how that works! Oh well, it ultimately doesn't matter. Just frustrating.
When UCLA goes 7-6 out of conference, losing to such basketball titans as Cal State Fullerton and Hofstra, but then turns around and leads the Pac 12 in conference play, it's not going to be great for the ratings of the conference as a whole. If the Pac 12 wants respect, maybe they need to do better than 1-6 vs. the top 3 teams in the WCC. It becomes clear that if the Ducks want to be a national power in football and basketball, they are going to have to do it on their own. The Pac 12 conference is next to worthless.
Phalanx wrote:When UCLA goes 7-6 out of conference, losing to such basketball titans as Cal State Fullerton and Hofstra, but then turns around and leads the Pac 12 in conference play, it's not going to be great for the ratings of the conference as a whole. If the Pac 12 wants respect, maybe they need to do better than 1-6 vs. the top 3 teams in the WCC. It becomes clear that if the Ducks want to be a national power in football and basketball, they are going to have to do it on their own. The Pac 12 conference is next to worthless.
This is where I actually agree with Clownzano on something. The Pac-12's incredibly shaky leadership and just the general "silence from within" (the presidents and A.D.'s) has sunk the P5 conference standing into the toilet. In fact, I think all the negative press to get Larry Scott out may have had a different effect. Where it just became an unending negative press barrage that now hampers any individual program's success. It has literally become open season and incredibly sheek to bash the Pac-12 if you are a SEC or Big 10 writer or pundit. The Athletic must include something about the conferences lower standing every week. That's why you have fans out there making memes about the legitimacy of UCLA's bid compared to mid majors like BYU. The Ducks are members of what is becoming the biggest joke in college sports.
And yet literally nothing from the conference itself. Nada. Not one single power broker in the Pac 12 publicly skewers Scott about the conference's future prospects. No Dave Gavitt type to try and re imagine the conference and oust Scott, galvanizing the coaches and sports personalities to save the conference's reputation. You have this wall of silence as the television contracts become worse, the amount of telecommunications providers refuse to carry the expensive Pac-12 network grows and the operating budget of the network itself is slashed to ribbons. The criticism of the Pac-12 itself has reached a fevered pitch... but the conference is literally watching itself drown and nobody inside seems to care. They just grit their teeth and talk about how they foresaw the dip in revenue sports funding and boast of how great it is watching volleyball or gymnastics on a terribly produced channel.
I am sorry if this comes off as a rant. But this subject has been a feverish topic of discussion among college sports fans recently.
Phalanx wrote:When UCLA goes 7-6 out of conference, losing to such basketball titans as Cal State Fullerton and Hofstra, but then turns around and leads the Pac 12 in conference play, it's not going to be great for the ratings of the conference as a whole. If the Pac 12 wants respect, maybe they need to do better than 1-6 vs. the top 3 teams in the WCC. It becomes clear that if the Ducks want to be a national power in football and basketball, they are going to have to do it on their own. The Pac 12 conference is next to worthless.
This is where I actually agree with Clownzano on something. The Pac-12's incredibly shaky leadership and just the general "silence from within" (the presidents and A.D.'s) has sunk the P5 conference standing into the toilet. In fact, I think all the negative press to get Larry Scott out may have had a different effect. Where it just became an unending negative press barrage that now hampers any individual program's success. It has literally become open season and incredibly sheek to bash the Pac-12 if you are a SEC or Big 10 writer or pundit. The Athletic must include something about the conferences lower standing every week. That's why you have fans out there making memes about the legitimacy of UCLA's bid compared to mid majors like BYU. The Ducks are members of what is becoming the biggest joke in college sports.
And yet literally nothing from the conference itself. Nada. Not one single power broker in the Pac 12 publicly skewers Scott about the conference's future prospects. No Dave Gavitt type to try and re imagine the conference and oust Scott, galvanizing the coaches and sports personalities to save the conference's reputation. You have this wall of silence as the television contracts become worse, the amount of telecommunications providers refuse to carry the expensive Pac-12 network grows and the operating budget of the network itself is slashed to ribbons. The criticism of the Pac-12 itself has reached a fevered pitch... but the conference is literally watching itself drown and nobody inside seems to care. They just grit their teeth and talk about how they foresaw the dip in revenue sports funding and boast of how great it is watching volleyball or gymnastics on a terribly produced channel.
I am sorry if this comes off as a rant. But this subject has been a feverish topic of discussion among college sports fans recently.
You seem more knowledgeable than me and I agree 100%. One thing I've noticed with Pac-12 schools is attendance at major sports are really low. How much of that is west coast culture and how much of it is cause of terrible scheduling for Pac-12 games? It seems like Pac-12 games are going til midnight when people have lives. These 8:00 PM games for both football and basketball have to ruin fan excitement and attendance and it's a major issue that needs to be fixed, and the irony is Larry Scott promotes these awful game times rather than fixes it.
Phalanx wrote:When UCLA goes 7-6 out of conference, losing to such basketball titans as Cal State Fullerton and Hofstra, but then turns around and leads the Pac 12 in conference play, it's not going to be great for the ratings of the conference as a whole. If the Pac 12 wants respect, maybe they need to do better than 1-6 vs. the top 3 teams in the WCC. It becomes clear that if the Ducks want to be a national power in football and basketball, they are going to have to do it on their own. The Pac 12 conference is next to worthless.
This is where I actually agree with Clownzano on something. The Pac-12's incredibly shaky leadership and just the general "silence from within" (the presidents and A.D.'s) has sunk the P5 conference standing into the toilet. In fact, I think all the negative press to get Larry Scott out may have had a different effect. Where it just became an unending negative press barrage that now hampers any individual program's success. It has literally become open season and incredibly sheek to bash the Pac-12 if you are a SEC or Big 10 writer or pundit. The Athletic must include something about the conferences lower standing every week. That's why you have fans out there making memes about the legitimacy of UCLA's bid compared to mid majors like BYU. The Ducks are members of what is becoming the biggest joke in college sports.
And yet literally nothing from the conference itself. Nada. Not one single power broker in the Pac 12 publicly skewers Scott about the conference's future prospects. No Dave Gavitt type to try and re imagine the conference and oust Scott, galvanizing the coaches and sports personalities to save the conference's reputation. You have this wall of silence as the television contracts become worse, the amount of telecommunications providers refuse to carry the expensive Pac-12 network grows and the operating budget of the network itself is slashed to ribbons. The criticism of the Pac-12 itself has reached a fevered pitch... but the conference is literally watching itself drown and nobody inside seems to care. They just grit their teeth and talk about how they foresaw the dip in revenue sports funding and boast of how great it is watching volleyball or gymnastics on a terribly produced channel.
I am sorry if this comes off as a rant. But this subject has been a feverish topic of discussion among college sports fans recently.
You seem more knowledgeable than me and I agree 100%. One thing I've noticed with Pac-12 schools is attendance at major sports are really low. How much of that is west coast culture and how much of it is cause of terrible scheduling for Pac-12 games? It seems like Pac-12 games are going til midnight when people have lives. These 8:00 PM games for both football and basketball have to ruin fan excitement and attendance and it's a major issue that needs to be fixed, and the irony is Larry Scott promotes these awful game times rather than fixes it.
Well. There is nothing that can really be done about population disparity, time zones and fluctuations of interest by market. College sports is always going to be more of a secondary entertainment option for a lot of people in major cities out here. And there isn't really the brand of a blue blood outside of USC football or UCLA basketball (well at least, in the past) that is strong enough to carry the rest of the conference along with it. Competitive rivalries that mean something tend to be better attended or seen on TV. But on a national level at least, the late time scheduling is just a reality. Get angry at the earth's rotation I guess... ESPN and FOX want a certain amount of games in those slots to guarantee a certain audience. But in the past the conference identity carried enough clout that your March Madness seeds were pretty cut and dried. Also a CFB playoff bid from the Pac-12 had more of a national showcase. Gradual poor showings of the conference overall along with poor leadership have sunk the conference. The poor officiating obviously didn't help win national viewers but if we had national champions that wouldn't matter. Scott should have put as much leverage as he had on the top earning schools like USC, UCLA, UW and Oregon that they all had to maintain good results in the revenue sports because poor showing at a national level would devalue any ability to sell the conference channel to vendors. He should also have made it clear he couldn't guarantee that their cut of the conference pie would be enough to remain competitive. Since almost every other conference struck a telecommunications deal after ours... they got better rates. And deals that were shorter for better windows of negotiation.
Larry Scott should have focused on the revenue sports above all else rather than sell an expensive network that covered all programs.... in so many different markets. Carroll's Trojans were the last dynasty that the Pac-12 could hang it's hat on for national relevancy in a major college sport. Oregon has obviously carried decent national numbers. But there aren't enough football crazies or basketball die hard viewers to even carry mid day fare or non prime time matchups. Look at the Big 10. They know their football programs will always have viewers. The brand has a certain value through almost all schools. Hell even I get the Big-10 channel for precisely that reason. The SEC... football as well. The ACC's new network is obviously basketball. But why should somebody order the Pac-12 Nework? I don't think Scott ever convincingly sold the world on that or even what the conference would look like when he tried to sell network viewing rights to streaming providers. In a few years with almost every major Pac-12 school at a competitive disadvantage ($$$) and unable to retain any cutting edge staff... He's going to have a slate of conference matchups to sell in the next telecommunications deal in an iffy market. If the Pac-12 was killing it in football and basketball, Scott could probably could have struck a better scheduling fit so only certain prime time matchups went to ESPN and Fox and then put a secondary slate on the Pac-12 Network. One that could have been funneled to more people through Direct TV. But that wasn't even possible because he refused to take on a partner with the Pac-12 network. It's amazing how short sighted the last few years have been. And now I think we are all beginning to realize that individual programs as brands are being dragged down by the conference itself. We have a bunch of late games at times we don't want with shitty officiating. It's a reputation that the Pac-12 as a conference can't shed. And who knows how to improve it?
Phalanx wrote:When UCLA goes 7-6 out of conference, losing to such basketball titans as Cal State Fullerton and Hofstra, but then turns around and leads the Pac 12 in conference play, it's not going to be great for the ratings of the conference as a whole. If the Pac 12 wants respect, maybe they need to do better than 1-6 vs. the top 3 teams in the WCC. It becomes clear that if the Ducks want to be a national power in football and basketball, they are going to have to do it on their own. The Pac 12 conference is next to worthless.
This is where I actually agree with Clownzano on something. The Pac-12's incredibly shaky leadership and just the general "silence from within" (the presidents and A.D.'s) has sunk the P5 conference standing into the toilet. In fact, I think all the negative press to get Larry Scott out may have had a different effect. Where it just became an unending negative press barrage that now hampers any individual program's success. It has literally become open season and incredibly sheek to bash the Pac-12 if you are a SEC or Big 10 writer or pundit. The Athletic must include something about the conferences lower standing every week. That's why you have fans out there making memes about the legitimacy of UCLA's bid compared to mid majors like BYU. The Ducks are members of what is becoming the biggest joke in college sports.
And yet literally nothing from the conference itself. Nada. Not one single power broker in the Pac 12 publicly skewers Scott about the conference's future prospects. No Dave Gavitt type to try and re imagine the conference and oust Scott, galvanizing the coaches and sports personalities to save the conference's reputation. You have this wall of silence as the television contracts become worse, the amount of telecommunications providers refuse to carry the expensive Pac-12 network grows and the operating budget of the network itself is slashed to ribbons. The criticism of the Pac-12 itself has reached a fevered pitch... but the conference is literally watching itself drown and nobody inside seems to care. They just grit their teeth and talk about how they foresaw the dip in revenue sports funding and boast of how great it is watching volleyball or gymnastics on a terribly produced channel.
I am sorry if this comes off as a rant. But this subject has been a feverish topic of discussion among college sports fans recently.
You seem more knowledgeable than me and I agree 100%. One thing I've noticed with Pac-12 schools is attendance at major sports are really low. How much of that is west coast culture and how much of it is cause of terrible scheduling for Pac-12 games? It seems like Pac-12 games are going til midnight when people have lives. These 8:00 PM games for both football and basketball have to ruin fan excitement and attendance and it's a major issue that needs to be fixed, and the irony is Larry Scott promotes these awful game times rather than fixes it.
Well. There is nothing that can really be done about population disparity, time zones and fluctuations of interest by market. College sports is always going to be more of a secondary entertainment option for a lot of people in major cities out here. And there isn't really the brand of a blue blood outside of USC football or UCLA basketball (well at least, in the past) that is strong enough to carry the rest of the conference along with it. Competitive rivalries that mean something tend to be better attended or seen on TV. But on a national level at least, the late time scheduling is just a reality. Get angry at the earth's rotation I guess... ESPN and FOX want a certain amount of games in those slots to guarantee a certain audience. But in the past the conference identity carried enough clout that your March Madness seeds were pretty cut and dried. Also a CFB playoff bid from the Pac-12 had more of a national showcase. Gradual poor showings of the conference overall along with poor leadership have sunk the conference. The poor officiating obviously didn't help win national viewers but if we had national champions that wouldn't matter. Scott should have put as much leverage as he had on the top earning schools like USC, UCLA, UW and Oregon that they all had to maintain good results in the revenue sports because poor showing at a national level would devalue any ability to sell the conference channel to vendors. He should also have made it clear he couldn't guarantee that their cut of the conference pie would be enough to remain competitive. Since almost every other conference struck a telecommunications deal after ours... they got better rates. And deals that were shorter for better windows of negotiation.
Larry Scott should have focused on the revenue sports above all else rather than sell an expensive network that covered all programs.... in so many different markets. Carroll's Trojans were the last dynasty that the Pac-12 could hang it's hat on for national relevancy in a major college sport. Oregon has obviously carried decent national numbers. But there aren't enough football crazies or basketball die hard viewers to even carry mid day fare or non prime time matchups. Look at the Big 10. They know their football programs will always have viewers. The brand has a certain value through almost all schools. Hell even I get the Big-10 channel for precisely that reason. The SEC... football as well. The ACC's new network is obviously basketball. But why should somebody order the Pac-12 Nework? I don't think Scott ever convincingly sold the world on that or even what the conference would look like when he tried to sell network viewing rights to streaming providers. In a few years with almost every major Pac-12 school at a competitive disadvantage ($$$) and unable to retain any cutting edge staff... He's going to have a slate of conference matchups to sell in the next telecommunications deal in an iffy market. If the Pac-12 was killing it in football and basketball, Scott could probably could have struck a better scheduling fit so only certain prime time matchups went to ESPN and Fox and then put a secondary slate on the Pac-12 Network. One that could have been funneled to more people through Direct TV. But that wasn't even possible because he refused to take on a partner with the Pac-12 network. It's amazing how short sighted the last few years have been. And now I think we are all beginning to realize that individual programs as brands are being dragged down by the conference itself. We have a bunch of late games at times we don't want with shitty officiating. It's a reputation that the Pac-12 as a conference can't shed. And who knows how to improve it?
Phalanx wrote:When UCLA goes 7-6 out of conference, losing to such basketball titans as Cal State Fullerton and Hofstra, but then turns around and leads the Pac 12 in conference play, it's not going to be great for the ratings of the conference as a whole. If the Pac 12 wants respect, maybe they need to do better than 1-6 vs. the top 3 teams in the WCC. It becomes clear that if the Ducks want to be a national power in football and basketball, they are going to have to do it on their own. The Pac 12 conference is next to worthless.
This is where I actually agree with Clownzano on something. The Pac-12's incredibly shaky leadership and just the general "silence from within" (the presidents and A.D.'s) has sunk the P5 conference standing into the toilet. In fact, I think all the negative press to get Larry Scott out may have had a different effect. Where it just became an unending negative press barrage that now hampers any individual program's success. It has literally become open season and incredibly sheek to bash the Pac-12 if you are a SEC or Big 10 writer or pundit. The Athletic must include something about the conferences lower standing every week. That's why you have fans out there making memes about the legitimacy of UCLA's bid compared to mid majors like BYU. The Ducks are members of what is becoming the biggest joke in college sports.
And yet literally nothing from the conference itself. Nada. Not one single power broker in the Pac 12 publicly skewers Scott about the conference's future prospects. No Dave Gavitt type to try and re imagine the conference and oust Scott, galvanizing the coaches and sports personalities to save the conference's reputation. You have this wall of silence as the television contracts become worse, the amount of telecommunications providers refuse to carry the expensive Pac-12 network grows and the operating budget of the network itself is slashed to ribbons. The criticism of the Pac-12 itself has reached a fevered pitch... but the conference is literally watching itself drown and nobody inside seems to care. They just grit their teeth and talk about how they foresaw the dip in revenue sports funding and boast of how great it is watching volleyball or gymnastics on a terribly produced channel.
I am sorry if this comes off as a rant. But this subject has been a feverish topic of discussion among college sports fans recently.
You seem more knowledgeable than me and I agree 100%. One thing I've noticed with Pac-12 schools is attendance at major sports are really low. How much of that is west coast culture and how much of it is cause of terrible scheduling for Pac-12 games? It seems like Pac-12 games are going til midnight when people have lives. These 8:00 PM games for both football and basketball have to ruin fan excitement and attendance and it's a major issue that needs to be fixed, and the irony is Larry Scott promotes these awful game times rather than fixes it.
Well. There is nothing that can really be done about population disparity, time zones and fluctuations of interest by market. College sports is always going to be more of a secondary entertainment option for a lot of people in major cities out here. And there isn't really the brand of a blue blood outside of USC football or UCLA basketball (well at least, in the past) that is strong enough to carry the rest of the conference along with it. Competitive rivalries that mean something tend to be better attended or seen on TV. But on a national level at least, the late time scheduling is just a reality. Get angry at the earth's rotation I guess... ESPN and FOX want a certain amount of games in those slots to guarantee a certain audience. But in the past the conference identity carried enough clout that your March Madness seeds were pretty cut and dried. Also a CFB playoff bid from the Pac-12 had more of a national showcase. Gradual poor showings of the conference overall along with poor leadership have sunk the conference. The poor officiating obviously didn't help win national viewers but if we had national champions that wouldn't matter. Scott should have put as much leverage as he had on the top earning schools like USC, UCLA, UW and Oregon that they all had to maintain good results in the revenue sports because poor showing at a national level would devalue any ability to sell the conference channel to vendors. He should also have made it clear he couldn't guarantee that their cut of the conference pie would be enough to remain competitive. Since almost every other conference struck a telecommunications deal after ours... they got better rates. And deals that were shorter for better windows of negotiation.
Larry Scott should have focused on the revenue sports above all else rather than sell an expensive network that covered all programs.... in so many different markets. Carroll's Trojans were the last dynasty that the Pac-12 could hang it's hat on for national relevancy in a major college sport. Oregon has obviously carried decent national numbers. But there aren't enough football crazies or basketball die hard viewers to even carry mid day fare or non prime time matchups. Look at the Big 10. They know their football programs will always have viewers. The brand has a certain value through almost all schools. Hell even I get the Big-10 channel for precisely that reason. The SEC... football as well. The ACC's new network is obviously basketball. But why should somebody order the Pac-12 Nework? I don't think Scott ever convincingly sold the world on that or even what the conference would look like when he tried to sell network viewing rights to streaming providers. In a few years with almost every major Pac-12 school at a competitive disadvantage ($$$) and unable to retain any cutting edge staff... He's going to have a slate of conference matchups to sell in the next telecommunications deal in an iffy market. If the Pac-12 was killing it in football and basketball, Scott could probably could have struck a better scheduling fit so only certain prime time matchups went to ESPN and Fox and then put a secondary slate on the Pac-12 Network. One that could have been funneled to more people through Direct TV. But that wasn't even possible because he refused to take on a partner with the Pac-12 network. It's amazing how short sighted the last few years have been. And now I think we are all beginning to realize that individual programs as brands are being dragged down by the conference itself. We have a bunch of late games at times we don't want with shitty officiating. It's a reputation that the Pac-12 as a conference can't shed. And who knows how to improve it?
I think you should replace Larry Scott.
Def a good idea.. But it sure isn't a job I'd want. Your predecessor has done things it will take many years to undo.
With UCLA losing to USC, Oregon has clinched the #1 seed in the conference tourney. To get the outright regular season title, they've got to beat Stanford.
