Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: 2012 Budweiser Shootout Entry List Released

Calling Hansen's bluff, and my Pac-10 wish list

It's been a dream come true. So far.

Nuss and I have been fairly outspoken in our crticism of Tom Hansen. Remember, during his tenure, the Pac-10 has failed to market itself nationally, been a key defender of the Bowl Championship Series and a key detractor when it comes to any sort of sweeping change to our television package.

But now, in comes Larry Scott. He's progressive. Experienced. He's earned rave reviews for what he's done with the WTA tour. If you read the quotes in Nuss' earlier post, you almost wonder why he'd leave the WTA at all - it seemed practically everyone admires him, and praises his leadership skills. He's someone who appears to have the uncanny ability to get the job done without pushing people over or forcing the issue. He brought about equal pay for women in the Grand Slams. One thing's for sure - this is at least an incredible victory for Pac-10 women's athletics.

So - we have the leader we want in place.

Now, we find out once and for all if Tom Hansen was bluffing.

Remember, it was Hansen who always hid behind the time-honored "the University Presidents want it, and I do their bidding," argument. Problem is, we didn't hear enough from the University presidents to determine whether it was Hansen carrying out the protocols of the conference or the other way around. When Pete Carroll speaks out against the BCS, do you really think the USC President is going to go against him? Do you really think Jim Sterk and Elson Floyd, who have brought WSU firmly into the 21st century, are going to squash progressive ideas from their new commissioner? Do you think University Presidents really have the time to worry about every single minutiae having to do with college sports? I don't think so. But this is truly the test of whether or not Scott can be successful.

Scott has made a point of saying that he will listen first - listen to the Presidents, the athletic directors, and his other constituents. From there, he'll have a decision to make: carry out the status quo, or push things forward with the Pac-10. My guess is the latter will prevail in most cases. The most pressing issue has to do with the BCS. If the conference leadership wants to keep it, we'll find out fairly soon where he stands. The good news, however, is that it would be logical for Scott to have free range with television deals and scheduling issues that have hurt the conference of late. Those are things the Presidents simply don't have time to deal with.

The other issue is that what all of us wants is different. Some want to keep the round robin in football and basketball, others want to ditch it in favor of expansion. Some want more local games, some want more national exposure. Scott's real challenge is to do the greatest good for the Pac-10 without upsetting its most loyal fans.

Good luck.

What do I want to see from the new Commish? Here's my wish list:

1. Support the plus-one system for now, and a playoff down the road

Even support of a plus-one system in College football would be a huge step forward for this conference. And, in terms of the playoff system, every BCS conference we can get on board in favor of it is a win. I understand the conference's love of the Rose Bowl game. Of course - my argument is that you can still have the Rose Bowl and a playoff system. If you do it right.

2. Consider conference expansion

Note that I didn't say "do it". This is a complex issue, and one that needs a lot of consideration. You need to figure out where to expand, who to include, what to do with the schedule, etc., etc. That's why I want the commissioner to not be afraid to say "we're looking into it", and not just the flat out "no" that Tom Hansen always gave. The Mountain West is lobbying for a BCS bowl-game spot. Even the WAC has expanded in hopes of broadening its audience. If the Pac-10 isn't careful - and I know this may sound crazy - the other conferences in the west might start to gain on us.

In my opinion, it's better to do what the ACC, Big XII and others have done - poach the big schools from the litte guys. Before those "big schools" start eating away at your conference revenue. And I know that a 12 team conference means less money spread around, but it also means a much greater chance of getting two teams into the BCS, or 6-7 into March Madness. Considering the amount of the BCS payout, it's better to do everything you can to get two teams in.

3. Reel in the officiating

It's hard to say the Pac-10's officials are worse than any other conference, because I don't follow any other conference as close (although, I can say with accuracy that the WCC goes overboard on calling offensive fouls). What we do know is that fans of outside schools have beef with the reffing, and if you don't believe me ask any Crimson-clad person in Oklahoma.

Still, officials are human, and they make mistakes. I think even the angriest fan understands that. My problem is that the Pac-10 has consistently said nothing when officiating breaks down. Or a "sorry, but we can't do anything about it" approach. You can do something about it, though. I'm not talking about firing everyone, I'm talking about coming out and saying "here's how we can prevent this next time". If that means being progressive in enacting instant replay rules, reigning in certain egotistical officials, then great. I, for one, don't hate the refs. I hate when nothing is done to protect the refs from making the same mistake twice.

4. Get the Pac-10 tournament out of L.A. A.S.A.P.

Hansen has continually defended his stance against a rotating Pac-10 tournament, stating that for TV purposes it is best to keep it in L.A. This is one instance where I care way more about fairness than TV dollars. I love rotating conference tournaments - the WCC does it and they have far less money to throw around.

I've said it before, but here's how I'd rotate the Pac-10 tournament: Seattle, Phoenix, Bay Area, Las Vegas, Portland, Los Angeles. Five of the cities are close to their two major fanbases, and have NBA-caliber arenas. The other one is Las Vegas. Tell me why this wouldn't work. I'm tired of looking at a third-full Staples Center and wondering what would happen if the tournament could be in the Northwest for once. I haven't even addressed the obvious advantage for USC and UCLA.

5. Improve the conference's television deals

This doesn't necessarily mean ditching FSN. There are some great things about FSN, most notably the number of games they are able to carry. Instead of just running straight to ESPN , we need to achieve some more specific goals, regardless of the network.

5a. Get every football game televised for every team

Difficult? Maybe. But I think it's possible, espeically if the Pac-10 can swing a deal to get two games broadcast nationally. The rest can be picked up FSN's regional networks, ESPN, Versus, whoever. I would just love to have the guarantee that WSU could be on TV every game. Recruits would too.

5b. Get more games on ESPN

I know, I said we shouldn't run straight for the entertainment and sports programming network. However, we don't have to go exclusive with ESPN (not happening anyway, because they will be in bed with the SEC for years to come), and we need a presence on the Worldwide Leader. It just makes sense from an exposure standpoint. ESPN promotes what they show, and if they don't show us, they won't promote us. Ask the NHL.

5c. Find a national network willing to promote the Pac-10, not just USC

This will be tough, but ever since the Pac-10 got the TV deal with ABC, it's been USC reaping the benefits and hardly anyone else. And that makes sense given the L.A. media market, but we need to find a network that's OK with carrying Cal/Oregon in addition. Easier said than done. And if all else fails...

5d. Consider creating a Pac-10 network

This would be ambitious, but if no other outlet can make things happen for us, this seems like a logical route. The Big XII network may not be a roaring success, but in some ways it doesn't have to be right now - they still get a large number of games on the ESPN networks and their viewership will grow when they finally start learning how to deal with Cable and Sattelite outfits.

Comment 12 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

TV

The one thing that really annoys me about FSN is they are setup for regional coverage but don’t take full advantage of it. In Hoops and Football anytime the WA and OR schools play is should be on TV. Fix this for each region. If they start doing that it’s simple to put every game on TV. Sure you can still have the all west coast big games. In football on ABC.

To FSN’s defense, over the last several years it has improved. Long gone are the days of one Coug game on TV.

Everyone likes to point to ESPN as the solution, but Fox also have national games. Get the pac 10 involved. If the pac ditches fox, we will see less games (excluding SC) on TV.

as far as the hoops tourney, TomH is using TV as an excuse. Does anyone really believe that you will have more TV viewers if the games are IN LA? It’s because FSN told TomH they don’t want to transport thier best equiptment out of LA. Well, tough. You have the TV rights. Pac up your cameras. They do it for games during the year. I know they own part of Staples. Tough.

The biggest thing I got out of your post? Maybe you should have applied for the job.

I think we will all like Scott because of what he does, not because TomH set the bar on the ground.

by woolybugger on Mar 25, 2009 7:08 PM PDT reply actions  

ESPN is definitely the solution as far as exposure.

it’s not really people watching the games on ESPN, but they promote the crap out of the teams that play on ESPN. Pundits (PIT, Around the Horn, Rome, etc) ignore the Pac-10 outside of USC, we don’t get Gameday coming to Pac-10 schools, and the big games are never the top story on SportCenter.

Outside of USC, has any Pac-10 school received as much exposure as Gonzaga?

by BigWood on Mar 26, 2009 7:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

To some degree you are right

Having the ABC connection in football helps. Now if we can get a team other than USC to get coverage on ABC we might get more ESPN notice. Then again, someone other than SC needs to win the pac 10.

I always hate going to the sunbowl for one reason. It’s on CBS so ESPN hardly acknowledges it.

I don’t have a solution, but see problems with both (really helpful I know) If we move to ESPN we will probably get less games on TV, if we stick with FSN we don’t get the national coverage. It’s all about sports center these days.

Maybe I do have a solution. We need the ocho All pac 10 espn channel. We would get all the coverage we want and sports center would pay more attention.

by woolybugger on Mar 26, 2009 10:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

At first glance, I'm with you on everything but #1.

I would enjoy a plus 1 system (and given the power would change up the BCS quite a bit), but I’ll stop well before playoff.

Other than that, nods of agreement. Good write up.

by philkid3 on Mar 25, 2009 11:17 PM PDT reply actions  

I'm not sure a +1 is all that useful

A four-team mini-playoff seeded by the BCS rankings would have excluded both USC and Utah last year. And if you play the ‘traditional matchup’ games and then pick the tile game participants, you’d have something like…

Rose: #5 USC defeats #8 Penn State (actually happened)
Fiesta: #6 Utah upsets #1 Oklahoma (don’t tell me this wouldn’t happen; we know how Oklahoma plays in BCS games)
Sugar: #2 Florida defeats #3 Texas (probably)
Orange: #19 Virginia Tech defeats #12 Cinci (actually happened)

Now, does USC or Utah play the winner of the Florida/Texas game?

by drothgery on Mar 26, 2009 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions  

I like it all, except expansion

Not to be too idealistic, but I really like the fact that our champions are actually champions — not some crazy made-up fabrication of a champion. Plus, why add schools in an attempt to play a game that keeps changing? I don’t see any advantage in basketball to adding schools, and any advantage in football could be made negligible by changes to the BCS. It’s easy to add schools, but practically impossible to get rid of them if you determine you don’t need them anymore …

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 26, 2009 8:49 AM PDT reply actions  

I agree with everything

I like your short term idea of supporting the plus one format. It’s kind of like MLB having replay, but only for homeruns. Everyone knows it needs to and will expand to cover other calls like the NFL’s replay has done over the years. But by getting the idea in the door it will help pave the way for a more comprehensive playoff system in the future.

I was listening to Colin Cowherd today, and he said something brilliant. He was talking about the NFL’s increasing popularity compared to baseball. The NFL has done it by being flexible (possibly adding 17th game) and not getting stuck in traditions like baseball. He said Purists hold sport leagues hostage. This is exactly what is going on in college football. The purists, the large bowl game executives and some college presidents at the more historically prestigious schools are stuck in their ways. If they want to improve their popularity like the NFL has done they have to be flexible and give the fans what they want.

by peaty411s on Mar 26, 2009 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

The problem is finances.

All the schools in a conference make money when other schools from their conference are represented. How is this going to continue in a playoff format? If the higher ranked teams play home games, are we going to force them to divvy the gate receipts up to the other schools? If they play each game at neutral sites, will the games be well attended (think about making 2-3 weeks worth of making travel plans Sunday and flying out Friday). Imagine the cost involved if your team advances in both football and basketball (though this would be a good problem to have).

When you’re talking about “the fans,” are you talking about the casual fan sitting at home, or the alum/supporting fan who’s more likely to go see the team at a lower tier bowl game?

I think the college game is different from the pro game, and I like it that way.

by TiltingRight on Mar 26, 2009 6:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

Then again...

College basketball has 4 tournaments, maybe college football can too?

by TiltingRight on Mar 26, 2009 6:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

What's wrong with continuing to have the lesser bowl games?

They’ve already been diminished by the BCS; they could be the NIT to the NCAA Tournament. I know as a Coug fan, even if I wasn’t in the playoff — which would be most every year — I’d be pretty happy with a bowl.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 26, 2009 10:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

Coug fans should generally be against expansion

one of the only recruiting advantages we have over, say, a Utah or a BYU is that we are in a BCS conference and have the opportunity to play big teams every week and the chance of a Rose Bowl, etc.

Pretty much any teams the Pac-10 would take in an expansion would probably be ahead of WSU in the pecking order immediately. It’s hard enough to do more with less against the teams we do already. Adding 2 more might be asking too much.

by BigWood on Mar 26, 2009 7:02 PM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to CougCenter, a website dedicated to WSU football, basketball and other athletics.

Community Guidelines

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Small
Some respect for Wulff
King_small
Post Signing Day 2012 Schedule: Eastern Washington
King_small
Post Signing Day 2012 Schedule: BYU
Donttakethebait_sd_021011_small
2013 class's first recruit?
Cougar_01t_small
Leach & ESPN
Small
Questions for Washington State Commits Khalil Pettway, Alex Jackson, and Gabriel Marks
King_small
2007 Recruiting Class: A Look Back
17351_652492462983_27214870_38132779_139527_n_small
Quick Analysis on Why We Are Still Going After Linemen
Cougar_01t_small
Wrapped Up In Recruiting
Small
TTU is no WSU

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Golden State Fan's perspective on Klay Thompson
The only female CougCenter reader?
Your reminder that Pullman is awesome. Yes, someone called the police because a squirrel was stuck in a peanut jar. Yes, the description is awesome. And yes, a Google Image Search for a squirrel stuck in a peanut butter jar turns up this adorable photo.

Police log screencap via Pullman PD.
If you missed the Steve Gleason piece during the Super Bowl pregame show, here it is. Brian has his...

Recent FanShots

Dunk of the Year?
The Cougar Football Project Webcam iPhone App
Zach Koepp Arrested
Chris Ball hired by ASU
What Would the End of Football Look Like?
Austin Statesman: Leach welcomes challenge at Washington State
Yahoo Sports Radio Interview With Mike Leach
Committment for next year?

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

Go Cougs


Attractive, intelligent managing editors

Jeff_mug_h2_small Jeff Nusser

62817_716885768283_27206155_40333453_7664553_n_small Grady Clapp

Arizona_small Craig Powers

Brianheadshot_small Brian Floyd

Attractive, intelligent editors

Florida_small Kyle Rancourt

Header_small Mark Sandritter