The leaders of the PAC were indeed outplayed. Outplayed because they thought they could rest on their laurels as the conference of champions. That they could continue to play up the academics and not pay as much attention to the desires and importance of the athletic departments. And everything would just fall into place.
USC has always known that importance though. And it has created a great deal of frustration for USC fans who indeed have seen USC as carrying the water for the league for some time as well. It's why so many USC fans have called to go, at least, Independent, for a very long time.
USC fans almost saw the league as being USC, and the 9 (and then later 11) dwarfs when it came to football. Altough to be fair, it wasn't like SC was winning the conference every year, even before the sanctions. So those "dwarfs" definitely were thorns in the side of USC. ucla had a string of 8 or 9 straight victories over SC during the 90s, I think. A horrible decade for sure. USC was definitely THE brand of the conference though.
And even more parity entered the league when SC got knocked out by sanctions, and then a litany of average, if not flat out horrible, coaches. USC wasn't that great, and others were again taking the titles.
But even Brando alludes to the fact that Oregon, who was one of those benefactors, is a come-lately to the party when you think about it. They've had a lot more success lately, but still pales by comparison to SC. They've been in the league, and an in-conference opponent, for a long time. But prior to CCK arriving at Oregon, the Ducks' record against USC wasn't all that impressive either.
Well, it all came to a head, didn't it? USC made the call. Got an invite from the 10. And took it. The leaders of the conference were shell-shocked.
Brando sees ucla as being about #5 in the conference, but they understood it too. They have a rich tradition in hoops and they understand the importance of athletics. They along with USC are two of the top 3 teams in the country with the most NCs across all sports. And being in the same market and a chief rival of USC, it was a no-brainer, and it didn't take long for them to get the invite to the 10 too. PAC leadership became even more shell-shocked. It wasn't unlike what OU/UT did to the 12.
ucla also holds onto a rich academic tradition too which we know the 10 likes. And with USC making leaps and bounds in this area as well, to the point there are students getting into ucla and Berkeley but not getting into USC, it's no slouch either. I am one of those who believes that you can have both in place. And I hope USC can hold onto that vision, as well as keeping its athletic traditions alive as well. There were many Trojan fans though who were beginning to think SC was sacrificing its athletics at the altar of academics.
We shall see how SC fares in the 10. The road to the NC will certainly be tougher, what with the travel schedule, and some of the teams we'll be playing. Hell, in the last couple of years the Trojans have had trouble with Utah, for God's sake. And ucla is on the rise in football and will still be in the same conference as SC.
I think the leadership in the PAC believed that they could just go along, business as usual, maintaining their academic prestige, while the likes of USC and ucla played good football and basketball respectively.
With Oregon and Utah helping out toward that cause, even if not necessarily as prestigious in academics. Stanford and Cal could sit by and reap the benefits while sheltering themselves in their gilded halls of academia (though to be fair, Stanford does have more Div. I NCs than both USC and ucla, just not in the big 2 sports; they certainly add to the "conference of champions" brand).
A good interview that hits a lot of nails square on their heads. .
USC has always known that importance though. And it has created a great deal of frustration for USC fans who indeed have seen USC as carrying the water for the league for some time as well. It's why so many USC fans have called to go, at least, Independent, for a very long time.
USC fans almost saw the league as being USC, and the 9 (and then later 11) dwarfs when it came to football. Altough to be fair, it wasn't like SC was winning the conference every year, even before the sanctions. So those "dwarfs" definitely were thorns in the side of USC. ucla had a string of 8 or 9 straight victories over SC during the 90s, I think. A horrible decade for sure. USC was definitely THE brand of the conference though.
And even more parity entered the league when SC got knocked out by sanctions, and then a litany of average, if not flat out horrible, coaches. USC wasn't that great, and others were again taking the titles.
But even Brando alludes to the fact that Oregon, who was one of those benefactors, is a come-lately to the party when you think about it. They've had a lot more success lately, but still pales by comparison to SC. They've been in the league, and an in-conference opponent, for a long time. But prior to CCK arriving at Oregon, the Ducks' record against USC wasn't all that impressive either.
Well, it all came to a head, didn't it? USC made the call. Got an invite from the 10. And took it. The leaders of the conference were shell-shocked.
Brando sees ucla as being about #5 in the conference, but they understood it too. They have a rich tradition in hoops and they understand the importance of athletics. They along with USC are two of the top 3 teams in the country with the most NCs across all sports. And being in the same market and a chief rival of USC, it was a no-brainer, and it didn't take long for them to get the invite to the 10 too. PAC leadership became even more shell-shocked. It wasn't unlike what OU/UT did to the 12.
ucla also holds onto a rich academic tradition too which we know the 10 likes. And with USC making leaps and bounds in this area as well, to the point there are students getting into ucla and Berkeley but not getting into USC, it's no slouch either. I am one of those who believes that you can have both in place. And I hope USC can hold onto that vision, as well as keeping its athletic traditions alive as well. There were many Trojan fans though who were beginning to think SC was sacrificing its athletics at the altar of academics.
We shall see how SC fares in the 10. The road to the NC will certainly be tougher, what with the travel schedule, and some of the teams we'll be playing. Hell, in the last couple of years the Trojans have had trouble with Utah, for God's sake. And ucla is on the rise in football and will still be in the same conference as SC.
I think the leadership in the PAC believed that they could just go along, business as usual, maintaining their academic prestige, while the likes of USC and ucla played good football and basketball respectively.
With Oregon and Utah helping out toward that cause, even if not necessarily as prestigious in academics. Stanford and Cal could sit by and reap the benefits while sheltering themselves in their gilded halls of academia (though to be fair, Stanford does have more Div. I NCs than both USC and ucla, just not in the big 2 sports; they certainly add to the "conference of champions" brand).
A good interview that hits a lot of nails square on their heads. .