Pac-10, Big Ten at the Rose Bowl to start the season?

by Brian Floyd on Jul 30, 2010 6:49 PM PDT

Larry Scott continues to bring fresh ideas to the table. In an interview with College Football Talk, Scott floats the idea of kicking off the season with a Big Ten vs. Pac-10 game in Pasadena.

"The Pac-10 has a tradition of playing some really tough out-of-conference games early on," Scott said. "We love the Rose Bowl relationship. ...

"There's a lot to think through. I would only want to do it if it wouldn't tarnish what it means to play in the Rose Bowl. This is hallowed turf."

Scott is continuing to think outside the box in promoting the Pac-10 product. A game at the Rose Bowl between the traditional conference pairing would draw plenty of interest and put the focus on the west coast to start the season.

The TV money to be made from this? Huge. Networks would be jumping at the chance to host a meaningful non-conference game between two power conferences.

From a sponsorship standpoint, this game could be marketed like a bowl game. Ads and sponsorships would command a premium, lining the pockets of the Pac-10 and Big Ten teams.

I'm more convinced than ever that Larry Scott has the marketing savvy to take the Pac-10 to the next level.

Tweet Comment 20 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

My only question

is how would the conferences decide who plays? Would it go on a cycle? Would it only be ranked teams? Would/could it be a rematch of the rose bowl?

by tclaus on Jul 30, 2010 8:58 PM PDT reply actions

Love the idea, but the 'who will play' issue is a big issue.

The rose bowl game is always played between the champions, so would the networks buy in to a game between WSU and Purdue (no diss to the 2001 Sun Bowl) right now? My fear is that the game would alternate between the California schools, further solidifying the separation between and the north and south regions of the Pac-12 (if, god forbid, that region thing happens). I’m on the fence about the idea of a rematch of the Rose Bowl: it could be interesting or really boring depending on what happens in Rose Bowl a year before. So, I think the idea will certainly bolster Pac 10/12 exposure, but I am a little skeptical that the game will be that interesting. If it’s USC vs. OSU every year, I’m already bored.

by JimtheCoug on Jul 30, 2010 9:29 PM PDT reply actions

No offense to us, but we're not playing in that game with the present state of the program

This wouldn’t be a permanent thing right away, so I’d expect a 3-4 year trial if it happens. If that’s the case, the top teams in the league would be playing.

I’d say pick the top teams or have a Rose Bowl rematch, but since non-conference games are done so far in advance, it makes it a little more difficult. I have no idea how the scheduling would work, but I really like the idea in theory.

As for the separation, I wouldn’t worry about that. If revenue is done equally, everyone gets a cut of the game. It doesn’t matter who plays as long as the exposure for the league as a whole is elevated. The whole point of moves like this is to get people outside the west coast interested in Pac-10(12) football.

CougCenter

by Brian Floyd on Jul 30, 2010 10:43 PM PDT reply actions

i don't think we're ever playing in this game

no matter what the state of the program.

Witches of Eastman

by BigWood on Jul 31, 2010 12:09 AM PDT up reply actions

shuffle up and deal

after you paired everybody up, sure you could cherry pick the top 4 games and stack them in the first four years, but I think at least portraying the idea that all the team names “went into the hat” would need to be maintained. given the state of conferences in football right now, I’d say officially scheduling anything more than 4 years is probably irrelevant. As soon as texas joins either conference you know they would be in that game as soon as the schedule could bump them in.

Not a fan of repeating the rosebowl, I think it cheapens the rosebowl. That said, I’m a huge fan of this idea… a pacXX/bigXX game in the rosebowl to start the season, I cant think of a more appropriate way to get awesome coverage for the conference, and do a fine job of raising a middle finger in the direction of the SEC at the same time.

by can-head on Jul 30, 2010 10:55 PM PDT reply actions

This sounds familiar.

I sent a proposal to the BCS and all the conference primary football contacts nearly a year ago to suggest expanding the few early season neutral site games into a bowl like system, run by the same people who have made the bowls lucrative.

These could even be run in northern cities.

An early season (it could be called preseason, if the conference slate is considered the real season) exhibition game in September in Seattle is far more inviting that a bowl game in Seattle in December.

The same with Ann Arbor.

I deleted this from later proposals because I thought it was too manifest destiny to not happen.

BCS Evolution -- Punctuating the Equilibrium - twitter

by utesfan100 on Jul 31, 2010 5:11 AM PDT reply actions

I wonder if the conferences could set up something like the basketball hardwood series

Where every Pac-12 plays a Big Ten/Twelve school, and then you just pick one for the neutral site game at the end of the previous season.

CougCenter
Twitter: @NussCoug

by Jeff Nusser on Jul 31, 2010 8:36 AM PDT reply actions

Look, Pac10-Big10 to start the year would be great. But what about Pac10-CFL. Who amongst us wouldn’t want to see a Arizona State-Montreal Alouettes game??

CGB's Jimmy Carter

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Jul 31, 2010 8:43 AM PDT reply actions