Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
How would USC fair as a football independent?
Author Message
BigEastMike Online
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 170
Joined: Aug 2021
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Big East
Location:
Post: #21
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
(10-09-2021 09:43 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  
(10-08-2021 10:06 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  
(10-08-2021 07:27 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let’s pretend for a moment that the PAC 12’s crown jewel was dissatisfied to the point of taking their football independent and moving the rest of their sports to the WCC.

What might that look like?

Annual Opponents:
ND
UCLA
Cal
Stanford
Washington
Oregon
2 G5s
4 Big Ten/SEC/ACC

thoughts?

You are kidding? USC should be dissatisfied with themselves. They are an embarrassment. They got crushed at home by Stanford and Oregon State. In your hypothetical scenario, they would be on their own. The other Pac-12 schools would not do them any favors by scheduling them. Recruiting would get nasty, because schools in the Pac-12 would point out that they will never play in the Rose Bowl, they left because they can't compete in the Pac-12, that they have downgraded their Olympic sports schedule to games against LMU, Pepperdine, San Diego.

Going independent would be a revenue loser, both in football and basketball. The alumni would not be happy at all. They are not happy as it is. With all of their football history and all of the football talent in Southern California, they should be the crown jewell. But they are not.

Every program goes through cycles where they are truly awful. Alabama went through this awhile back (pre-Nick Saban), LSU went through it, etc. The important thing is to get an AD who can get it right because if not, you could have a situation like Tennessee who hasn't got it right yet!! I'm sure with the right coach, USC can be good once again. But I think you're right about the Pac 12 schools.

Tennessee could have had Schiano as coach but the idiot Clay Travis got the fanbase all riled up to reject that idea and look at them now.
10-09-2021 10:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AuzGrams Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 613
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 6
I Root For: Utah, UVU
Location:
Post: #22
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
(10-09-2021 09:52 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  
(10-09-2021 08:55 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  
(10-09-2021 08:10 AM)schmolik Wrote:  
(10-09-2021 06:58 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  Every conference needs an average to “dead weight” program to make USC, Oregon, Washington and whatever other up and coming school (Utah) to look good.

In a conference of 10 or 12 teams, someone is almost always going to be the dead weight. If the SEC kicked Vanderbilt out, either Tennessee, Kentucky, or one or both of the Mississippi schools would become the new dead weight. There were dead weights in the Big Ten before Rutgers got there, Northwestern mainly was the dead weight in the 80's before Gary Barnett got there. If Rutgers and Maryland left the Big Ten, Ohio State would still beat up on Illinois and the Indiana schools (and these days Michigan Rimshot)

Dead weight has more than one meaning and football isn't everything. Maybe Oregon State and Washington State can be competitive with the California schools in football. So what? So could 20-50 other schools in the country. What makes them more special than say San Diego State other than historical ties? The California schools (especially Stanford) take great pride on academics, and Oregon State and Washington State are pretty bad academically according to USN&WR rankings. And unless Corvallis and Pullman are nicer places than I think they are, why would UCLA and Berkeley want to go there every other year or however often they do? If the California schools have Oregon and Washington (the clear cut #1 schools in those states, do they need the "little brothers"?)

The SEC and Big Ten can ask themselves the same questions about conference members but they are being paid well despite having to share with the Rutgers's and Vanderbilt's so they are OK with it. Texas and Oklahoma were dangled with more money so they left. Can the California Four get more money leaving behind some schools?

Kinda a shame that Tennessee for football these days is considered dead weight but it’s true. This type of **** is why they need a 5-1-2 playoff system. Plus, 8 teams keeps the regular season important.

And Washington/Washington State & Oregon/Oregon State are good rivalries. The PAC-12 is a little more than the California schools. You know better.

That’s okay. The PAC-8 aka the new WAC would look good without USC/UCLA/Stanford/Cal.

I’m not trying to hate but Berkeley, CA is a little overrated compared to what you think of Corvallis. Nothing I’ve seen indicates that town is a shithole.

Actually, South Carolina is more dead weight than Tennessee, IMO, but Tennessee isn't much better.

No offense to South Carolina, but Tennessee I thought was closer to Alabama’s level than what the norm is for South Carolina. I miss Steve Spurrier though.
10-09-2021 10:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
schmolik Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,492
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation: 186
I Root For: UIUC, PSU, Nova
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
Post: #23
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
(10-09-2021 08:55 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  
(10-09-2021 08:10 AM)schmolik Wrote:  
(10-09-2021 06:58 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  Every conference needs an average to “dead weight” program to make USC, Oregon, Washington and whatever other up and coming school (Utah) to look good.

In a conference of 10 or 12 teams, someone is almost always going to be the dead weight. If the SEC kicked Vanderbilt out, either Tennessee, Kentucky, or one or both of the Mississippi schools would become the new dead weight. There were dead weights in the Big Ten before Rutgers got there, Northwestern mainly was the dead weight in the 80's before Gary Barnett got there. If Rutgers and Maryland left the Big Ten, Ohio State would still beat up on Illinois and the Indiana schools (and these days Michigan Rimshot)

Dead weight has more than one meaning and football isn't everything. Maybe Oregon State and Washington State can be competitive with the California schools in football. So what? So could 20-50 other schools in the country. What makes them more special than say San Diego State other than historical ties? The California schools (especially Stanford) take great pride on academics, and Oregon State and Washington State are pretty bad academically according to USN&WR rankings. And unless Corvallis and Pullman are nicer places than I think they are, why would UCLA and Berkeley want to go there every other year or however often they do? If the California schools have Oregon and Washington (the clear cut #1 schools in those states, do they need the "little brothers"?)

The SEC and Big Ten can ask themselves the same questions about conference members but they are being paid well despite having to share with the Rutgers's and Vanderbilt's so they are OK with it. Texas and Oklahoma were dangled with more money so they left. Can the California Four get more money leaving behind some schools?

Kinda a shame that Tennessee for football these days is considered dead weight but it’s true. This type of **** is why they need a 5-1-2 playoff system. Plus, 8 teams keeps the regular season important.

And Washington/Washington State & Oregon/Oregon State are good rivalries. The PAC-12 is a little more than the California schools. You know better.

That’s okay. The PAC-8 aka the new WAC would look good without USC/UCLA/Stanford/Cal.

I’m not trying to hate but Berkeley, CA is a little overrated compared to what you think of Corvallis. Nothing I’ve seen indicates that town is a shithole.

I've been to Berkeley. They have a unique clock tower I've been in. And even if the campus isn't nice, it's close to San Fran which has tons of tourist attractions for out of towners. Is Corvallis near Portland? And even if it is, Portland isn't anywhere near as fun a city as San Fran. And if I wanted to go to Oregon, that's what the University of Oregon is for. What does Oregon State give that Oregon doesn't? Oregon is a much more consistent football and men's basketball performer and of course they're Nike U. What does Washington State give that the University of Washington doesn't? Pullman/Spokane or Seattle?
10-09-2021 10:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 41,494
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1479
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #24
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
Just fine. But IMO they are better off in the PAC.
(This post was last modified: 10-09-2021 01:02 PM by quo vadis.)
10-09-2021 01:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SoCalBobcat78 Online
All American
*

Posts: 2,550
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 126
I Root For: TXST, UCLA, CBU
Location:
Post: #25
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
(10-09-2021 09:43 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  
(10-08-2021 10:06 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  
(10-08-2021 07:27 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let’s pretend for a moment that the PAC 12’s crown jewel was dissatisfied to the point of taking their football independent and moving the rest of their sports to the WCC.

What might that look like?

Annual Opponents:
ND
UCLA
Cal
Stanford
Washington
Oregon
2 G5s
4 Big Ten/SEC/ACC

thoughts?

You are kidding? USC should be dissatisfied with themselves. They are an embarrassment. They got crushed at home by Stanford and Oregon State. In your hypothetical scenario, they would be on their own. The other Pac-12 schools would not do them any favors by scheduling them. Recruiting would get nasty, because schools in the Pac-12 would point out that they will never play in the Rose Bowl, they left because they can't compete in the Pac-12, that they have downgraded their Olympic sports schedule to games against LMU, Pepperdine, San Diego.

Going independent would be a revenue loser, both in football and basketball. The alumni would not be happy at all. They are not happy as it is. With all of their football history and all of the football talent in Southern California, they should be the crown jewell. But they are not.

Every program goes through cycles where they are truly awful. Alabama went through this awhile back (pre-Nick Saban), LSU went through it, etc. The important thing is to get an AD who can get it right because if not, you could have a situation like Tennessee who hasn't got it right yet!! I'm sure with the right coach, USC can be good once again. But I think you're right about the Pac 12 schools.

Obviously, that is correct. In the 2000 season, a six win UCLA team beat Alabama and Michigan. In 2001, a seven win UCLA team beat Alabama in Tuscaloosa and Ohio State. That 2000-2001 Alabama team was not the Saban team of today. The 2001 Ohio State team was not the team of today.

USC still gets plenty of talent by virtue of where they live. They need somone to develop the talent and instill some pride and discipline into the football program. They also need to keep the top players in the west. Bijon Robinson from Tucson, grew up a USC fan. They were his favorite team. Xavier Worthy is from Fresno. These two kids are killing OU today and both look like future NFL first round picks. Ohio State wide receiver Chris Olave, from San Marcos, California, is a future first round pick that got away. Just too many examples of talent going back east and a good USC head coach could put a stop to that.

But they have no reason to be dissatisfied with the Pac, but the Pac has plenty of reasons to be dissatisfied with them.
10-09-2021 02:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AuzGrams Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 613
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 6
I Root For: Utah, UVU
Location:
Post: #26
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
(10-09-2021 10:28 AM)schmolik Wrote:  
(10-09-2021 08:55 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  
(10-09-2021 08:10 AM)schmolik Wrote:  
(10-09-2021 06:58 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  Every conference needs an average to “dead weight” program to make USC, Oregon, Washington and whatever other up and coming school (Utah) to look good.

In a conference of 10 or 12 teams, someone is almost always going to be the dead weight. If the SEC kicked Vanderbilt out, either Tennessee, Kentucky, or one or both of the Mississippi schools would become the new dead weight. There were dead weights in the Big Ten before Rutgers got there, Northwestern mainly was the dead weight in the 80's before Gary Barnett got there. If Rutgers and Maryland left the Big Ten, Ohio State would still beat up on Illinois and the Indiana schools (and these days Michigan Rimshot)

Dead weight has more than one meaning and football isn't everything. Maybe Oregon State and Washington State can be competitive with the California schools in football. So what? So could 20-50 other schools in the country. What makes them more special than say San Diego State other than historical ties? The California schools (especially Stanford) take great pride on academics, and Oregon State and Washington State are pretty bad academically according to USN&WR rankings. And unless Corvallis and Pullman are nicer places than I think they are, why would UCLA and Berkeley want to go there every other year or however often they do? If the California schools have Oregon and Washington (the clear cut #1 schools in those states, do they need the "little brothers"?)

The SEC and Big Ten can ask themselves the same questions about conference members but they are being paid well despite having to share with the Rutgers's and Vanderbilt's so they are OK with it. Texas and Oklahoma were dangled with more money so they left. Can the California Four get more money leaving behind some schools?

Kinda a shame that Tennessee for football these days is considered dead weight but it’s true. This type of **** is why they need a 5-1-2 playoff system. Plus, 8 teams keeps the regular season important.

And Washington/Washington State & Oregon/Oregon State are good rivalries. The PAC-12 is a little more than the California schools. You know better.

That’s okay. The PAC-8 aka the new WAC would look good without USC/UCLA/Stanford/Cal.

I’m not trying to hate but Berkeley, CA is a little overrated compared to what you think of Corvallis. Nothing I’ve seen indicates that town is a shithole.

I've been to Berkeley. They have a unique clock tower I've been in. And even if the campus isn't nice, it's close to San Fran which has tons of tourist attractions for out of towners. Is Corvallis near Portland? And even if it is, Portland isn't anywhere near as fun a city as San Fran. And if I wanted to go to Oregon, that's what the University of Oregon is for. What does Oregon State give that Oregon doesn't? Oregon is a much more consistent football and men's basketball performer and of course they're Nike U. What does Washington State give that the University of Washington doesn't? Pullman/Spokane or Seattle?

Why not a college football conference with all past champions and the rest get table scraps?

A Cal4 breakaway is ridiculous.
10-09-2021 05:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AuzGrams Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 613
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 6
I Root For: Utah, UVU
Location:
Post: #27
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
(10-09-2021 10:28 AM)schmolik Wrote:  
(10-09-2021 08:55 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  
(10-09-2021 08:10 AM)schmolik Wrote:  
(10-09-2021 06:58 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  Every conference needs an average to “dead weight” program to make USC, Oregon, Washington and whatever other up and coming school (Utah) to look good.

In a conference of 10 or 12 teams, someone is almost always going to be the dead weight. If the SEC kicked Vanderbilt out, either Tennessee, Kentucky, or one or both of the Mississippi schools would become the new dead weight. There were dead weights in the Big Ten before Rutgers got there, Northwestern mainly was the dead weight in the 80's before Gary Barnett got there. If Rutgers and Maryland left the Big Ten, Ohio State would still beat up on Illinois and the Indiana schools (and these days Michigan Rimshot)

Dead weight has more than one meaning and football isn't everything. Maybe Oregon State and Washington State can be competitive with the California schools in football. So what? So could 20-50 other schools in the country. What makes them more special than say San Diego State other than historical ties? The California schools (especially Stanford) take great pride on academics, and Oregon State and Washington State are pretty bad academically according to USN&WR rankings. And unless Corvallis and Pullman are nicer places than I think they are, why would UCLA and Berkeley want to go there every other year or however often they do? If the California schools have Oregon and Washington (the clear cut #1 schools in those states, do they need the "little brothers"?)

The SEC and Big Ten can ask themselves the same questions about conference members but they are being paid well despite having to share with the Rutgers's and Vanderbilt's so they are OK with it. Texas and Oklahoma were dangled with more money so they left. Can the California Four get more money leaving behind some schools?

Kinda a shame that Tennessee for football these days is considered dead weight but it’s true. This type of **** is why they need a 5-1-2 playoff system. Plus, 8 teams keeps the regular season important.

And Washington/Washington State & Oregon/Oregon State are good rivalries. The PAC-12 is a little more than the California schools. You know better.

That’s okay. The PAC-8 aka the new WAC would look good without USC/UCLA/Stanford/Cal.

I’m not trying to hate but Berkeley, CA is a little overrated compared to what you think of Corvallis. Nothing I’ve seen indicates that town is a shithole.

I've been to Berkeley. They have a unique clock tower I've been in. And even if the campus isn't nice, it's close to San Fran which has tons of tourist attractions for out of towners. Is Corvallis near Portland? And even if it is, Portland isn't anywhere near as fun a city as San Fran. And if I wanted to go to Oregon, that's what the University of Oregon is for. What does Oregon State give that Oregon doesn't? Oregon is a much more consistent football and men's basketball performer and of course they're Nike U. What does Washington State give that the University of Washington doesn't? Pullman/Spokane or Seattle?

Why not a college football conference with all past champions and the rest get table scraps?

A Cal4 breakaway is ridiculous.
10-09-2021 05:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,430
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 364
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #28
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
(10-09-2021 08:10 AM)schmolik Wrote:  In a conference of 10 or 12 teams, someone is almost always going to be the dead weight. ...

Dead weight has more than one meaning and football isn't everything. Maybe Oregon State and Washington State can be competitive with the California schools in football. So what? So could 20-50 other schools in the country. What makes them more special than say San Diego State other than historical ties?

You hit that nail on the head ... it's exactly historical ties which makes them more special than SDSU. Their brand value is that they are instantly recognized as longtime PAC schools within the core PAC market.

Quote: The California schools (especially Stanford) take great pride on academics, and Oregon State and Washington State are pretty bad academically according to USN&WR rankings.

USN&WR is most relevant for a University that ties its academic status to its undergraduate teaching. For Washington State, in the 95-114 US tier (top 400 in the world) in the AWRU and Oregon State in the 66-94 tier (top 300 in the world), their academic research standing is likely their priority in terms of academic status. SDSU would be a step below those in academic research standing (though certainly not as far below as Boise State or Memphis).

Quote: And unless Corvallis and Pullman are nicer places than I think they are, why would UCLA and Berkeley want to go there every other year or however often they do? If the California schools have Oregon and Washington (the clear cut #1 schools in those states, do they need the "little brothers"?)

Obviously UCLA and USC don't see Corvallis or Pullman all that often. And it's not like Cal is going to complain that they get to go to Corvallis and Pullman, when they are more often focusing on getting to a bowl than getting to the conference championship.

None of them need the little brothers of Washington and Oregon, and if need be, under some future restructure of big money college football, it seems likely they will, with some reluctance, say goodbye to them ...
... but until then, the history exists.

And as you point out, every conference of 12 needs some teams to be in the cellar in any given year, so under the current system, it would be silly to work on replacing them with someone else and restarting the process of building up history from the ground up.

Quote: Can the California Four get more money leaving behind some schools?

If they can join the Big Ten along with Oregon and Washington, perhaps yes, but a coast to coast conference of 20 or more is not yet feasible, so that's a question for another day.
10-09-2021 09:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,561
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 785
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #29
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
The continuous underrating of the Pac-12 in conference realignment matters is sooooooo tiresome (and I’m not even a Pac-12 fan). USC, Stanford and the rest of the Pac-12 schools are exactly where they should be for conference purposes.
10-09-2021 09:48 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,205
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 90
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #30
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
Slightly over-cooked deep-fried Oreo.
Next to the Chanticleers' pool.
10-09-2021 10:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DawgNBama Online
the Rush Limbaugh of CSNBBS
*

Posts: 4,461
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation: 144
I Root For: common sense
Location: common sense
Post: #31
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
(10-09-2021 10:28 AM)schmolik Wrote:  
(10-09-2021 08:55 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  
(10-09-2021 08:10 AM)schmolik Wrote:  
(10-09-2021 06:58 AM)AuzGrams Wrote:  Every conference needs an average to “dead weight” program to make USC, Oregon, Washington and whatever other up and coming school (Utah) to look good.

In a conference of 10 or 12 teams, someone is almost always going to be the dead weight. If the SEC kicked Vanderbilt out, either Tennessee, Kentucky, or one or both of the Mississippi schools would become the new dead weight. There were dead weights in the Big Ten before Rutgers got there, Northwestern mainly was the dead weight in the 80's before Gary Barnett got there. If Rutgers and Maryland left the Big Ten, Ohio State would still beat up on Illinois and the Indiana schools (and these days Michigan Rimshot)

Dead weight has more than one meaning and football isn't everything. Maybe Oregon State and Washington State can be competitive with the California schools in football. So what? So could 20-50 other schools in the country. What makes them more special than say San Diego State other than historical ties? The California schools (especially Stanford) take great pride on academics, and Oregon State and Washington State are pretty bad academically according to USN&WR rankings. And unless Corvallis and Pullman are nicer places than I think they are, why would UCLA and Berkeley want to go there every other year or however often they do? If the California schools have Oregon and Washington (the clear cut #1 schools in those states, do they need the "little brothers"?)

The SEC and Big Ten can ask themselves the same questions about conference members but they are being paid well despite having to share with the Rutgers's and Vanderbilt's so they are OK with it. Texas and Oklahoma were dangled with more money so they left. Can the California Four get more money leaving behind some schools?

Kinda a shame that Tennessee for football these days is considered dead weight but it’s true. This type of **** is why they need a 5-1-2 playoff system. Plus, 8 teams keeps the regular season important.

And Washington/Washington State & Oregon/Oregon State are good rivalries. The PAC-12 is a little more than the California schools. You know better.

That’s okay. The PAC-8 aka the new WAC would look good without USC/UCLA/Stanford/Cal.

I’m not trying to hate but Berkeley, CA is a little overrated compared to what you think of Corvallis. Nothing I’ve seen indicates that town is a shithole.

I've been to Berkeley. They have a unique clock tower I've been in. And even if the campus isn't nice, it's close to San Fran which has tons of tourist attractions for out of towners. Is Corvallis near Portland? And even if it is, Portland isn't anywhere near as fun a city as San Fran. And if I wanted to go to Oregon, that's what the University of Oregon is for. What does Oregon State give that Oregon doesn't? Oregon is a much more consistent football and men's basketball performer and of course they're Nike U. What does Washington State give that the University of Washington doesn't? Pullman/Spokane or Seattle?


I'm not going anywhere near San Francisco, and they (San Francisco) probably wouldn't let me in anyway because I'm a conservative and they are a very liberal city.

FTW, Corvallis is near Portland, and I used to like the city of Portland. Plenty of things to see and do, and just enjoy life in the big city. Not anymore, ever since Antifa/BLM took over. I'll pass on Portland also now until Antifa is banned from the city. The mayor of Portland is a spineless wimp who just gives Antifa/BLM anything they want. The surrounding cities know this too, and they won't help him out. Knowing this about Portland, I can only imagine what San Francisco and Seattle are like. Hard pass!!!!
10-09-2021 11:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ClairtonPanther Offline
people need to wake up
*

Posts: 24,500
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 674
I Root For: Pitt/Navy
Location: Portland, Oregon

Donators
Post: #32
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
USC has so many natural advantages over the competition nationwide its truly amazing. California HSs produce the third highest amount of talent that plays on Sundays. The talent in that state is phenomenal. The weather in southern Cali alone is attractive for those from out of state. Cali isn't ridiculously humid like the south east is. Now look at the potential impact of NIL, California is the third largest economy in the world. California is one of two states that can stand alone as independent countries and thrive, but that's for another board. USC's tradition and branding is as rich as any other school in the country. USC is literally a coach away from being what Alabama is today. If they fail to do so in the coming 5-10 years; it's on them, not the PAC 12.
(This post was last modified: 10-10-2021 01:54 AM by ClairtonPanther.)
10-10-2021 01:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AuzGrams Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 613
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 6
I Root For: Utah, UVU
Location:
Post: #33
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
(10-09-2021 09:48 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The continuous underrating of the Pac-12 in conference realignment matters is sooooooo tiresome (and I’m not even a Pac-12 fan). USC, Stanford and the rest of the Pac-12 schools are exactly where they should be for conference purposes.

Indeed
10-10-2021 02:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goodknightfl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,566
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 333
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #34
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
USC is a huge brand without a huge product. They would be fine as Inde, but don't see it. They fit the Pac profile perfectly, as they would in the Big. All the Pac schools have a problem TV wise, they simply play to late, to draw eastern eyes.
10-10-2021 08:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,141
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 645
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Mouth of Wilson, VA
Post: #35
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
(10-09-2021 06:28 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(10-08-2021 11:06 PM)WAChsenburggemeinde Wrote:  
(10-08-2021 10:32 PM)BigEastMike Wrote:  
(10-08-2021 08:53 PM)clpp01 Wrote:  
(10-08-2021 07:27 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let’s pretend for a moment that the PAC 12’s crown jewel was dissatisfied to the point of taking their football independent and moving the rest of their sports to the WCC.

What might that look like?

Annual Opponents:
ND
UCLA
Cal
Stanford
Washington
Oregon
2 G5s
4 Big Ten/SEC/ACC

thoughts?

USC's problem with independence isn't putting together a football schedule it would be their unwillingness to sacrifice their olympic sports to make a go at it. They leave in football they would have to take everything with them and having to put their olympic programs in the Big West or WCC is a complete non starter for them.

Exactly, the Irish have a great option with the ACC and the Big East before that. USC doesn't have a high level conference to park its non revenue sports in.

They would do fine as an independent. Probably make a little more money on the football side, but it might hurt their Olympic sports.

I think for Olympic sports they would swing a deal with the MWC over the WCC. The 2 G5 opponents would be MWC teams as part of that deal. But they'd probably just be USC home games or neutral site games rather than home-and-homes.

Why do you assume their football team would make more money as an independent? Notre Dame doesn't, and their following is more national than the Trojans'.

There are five valuable brands on the west coast, and if they were to move to the B1G as a group (along with Cal) they could make more than they do now in the PAC. But none of those five would make more as an independent IMO.

ND is 6th in the country in revenue.

Its just TV revenue that is less for ND as an independent

(The NBC deal is up in 2025, lets see how much the new contract is)

There are other routes to make money (tickets, apparel, donations, etc...)
(This post was last modified: 10-10-2021 09:24 AM by TerryD.)
10-10-2021 09:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fort Bend Owl Online
Legend
*

Posts: 26,098
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 380
I Root For: An easy win
Location:

The Parliament Awards
Post: #36
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
(10-10-2021 01:53 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  USC has so many natural advantages over the competition nationwide its truly amazing. California HSs produce the third highest amount of talent that plays on Sundays. The talent in that state is phenomenal. The weather in southern Cali alone is attractive for those from out of state. Cali isn't ridiculously humid like the south east is. Now look at the potential impact of NIL, California is the third largest economy in the world. California is one of two states that can stand alone as independent countries and thrive, but that's for another board. USC's tradition and branding is as rich as any other school in the country. USC is literally a coach away from being what Alabama is today. If they fail to do so in the coming 5-10 years; it's on them, not the PAC 12.

They don't have as many natural advantages as you think. The state of California is drastically changing, and for sure the inner-city Los Angeles is not what it used to be 30-40 years ago. Their stadium (Memorial Stadium) is an old dinosaur, although they probably could play their games at the new SoFi Stadium if they want an upgrade there. And even the LA weather isn't what it used to be. It's turning more into a desert-like climate (think Palm Springs), but with a ton of smog built in. You pretty much have to be on the coast to get the idyllic Southern California weather.

If you disagree with me, then how do you explain the Southern California population decline? People are moving to Colorado, Montana and Texas in droves.
10-10-2021 09:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DawgNBama Online
the Rush Limbaugh of CSNBBS
*

Posts: 4,461
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation: 144
I Root For: common sense
Location: common sense
Post: #37
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
From what I have heard, the main reason Californians are moving to Colorado, Montana, and Texas in droves (even Alabama is getting a trickle of Californians coming in) is due because of politics. Conservative Californians can't take it anymore, so they packed their bags and left.
10-10-2021 10:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,561
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 785
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #38
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
(10-10-2021 09:50 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  
(10-10-2021 01:53 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  USC has so many natural advantages over the competition nationwide its truly amazing. California HSs produce the third highest amount of talent that plays on Sundays. The talent in that state is phenomenal. The weather in southern Cali alone is attractive for those from out of state. Cali isn't ridiculously humid like the south east is. Now look at the potential impact of NIL, California is the third largest economy in the world. California is one of two states that can stand alone as independent countries and thrive, but that's for another board. USC's tradition and branding is as rich as any other school in the country. USC is literally a coach away from being what Alabama is today. If they fail to do so in the coming 5-10 years; it's on them, not the PAC 12.

They don't have as many natural advantages as you think. The state of California is drastically changing, and for sure the inner-city Los Angeles is not what it used to be 30-40 years ago. Their stadium (Memorial Stadium) is an old dinosaur, although they probably could play their games at the new SoFi Stadium if they want an upgrade there. And even the LA weather isn't what it used to be. It's turning more into a desert-like climate (think Palm Springs), but with a ton of smog built in. You pretty much have to be on the coast to get the idyllic Southern California weather.

If you disagree with me, then how do you explain the Southern California population decline? People are moving to Colorado, Montana and Texas in droves.

The Southern California population is NOT declining. They’re now in mature late stage slow growth mode as opposed to hyper-fast growing mode. Colorado and Texas are in the stage where California was from 1950 to 2000.

I’m sure plenty of people like whining about the political atmosphere there, but that’s a complete red herring constantly fed by biased news sources. Instead, it’s largely about economics: California has the highest housing costs in the country because it’s in *super* high demand (as a result of lots of people that actually *do* want to live there), but supply is limited. California is probably three decades behind in building enough housing for the number of people that want to live there. Therefore, even if you love the weather, politics, natural scenery, etc., if you have either (a) the opportunity to cash out if you’ve owned a California home for the past 20-30 years and make a small fortune by moving elsewhere or (b) no opportunity to buy a California home in the first place because the prices are so high, then you’ll move out in either case. Everyone ultimately needs a place to live.
10-10-2021 10:56 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,561
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 785
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #39
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
(10-10-2021 09:50 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  
(10-10-2021 01:53 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  USC has so many natural advantages over the competition nationwide its truly amazing. California HSs produce the third highest amount of talent that plays on Sundays. The talent in that state is phenomenal. The weather in southern Cali alone is attractive for those from out of state. Cali isn't ridiculously humid like the south east is. Now look at the potential impact of NIL, California is the third largest economy in the world. California is one of two states that can stand alone as independent countries and thrive, but that's for another board. USC's tradition and branding is as rich as any other school in the country. USC is literally a coach away from being what Alabama is today. If they fail to do so in the coming 5-10 years; it's on them, not the PAC 12.

They don't have as many natural advantages as you think. The state of California is drastically changing, and for sure the inner-city Los Angeles is not what it used to be 30-40 years ago. Their stadium (Memorial Stadium) is an old dinosaur, although they probably could play their games at the new SoFi Stadium if they want an upgrade there. And even the LA weather isn't what it used to be. It's turning more into a desert-like climate (think Palm Springs), but with a ton of smog built in. You pretty much have to be on the coast to get the idyllic Southern California weather.

If you disagree with me, then how do you explain the Southern California population decline? People are moving to Colorado, Montana and Texas in droves.

People are thinking too hard about this.

The Pete Carroll USC teams had greatest recruiting pitch that you could ever hope for: you could compete for national championships in great weather with A-list celebrities on the sidelines (a la courtside at a Lakers game) and you’d be the BMOC where the campus is freaking Hollywood.

Could you imagine how much money Matt Leinart and Reggie Bush would have made in the NIL era? It’s on a completely different level when you’re able to achieve that in Los Angeles.

Why did Lori Laughlin bribe people to get her daughter into USC? Because you get exponentially more social media “Insta-famous” opportunities at USC that don’t exist at Arizona State. Isn’t that what NIL is largely going to come down to: getting paid for being Insta-famous? There’s no better place in the country to do that compared to USC.

Imagine where your NIL compensation isn’t about promoting a local college town movie theater, but where you’re getting paid by the movie studio to post on Twitter and Instagram about a new movie and then go to the movie premiere. Imagine where you’re getting paid to promote a concert or album for music acts all of us have actually heard of instead of the local band. Imagine an NIL world where the campus is down the street from where all of the major sports agencies are now located. (Note that the entertainment and sports agencies have all largely consolidated to be based in LA.)

We should all fear the day that USC figures it out. They always had a natural advantage by simply being the Hollywood team in world where every kid is obsessed with pop culture, but they can now even cash in on it with NIL. This isn’t like trying to convince a top recruit to go to Nebraska. It doesn’t take much to get top players to go to a winning team that’s located in Los Angeles.
(This post was last modified: 10-10-2021 11:33 AM by Frank the Tank.)
10-10-2021 11:16 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fort Bend Owl Online
Legend
*

Posts: 26,098
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 380
I Root For: An easy win
Location:

The Parliament Awards
Post: #40
RE: How would USC fair as a football independent?
(10-10-2021 10:56 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(10-10-2021 09:50 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  
(10-10-2021 01:53 AM)ClairtonPanther Wrote:  USC has so many natural advantages over the competition nationwide its truly amazing. California HSs produce the third highest amount of talent that plays on Sundays. The talent in that state is phenomenal. The weather in southern Cali alone is attractive for those from out of state. Cali isn't ridiculously humid like the south east is. Now look at the potential impact of NIL, California is the third largest economy in the world. California is one of two states that can stand alone as independent countries and thrive, but that's for another board. USC's tradition and branding is as rich as any other school in the country. USC is literally a coach away from being what Alabama is today. If they fail to do so in the coming 5-10 years; it's on them, not the PAC 12.

They don't have as many natural advantages as you think. The state of California is drastically changing, and for sure the inner-city Los Angeles is not what it used to be 30-40 years ago. Their stadium (Memorial Stadium) is an old dinosaur, although they probably could play their games at the new SoFi Stadium if they want an upgrade there. And even the LA weather isn't what it used to be. It's turning more into a desert-like climate (think Palm Springs), but with a ton of smog built in. You pretty much have to be on the coast to get the idyllic Southern California weather.

If you disagree with me, then how do you explain the Southern California population decline? People are moving to Colorado, Montana and Texas in droves.

The Southern California population is NOT declining. They’re now in mature late stage slow growth mode as opposed to hyper-fast growing mode. Colorado and Texas are in the stage where California was from 1950 to 2000.

I’m sure plenty of people like whining about the political atmosphere there, but that’s a complete red herring constantly fed by biased news sources. Instead, it’s largely about economics: California has the highest housing costs in the country because it’s in *super* high demand (as a result of lots of people that actually *do* want to live there), but supply is limited. California is probably three decades behind in building enough housing for the number of people that want to live there. Therefore, even if you love the weather, politics, natural scenery, etc., if you have either (a) the opportunity to cash out if you’ve owned a California home for the past 20-30 years and make a small fortune by moving elsewhere or (b) no opportunity to buy a California home in the first place because the prices are so high, then you’ll move out in either case. Everyone ultimately needs a place to live.

https://timesofsandiego.com/life/2021/06...n-decline/

story dated June, 2021 -- some of the highlights from the story

Low birth rates, uncertainty over immigration and long-term impacts from COVID-19 will result in a year-over-year population decline in Southern California for the first time ever, researchers said in the first of a two-part demographic conference sponsored by the Southern California Association of Governments and USC.

For decades, Southern California has ranked among the most vibrant population centers in the United States, climbing above 19 million. However, the rate of growth has slowed throughout the 2010s as declining fertility rates, the housing crisis and other factors have resulted in a gradually aging – – and less mobile — population base.

According to projections released Tuesday, the fastest-growing segment of the population will be mature retirees, ages 75-84, followed by young retirees (65-74) and seniors (85 and older). Meanwhile, there will actually be a decline in college-age young adults and preschool-age children. Also, the ratio of working-age adults to retirement-age adults — which once stood at six to one — has fallen below four to one, according to the workshop projections.

Compounding all of this is the pandemic, which led to an increase in mortality rates, a further decrease in birth rates and virtually halted foreign immigration into California. As a result, 2020 saw the first year-over-year drop in overall population.
10-10-2021 11:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2021 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.