There are about 700 tickets left for Oregon State’s football game with Washington on Saturday in the 45,674-seat Reser Stadium.
The Beavers average a crowd of 41,739 through the first five home games, and that number will go up after this game.
Only DT Brennan Olander (back) remains out of practice of the active players who are injured. He claims he’ll be ready.
CB Brandon Hardin (finger), WR Damola Adeniji (thigh) and S Anthony Watkins (shoulder) went full speed in practice.
BCS Banter
What are your thoughts on this topic? Please comment.
(AP) — The Pac-10 is ranked first in four of the six computers used by the Bowl Championship Series. It ranks third, behind the Southeastern Conference and Big East, in the other two computers.
This is a nice boost for the conference’s pride, but it may not mean much when BCS pairings are announced on Dec. 6.
The Pac-10 is hoping to land an at-large berth, worth $4.5 million to the conference. If it doesn’t, look for renewed debate about whether the conference should drop its round-robin format and go to an eight-game conference schedule.
That would allow teams to add a fourth nonconference game, and most would likely schedule an easy victory at home. Goodbye, USC. Hello, UAB.
The way some coaches see it, the round-robin format guarantees Pac-10 members a total of five extra losses, and they worry that those losses diminish the conference’s bowl prospects.
“The fact of the matter is, you’re adding five losses to the conference that other conferences avoid,” said UCLA coach Rick Neuheisel, whose Bruins played at Tennessee and against Kansas State this season and won. “You can look at the nonconference schedules in the Big Ten and the SEC, and you can realize that they aren’t asking very much of those teams on a weekly basis. That’s not the case in the Pac-10.”
Of course, if the Pac-10 didn’t play such demanding schedules, it might not rank so high in the BCS computers.
Oregon State coach Mike Riley likes the idea of settling the conference title on the field.
“I think it’s fair,” Riley said. “I think we come up with the right way to decide the conference championship. At the same time, it hurts us. We beat each other up.”
20 comments
aaron_ says:
Nov 12, 2009
what is going on with the TV situation for Wazzu?
ckirkpatrick says:
Nov 12, 2009
WSU told me it would have it worked out today, but didn't. Still waiting.
WebTraveler says:
Nov 12, 2009
This season has been a disappointment in the TV arena. The Versus games, the Halloween game I couldn't make wasn't on TV, and now thw WSU game is questionable for TV after not being selected. How much does OSU receive from each game on ABC, ESPN, FSN, FSN-NW, Versus? That's got to be a big drop this year in revenue.
Tweets that mention Cliff: Football notes, Pac-10 talk « Cliff Kirkpatrick -- Topsy.com says:
Nov 11, 2009
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Rick Eriksen, Cliff Kirkpatrick. Cliff Kirkpatrick said: Cliff: Football notes, Pac-10 talk http://bit.ly/1gh8xz – Comments requested. [...]
corbeav says:
Nov 12, 2009
I like the Round Robin format. It may add some losses, but it seems like the "right way" to do it.
angrybeaver says:
Nov 12, 2009
Funny, I just talked about this a few days ago.
Beaver fans should be thankful for the BCS, it's making up for human error. There's no way that Stanford should be ranked ahead of OSU in any (human) poll. I'd love to see us drop the round robin format and play weak schedules like the rest of the country. Why? Because we play the tough schedule but don't get the benefit of doing so (i.e. respect). I bet we get more respect by playing a weak schedule and earning more wins and more bowl games. Sad state of college football is that schedule manipulation is everything.
http://angrybeavers.wordpress.com
maffub says:
Nov 12, 2009
I agree and I don't.
We (the PAC) do it the right way and we're punished for it.
That drives me nuts, but I would never willingly change to what I perceive is "the wrong way" just because everybody else is doing it.
What Larry Scott needs to do (and the coaches, too) is continue to ask WHY doesn't everybody play by the same rules? Keep on "squeaking" and eventually people will start catching on.
In my dream college football realignment, every conference has the same number of teams and plays the same number of conference and non-conference games.
Cliff: Football notes, Pac-10 talk « Cliff Kirkpatrick | College Sports Nation says:
Nov 11, 2009
[...] original here: Cliff: Football notes, Pac-10 talk « Cliff Kirkpatrick addthis_url = [...]
Blogging - Cliff: Football notes, Pac-10 talk « Cliff Kirkpatrick says:
Nov 11, 2009
[...] Excerpt from: Cliff: Football notes, Pac-10 talk « Cliff Kirkpatrick [...]
ajf7688 Blog - Cliff: Football notes, Pac-10 talk « Cliff Kirkpatrick says:
Nov 12, 2009
[...] Read more here: Cliff: Football notes, Pac-10 talk « Cliff Kirkpatrick [...]
kersting13 says:
Nov 12, 2009
It was obvious to me when we first went to round-robin – and I've said it from the start – it's the "right" way to do it, but it hurts the league WAY too much on the national level.
Mike Riley has it exactly right.
Sooner or later, we'll drop the round robin because it's bad for the conference's standing compared to others.
With all the talk about strength of schedule, no one really looks past the W-L record.
I still can't believe that they went to it in the first place, and I can't beleive that it's still a debate about whether we should continue.
ean says:
Nov 12, 2009
As a fan I love getting to see the Beavs play every team every year but I agree that the way the system is set up the more cheese puffs you can play the higher you will rank and the more likely your players are to win individual awards. The whole system is a joke… this discussion should be about adding an 8 team playoff.
JuneauJim says:
Nov 12, 2009
A playoff would be soooo great. i wonder if we will ever see it. The current system is indeed a joke. How many games does Oklahoma have to lose before they drop from the Top-25. Is four enough??
The year the Beavs whopped ND in the Fiesta Bowl, our non-conference games were against Eastern Washington, New Mexico and San Diego St. Not exactly Cincy, Boise St, or Louisville. As it is, the system discourages everyone in a BCS conference from playing a stud from another BCS conference. it would be great to see a Pac-10/Big-10 challenge similar to what basketball does. But the stakes are too high…..
Mxpx5678 says:
Nov 12, 2009
I would love to see a pac ten south and west or east and west. Or just rotate the teams you play. Maybe you always play six or something. Then have a true championship game.
beeverluv says:
Nov 12, 2009
I agree. We get screwed as a conference either way, so why not just do the right thing? The bowl system gives us five non-BCS bowls (all prior to New Year's Day) for a whopping $6.33 million in pay-outs. Compare that to the (our 6-6 teams don't play anyone but are still better than your 9-3 teams because we're the) SEC, who gets 7 non-BCS bowls (one on New Year's eve prime time, and five Jan. 1st or 2nd) for some $15 million. So in a non-parity league, we get two BCS bowls, five lousy pay-outs (comparatively) and a crappy season of football. In other words, we would get SEC or Big 12 football. But because we wouldn't have parity anymore, the rest of the country would just see us as they do the ACC or Big Televen.
If we get rid of the round robin, then we just turn into a bunch of whiners when the SEC and Big 12 (or Miami, tOSU, Notre Dame, et al) get the at large bids anyway. Yay! Crappy football plus whining just gave our conference the respect it deserves.
DaMonkey says:
Nov 12, 2009
If the playing field isn't fair for all conferences then it needs to be made that way. Having the Pac 10 at a voluntary disadvantage makes no sense and doesn't serve the student athletes or fans.
I think playing the round robin is the best way to do it, but if everyone else isn't required to do something similar it becomes self-defeating. The NCAA should determine a standard to ensures an even playing field for all conferences and allows a fair comparison so that an 8 playoff can be played at the end of the year to determine the champion ON THE FIELD… and to the benefit of fans EVERYWHERE.
SnohoBeav says:
Nov 12, 2009
It boils down to a money grab vs. a quality football season
1) Pad your schedule with IAAs and 1 less conference team to better the chances of getting a 2nd BCS team (SEC) or
2) play the most compelling conference schedule (9 games), the best possible home schedule and make the Rose Bowl the goal?
I prefer option 2. For one thing, a second conference BCS team gets less than a full BCS payout ($4.5 miilion, split 10 ways after expenses).
Playing another E Washington, SD State, Sacramento State, etc. at home just so the conference has a better chance of getting an at-large BCS team doesn't interest me.
I'd even be in favor of a rule that didn't allow IA schools to play IAA schools. There are 120 or so IA teams, more than enough to fill out 3 non-conference games. All conferences should consist of 9 conference games and 3 non-conference (vs. IA) games.
mxpx5678 says:
Nov 12, 2009
I think we are nearing a time where it might be possible to talk about some form of a playoff. The non Automatic Qualifier schools won't put up with it for too much longer and a lot of them are as good as most big conference schools now.
I also think as a lot of the older school presidents switchover to younger ones who don't have the same thoughts of "historical" meaning to bowl games you could see a shit of thinking towards playoffs.
Along those same lines I would want to see a standard set for how the conferences are setup and how a conference champion is determined. The most likely would be to split the pac-10 into a North and South and rotate a couple of the schools each year.
fparnon says:
Nov 12, 2009
If it's not broken, don't fix it.
PAC-10 football is not broken — it's acknowledged by many to be the best and most competitive conference in the country. Nine of ten teams in the PAC-10 are in the top 20 for strength-of-schedule. Every week during the regular season, there are compelling games involving excellent teams. The race for the PAC-10 championship is often decided only in the final week. PAC-10 fans are privileged to see great football week-in and week-out.
Contrast this with fans of a team like Florida (rated #40 in strength of schedule this year), which plays a cupcake OOC schedule each year to pander to the BCS beauty contest (as do Alabama and Texas and bunch of other SEC and Big 12 schools). Florida fans this year were treated to exciting hard fought contests against Charleston Southern (62-3), Troy (56-6), Vanderbilt (27-3), and FIU (TBD). If that's what it takes to get into a BCS bowl, it's not worth it. Not even close.
If anything is broken, it's the BCS bowl system (as noted by President Obama, and various members of Congress, among others). So, sure, go ahead and fix the BCS bowl system by creating a playoff system for the national championship. Meanwhile, leave PAC-10 football alone — it's the best college football in the country, and there is no reason to change that.
Cliff: Hekker, Guy semifinalist « Cliff Kirkpatrick says:
Nov 13, 2009
[...] schedule and then adding a cream puff nonconference team to help get another team into a BCS game. Check back on my blog here, and check out the [...]