Why the Pac 12 is failing at Football

I agree with all of this. All this needs to change. But I think the biggest thing is that we need our best teams to win when they get in big games. That will help in the national perception, which is everything. The pac12 is much better then the Acc, IMO, but the acc never gets bagged on because they have Clemson dominating. USC is by far our biggest national brand and they’re a dumpster fire. The conference needs them to be good.

We need Usc, Washington and Oregon in the big bowl games and winning them.

Can we please also do away with stupid weeknight games?

sc85sis":v10l92kd said:

Can we please also do away with stupid weeknight games?

Click to expand...

I agree with these points.

I also have a theory:

The westcoast states have options as far as jobs are concerned.

On the westcoast, football is not the only option to "make it."

California has a plethora of big name cities with available jobs to make a living.

Other states lack this option.

The SEC states is a fine example of football is life.

The PAC-12 states have big name cities with higher quality educational institutions.

Inner city students are aware they do not have to have sports be only path for their future.

Although the SEC, ACC, BIG 10, BIG 12 are "ahead" in football talent, the PAC-12 have consistently better higher quality research universities.

If you were to go to medical school, would you rather go to UW, UCLA, Stanford, or an SEC, BIG 10, BIG 12, ACC school??

No offense to those schools but academically, unless they are private, my theory is the westcoast have gone down in talent for football because their high school students see other avenues they can explore.

Largely, in the SEC country, football is "still" the "only" way out.

The PAC 8 or 10 or 12 survived on the population of California. If that state will no longer allow public schools to get insurance waivers to play football things will look really bleak. The parents have already started to push for that. If California is out of the football business then I don't see a way that the PAC-12 can be a viable football conference.

The_Z_Man":1hopfw6s said:

#1 The talent pool in California is shrinking rapidly

https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/01/30/ ... nferences/


#2 Terrible officiating issues ruining outcomes, leaving Pac 12 teams ill prepared to face teams out of conference.

http://www.footballzebras.com/2018/10/p ... -decision/

I've said this many times. You can't call games in your conference differently than what's being called in the rest of the country. You can't favor certain teams and their tactics, and falsely prop them up as your conference darling and then have them go on the road in the ACC, Big 10, SEC, et and not know how to play the game of football.

You've got to make your officiating similar to the officiating in all the other major conferences, so Pac 12 players are playing the same brand of football when they go somewhere else and don't have to radically adjust their game.

Stanford is a primary example of being ill prepared to win on the road due to Pac 12 officiating. Their O lines get away with murder in the Pac 12... they don't get called for penalties they should. Then they go play on the east coast, suffer 5 holding penalties in the first 5 minutes of a game that negate every possession and get utterly blown out by a team like Notre Dame.


#3 Night Games

https://fansided.com/2018/12/27/alabama ... mpionship/

They simply need to go. You can't build interest in your conference if only thirty percent of the nations football fans can watch the games! It's insane.

Pac 12 night games should start no later than 6pm pacific, and often at 5:30pm. Never at 7, 8, or good grief, 8:30, that's just stupid/

The 6pm rule means that east coast viewers can watch Pac12 football from 9pm to midnight -- and they will do that.... you will gain a HUGE boost in Pac 12 ratings by creating this simple rule.

Click to expand...

Interesting points, unlike some in this thread.

And, get rid of the Pac-12 Network!

The_Z_Man":vui534kl said:

I see what your saying, but personal experience here in Tucson is a bit different.

I don't know how it relates to football, but a LOT of the remaining American Manufacturing Industry has relocated to the Southeast US.

And, if you think about it, working class people are more likely to be major sports fans.

Of my 20 closest friends in Arizona, 13 have relocated to South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Virginia, et. because that's where the working class jobs are. 5 of those were my football buddies.... they're all gone now.

The friends I have still living here in Tucson are Doctors, Nurses, and those on state assistance/welfare or are working as uber/lyft drivers. Not a single one of them is a football fan.

Just a personal observation though, but I bet if anyone took the time to do an actual study on it, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if they found that the relocation of the working class to the SE US is what has driven the rabid fandom down there and the subsequent rise in football dominance.

Click to expand...

There are car plants in southeast US, and there is reason for that, cheap labor and cheap(er) cost of living.

Football is mainly considered, what, a blue collar sport? It would make sense areas with primarily blue collar jobs may produce "better" football players.

You said your friends are doctors, nurses, etc. in Tucson, Tucson is good known city. Guarantee your friends would rather be a doctor, nurse, etc. in Tucson than in Chattanooga.

Football talent may be cyclical and shifts to other portions of the country depending on the limited options for "things to do" in your leisure.

Like, if you're living in rural Mississippi or rural South Carolina, what the heck can you do on a Friday night??

Go to your high school football game and support the kids.

What can you do on a Friday night living in Phoenix? San Diego? LA? San Fran? Seattle? A helluva a lot more than you can compared to Tuscaloosa Alabama, for sure!

TheLegendOfBoom":2r3mz2ku said:

The_Z_Man":2r3mz2ku said:

I see what your saying, but personal experience here in Tucson is a bit different.

I don't know how it relates to football, but a LOT of the remaining American Manufacturing Industry has relocated to the Southeast US.

And, if you think about it, working class people are more likely to be major sports fans.

Of my 20 closest friends in Arizona, 13 have relocated to South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Virginia, et. because that's where the working class jobs are. 5 of those were my football buddies.... they're all gone now.

The friends I have still living here in Tucson are Doctors, Nurses, and those on state assistance/welfare or are working as uber/lyft drivers. Not a single one of them is a football fan.

Just a personal observation though, but I bet if anyone took the time to do an actual study on it, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if they found that the relocation of the working class to the SE US is what has driven the rabid fandom down there and the subsequent rise in football dominance.

Click to expand...

There are car plants in southeast US, and there is reason for that, cheap labor and cheap(er) cost of living.

Football is mainly considered, what, a blue collar sport? It would make sense areas with primarily blue collar jobs may produce "better" football players.

You said your friends are doctors, nurses, etc. in Tucson, Tucson is good known city. Guarantee your friends would rather be a doctor, nurse, etc. in Tucson than in Chattanooga.

Football talent may be cyclical and shifts to other portions of the country depending on the limited options for "things to do" in your leisure.

Like, if you're living in rural Mississippi or rural South Carolina, what the heck can you do on a Friday night??

Go to your high school football game and support the kids.

What can you do on a Friday night living in Phoenix? San Diego? LA? San Fran? Seattle? A helluva a lot more than you can compared to Tuscaloosa Alabama, for sure!

Click to expand...

I don't get this thread, I started playing football in pee-wee leagues age 8-9. For me and it seems everyone I played for football was just something we loved to do. I guess we kind of dreamed about playing in the NFL but it never anything really serious, just kid talk.

We loved the game but probably more than anything we loved the camaraderie and the sense of being part of a team - the extended family part of our lives that we look back upon. You didn't have to be a star or even a particularly good player to be accepted as a member of the team to be accepted as one of us. For me and many other people I talk to, those were always the best friends you will ever have. The friends I played with in pee-wee all the way through college still get together frequently and the bonds we have are irreplaceable.

The conversation about career choosing at that time seems so out of context to me.

The_Z_Man":m3xy6ea2 said:

So, I'm just trying to subtlety point out that that the SEC isn't just "good at football" because everyone down there is dumb and poor and they have nothing else.

That's all.

Click to expand...

This is a major factor in sports. Even in Europe some of the best players come from the poorest parts of society. Many times people from that part of society feel that this is their one and only chance to get out of poverty. That adds a drive and motivation that can lead to anyone excelling at sports.

I do agree with you that calling everyone dumb is just ignorant. I feel the poverty is more of a driving factor than intelligence.

You are going off the deep end with the statics they do not operate in a vacuum. You are ignoring the culture around the southeast. The athletes that are being sought after by every D1 school are not coming from the rich suburbs of Biloxi Mississippi or Atlanta Georiga. They are coming from the poorest counties and cities in these states. No matter how few tax dollars these states have, they will always find ways to pay for football. California and Washington will not do that, in the state of Washington 2A school's will forfeit football games because they think they are too dangerous. That will never happen in the south, the culture would not allow it.

I think a big reason is because we play more fairly than others on the recruiting trail. When someone commits to another school, we let off the gas and honor it, where SEC schools stomp on the gas.

:

Tical21":3vh85gu1 said:

I think a big reason is because we play more fairly than others on the recruiting trail. When someone commits to another school, we let off the gas and honor it, where SEC schools stomp on the gas.

Click to expand...

How did Puka end up in UW? Pac12 schools flip recruits all the time.

JSeahawks":2yazdy1u said:

:

Tical21":2yazdy1u said:

I think a big reason is because we play more fairly than others on the recruiting trail. When someone commits to another school, we let off the gas and honor it, where SEC schools stomp on the gas.

Click to expand...

How did Puka end up in UW? Pac12 schools flip recruits all the time.

Click to expand...

Coaching change cases are a little different, but the Pac-12 doesn't flip guys at nearly the rate of most other conferences, especially UW.

The_Z_Man":3qedvc6w said:

sdog1981":3qedvc6w said:

You are going off the deep end with the statics they do not operate in a vacuum. You are ignoring the culture around the southeast. The athletes that are being sought after by every D1 school are not coming from the rich suburbs of Biloxi Mississippi or Atlanta Georiga. They are coming from the poorest counties and cities in these states. No matter how few tax dollars these states have, they will always find ways to pay for football. California and Washington will not do that, in the state of Washington 2A school's will forfeit football games because they think they are too dangerous. That will never happen in the south, the culture would not allow it.

Click to expand...

I'm not producing a narrative here. I'm blowing a bad one up.

I'm pointing out that the SEC is not located in the south of the 1940's or 50's... times have changed.

This whole notion that "they're better at football because they are poor and dumb" is nothing more than sour grapes.

Everyone has to be on board to create a certain culture in a sport. It's about passion, not poverty.

And I know how to look at statistics, it's all I did for 20 years as an engineer/production and QA manager in aerospace and lasers.

Click to expand...

I agree with you that they are all not dumb. That is just an ignorant statement. However, I absolutely disagree with poverty and sports performance. In every major sport, the majority of players come from the lower economic rungs.

86% of student-athletes live below the poverty line.

http://www.sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-foo ... texas-duke

I tip my hat to your career as an engineer it gives me insights to how you process numbers. We are dealing with people here and they are not an exact science.

As for the PAC-12 I wonder what no NFL in LA for 25 years and the poor performance of the 49ers over that time did to the youth populations interest in football.

sdog1981":1babu3jl said:

The_Z_Man":1babu3jl said:

So, I'm just trying to subtlety point out that that the SEC isn't just "good at football" because everyone down there is dumb and poor and they have nothing else.

That's all.

Click to expand...

This is a major factor in sports. Even in Europe some of the best players come from the poorest parts of society. Many times people from that part of society feel that this is their one and only chance to get out of poverty. That adds a drive and motivation that can lead to anyone excelling at sports.

I do agree with you that calling everyone dumb is just ignorant. I feel the poverty is more of a driving factor than intelligence.

Click to expand...

Let me put it out there that combining athletic talent with desire to flee situation are only part of the picture for some participants. In the US, both Hockey and Baseball have a lot of solidly above middle class participants who get extra time, energy, expertise and equipment to foster their participation in sports. In fact, only football really seems to buck the overlap of dollars to participation but players like Jared Goff are a key example of what it looks like when a well-to-do family puts a lot of support on their kid to be the best they can be.

When I played Pop Warner for two years before high school the demographic makeup was far and away more diverse racially and incomewise. Whereas with baseball and soccer, I mostly played with other upper middle class white kids, despite that not being the demographic makeup of the area, within football it was everyone - rich, poorer, white, latino, samoan and tongan. It was actually far more egalitarian than any other sport I played as a kid, not the least of which had to do with the lack of a kid of a coach on the team.

I played on a travelling soccer team from 12 to 14 and none of us were poor and none of us were that great but within that microcosm of travelling soccer teams, none of our opponents were comprised of a team of scrappy underdogs from the wrong side of the tracks who just waxed us. The logistics of the league precluded poorer people and teams from being able to compete. Making a 50 mile trip down to Morgan Hill from the Mid Peninsula was trivial for every single kid on both sides of the pitch.

I think you have it a bit backwards though - people with limited opportunities don't so much as choose those opportunities as make the most of them when presented. You can make the argument that poor people with poor aggregate prospects gravitate towards sizzle industries where generations before them have made a name but that is only half the picture - poor people with poor aggregate prospects also are given scant opportunities by various gatekeepers. An abstract example would be someone steering a poor kid from rural Bama the size of a moutain into playing football early in high school, implored to shun any other possible avenue for living - even if they would make a great doctor if they were afforded the same familial support that others get by virtue of being born lucky. They could be a great ANYTHING if they were given the support and direction.

But we live in a society and culture that presorts people into stations based on a lot of factors that have nothing to do with themselves or the station you sorted them into. I catch myself wondering if a guy over 6'8" ever played basketball and what that was like for him now that he sells insurance. I do this with every single person I meet over 6'8" and I always wonder "why didn't they make it in basketball" and then it becomes crystal clear that NBA players are in fact amazing talents who make it look simple.

The_Z_Man":3bw4lnru said:

sdog1981":3bw4lnru said:

As for the PAC-12 I wonder what no NFL in LA for 25 years and the poor performance of the 49ers over that time did to the youth populations interest in football.

Click to expand...

On point!

Exactly, now I think you're onto something.

Not only was there no NFL in LA, but the 49ers, Raiders, and Chargers all went into the toilet at the same time.

Ryan Leaf and Purple Dank, two biggest busts in NFL history.

Frustrating mismanagement by owners/gms'


The Chargers firing Schottenheimer after a 14-2 season and wasting LT's prime years.

York's 49ers firing Harb, the only successful coach in San Fran over the last quarter century.

The Raiders pushing Gruden out after he built a contender.


Think about this:

The state of California produced 8 Superbowl victories and 12 appearances over a 25 year period from 1969 to 1994. That means a Cal team was in the Superbowl every other year on average!

From 1995 to 2019, the next 24 years, the state has 3 Superbowl appearances and zero championships, and only 1 of those (the 49er loss to the Ravens) was a good game, and one (Raiders/Bucs) was a complete beatdown.


That kind of thing has more of an impact than I think people realize.

Click to expand...

I don't think NFL interest is as much of a prime mover of overall football appreciation and cultural interest. When we talk about football in the southern part of the nation, the only NFL team that comes to mind as something worth talking about is the Saints. Because every other franchise bar maybe the Falcons has been an exercise in frivolity and futility - Jacksonville, Tampa, Miami, Tennessee, Carolina, Houston, Dallas...I mean who am I forgetting here?

In the incubator of Midwest football, Ohio (and please bear with me on asserting Ohio is the Midwest.) The Browns and Bengals play second fiddle to the Buckeyes at worst. The dream for any nascent football talent isn't to wear the orange and whatever, it's to wear the Scarlet and Grey or troll the family and wear the Maize and Blue.

Anywhere you look at this current point in time in regards to football interest, the NCAA is the primary football interest of the region and the NFL isn't. And why would something as fickle as NFL success bar the Patriots foster football interest in greater proportion to the relatively sticky fates of NCAA teams that are in the top 25 year after year?

Also consider how California has a similar influx of population to Florida and how a common complaint in Florida is that there are more Steeler and Yankee fans than the combined fandom of all of Florida's teams.

While these things might matter greatly to NFL interest in those regions, I think that the NCAA is still superior in fostering football appreciation. And for a few of the reasons mentioned above like night games, the Pac-12 shoots itself in the foot.

I think the biggest factor in California's relative sports success is simply having a nation's worth of talent within the state or within arm's reach for several decades. Other sports programs in the Pac-12 are still as ever dominant as they ever were, it's just not in sports that we really measure an entire Athletic Program by.

One thought as well - I was reading an article recently (and I can't recall the source) which was talking about how the Pac-12 is paying exorbitant rent to have their offices and a full fledged production studio in SF. Comparing to the relative costs of other conference HQs, the Pac-12 get's less ROI for everything it does on mere Cost of Living alone, never mind conscious decisions to spend money like they're drunk on Venture Captial. The SEC, for all its flaws and warts at least seems to realize that they don't need to wear the veneer of panache to deliver the goods.

Basically the Pac-12 is too busy being West Coast to a fault to realize what their purpose is.

TheLegendOfBoom":3dn1mtg9 said:

sc85sis":3dn1mtg9 said:

Can we please also do away with stupid weeknight games?

Click to expand...

I agree with these points.

I also have a theory:

The westcoast states have options as far as jobs are concerned.

On the westcoast, football is not the only option to "make it."

California has a plethora of big name cities with available jobs to make a living.

Other states lack this option.

The SEC states is a fine example of football is life.

The PAC-12 states have big name cities with higher quality educational institutions.

Inner city students are aware they do not have to have sports be only path for their future.

Although the SEC, ACC, BIG 10, BIG 12 are "ahead" in football talent, the PAC-12 have consistently better higher quality research universities.

If you were to go to medical school, would you rather go to UW, UCLA, Stanford, or an SEC, BIG 10, BIG 12, ACC school??

No offense to those schools but academically, unless they are private, my theory is the westcoast have gone down in talent for football because their high school students see other avenues they can explore.

Largely, in the SEC country, football is "still" the "only" way out.

Click to expand...

This is silly. The South and East have plenty of opportunities outside of sports. Plenty of institutions of higher learning where you can be just as qualified. Yes, I'd go to a doctor at Duke, UNC and feel perfectly fine. Plenty of jobs opening up. And not everyone works in the factory as cheap labor.

You'd be better off noting the demographic differences in ethnicity. Hispanic American folks lean into Futbol, while African Americans toward American Football. That will limit the pool, especially when you consider the working class populations of each area. I was surprised by the relative small number of African Americans when I visited the SF area. Just different than where I live in NC.