Pac-12, Here We Come

Hello Followers.  Hope you’re having a good week.

In anticipation for today’s 11:30 am PST press conference, I thought I would offer my two cents on the upcoming meeting of the Pac-10’s presidents and chancellors.  Want to read Sutra’s takes on Pac-10 realignment?  Then read on…

Followers, there has been much hoopla and downright celebration concerning WSU’s ability to close the revenue gap as a result of the conference’s expansion. And for good reason. Without a change in the ways that revenue is distributed throughout the conference, it will be tough for us to field competitive teams in all major sports.

In addition, some of you have viewed the Pac-10’s plans favorably by simple virtue that the Cougs are still in the conference at all.

And, while I personally share these sentiments, that does not mean that I view the forthcoming announcement without concern. With that in mind, here are my primary bones of contention with the leading Pac-12 realignment proposal:

1) 5-2-2. As confirmed through several reputable media outlets, the PAC-10 is supposed to formally approve a Pac-10 division alignment that melds the NoCAL schools with the Pac-10 schools. However, there is also rumor out there that, as a part of this proposal, the Bay Area schools would be guaranteed to play BOTH LA schools every year. What is silenced at this point is whether or not this arrangement would be targeted specifically at the LA schools. If not, then each of the Northwest schools would appear to be slotted into a 5-2-2 of their own with some pod in the Southern Division.

So, if we go by what would appear to be the closest geographic alignment between North and South, then I think it would be fair to assume that, under a 5-2-2 the Washington schools would be paired with Utah and Colorado, rendering contests with the Arizona and LA schools to rotate over a four year time frame.

Now, why is this significant?

Well, check out the teams that we would be guaranteed to face each year in conference in order to “win” our division: Utah (#10 right now and ranked #2 a few years back); Oregon (current #1 who looks to stay near the top in the years to come): Oregon State (a top 3 team in conference for the last several years who figures to be the favorite next year); Stanford (going on their fifth year of top 15 recruiting classes); CAL (.600 plus winning percentage over the past decade); UW (horrible a few years ago, now looks to be squarely on the rise); and Colorado (a current cupcake, but one that lurks as a potential power—especially when you consider they play at altitude). Don’t know about you all, but with the LA programs both looking like they’ll be in transition over the next couple of years, our presumed pod and division looks to be the toughest of any in the conference.

And that should make none of us happy as we desperately try to move forward.

2) Championship Game at the “higher seed’s house.” Allow ourselves to dream (or halucinate) for a moment. That is, let’s suppose that we were to win the Division next year. Now, who do you think is going to be a higher seeded team? Who is going to be ranked higher in the polls? An 11-1 Arizona or Utah or an 11-1 WSU? So, instead of playing a championship on “neutral” ground, we’d have to “win” the conference by playing a stinking road game. How is that fair? And how does that represent a true conference “champion?”

Moreover, think about what such an arrangement would mean for the conference? Presumably, having a conference championship game not only increases revenue, it increases opportunity for the conference to play themselves into the National Championship conversation. But, one has to wonder whether or not that would be possible if the higher seeded team is basically put into a position of having to win impressively in the championship game, given that the championship game would be played in their own house?

So, count me in as one that is looking for NO 5-2-2 as well a championship game that is at a neutral site.

All for now. Go Cougs.