[CTcard]

I know it is heresy on this board to defend a Kal coach, but I don't think it is so unreasonable for him to want to be on the same scheduling plane with the teams (like Oregon and Washington) he has to compete with for a North championship.

Whether it's heresy or not depends on the details (and the responder). However, that isn't really what Yikes was talking about. He was talking about wanting an 8 game conference schedule, and to get that was willing to give up the guaranteed LA games.

Yikes is right.  It's crazy to play U$€ & UCLA every year when also scheduling the like of Ohio State, Texas, Auburn OOC. 

Again, that isn't really what Yikes was talking about.

Nevertheless, on this issue Yikes is (mostly) wrong.

It is not crazy to play S-C and UCLA every year.

I'm not going to repeat it now, but I looked at the difference between Stanford having both LA schools every year vs a random sampling of south division teams and posted it here - at least twice. By memory, an aggressive estimate was that on average it would cost about 1 win every ten years.

So, there is a small possible trade off in win-loss record to balance against the tradition of always playing the LA schools plus having a larger presence in southern California - the main recruiting bed for the Pac 12 (remember that EVERY conference team wanted to be grouped with the LA schools - supposedly Colorado demanded it as the cost of swapping conferences).
Some might prefer the former, some the latter (about 90% of this board if I remember the poll); but that makes it a difficult call at most - not crazy.

[CTcard]

I know it is heresy on this board to defend a Kal coach, but I don't think it is so unreasonable for him to want to be on the same scheduling plane with the teams (like Oregon and Washington) he has to compete with for a North championship.

Whether it's heresy or not depends on the details (and the responder). However, that isn't really what Yikes was talking about. He was talking about wanting an 8 game conference schedule, and to get that was willing to give up the guaranteed LA games.

Yikes is right.  It's crazy to play U$€ & UCLA every year when also scheduling the like of Ohio State, Texas, Auburn OOC. 

Again, that isn't really what Yikes was talking about.

Nevertheless, on this issue Yikes is (mostly) wrong.

It is not crazy to play S-C and UCLA every year.

I'm not going to repeat it now, but I looked at the difference between Stanford having both LA schools every year vs a random sampling of south division teams and posted it here - at least twice. By memory, an aggressive estimate was that on average it would cost about 1 win every ten years.

So, there is a small possible trade off in win-loss record to balance against the tradition of always playing the LA schools plus having a larger presence in southern California - the main recruiting bed for the Pac 12 (remember that EVERY conference team wanted to be grouped with the LA schools - supposedly Colorado demanded it as the cost of swapping conferences).
Some might prefer the former, some the latter (about 90% of this board if I remember the poll); but that makes it a difficult call at most - not crazy.