Oregon Ducks 2023!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Natebishop3 said:
Are those votes public?
Click to expand...

I shouldn't have said vote. What I was told is that Oregon advocated for those proposed moves

I do believe there was a vote on expansion in 2021 and the vote was 8-4 against; and Oregon was one of the 4 yes votes. I'm not sure if those votes are ever made public
 
wizenheimer said:
* Oregon wanted Texas & Oklahoma to join the PAC in 2011, saving and strengthening it (along with Ok State and TTU). OSU/WSU were opposed

* Oregon was in favor of adding Big-12 teams to the PAC in 2021 when several of those teams asked to join after Texas/OK announced they were moving to the SEC. That would have saved the PAC. OSU/WSU were opposed

* Oregon voted to accept ESPN's new media deal that would have saved the PAC. OSU/WSU were against accepting

* OSU/WSU, along with ASU & USC, were the principal cheerleaders and supporters of Larry Scott, every step of the way

fuck OSU/WSU. They were the primary members of the cabal of hubris and incompetence that was responsible for destroying the PAC-12. And now they are the whiny little shits dodging their own accountability while blaming their situation on everybody else
Click to expand...
OSU and WSU were the ONLY teams opposed?
 
BBert said:
OSU and WSU were the ONLY teams opposed?
Click to expand...

no, they weren't

but the demise of the Pac-12 can be distilled down to about 4 really bad decisions, (and other smaller decisions) any of which going the other direction could have saved the PAC

1) refusing admission to Texas, Oklahoma, Ok. State, and Texas Tech in 2011
2) signing the biggest media deal in college history in 2012, BUT, refusing to partner with ESPN/FOX to create a dedicated broadcast network

(those two things are directly related as Larry Scott used Texas wanting to keep their Longhorn Network alive with shared content as a lever to convince a majority of schools to vote no. Then, shortly after in 2012, he was primary in refusing to partner with ESPN/FOX on a PAC-12 network; and he convinced enough schools that the conference owning 100% of the new network would be a windfall. Instead, it was a money-losing boondoggle. He then convinced the schools to form their own network and he hired his college roommate to run it

further, when it came time to secure a new media deal this year, the PAC had no leverage with ESPN/FOX for a new linear TV package. Those potential media partners had no skin in a shared network game)

3) voting against expansion with select Big-12 teams in 2021 when those teams were desperate to join the Pac-12 and willing to negotiate terms

4) refusing the offer from ESPN in 2022 that would have given the Pac-12 a contract similar to what the Big-12 received

I'm about 85% certain that Oregon was in favor of expansion in 2011 & 2021 as well as accepting ESPN's offer in 2022. I don't know how Oregon felt about the creation of a 100% owned Pac-12 network. I've been told that Phil Knight had a low opinion of Larry Scott but I don't know if that was an evolved opinion or it started that way. The 4 biggest Larry Scott supporters every step of the way were USC/OSU/WSU/ASU and were always in lockstep with Scott; and Scott opposed expansion consistently. What USC did was about as underhanded as you can imagine. They were actually working to torpedo any opportunities the Pac-12 had for survival while plotting their own exit. USC is far more responsible than any other school for the death of the PAC
 
wizenheimer said:
no, they weren't

but the demise of the Pac-12 can be distilled down to about 4 really bad decisions, (and other smaller decisions) any of which going the other direction could have saved the PAC

1) refusing admission to Texas, Oklahoma, Ok. State, and Texas Tech in 2011
2) signing the biggest media deal in college history in 2012, BUT, refusing to partner with ESPN/FOX to create a dedicated broadcast network

(those two things are directly related as Larry Scott used Texas wanting to keep their Longhorn Network alive with shared content as a lever to convince a majority of schools to vote no. Then, shortly after in 2012, he was primary in refusing to partner with ESPN/FOX on a PAC-12 network; and he convinced enough schools that the conference owning 100% of the new network would be a windfall. Instead, it was a money-losing boondoggle. He then convinced the schools to form their own network and he hired his college roommate to run it

further, when it came time to secure a new media deal this year, the PAC had no leverage with ESPN/FOX for a new linear TV package. Those potential media partners had no skin in a shared network game)

3) voting against expansion with select Big-12 teams in 2021 when those teams were desperate to join the Pac-12 and willing to negotiate terms

4) refusing the offer from ESPN in 2022 that would have given the Pac-12 a contract similar to what the Big-12 received

I'm about 85% certain that Oregon was in favor of expansion in 2011 & 2021 as well as accepting ESPN's offer in 2022. I don't know how Oregon felt about the creation of a 100% owned Pac-12 network. I've been told that Phil Knight had a low opinion of Larry Scott but I don't know if that was an evolved opinion or it started that way. The 4 biggest Larry Scott supporters every step of the way were USC/OSU/WSU/ASU and were always in lockstep with Scott; and Scott opposed expansion consistently. What USC did was about as underhanded as you can imagine. They were actually working to torpedo any opportunities the Pac-12 had for survival while plotting their own exit. USC is far more responsible than any other school for the death of the PAC
Click to expand...
In other words, you reap what you sow fits perfectly here.
 
Template public:_media_site_embed_twitter not found. Try rebuilding or reinstalling the s9e/MediaSites add-on.
 
If we beat UW and one of Michigan or Ohio state loses, we have a chance.
 
The pac-12 should get 2 schools in the CFP. Those 2 will be forever be known as “THE PAC-2”. I have spoken.
 
wizenheimer said:
one of Ohio State/Michigan will have a loss. The committee has been fairly consistent in taking a 1 loss conference champion over a 12-1 non-champion.

got to keep an eye on Texas too
Click to expand...
Until FSU moves to a real conference, they shouldn’t get any love. What a joke of a schedule.
 
inconceivable said:
Aggressive offensive decisions backfired that game
Click to expand...
I mean I understand what he was trying to do but certainly the gift before halftime he should have taken. It would have made the score 22-21 and the Huskies would not have gone into halftime with a huge defensive stop. On the other hand if they make that TD they have the lead and a bunch of momentum. How can you blame him for trying it really? The classic "Hero" or "Zero" call.
 
STOMP said:
In the rivals top 250 list of the top 2024 HS prospects in the country, 109 are listed as Defenders. As things sit today, 9 of those 109 are committed to Oregon

STOMP
Click to expand...

I read yesterday that of the top-7 defensive players on the West Coast, 4 are committed to Oregon. Of course, commitments in November don't always mean signed LOI's in mid-December
 
wizenheimer said:
I read yesterday that of the top-7 defensive players on the West Coast, 4 are committed to Oregon. Of course, commitments in November don't always mean signed LOI's in mid-December
Click to expand...

I like recruiting news, but I really only got into it after that 2010 team and then I realized how fickle the players are, and they might not even end up playing for us. Good recruiting is crucial, but I don't think I'll ever care like I did. I'm much more invested in what actually happens on the field.
 
Natebishop3 said:
I like recruiting news, but I really only got into it after that 2010 team and then I realized how fickle the players are, and they might not even end up playing for us. Good recruiting is crucial, but I don't think I'll ever care like I did. I'm much more invested in what actually happens on the field.
Click to expand...

Cameron Colvin was supposed to be the next Jerry Rice if you read his scout profile back in the day. Herbert and Clemens were lightly recruited.
 
MickZagger said:
Cameron Colvin was supposed to be the next Jerry Rice if you read his scout profile back in the day. Herbert and Clemens were lightly recruited.
Click to expand...

Yeah... some guys come in highly recruited and they just never produce. It is what it is. That's why you have to recruit at a high level for a sustained period of time because some guys work out and some don't.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Yeah... some guys come in highly recruited and they just never produce. It is what it is. That's why you have to recruit at a high level for a sustained period of time because some guys work out and some don't.
Click to expand...
And if you do it at a high level for an extended period of time you will have far more success than the teams who don't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top