Pac-12 Split

[ThisCouldBeHeavn]

<p>

The northwest schools won’t go for that. They benefit whenever they play in los angeles (recruiting) or when USC visits (sell more tickets). They won’t want Cal/Stanford to get that benefit every year when they only get it every other year.

</p>

<p>They can’t all play in LA every year (unless USC and UCLA are going to play more home games than road, which they wouldn’t want obviously), so no matter what there are going to be 4 unhappy schools.</p>

<p>

They’ll probably use a 5-1-2 format like the SEC does if they decide to do 8 conference games. If they do nine, I would bet on it being 5-1-3 rather than 5-2-2. 5 teams from your own conference, a permanent inter-division rival, and then rotating teams.

</p>

<p>That format doesn’t really make any sense for the Pac-10. The only schools with permanent inter-division rivals would be the CA schools, and they would have 2, not 1. Having say Oregon play Colorado rather than Arizona every year would just be arbitrary.</p>

[jbusc]

<p>Well consider the example of Oregon and USC. It’s good for Oregon when USC visits, they can sell more tickets at higher prices, more likely to appear on ESPN at prime time, etc.</p>

<p>In the old round robin, USC played at Oregon every 2 years. If Oregon plays 4 games against the south division (with no permanent games) then USC plays at Oregon once every 3 years. But if Oregon plays 3 games against the south division plus one permanent non-USC south game, then USC plays at Oregon once every 4 years.</p>

<p>Oregon has to give up hosting USC every 2 years (because it is impossible if they’re not in the same division) but there’s no reason why they would have to give up every 3 years.</p>

<p>Same logic applies to playing in Los Angeles. Oregon is guaranteed playing in LA for 2 of every 3 years with a rotating 4-game cross division schedule, but only once every 2 years if they have a non-USC/UCLA permanent south opponent. They give up playing in LA every year, but they don’t have to give up every other year either.</p>

[spaceneedle]

<p>pac 16 or pac 10, i’m not a fan of this in between scenario we’re now left with. we once had 5 pairs of bitter rivalries, now we are left with one additional fabricated faux rivalry and a split that is likely to destroy the chemistry of the conference. no thank you.</p>

[Knights09]

<p>

That format doesn’t really make any sense for the Pac-10. The only schools with permanent inter-division rivals would be the CA schools, and they would have 2, not 1. Having say Oregon play Colorado rather than Arizona every year would just be arbitrary.

</p>

<p>SEC has some arbitrary rivals as well. South Carolina’s permanent West rival is Arkansas.</p>