Tag Archive: Pac-12 Conference


Remember the Oakland Raiders and their “Commitment to Excellence”?

The Silver and Black catch-phrase was quietly buried along with its originator, Al Davis.

Is it time, actually past time, for the Pac-12 Conference to drop its divorced-from-reality tag: “Conference of Champions”?

Consider that only 35,000 (assuming you believe the “announced” official attendance) bothered to show up for the conference football “championship” game this past November 30. The game was an absolute non-factor in deciding which four teams made the College Football Playoff (CFP).

Why would any conference commissioner hold its football championship game on a gridlocked Friday night in a pro-football Mecca, while the real Power Five conferences play their championship games on Saturday?

The literal oceans of empty seats in Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara sent an unmistakable signal to the sports world: If Pac-12 fans don’t care, why should you? What ya think Pac-12 boss Larry Scott?

Weigh that only two times has the Pac-12 qualified its teams for the College Football Playoff (i.e., Oregon in 2014 and Washington in 2016) out of a potential 20 spots over five years.

In bowl games, the conference is 4-12 in the past two years: 1-8, 2017-18; 3-4 2018-19.

The last time a Pac-12 team won the national title in football: USC in 2004.

The last time a Pac-12 team won the national title in men’s basketball: Arizona in the previous century,1997.

The last time a Pac-12 team won the national title in women’s basketball: Stanford, ditto for the 20th century, 1992.

The conference is fond of championing its NCAA Director’s Cup standings as tantamount to “athletic success,” most notably Stanford, UCLA, USC, Cal and Oregon. Does anyone really care about college sports outside of the aforementioned football, men’s and women’s basketball?

Yes, Oregon State is the current champion in baseball. Oregon won its seventh track-and-field championship in 2015 … but other than piling up Director’s Cup points, do these championships really matter to the sports public?

From Love to The Embarcadero

In 2009, the Pac-12 presidents hired Larry Scott away from the women’s tennis circuit (where love means nothing) to run the conference, which was falling behind the other Power Five conferences (i.e., SEC, ACC, Big 10, Big 12).

To Scott’s credit, he took the lead in creating the Pac-12 Network. He also brought in the Denver and Salt Lake City media markets into the fold with the expansion of the 10-school contiguous state balanced conference to include non-contiguous Colorado and Utah.

The aforementioned conference championship game was added to the mix, but for some reason Scott and his lieutenants can’t seem the figure out the Levi’s Stadium dog just won’t hunt after five tries.

When was the only time the conference championship ever sold out? The first game in 2011 held at the venue of the team with the best record, Oregon’s Autzen Stadium. Why not persist in awarding the championship game to the team with the best record?

Sure beats an empty tarped stadium with an “announced” crowd of 35,134 on a Friday night.

The conference’s men’s basketball tournament is held in Las Vegas. There are zero Pac-12 teams in Nevada. Are gambling tables and shows with lots of skin, the secret to drawing fans to watch the conference’s best?

John Canzano of the struggling Portland Oregonian penned a four-piece mammoth series essentially asking if the Pac-12 is getting the bang for its buck. The conference pays Scott $4.8 million per annum and devotes $6.9 million yearly for its offices near the Embarcadero in downtown San Francisco.

Pac-12 members receive $31 million annually from the conference. By contrast, SEC members receive $41 million and the Big 10 universities garner $37 million from their respective conferences.

Certainly geography is not Scott’s fault, but it still must be his concern. The majority of Pac-12 members are situated three hours west of Bristol, Connecticut, the home of ESECPN. What Almost DailyBrett does not understand is the surrender implied in “Pac-12 After Dark.”

In order to provide ESPN and Fox with late evening “sports programming” for insomniacs in the Eastern and Central time zones, our fans and teams must sometimes wait until 7:45 pm to kick-off or tip-off our games. The alternative is 11 am kickoffs, fostering 8 am tailgates. Pass the orange juice.

Hey Larry instead of the networks deciding the times of our games, let’s team with Pac-12 presidents and athletic directors in courageously insisting the majority of our games be held between 12:30 pm and 5 pm local time for our fans on Saturdays.

As for the tagline: “Conference of Champions,” let’s shelve/deep six it until Pac-12 teams once again actually win some real championships.

https://www.oregonlive.com/sports/oregonian/john_canzano/index.ssf/2018/11/pac-12-larry-scott-leftout-part1.html

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2017/11/05/pac-12-after-midnight/

 

 

Pac-12 Announces First-Ever Football Relegation

Oregon State Football To Join The Big-Sky Conference

San Francisco, CA, November 24, 2018 – Following in the footsteps of major European soccer leagues, the Pac-12 Conference announced today that Oregon State has been relegated to the Big Sky Conference, effective immediately.

In place of the Beavers, the Pac-12 Conference is awaiting the results of the FCS playoffs to determine which Big Sky team will be promoted to replace Oregon State as one of the Power-Five conference’s dozen teams.

“Similar to Chapter 11 Bankruptcy, mandatory relegation affords Oregon State the opportunity to ‘reorganize’ its football program without having to worry about trying to compete with its perceived rival, Oregon,” said Pac-12 Commissioner Larry Scott. “Instead, Oregon State can renew its historic rivalry with in-state commuter school, Portland State.”

Using the model employed by Britain’s Premier League (20 teams) and Germany’s Bundesliga (18 teams), the lowest finishing team(s) is/are “relegated” to the second league, while the lower league promotes its top finisher(s).

Scott said the conference carefully examined the most recent two-year records (i.e., OSU, 1-11, 2-10) and academic/athletic direction of its 12 teams, and inevitably concluded that Oregon State with its solitary Pac-12 win against Colorado and its “victories” against Portland State and Southern Utah justifiably warranted relegation.

 

The Pac-12 conference also announced that Oregon and Washington have shifted their rivalry game to the last game of the season, acknowledging the obvious fact these schools both see each other as their respective number one rival.

A New League, A New Beginning for Benny Beaver

“Our relegation to the Big-Sky conference is a relief for everyone associated with the black-and-orange of Oregon State,” said OSU President Dr. Edward John Ray. “We need to address the futility of attempting to athletically — let alone academically — compete with the standard of excellence set by the University of Oregon. We can now adjust our focus further downward, and match up with schools of commensurate stature (e.g., Weber State).”

New Big Sky Conference Commissioner Tom Wistrcill formally welcomed Oregon State to the FCS conference, and called upon the “Beaver Nation” to envision fan trips to Pocatello, Ogden, Flagstaff and Cheney.

“Having a former Power-Five Conference participant join our league provides hope to our 13 teams that someday one of them will be granted ascension to the Mountain West Conference or maybe even the Pac-12 Conference,” said Wistrcill.

After losing to Oregon 69-10 and 55-15 in the last two years alone (124-25, if you are scoring at home), new Oregon State football coach Jonathan Smith was sober in his assessment of how far the Beavers have fallen.

“Sometimes you have to acknowledge the inescapable reality of our struggling program,” said Smith. “When you can’t compete with them, let alone beat them, and you can’t join them … well you have to ask: ‘How about a new conference?’”

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2012/02/26/ducks-vs-dawgs-to-end-the-season/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2015/11/30/the-world-through-corvallis-eyes/

 

collegegrad

“…We welcome applications from women and members of historically underrepresented minority groups, persons with disabilities, and others who would bring additional dimensions of experience to our community.” – De rigueur boilerplate at the bottom of a typical job description

Looking around a crowded classroom during the last three Saturdays of students taking a Graduate Records Examination (GRE) preparation course, I repeatedly thought to myself:

Where are the guys?

Can I count them on one hand, including me?

Do women have a better approach toward learning?

Is the pink brain superior to the blue brain?

I don’t want Almost DailyBrett to come across as a whine or to imply that I do not celebrate the shattering of one class ceiling after another, but to question the absence of men…particularly pale males…from one classroom after another.

Is it just a matter that I am looking in all the wrong places? Sure, I know that men can be found in engineering schools, (particularly Asian men) sales conferences, and football practices, but is something more complex happening here?

Is it a case of: Pale + Male + (Assumed Privilege) = No “Additional Dimension of Experience?”

Almost DailyBrett offers zero empirical data to support this uneasy sense, but nonetheless one has to question why aren’t more males competing for advanced degrees or even undergraduate degrees? There is a growing amount of literature questioning why aren’t males doing better academically. Do they (men) believe it is not worth making the effort?

Is this a recent development or part of a multi-decade trend?

Pursuing my bachelor’s degree at the University of Southern California way back when Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter occupied the White House, the ratio of men-to-women students was approximately three-to-one. This was not good news for men (including me) looking for coed attention. Many times we were compelled to outsource to UCLA to find females that were willing to give us (SC guys) the time of day.

In my fraternity house, you became a “Row God” and signed autographs, if a Pi Phi merely breathed on you, let alone permitted any other physical activity. It was all a function of the preponderance of males on university campuses at the time. If women were to be found on campus, it was usually in education or nursing, not the journalism school.

Times have clearly changed and I have absolutely no desire to go back to the days when the scales were so unevenly balanced on behalf of males. I am just wondering whether the pendulum has swung to the point of no return?

Checking out the U.S. News & World Report gender stats for the campuses of the Pac-12 Conference, seven have female majorities (e.g., Arizona, Cal, Oregon, UCLA, USC, Washington and WSU); four have male majorities (e.g., Colorado, OSU, Stanford and Utah); one is locked in a 50-50 percent statistical tie (e.g., ASU).

Looking deeper, the ratios are relatively close with Utah having the largest percentage of males, 55 percent, and UCLA having the highest percentage of females, 55 percent. Liberal arts schools and those located near the coast trend toward female majorities, while engineering, scientific, agriculture and mountain schools tend to have more males.

Could my feelings of unease simply revolve around my teaching at the University of Oregon School of Journalism and Communication, amplified by the fact that I have served as an instructor of public relations? Women absolutely dominate public relations as they do real estate and local government. If you don’t believe me, just check out virtually any metropolitan public relations agency.

Coming back to my Saturday GRE class, I didn’t recognize any of the perspective graduate students as hailing from our journalism school. They were coming from other disciplines on campus. The ratio in my GRE class is about seven-to-one, female.

Is this the experience at other public research universities? And if it is, what does it mean for the future? Sounds like a great research project.

Technology has produced a paradigm shift in how work gets done in this country and other developed nations around the world.

The days in which we relied on brute strength, ignorance and testosterone for the majority of the heavy lifting in the workplace are in the rear-view mirror. Today, we are focused on productivity. Today, we rely on a service-oriented economy. The “services” provided by knuckle-draggers in the form of brute strength, ignorance and testosterone are no longer desired. Can they (e.g., males en masse) shift to providing services with a smile? I have my doubts.

Can I prove the reasoning behind my trepidation about the future of men? Not yet. Can I deny that I have these concerns? No.

Are all men doomed to being academic second-class citizens? There are going to be men that will do well, very well. As a gender, I suspect that blue brains are taking a back seat to pink brains.

Some may inclined to think: How come it took you so long to come to this obvious conclusion?

http://www.usnews.com/rankings

http://www.askmen.com/entertainment/better_look/7b_why-schools-arent-built-for-boys.html

http://news.slashdot.org/story/13/01/04/1555229/why-girls-do-better-at-school

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2011/05/01/pr%E2%80%99s-endangered-species/

%d bloggers like this: