The Pac-12 Thread....

NativeWebfoot, trespass?? What's up with that?

If more than just Hippie U would complain then why did they allow Boise State to join wrestling? It is ok to lower the standards for a non revenue sport but not to lower the standards for a sport Boise State would actually bring money to the conference? I personally think going to 12 sucked but if the superconferences are the way of the future then the Pac-12 better join instead of being left in the dust like last time with Hansen and snotty Cal. As for sharing the money, if superconferences are formed then who knows how the restructering of money will go. If the Big East and ACC lose their AQ's, I can see ESPN's legal team getting involved which will leave extra money out there to be had. BYU and Boise already have home for the olympic sports so what would the fuss be bringing in extra sponsors for football only?

Well I am not familiar with the "O" zone, but up here we can watch sh*tty podcasts of WSU baseball and UW softball games. As well as I don't like Oregon because you guys bought a baseball program but I still will watch it if it were available because you guys play good ball as does the rest of the Pac-12 but I get podcasts of WSU schools or watch overrated SEC baseball. My first love is baseball as I grew up seeing tons of the Olerud hayday Coug games then watching ASU, SC and Stanford do their usual powerhouse thing.

It's quiet in the Pac-12 these days. No compulsion to expand, good TV package already in place. The players tend to stay out of trouble with the worst being a Beaver player who gets charged with trespass for going into a bar and grill that he was barred from. (yawn)


The Pac commissioner is the highest paid in CFB. (wow) Not even any trash talkers here.(Yea)


It's tough to keep a thread active without inventing news.LOL. Sounds like the national media.......      


One question That I have is Wazzu's comment on Oregon "buying" a baseball program. I get that an individual helps the Oregon football(?), sports(?) program. Yet don't all school have alum that donate? Is it much different than other schools' alum except for the size of the donations?


How is Oregon's situation any different in the long run than say, USC's or Washinfton's. I"m sure Utah probably gets donations for alum as well.


I guess my question is "So what?" So if someone came along and made a big/continuous donation/s to Wash St. you'd turn it down?


Am I missing something? (Again?)         

  

"Oregon because you guys bought a baseball program "

Or it could be that Oregon sports are just that good now. 
Football 3 time conference champs top 5 finish projected top 5 start
basketball has done nothing but get better under Altman back to back 20 win seasons.
Track women were indoor national champs and now outdoor pac champs and men won Pac as well.
Mens Golf is in the National tourney
Softball is in Super regional
Volleyball finished ranked
Acrobatics and tumbling are 2x back to back national champs
Baseball is a top 5 team right now

Trucker,

Wazzu is just being ugly regarding the BB team because he can.  Oregon dropped baseball after the 1980 season, and showed little interest in the sport until Oregon State won back to back National titles in the not so distant past.  So, Oregon began playing baseball again a couple of years ago.

Oregon built a nice little ball yard next to Autzen, (thank you, Phil), and they became a power almost instantly. 

This is why Wazzu talks trash about "buying" a baseball team.

However, your point is well taken, every school has boosters and the only difference is in the amount of the checks or in the amount of donors.

Wazzu knows you can't buy a BB team, but it is a fair smack talking insult to insinuate that is the case. 

E.D., LOL, it's quiet right now, so a little in-conference "light" trash talk isn't out of order, IMO.


After all, a little envy is a back-handed compliment, of sorts.... 

I said I'd still watch it. And of course it is trash talking. Oregon State was never a legitimate regular season top 5 team yet Oregon (a team that was not stocked with freshmen) became nearly an instant powerhouse? The lack of scholarship for baseball players and they are out of school more than any other athlete actually makes it easier to alot easier to cheat, but like I said just trash talk

wazzufan31, by the way the baseball talk raises a question, is it true the are more scholarships given to equestrian riders than baseball?  I thought I heard that on Rival's Radio a few years back......

I don't know anything about horses so guess it depends on how many. At least back in my day most pitchers were on scholarship, the star hitters were then most everyone else was on partial or academic scholarships or walk ons, not sure how it is now. But that is one thing that has always bugged me if with how much "sacrificing" football and basketball players do, when most ball players do more and, at least in my day, a good portion had to actually do well in the classroom. It might be different now I don't know but back then you saw a ton of HS players going professional when they are picked after round 10 which is just nuts.

Per maxPrep, USC has jumped to 6th in the nation for 2013 recruiting. Bama tops the list, with Georgia, Michigan, Texas, one more, I can't remember who, brain fart, sigh.


These top five already have about as many committs as USC has slots, ie 14-18 commits, USC has 17 slots, 2 extra from last years 13. Not bad at all.


Even though many of the best are already committed, if USC can maintain their quality of recruits, they could move up some. Surely aren't going top the list though. It just can't be done. Not with ten less schollies.....       

Surely aren't going top the list though. It just can't be done. Not with ten less schollies.....

True, but they can be tops in average stars per player. For last recruiting season, USC ranked in the top 10 overall, but was number one in stars per commit at about 4.08.    

tj12, that one is almost a given,LOL. We're probably one or two already per average rating, although the differences between say, Rivals and Scout rating are surprisingly wide..

tj12, that one is almost a given,LOL. We're probably one or two already per average rating, although the differences between say, Rivals and Scout rating are surprisingly wide..

I've always wondered how there can be such discrepancy between recruit ratings. I guess it just shows that you never know how a kid will respond to the next level of play. Some guys "peak" in high school, some really don't get going and develope until they get to college. You can measure a kids speed, etc. but you can't measure his heart or how bad he "wants it". 

Looks like Cal just lost a linebacker, dismissed for violating team rules......

I just checked out the Bleacher report and found a "pre-season" post spring, power ranking, whatever that is. The author claimed that he wasn't the one doing the rankings...I think you'll see why anyway this is reverse order as was posted.


Please do not shoot the messenger....


Or St. 93  out of 126


Az      77


Col     66



Az St. 64



Wazzu 61



Cal      52



UCLA    48



Wash.   32




Utah      23




Stanford 16



Oregon   10



(Boise St.) 7



USC        !



LMAO, that should wake up the thread......               



                            



                          

How is Oregon's situation any different in the long run than say, USC's or Washinfton's. I"m sure Utah probably gets donations for alum as well. 

And yes Utah has donations coming in, Just this spring at the Red and White spring game Eric Weddle $250,000 Ya The alum up here is doing thier part.

utah ute, I take it your satisfied with a 23rd ranking in this "power poll?"
 

Trucker you should check out some of my stuff on there.

http://bleacherreport.com/users/301
41-david-hedlind

OlyDuck, your favorited. Did you have a hand in this power ranking? 10th???

nope I pretty much agree with everyone else who has oregon right about 5