New Pac-12 divisions

[EPJr]

It appears the University of Colorado will like the news when the future of the expanded Pac-12 Conference is announced Thursday at the presidents' meetings in San Francisco. Momentum is headed toward these policies, according to multiple sources around the conference:

• Colorado and Utah will join the Arizona and Los Angeles schools — Southern California and UCLA — in a South Division, with the Bay Area schools joining the Oregon and Washington schools in a North Division.

• The league will have equal revenue sharing, after a threshold is met, with concessions to the Los Angeles schools. According to The Seattle Times, the presidents will approve a proposal giving USC and UCLA $2 million more per year than the other 10 schools until the broadcast revenues reach a certain level, at which point the 12 schools would divide revenues equally.

• The inaugural football championship game will be held in the stadium of the highest-seeded division champion.

While the decisions aren't yet firm, logistics point to Thursday's meetings being little more than a rubber stamp of negotiations that have been held over the past few weeks. The presidents meet in the morning, and Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott has set a late-morning news conference.

http://www.denverpost.com/colleges/ci_16382545" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[SDHornet]

• The league will have equal revenue sharing, after a threshold is met, with concessions to the Los Angeles schools. According to The Seattle Times, the presidents will approve a proposal giving USC and UCLA $2 million more per year than the other 10 schools until the broadcast revenues reach a certain level, at which point the 12 schools would divide revenues equally.

So basically Colorado will find itself in a similar situation as they did when they were in a conference with Texas.

[SuperHornet]

I really don't like this split. Unfortunately, I really can't come up with anything more appealing. This is probably about as good as it'll get unless they go to 16.

[SDHornet]

I really don't like this split. Unfortunately, I really can't come up with anything more appealing. This is probably about as good as it'll get unless they go to 16.

I don’t think there was any reasonable geographical way to not split the CA schools.

[SuperHornet]

I really don't like this split. Unfortunately, I really can't come up with anything more appealing. This is probably about as good as it'll get unless they go to 16.

I don’t think there was any reasonable geographical way to not split the CA schools.

Exactly.

About the only way I could see to make it work would be to add New Mexico, New Mexico State, Colorado State, and Utah State (unless they want BYU as an Eastern "Stanford"), so they could split into four easy divisions. But athletically, they couldn't really compete. I'm not sure about the academics, either.

This is about as good as it'll get, I guess.

[T-Dog]

I thought they should split the schools among the geographical rivals so for instance UCLA and USC would be in separate divisions. One of the major issues is that each Pac-12 school wanted a game in LA as often as possible for recruiting so that would have helped out with that (one every two years minimum).

So something like Division A of USC, Arizona State, Utah, Cal, Oregon State and Washington and Division B of UCLA, Arizona State, Colorado, Stanford, Oregon and Washington State. Of course the guaranteed inter-divisional game would be the geographical rivalry game.

The Pac-12 title game should be in Vegas.

[Shellin]

I preferred the "Zipper Model" as well but I'm ok with the proposed plan. the NW schools will get a trip to the Bay area every year and it sounds like they're working on scheduling so 2 out of 3 years we'll get an LA trip. Part of me wishes Colorado was in the north so that the Cougs have a shot at a win next season though....

As for the Vegas title game, I don't think they have any venues large enough. I like the idea currently being tossed around about having a rotating title game between LA, Glendale, Seattle, etc.

[SDHornet]

As for the Vegas title game, I don't think they have any venues large enough. I like the idea currently being tossed around about having a rotating title game between LA, Glendale, Seattle, etc.

I think there would be opposition to having it in Vegas. I don’t think they can take bets on any college events that happen in Nevada. That rotating championship game location is a good idea and I like it as well. I wish the BSC would do that for the hoops tournament.

[clenz]

The title game will be played in the higher ranked teams home stadium.

I think the Pac 12 was scared of a ton of empty seats at a neutral site with the conference footprint being so large

[DJH]

The title game will be played in the higher ranked teams home stadium.

I think the Pac 12 was scared of a ton of empty seats at a neutral site with the conference footprint being so large

Probably true. I don't think many pac 10 schools have a good reputation of having a bunch of traveling fans. With the conf schools are so spread apart, it would almost assuredly be a long trip for anyone.

If they did it, it would probably be similar to the ACC title game; Lame.

Big title games like that work in the Midwest and the South where everyone is football crazy, but not so much on the coasts.

[Shellin]

The title game will be played in the higher ranked teams home stadium.

I think the Pac 12 was scared of a ton of empty seats at a neutral site with the conference footprint being so large

Agreed, which was one of the reasons I was opposed to conference expansion in the first place. Playing it in the higher ranked team's home stadium is a good choice with regards to low attendance numbers, but I'm worried about what will happen if there are two teams with the same record in the game...

[clenz]

The title game will be played in the higher ranked teams home stadium.

I think the Pac 12 was scared of a ton of empty seats at a neutral site with the conference footprint being so large

Agreed, which was one of the reasons I was opposed to conference expansion in the first place. Playing it in the higher ranked team's home stadium is a good choice with regards to low attendance numbers, but I'm worried about what will happen if there are two teams with the same record in the game...

Since I typed that, I have heard a clarification. The game will be at the team with the better conference record. It sounds like if that is even, it will be the higher ranked team...I think.

[Shellin]

Since I typed that, I have heard a clarification. The game will be at the team with the better conference record. It sounds like if that is even, it will be the higher ranked team...I think.

Yeah, I have heard that it is the team with the best conference record and that the likely tie breaker will be BCS standings.

[siuham]

Yeah, I have heard that it is the team with the best conference record and that the likely tie breaker will be BCS standings.

You can't tell me they can't figure out tiebreakers like every other sport in America amongst themselves rather than using a ranking.

[Shellin]

I'm sure there are other tie breakers that will take precedence over the BCS rankings unless two teams have identical conference records and didn't play each other during the regular season, like what happened with Florida and Alabama last year in the SEC.

[clenz]

I'm sure there are other tie breakers that will take precedence over the BCS rankings unless two teams have identical conference records and didn't play each other during the regular season, like what happened with Florida and Alabama last year in the SEC.

A couple years ago the B12 South champion was determined by BCS ranking....and the difference was something like .001 point