The pac12's worst just upset big12's best
Comments
-
Thank Larry Scott FS for finishing the last attempt at adding Big12 teams by getting only Colorado. Colo-fucking-rado? Christ.Swaye said:
Agree. The PAC finally wouldn't be a shit show. Texas. OU. USC. Washington before they gave up football. Stanford in the last 10 years, Oregon the last 20. That's a conference that people in the rest of the cuntry would give a shit about. Even Oklahomo State is good sometimes (maybe like an ASU level school?). Whatever. The details don't matter. You basically need to merge the best of the Pac 12 and Big 12 to make a conference that is even arguably on par with B1G and SEC. My .02TierbsHsotBoobs said:
The SEC has raped the whole XII just by taking A&M.PurpleJ said:Texas sucks. That's what happens when SEC takes over your state and starts recruiting your talent. That's what happens when you're too scared to play with the big boys. You end up a shadow of yourself in a shitty conference while A&M prospers.
Texas and Oklahoma should have gone west. -
Congrats. The pac now has 1 quality win. And if Charlie strong and Co. Is the best in the big 12 lol
-
I'm going @Tequilla and I have no idea why. My best guesses (and this is based on a 50-60 year history, but mostly my opinion) as to what these conferences would look like to the media/fans. For illustrative purposes only not to argue over is LSU actually top tier and bullshit Penn State sucks now shit. Just fuck off and take it as an approximate view of the major players.
Top tier:
SEC - Bama, LSU, Florida
B1G - Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska,
PAC16 - USC, Texas, OU
Second Tier:
SEC - Georgia, Tennessee, Auburn, Georgia
BiG - Penn State, Michigan State
PAC16 - Washington, UCLA, Oregon, Stanford
Anyway, that conference would actually compare favorably to the other two. I think the Pac is still viewed as the USC and dwarves, so getting some more top end cache would be very helpful. We have a decent B team of has beens like Washington, and new money like Oregon and Stanford to compare pretty well in the second tier already, but the top is where we just suck.
Whatever. I must be fucking bored. -
Look back at what Texas wanted then vs what Texas is now. It was best not to let them in. If they want to come in as a 1/n equal then by all means they are welcome to join now.Southerndawg said:
Thank Larry Scott FS for finishing the last attempt at adding Big12 teams by getting only Colorado. Colo-fucking-rado? Christ.Swaye said:
Agree. The PAC finally wouldn't be a shit show. Texas. OU. USC. Washington before they gave up football. Stanford in the last 10 years, Oregon the last 20. That's a conference that people in the rest of the cuntry would give a shit about. Even Oklahomo State is good sometimes (maybe like an ASU level school?). Whatever. The details don't matter. You basically need to merge the best of the Pac 12 and Big 12 to make a conference that is even arguably on par with B1G and SEC. My .02TierbsHsotBoobs said:
The SEC has raped the whole XII just by taking A&M.PurpleJ said:Texas sucks. That's what happens when SEC takes over your state and starts recruiting your talent. That's what happens when you're too scared to play with the big boys. You end up a shadow of yourself in a shitty conference while A&M prospers.
Texas and Oklahoma should have gone west. -
Georgia x 2??Swaye said:I'm going @Tequilla and I have no idea why. My best guesses (and this is based on a 50-60 year history, but mostly my opinion) as to what these conferences would look like to the media/fans. For illustrative purposes only not to argue over is LSU actually top tier and bullshit Penn State sucks now shit. Just fuck off and take it as an approximate view of the major players.
Top tier:
SEC - Bama, LSU, Florida
B1G - Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska,
PAC16 - USC, Texas, OU
Second Tier:
SEC - Georgia, Tennessee, Auburn, Georgia
BiG - Penn State, Michigan State
PAC16 - Washington, UCLA, Oregon, Stanford
Anyway, that conference would actually compare favorably to the other two. I think the Pac is still viewed as the USC and dwarves, so getting some more top end cache would be very helpful. We have a decent B team of has beens like Washington, and new money like Oregon and Stanford to compare pretty well in the second tier already, but the top is where we just suck.
Whatever. I must be fucking bored.
If you look at that list from an historical perspective, all of your tier one teams have won multiple national championships, that's a fitting criteria IMO. In your second tier, all of the SEC and B1G teams have won at least one National Championship, but only three of the PAC teams have, and one of those is squarely in #ProveIt mode. Not saying that currently the "respect" wouldn't be there, so don't twist, but objectively the PAC would still suck when you compare it to the B1G and the SEC.
Edit: that said, I agree that the conference would have a lot more gravitas with those schools added. -
Doesn't excuse adding Colorado and Utah as consolation prizes.Mad_Son said:
Look back at what Texas wanted then vs what Texas is now. It was best not to let them in. If they want to come in as a 1/n equal then by all means they are welcome to join now.Southerndawg said:
Thank Larry Scott FS for finishing the last attempt at adding Big12 teams by getting only Colorado. Colo-fucking-rado? Christ.Swaye said:
Agree. The PAC finally wouldn't be a shit show. Texas. OU. USC. Washington before they gave up football. Stanford in the last 10 years, Oregon the last 20. That's a conference that people in the rest of the cuntry would give a shit about. Even Oklahomo State is good sometimes (maybe like an ASU level school?). Whatever. The details don't matter. You basically need to merge the best of the Pac 12 and Big 12 to make a conference that is even arguably on par with B1G and SEC. My .02TierbsHsotBoobs said:
The SEC has raped the whole XII just by taking A&M.PurpleJ said:Texas sucks. That's what happens when SEC takes over your state and starts recruiting your talent. That's what happens when you're too scared to play with the big boys. You end up a shadow of yourself in a shitty conference while A&M prospers.
Texas and Oklahoma should have gone west. -
But we got the Denver and Salt Lake City TV markets for the new and exciting Pac-12 Network TV deal that is in DOZENS of homes across America!!1!Southerndawg said:
Doesn't excuse adding Colorado and Utah as consolation prizes.Mad_Son said:
Look back at what Texas wanted then vs what Texas is now. It was best not to let them in. If they want to come in as a 1/n equal then by all means they are welcome to join now.Southerndawg said:
Thank Larry Scott FS for finishing the last attempt at adding Big12 teams by getting only Colorado. Colo-fucking-rado? Christ.Swaye said:
Agree. The PAC finally wouldn't be a shit show. Texas. OU. USC. Washington before they gave up football. Stanford in the last 10 years, Oregon the last 20. That's a conference that people in the rest of the cuntry would give a shit about. Even Oklahomo State is good sometimes (maybe like an ASU level school?). Whatever. The details don't matter. You basically need to merge the best of the Pac 12 and Big 12 to make a conference that is even arguably on par with B1G and SEC. My .02TierbsHsotBoobs said:
The SEC has raped the whole XII just by taking A&M.PurpleJ said:Texas sucks. That's what happens when SEC takes over your state and starts recruiting your talent. That's what happens when you're too scared to play with the big boys. You end up a shadow of yourself in a shitty conference while A&M prospers.
Texas and Oklahoma should have gone west. -
And that globally all important Salt Lake City Market 111!!1!!!!!ThomasFremont said:
But we got the Denver and Salt Lake City TV markets for the new and exciting Pac-12 Network TV deal that is in DOZENS of homes across America!!1!Southerndawg said:
Doesn't excuse adding Colorado and Utah as consolation prizes.Mad_Son said:
Look back at what Texas wanted then vs what Texas is now. It was best not to let them in. If they want to come in as a 1/n equal then by all means they are welcome to join now.Southerndawg said:
Thank Larry Scott FS for finishing the last attempt at adding Big12 teams by getting only Colorado. Colo-fucking-rado? Christ.Swaye said:
Agree. The PAC finally wouldn't be a shit show. Texas. OU. USC. Washington before they gave up football. Stanford in the last 10 years, Oregon the last 20. That's a conference that people in the rest of the cuntry would give a shit about. Even Oklahomo State is good sometimes (maybe like an ASU level school?). Whatever. The details don't matter. You basically need to merge the best of the Pac 12 and Big 12 to make a conference that is even arguably on par with B1G and SEC. My .02TierbsHsotBoobs said:
The SEC has raped the whole XII just by taking A&M.PurpleJ said:Texas sucks. That's what happens when SEC takes over your state and starts recruiting your talent. That's what happens when you're too scared to play with the big boys. You end up a shadow of yourself in a shitty conference while A&M prospers.
Texas and Oklahoma should have gone west. -
Football as a whole has gotten worse over the last decade across all conferences. More talented, prepared skill players and individuals, but teams and over all play have gotten shittier.
-
REAL TALK: just add Texas, OU, OSU, and Houston and be done with it.
The rest of the BigXII dreck can fuck off. I guess Kansas would be an acceptable alternate for Houston.
What will actually happen: BigXII tells Larry Scott to go fuck his tennis racket, so he adds Colorado St, Utah St, and then New Mexico and New Mexico St or UNLV and Nevada. Larry Scott sells this as "filling out the intra-state conference rivalries and adding a new state to the Pac-16 family" that nobody cares about.
