He said that 4 pods were favored because "you get to play more teams more regularly" or something like that. He specifically mentioned pods and contrasted them to divisions, and didn't mention anything about a pod within a division.
Maybe it is a "technical" thing, but why not call them 4 divisions?
4 pods implies that you have groupings that move together within the conference format, between divisions.
Larry Scott said that inconference play will be "revolutionary".
He also said that they would review petitioning the NCAA to allow a CCG with only 10 members.
I'm not knocking the attempts, but some of those things are not currently possible without some major overhauls to the NCAA bylaws.
I would be happy with a "pod rotation" so that we can have better access to the Cali market.
Revolutionary could mean playing 10 in-conference games, or even playing Home and Home games against rivals IN THE SAME SEASON.
Something like:
Pod A: USC, UCLA, Stanford, Cal
Pod B: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State
Pod C: Arizona, ASU, Utah,
CU
Pod D: Texas, TTech, OU, OSU
Pods A&B form Division 1 for two years, with Pods C&D forming Division 2.
CU would play their interdivisional opponents once each: AZ, ASU, UU, UT, TT, OU, OSU for a total of 7 games. Then we would play the 3 "pod partners" once again, switching from home/away. That will total 10 games in conference and would increase the value of the TV package significantly.
The lack of intra-dvisional games would be minimized by having the Pods rotate every 2 years (to allow for home/homes to even out) so that each school gets to play every Pac-16 school every 6 years, but kick-starting (or deepening) intense rivalries within the "pods". Travel costs would be minimized, and the need to find "cupcake" payout games would be minimized in the OOC games.