University presidents tend to bounce around. He could wind up being president of a school in the SEC sometime down the road. In most cases, conference commissioners answer to the university presidents, though I will admit that often doesn’t seem to be the case in the SEC.
Do they? That’s not good for y’all. The Pac 12 has been poorly mismanaged for the past 6 or so years.
Oklahoma and Texas weren’t needed either and yet …
1 Like
Completely agree. At least with FSU and Clemson that would give the SEC every National Champion since 2005 except for Ohio State’s single season.
“OSU & KSU to the PAC12”
Geez I hope not.
1 Like
Bio-Engineering, Business, Public Health, Infectious Disease, Computer Engineering, Chem-E and more
1 Like
I have a hard time believing the Pac-12 is interested in adding two teams that will (1) decrease our per team revenue and (2) do Oklahoma and Texas a huge favor by dissolving their payout.
2 Likes
Yup. Bio-e is pretty good. A very good friend of mine got his BS from Johns Hopkins and MS from the U. CE is also up there…I actually interned with Evans & Sutherland back in the day when E&S was at the bleeding edge.
1 Like
I think this PC yesterday did the opposite of the intended purpose.
Are we wrong to believe that you are happy about this?
I am not. I am tired of inept leadership from Conferences that are supposed to be academically superior. The sport isn’t fun playing Clemson, Ohio State and a random SEC school for the title every year.
I would assume you know I am a Pac 12 fan from our past talks.
1 Like
This is actually helpful to know. Sometimes you come across as an SEC homer. Looks like I’ve got you wrong.
It really was a bummer of an announcement. If they felt it was important to send a message of solidarity, they needed to package something - anything - exciting in there as well. This is a marketing fail. Like usual, they failed to consult me, and they are worse off for it.
Maybe this is not the last we will hear of this nascent effort.
I’ll tell you who is unquestionably a SEC homer: Paul Finebaum. I haven’t listened to him much, I don’t normally don’t watch sports talking heads, I’d rather watch the games, the pennant races, some Xs and Os, etc.
Finebaum repeated the talking points: Nothing signed, no contracts, blah, blah.
Then he let slip the mindset the Alliance is trying to counter: “It’s like the PAC-12, Big 10 and ACC have no idea how businesses operate in 2021”
Well said, Paul. The point of the Allliance, exactly.
Scheduling involves contracts, no question. If this thing works there will be more formalization.
So… how did the Big-10 schools get to the point where they share curricula for many undergrad courses & accept credit for these courses from other member schools?
Don’t they understand business is all about competition, market analysis, ROI, IPOs, etc?
Money, the appetite for more dinero & power is how the NCAA got completely eclipsed, and what drives the SEC & ESPN.
If the Alliance helps balance the pursuit of money by non-student athletes against what college is all about, is a counterweight against the SEC and we get games against B1G and ACC teams, then it’s a win, in my book.
3 Likes
It’s going to take some heavy lifting to come up with a set of operational rules. I am going to say the announcement of cooperation yesterday was the opening so that more granular work can get done.
3 Likes
It is likely. But you don’t announce something until you have something to announce. You don’t say “we have been thinking about doing something together, we’ll let you within the next 5 years or so if anything comes of it.”
Even if they had just said that Oregon and Clemson will play next season as part of the Alliance, they would have had people excited instead of letdown.
Finally, everything they’ve said the alliance is about - academic excellence, student athletes, scheduling, a revised playoff - are things the SEC also believes in. We might as well invite them into this nebulous club as well and work together on keeping this sport from eating itself. Creating it without them makes it look reactionary and adversarial. An alliance between just the Pac and the Big10 would have been great and easy in terms of scheduling. When you add the ACC as well, you are basically announcing that this is some kind of counter strike.
First, Don’t listen to Finebaum. He’s not an SEC fan he’s an opportunist like Cowherd and Skip.
Second, they stated that all current scheduling contracts will stay as is. So, scheduling begins in 2032?
Problem is the first presser came off like an episode of VEEP.
This is interesting, but I can’t read it. Anyone with access like to summarize?
Wilner’s article summary
-
every conference would have added OU and Texas if given the opportunity
-
there is zero indication that the PAC12 Presidents and chancellors want to expand
-
expect the conference to stay at 12
6 Likes