When USC and UCLA are gone, and assuming there are no replacements, is the Pac-12 going to be renamed back to the Pac-10? Seems like maybe a rebrand would be in order to just “Pac.”
It’s our conference now and tying the name to the number of teams is a pain. Let’s just make it what we want and honor Ty Jordan and Aaron Lowe at the same time.
True, true, true…My only add would be to rename the PAC-12 to the PAC-10. That is what is has always been. We will be at 10 teams, we will be in the PAC10. Let’s go back.
And then when USC and UCLA come back in 5 years, we can just keep it at the PAC-10.
I’m not sure that they will actually go to the Big Ten. There will be major hurdles to overcome:
1) A large number of alumni and fans don’t like the move.
2) Travel to away games won’t be easy for their fans
3) Many of their away games will be played early for the Pacific time zone.
4) The increased school payout may not cover the travel costs for all sports.
5) Logistical scheduling issues with a 16 team conference may become a negative for the schools and their fans.
6) A possible increase in school payout negotiated by the PAC-12 may substantially reduce the difference between them and the Big Ten.
This may appear as wishful thinking, but I think that they are legitimate issues.
There are $80-$100M reasons a year they will be going to the Big X. USC and UCLAs presidents torpedoed expansion and nixed the $1B joint venture with the PAC-12 network that would have solidified the conference for the next 10-15 years then bailed. I hope they go the big X and get their asses kicked every single year and lose all their fans because nobody in California cares about Iowa, Northwestern, Minnesota or Nebraska. Screw them…I wish were were invited though.
.
Loading ...
