But see, reality has a way of stepping on dreams, you know what I mean? Reality and, well, greed tends to muck things up. Today, Bud Withers rolled out a fantastic read over at the Times, and it details the “elephant in the room”, which is the plan of equal sharing among the Pac-12 teams. And per Withers, things are getting set to really heat up:
On July 30 in Pasadena, Pac-10 athletic directors are due to get about the business of how to place the two new members. To play a moneymaking league-championship football game, you need divisions, and that’s an apt term in this discussion.
However they slice it, it’s going to lead the conference fathers into another debate. And though it might not take place right away, it’s probably going to be more explosive than the talks about divisions.
It’s revenue sharing, and it might be the only subject that gets USC as fired up as the NCAA infractions committee.
“That’ll be a great drama to watch unfold,” said Washington State athletic director Bill Moos.
“It’s the elephant in the room,” Washington AD Scott Woodward said.
I know we don’t always take things seriously around here (really?). We don’t try to dictate to you what you should or shouldn’t think, and we won’t call you a dope if you don’t agree with what we have to say. But if you want to understand what this whole thing is about, and why it could mean so much to the “have-nots”, we can definitely say this article should be required reading.
At least on the surface, one can understand why a USC wouldn’t want to share money with a WSU. Think about it – you own a vast majority of one of the biggest TV markets in the country. Probation or not, SC football is a big flippin’ deal. They have carried the Pac-10 torch on the national scale for many years, that much is undeniable. So why should they care about what happens to WSU, or Oregon State, or even newbies like Utah and Colorado? SC makes a ton of money simply being SC in LA-LA land, shouldn’t they reap whatever it is they sow? Isn’t the very idea of venturing out and making as much money as humanly possible the very foundation of these United States of America!??
But all you have to do is look around at the best of the BCS conferences, and you can also understand why equal sharing would be a pretty damn good idea at the end of the day. You know that conference that keeps winning national championships? That monster called the SEC? They share the TV pie equally. Meaning Vanderbilt gets the same TV revenue check that Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, LSU, etc all get from their superduper TV deal. Is there any argument that Florida and Alabama produce more money for the conference compared to a Vandy? Of course not. But has that sharing hurt the conference? Have Florida and Alabama “suffered” because they have had to watch Vandy and Mississippi State get the same chunk of change that they get, even though everyone knows Florida and ‘Bama are the very definition of football superpower?
You tell me. Look at the records of the BCS Championship participants, and you decide if it’s a bad idea.
SEC: 6-0 in BCS title games, never losing a BCS championship. Florida and LSU have won it twice, while Tennessee and Alabama both have one.
Big 12: 2-5 in BCS title games, with Oklahoma and Texas both winning it once. Nebraska, Texas, and Oklahoma have each lost (Oklahoma losing three times).
ACC: 1-2 in BCS title games, with Florida State making all three appearances.
Big East: 1-2 in BCS title games, with Miami going 1-1 while Va-Tech went 0-1.
Big Ten: 1-2 in BCS title games, all three appearances by Ohio State.
Finally….
Pac-10: 1-1 in BCS title games, both appearances by SC.
Hmmm.
The most tired cliche’ rolled out during the Pac-12 expansion talk was the “rising tide lifts all boats” theory. From commentators and callers to sports radio, bloggers and message board honks alike, they all used that at some point or another. But you know what? The evidence is out there, black and white, plain as day – equal sharing can work. The conference being strong, top to bottom, can benefit everyone.
Imagine it for the team that is likely to scream the loudest against it, none other than the men of Troy. Let’s say in five years, the BCS is still here and we are still not closer to a playoff. SC recovers from probation and are sitting with, oh, let’s say an 11-1 record, their lone loss coming to a conference opponent on the road. But let’s also say that because of equal sharing of the money, WSU and others have used the uptick in cash to improve their facilities, therefore they are recruiting better, faster, stronger talent. These programs naturally improve on the football field, and suddenly the Pac-12 teams outside of the traditional powers start really laying the wood on their out-of-conference opponents.
In that rising-tide-lifting-boats idea, wouldn’t a WSU beating their out-of-conference opponents only strengthen the argument for SC when they are stumping to be in the BCS title game? Instead of the national perspective of USC and the eleven dwarfs, the pundits could look at the top-to-bottom quality of the Pac-12 and say that “Hey now, SC just went 11-1 playing in one of the best conferences in the country. They deserve to be there over Texas/Oklahoma/Florida State!”
And that argument, folks, is exactly the same argument that they use today for a Florida or Alabama. It’s OK for them to lose a game during the season, and still be right there for BCS title game discussion, because they play in such an elite conference. For the Pac-12 to change the perception of the conference, they have to allow those at the bottom to improve. And to do that, they have to share the TV money – PERIOD. At the end of the day, a better Pac-12 will ensure that everyone wins! The gap between the “Haves” and Have Nots” in the new conference alignment has to get smaller. And winning titles, isn’t that what the so-called Conference of Champions is supposed to be about??
Other stuff out there today:
- The Cougs landed another recruit, but this one is a surprise, as said recruit is going to be in camp next month and ready to play for the 2010 season. Per Cougfan, Al Lapuaho has signed with WSU and is eligible to play this fall. Interesting story in that the original thought was that Lapuaho was to remain at a JC for another year, but after some homework on his transcript, they found that he is actually eligibile to enroll now. Lapuaho will have four years to use his three years of eligibility, and at 6-3, 295 lbs, he sounds like a decent addition to the depth at defensive tackle (especially after losing the likes of Toby Turpin and Josh Luapo for various reasons). I actually think the d-line depth is going to be a position of strength this upcoming season, but adding a near-300 pounder who is ready to play can only help the cause up front. Welcome to the fold Al!
- This next one has absolutely nothing to do with the Cougs, and I know the very thought of the NBA makes most upset around here…..but there is a really fascinating read on LeBron James and his whole fleeing to South Beach act. Yahoo Sports has an article about how, it now appears anyway, LeBron was NEVER going back to Cleveland, period, and it was that way for some time.
Also some damaging stuff on LeBron’s image, where he has been coddled and enabled since he broke into the league (surprise?). It’s a good read, so check it out.
All for now. Enjoy the rest of your weekend, and GO COUGS!
Add The Sports Daily to your Google News Feed!
