Pac-10 Meetings Highlights

by freesia39 on Jun 9, 2009 9:12 AM PDT Comment 6 comments

The Pac-10 met and the biggest issue that was discussed was possibly eliminating the round robin schedule.

I can't find a link to the discussion on the Pac-10 website, but I did find it on Wilner's blog at the San Jose Mercury News. Of course, Wilner hates the round robin schedule because he believes it puts the Pac-10 at a disadvantage compared to other conferences because it's one additional loss:

The Pac-10 won’t drop its round-robin football schedule in favor of an eight-game lineup that allows for an extra non-conference game — and presumably an extra win.

Put another way: The league will continue to operate at a competitive disadvantage relative to other BCS conferences.

Sounds about right.

Continuing:

Muldoon said the Pac-10 coaches expressed interested in dropping the round-robin schedule during their meeting, so the issue was placed before the athletic directors.

"It didn’t gain a lot of traction," Muldoon said.

So what’s the status, I asked.

"It’s dead."

Why wouldn’t the athletic directors be in favor of a change that could help their teams qualify for a bowl game? Or improve their bowl position? Or possibly get a second team into the BCS?

"Most people like the nine-game schedule," Muldoon said. "They don’t want to buy another non-conference game. There just wasn’t a lot of interest."

So little, in fact, that the topic didn’t even reach the presidents.

I don't agree with Wilner at all, since I like the fact the Pac-10 comes up with a true conference champion, and hey, a team could go undefeated. Tell $C to stop losing to the powerhouses of Stanford and OSU.

In other Pac-10 News, the major news was about cost containment proposals which I'm sure has everyone in a tizzy but didn't make a lot of news.

Bowls were discussed briefly, along with the TV Network idea:

In other action, the Conference approved a policy limiting institutions to one road weekday football game per season when classes are in session, discussed interest in studying the viability of establishing a Conference television network, met with interested bowl game organizations regarding affiliations for the 2010-13 bowl cycle and approved in concept holding the 2011 Pac-10 Women's Basketball Tournament at USC's Galen Center.

Hopefully the future Pac-10 Network can actually be watched by fans of the Pac-10. Isn't that a current issue with the Big-10 network?

And in news I know everyone here will absolutely love, the Conference Medal has been renamed to honor everyone's favorite former Pac-10 Commissioner:

The Conference Medal, awarded annually to each institution's outstanding senior male and female student-athlete, was renamed the Tom Hansen Conference Medal in honor of Hansen, who is retiring at the end of June after 26 years as Pac-10 Commissioner.

Oh boy.

The only good part about this was the round robin schedule staying. I do remember when I frst came to UCLA, we didn't play every team each year, but when we switched to the round robin, it was nice to know we would play every team in the league. I didn't realize this concept was foreign to other leagues, but I guess if you're too busy trying to beat up Appalachain State... oh wait...

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.

0 recs | Comment 6 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Thanks for the update

While I like the round-robin in concept, it really does put us at a disadvantage compared to the other BCS conferences.

by gilbert on Jun 9, 2009 11:56 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

How do you figure?

Where is the disadvantage? I don’t get it. I’d rather play a BCS school than some directional school. 3 non-conference games are plenty, and if you’re smart you’ll schedule one “cupcake” that’s still in the same division, one semi-competitive game (i.e. recognizable name but not a powerhouse) and one tough Big Six game…which I believe is exactly what UCLA is doing this year.

But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.

by tasser10 on Jun 9, 2009 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Most teams in other conferences

have no problem qualifying for a bowl because they have that extra win in the bag. Instead of playing an easy team, Pac-10 schools play another conference foe, making it tougher to get to six wins. It’s part of the reason the conference hasn’t fulfilled all seven of their bowl obligations since the schedule was expanded to 12 games.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jun 9, 2009 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

The Pac-10 has sent and is sending fewer teams to bowls annually because of this. That’s five extra losses in Pac-10 play other conferences don’t have.

by gilbert on Jun 9, 2009 4:52 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I still don't agree

What’s the difference between having to play Wazzu or UW in the extra conference game, rather than some nonconference cupcake? It’ll vary every year, of course, but your argument would only make sense if every team in the Pac-10 was competitive every year. By the same token, my argument only makes sense if the extra conference game is one of the Pac-10 cellar-dwellers. So in essence, it’s a wash, in my opinion. It may be a little tougher to play a conference foe even if they are a bad team, but I’d rather play a Big Six bad team than some random school.

But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.

by tasser10 on Jun 10, 2009 7:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Last year

two Pac-10 teams would have been bow eligible had they beaten some cupcake instead of playing another Pac-10 school. Two more teams would have been bowl eligible under that same circumstances in 2007. Instead of going .500 as a conference in that game, the conference could go 10-0 or 9-1. Those extra 4 or 5 wins could easily be the difference between making a bowl and missing it for teams.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jun 10, 2009 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs