What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

No pods in Pac-16?

Sportsfan101

Well-Known Member

Is what I'm hearing -- see comments to latest Wilner article. This would be bad news. CU needs to threaten to try to block expansion unless pods implemented. Get Arizona schools and Utah on board. Because this PAC 16 stuff is getting real.
 
Scott promised "innovative scheduling" if the Pac went to 16. Not sure that it's pods, but it will not be two divisions with 7/2 conference scheduling.
 
A zipper format would take care of this. A game against one of the teams in each geographical pair, plus a game against your own travel partner every year.
 
Hard for me to imagine that Scott will go anything other than East/West or a remote possibility of PODS. As CU fans, we need to be pushing for some sort of POD format.
 
As CU fans, we need to be pushing for the damn league to stay at 12 freaking teams. I see no benefit to expansion.
 
Somewhat off topic here --

When Colorado originally announced they were joining the Pac-12, they were not going to join the league until 2012. They were set to enter the league as a full 100% member in 2012. When that timetable got bumped up a year, there was some discussion that Colorado would not receive the full 100% share, because of the fact that they are entering a year earlier than expected.

Whatever happened with that?

I wonder if UT, OU, OSU, Tech will be able to come in and get a full share, immediately?
 
We'll probably need to up the conference games. I don't see how you can have a league if you're not playing every team at least every other year.

With pods, play all 3 in your own, then 2 each of the other pods (9 conference games). A semifinal (pod winners) game to decide who plays the conference championship game (potentially 11 conference games).

With two divisions, play 6 in your own division (skipping one team) and 4 of the other 8 for a total of 10 conference games. A championship game would be the 11th conference game of the year.

Either way, a Pac-16 with the right teams would be as formidable as any other conference. Scheduling would be brutal. I can't see skipping any team two years in a row...
 
Just like expansion to 16 teams, which will happen, the division/pod breakdown will be driven by TV market considerations as Scott has said. One of those elements is simplicity for the casual fan. For an example, see how the NHL changed their setup.
 
Last edited:
We'll probably need to up the conference games. I don't see how you can have a league if you're not playing every team at least every other year.

With pods, play all 3 in your own, then 2 each of the other pods (9 conference games). A semifinal (pod winners) game to decide who plays the conference championship game (potentially 11 conference games).

With two divisions, play 6 in your own division (skipping one team) and 4 of the other 8 for a total of 10 conference games. A championship game would be the 11th conference game of the year.

Either way, a Pac-16 with the right teams would be as formidable as any other conference. Scheduling would be brutal. I can't see skipping any team two years in a row...

I believe there is an NCAA rule that you have to play all the teams in your own division... so if the 16 team pac divides into two divisions, you have to play 7 games in your division
 
16-team conferences will require NCAA rules changes, so we shouldn't get hung up on that.
 
Actually like this one. Except that is only 8 games.

Just like an east/west split. Play the 7 in your division plus rotate through the schools in the other division. Only one of the games in the other division will always be with your partner.
 
Just like an east/west split. Play the 7 in your division plus rotate through the schools in the other division. Only one of the games in the other division will always be with your partner.

So we get a home/home with the 7 teams in the other division over the course of 14 years?

No thanks. We can do better than that.

Pod Scheduling gets a home and home with everyone in the conference every 4 years.
 
So we get a home/home with the 7 teams in the other division over the course of 14 years?

No thanks. We can do better than that.

Pod Scheduling gets a home and home with everyone in the conference every 4 years.

well.... maybe its not the best
 
UA and ASU will not want to get shut off from CA in a Pac East division. We don't want it, and from what I'm hearing, UU doesn't want it either.

When it was only the Pac-10, UA and ASU were the only teams that could try to block a Pac West/Pac East division split. Now they have two more allies that will join them, which is 1/3 of the league. As long as the 4 stay firm, there will have to be negotiation.

Hell, I'd take being in the Pac North with UU, UO, OSU, UW, WSU, Cal and Stanford before I'd want to go Pac East. Of course, the CA schools will never go for that.

There's going to be two OSUs in this conference? That alone should kick the Cowboys out.
 
UA and ASU will not want to get shut off from CA in a Pac East division. We don't want it, and from what I'm hearing, UU doesn't want it either.

When it was only the Pac-10, UA and ASU were the only teams that could try to block a Pac West/Pac East division split. Now they have two more allies that will join them, which is 1/3 of the league. As long as the 4 stay firm, there will have to be negotiation.

Hell, I'd take being in the Pac North with UU, UO, OSU, UW, WSU, Cal and Stanford before I'd want to go Pac East. Of course, the CA schools will never go for that.

There's going to be two OSUs in this conference? That alone should kick the Cowboys out.


Elitist College Presidents who only are looking for $$$$ will be making the decisions. They could care less if the majority of the fans or alumni want it or not.
 
The "pod" idea, though I imagine they'd call them Divisions, makes a hell of a lot of sense. It's logical geographically, it preserves whatever rivalries are out there, it allows everyone a trip to every part of the conference each year. It's pretty much all anyone would ask for. The trick would be getting the NCAA to allow a 4 team playoff, but I've yet to see a fan on a forum say they didn't like it.
 
UA and ASU will not want to get shut off from CA in a Pac East division. We don't want it, and from what I'm hearing, UU doesn't want it either.

When it was only the Pac-10, UA and ASU were the only teams that could try to block a Pac West/Pac East division split. Now they have two more allies that will join them, which is 1/3 of the league. As long as the 4 stay firm, there will have to be negotiation.

Hell, I'd take being in the Pac North with UU, UO, OSU, UW, WSU, Cal and Stanford before I'd want to go Pac East. Of course, the CA schools will never go for that.

There's going to be two OSUs in this conference? That alone should kick the Cowboys out.

Something I haven't heard kicked around is a loose North/South division of a Pac 16, USC,UCLA,ASU, UA,UU,CU,TX,TT and OU,OSU,WU,WSU,CAL,STFD,OKU,OKSU while we would still be stuck with playing TX - there would be the benefit of having visibility in both of our target markets.
 
Back
Top