The Bishin Cutter wrote:
The reality is time zones. They have to work with it.
I wonder how much relief they would have gotten if they just bit the bullet and had taken OU and oSu. Two games that would have put them into the CTZ where there could have been more leverage for the conference to field earlier games. Putting programs of that notoriety into the conference would have resulted in the conference getting to tear up the old contract and renegotiate a new one.
This is why I can't take the endless Chicken Little fanspeak about the ACC and Big XII issues too seriously...the PAC is having some serious, real issues. What, they didn't see this coming? That they could have addressed this by relenting on Oklahoma State? These guys? The network isn't going to force more money down their way if the product doesn't sell, and the schools need better minds to think this rationally through. Something's going to have to give on the PAC's end...it's not the networks' fault.
The Pac12 not taking the OU-OSU does look like a head scratcher. There was some indication that decision was made because it did not include Texas without the LHN stuff. But the PAC12 is mostly made up of 'combos' in format, and it's hard to see a better combo available other than OU/OSU. That certainly would render the PAC12 CTZ exposure with quality content. But the refusal may be placed on those two or three or so PAC12 schools inherently resistant to expansion due to elitist attitudes and fear of changing the west coast dynamics. They even undermined a potentially lucrative 'coop' agreement with the B1G---and that certainly would have added to a slate of ETZ and CTZ games. One has to think the PAC12 is engaged in 'protectionism' and institutional selfishness a bit too much whereby they miss taking advantage of certain new economic opportunities.
With any new expansion, the PAC12 is going to also fret about divisions. All the members apparently want those games in southern California for exposure, gate receipts, and recruitment. If SEC, B1G, and ACC divisional set-ups have generated varying levels of complications and fuss, one can imagine the higher level of compromise it would take for the PAC12 to deal with 14 or 16 members.
Texas will be Texas and who knows what they would have done had OU/OSU left. Following those two could have been among the options with certain compromising. What is also known is the SEC talked with OU about being #14 prior to the Mizzou addition. The SEC was not going to take two from the same state, and the resolve of OU to go there alone was not evident or simply OU did not want to be in the SEC. And, it is known that the B1G has 'studied' OU in formulating a potential future expansion plan.
In the PAC12's case, an in-state pair could be positive. Depth with an extension that far would be important. Something is lost when a prime rival is not included.
Also, had the PAC12 taken OU/OSU, and prime Texas schools were not available for further inclusion, the PAC12 could have found a couple more (to 16) in the western region to fill in the geographic gaps to make an even more vast, but congruent, conference.