OKCBuff
Well-Known Member
The latest from the SJ Mercury-News:
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/colleg...on-the-latest-on-the-division-split-and-more/
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/colleg...on-the-latest-on-the-division-split-and-more/
I hope they do split TV money evenly, though.
So long as we play nine conference games and get one in so-cal and one in NorCal every year I'll be happy.
However, I also think the N/S with California zipper alignment is intriguing. So it could be North/West: Oregon schools, WA schools, plus Cal and UCLA. South/East: CO, UT, AZ schools plus USC and Stanford. That way everyone gets an LA team and Bay Area team in their division. With a dedicated rivalry game, UCLA-USC would still be annual, as well as Cal-Stanford.
:hitit:However, I also think the N/S with California zipper alignment is intriguing. So it could be North/West: Oregon schools, WA schools, plus Cal and UCLA. South/East: CO, UT, AZ schools plus USC and Stanford. That way everyone gets an LA team and Bay Area team in their division. With a dedicated rivalry game, UCLA-USC would still be annual, as well as Cal-Stanford.
:hitit:
Only problem with that scenario, if you could call it one, is that some of the obvious "dedicated rivals" are in the same division (CO and UT, AZ and AZ St., Wa schools). So maybe, instead of playing a rival every year from the other division, CU (e.g.) would just rotate that extra game versus the other division teams.
I could live with this too.
I think it's important that CU, UU, UA and ASU all play each other every season.
Beyond that, I don't care how they structure it. Just give me the regional rivalry games.
And do a fully equal revenue share.
So long as we play nine conference games and get one in so-cal and one in NorCal every year I'll be happy.
This.
But I'm not sure that's going to be the case if they don't zipper this thing. I still don't know what the issue is against the zipper. It makes a ton of sense. It's not geographically pleasant to the eye, but it maintains traditional rivalries and grants access to every team to every part of the conference every year. What's not to like about that?
Well, you can just call it a "dedicated cross-over game", with UCLA-USC and Cal-Stanford being the obvious dedicated "rivalry" games. The rest you would have a dedicated cross-over game with a specific team in the other division (similar to the SEC). I think the SEC does dedicated cross-over games so they could maintain the Tennessee-Alabama rivalry. The rest are not really "rivals" but they play the same cross-divisional opponent every year.
I'm really not a fan of the true "zipper" format, since it would make remembering who is in each division more difficult for the rest of the country (the ACC is kind of a mess in this perspective -- who is in the Coastal conference? Who is in the Atlantic conference? Who cares?).
I'm really not a fan of the true "zipper" format, since it would make remembering who is in each division more difficult for the rest of the country (the ACC is kind of a mess in this perspective -- who is in the Coastal conference? Who is in the Atlantic conference? Who cares?).
The Big 10 has been the smartest conference with maximizing revenue. So when they organize divisions based on competitive balance rather than geography, I think everyone needs to pause and take note. Equal revenue sharing is another thing that has made that conference (and the SEC) work so well.