If these past few weeks have felt like months for Pac-12 fans, well, just wait until Oct. 24.
That’s when the Big Ten and the Mountain West are expected to start their seasons, bringing all the Power Five conferences and all the major college teams in the west back to competition.
Except for you know who.
At that point, it will be two weeks until the Pac-12 starts.
Two weeks of the ACC, Big 12, SEC and Big Ten in action, and no Pac-12.
Two weeks of Boise State and Nevada and San Diego State on the field, and no Pac-12.
New Mexico and UNLV are starting two weeks before USC and Oregon.
Those weeks will feel like years for the Pac-12.
We remain a tad skeptical that all the Mountain West teams, especially the three in California, will be ready to play Oct. 24.
But we know the Pac-12 won’t be.
And that’s fine:
Given the practice restrictions, the wildfires. the standards for health and safety and the desire for a unified start, it’s unreasonable to think the Pac-12 could have returned to competition by Oct. 24.
But having reported on this issue every hour of every day since the Aug. 11 decision to postpone …
Having spent far more time immersed in the world of California public health ordinances than you can possibly imagine …
Having spent hours researching the various Covid testing strategies, reading scientific papers and watching virology videos …
Having spent countless hours with sources to understand how the presidents and conference officials approached the process …
Having done all that, the Hotline feels confident in this conclusion:
The Pac-12 could have been on the field Oct. 31 — all 12 teams — if every facet of the operation, on the campuses and in the conference office, had acted with urgency.
That’s a big ‘if’, for this reason: Much of the responsibility falls on the presidents and chancellors, and they opted for the methodical approach.
For them, the deliberative process was more important than getting back on the field a week earlier.
Yes, it’s very Pac-12, and that could be good or it could be bad, depending on your perspective.
But the conference could have been back on Halloween, back on the stage, in the spotlight, with six games.
(Truth be told: It probably would have been five, with one played on Friday the 30th.)
Based on what the Hotline believes is a fair-and-reasonable assessment of events, the conference lost nine days in the return-to-play process.
Nine days.
If you’re curious, here they are: Sept. 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 21, 22 and 23.
Yes, we counted.
Of course we counted.
It’s the only way to hold the campuses and the conference accountable for the timing of the vote.
Okay, let’s plunge into the weeds … deep into the weeds … of the past three weeks.
If you’d prefer to stop reading, I get that. No offense taken. It’s not a pretty picture.
From Aug. 12, the day after the vote to postpone, until Sept. 2, the day before the Quidel partnership, everything was on pause.
The key drivers of Pac-12 football (the players, coaches, directors of football operations and athletic directors) did not believe the conference would set foot on the field this fall.
The medical team established daily Covid testing as a requirement for contact practices, and the Quidel tests weren’t due on the campuses until November.
(We completely agree with that standard, by the way:
It was the best strategy for keeping the players safe and preventing them from spreading the virus to the campus community.)
Add six weeks of ramp time — the acclimatization period recommended by the NCAA and the Pac-12 medical team — and there was no way the conference could start before the SEC, ACC and Big 12 finished.
Then came the Quidel deal, orchestrated by commissioner Larry Scott with what appears to be an assist from his longtime friend and crisis communications advisor, Jeff Hunt.
That changed everything, as we have written frequently of the past few weeks:
It allowed the conference to scale the first of two obstacles, the daily testing, and set the stage for clearing the second: Gaining approval of public health officials.
But it also changed nothing.
The next day, Sept. 4, a Friday, should have brought a sounding of the trumpet at first light — a collective urgency to start the process of preparing for training camp.
Instead, it was met with relative silence and a lingering sense of purgatory.
Why? Because of the public health restrictions in California and Oregon — restrictions that the conference viewed as daunting.
Also, because the Big Ten remained on hiatus.
So Sept. 4 came and went, followed by a three-day weekend during which state agencies were closed and the wildfires raged.
Nothing could get done and, indeed, nothing got done. We won’t count those as lost days.
But then Tuesday, Sept. 8 arrived, and it was more of the same.
Conference and a smattering of campus officials in California continued to poke around with the restrictions — the strategy at that point was more about hope than action.
The exchanges between the universities and state/local health authorities unfolded, to a large degree, outside the athletic departments:
Each campus has government relations and campus health/safety officials to coordinate on matter that impact the entire community.
In addition, the conference office was communicating with advisors to California Gov. Gavin Newsom — without much progress. The wall of bureaucracy was as tall and sheer as El Capitan.
Four business days came and went, and the conference — at all levels — remained in neutral.
Some teams were working out in standard fashion under the NCAA’s 12-hour rule.
But in California and Oregon, there was stagnation.
What should have happened?
In our view, the conference should have been moving with all necessary urgency regardless of the Big Ten’s position.
What does that mean in relation to the public health restrictions?
It strikes the Hotline that three courses of action existed:
1. Continue to converse and exchange emails with state officials who had zero motivation to work with the schools because of cover from their bosses: Newsom and Oregon Gov. Kate Brown.
2. Appeal directly to Newsom and Brown.
3. Apply public pressure.
As the week of Sept. 8-11 unfolded, the conference stuck to its strategy — option 1 — and there was zero progress.
But that weekend, the Big Ten shifted to a higher gear, with media reports indicating the conference would vote on a return to play.
That sparked action — from USC.
Sept. 14, a Monday, counts in the loss column. But the next day, the Trojans took the fight public … and directly to Newsom.
Their open letter asked Newsom to work with the schools to establish a path through the restrictions and back to the field.
When players go public with pleas to government officials, it’s news.
The next day, the Big Ten made its return official, Scott spoke with Newsom about creating a path forward, and the Mercury News asked Newsom during a press conference what needed to happen (with the daily testing acquired) for an easing of restrictions.
Suddenly on the defensive, he responded that California guidelines were not preventing the teams from playing.
Technically, he was correct:
There was no rule in California prohibiting college football games, but the cohort limits for practice were so severe that proper game preparation was impossible.
Teams couldn’t conduct 11-on-11 workouts, but as an official told the Hotline, there was nothing stopping them from going 5-on-5 — or doing “mental exercises.”
It was as if Newsom had said: There’s your new car, fellas, but I have the keys, there’s no gas and the tires are flat … have a nice drive.
At the end of his remarks, Newsom vowed to work with the teams to raise the cohort levels to a practical level for 11-on-11.
With the governor giving clearance, the local health officials lost their cover. That evening, UCLA asked USC to join in a conversation with L.A. County officials, and the schools received assurances that they could move forward.
There was bureaucratic work left — changing the health restrictions in California is no simple process — but with Kate Brown joining Newsom in granting approval, the conference was on its way to scaling the second major obstacle.
Those four events … the Big Ten’s announcement, Scott’s conversation with Newsom, Newsom’s public clearance and L.A. County officials backing away … all happened on Sept. 15.
It was a day like no other for the conference, ever.
That’s when the Big Ten and the Mountain West are expected to start their seasons, bringing all the Power Five conferences and all the major college teams in the west back to competition.
Except for you know who.
At that point, it will be two weeks until the Pac-12 starts.
Two weeks of the ACC, Big 12, SEC and Big Ten in action, and no Pac-12.
Two weeks of Boise State and Nevada and San Diego State on the field, and no Pac-12.
New Mexico and UNLV are starting two weeks before USC and Oregon.
Those weeks will feel like years for the Pac-12.
We remain a tad skeptical that all the Mountain West teams, especially the three in California, will be ready to play Oct. 24.
But we know the Pac-12 won’t be.
And that’s fine:
Given the practice restrictions, the wildfires. the standards for health and safety and the desire for a unified start, it’s unreasonable to think the Pac-12 could have returned to competition by Oct. 24.
But having reported on this issue every hour of every day since the Aug. 11 decision to postpone …
Having spent far more time immersed in the world of California public health ordinances than you can possibly imagine …
Having spent hours researching the various Covid testing strategies, reading scientific papers and watching virology videos …
Having spent countless hours with sources to understand how the presidents and conference officials approached the process …
Having done all that, the Hotline feels confident in this conclusion:
The Pac-12 could have been on the field Oct. 31 — all 12 teams — if every facet of the operation, on the campuses and in the conference office, had acted with urgency.
That’s a big ‘if’, for this reason: Much of the responsibility falls on the presidents and chancellors, and they opted for the methodical approach.
For them, the deliberative process was more important than getting back on the field a week earlier.
Yes, it’s very Pac-12, and that could be good or it could be bad, depending on your perspective.
But the conference could have been back on Halloween, back on the stage, in the spotlight, with six games.
(Truth be told: It probably would have been five, with one played on Friday the 30th.)
Based on what the Hotline believes is a fair-and-reasonable assessment of events, the conference lost nine days in the return-to-play process.
Nine days.
If you’re curious, here they are: Sept. 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 21, 22 and 23.
Yes, we counted.
Of course we counted.
It’s the only way to hold the campuses and the conference accountable for the timing of the vote.
Okay, let’s plunge into the weeds … deep into the weeds … of the past three weeks.
If you’d prefer to stop reading, I get that. No offense taken. It’s not a pretty picture.
From Aug. 12, the day after the vote to postpone, until Sept. 2, the day before the Quidel partnership, everything was on pause.
The key drivers of Pac-12 football (the players, coaches, directors of football operations and athletic directors) did not believe the conference would set foot on the field this fall.
The medical team established daily Covid testing as a requirement for contact practices, and the Quidel tests weren’t due on the campuses until November.
(We completely agree with that standard, by the way:
It was the best strategy for keeping the players safe and preventing them from spreading the virus to the campus community.)
Add six weeks of ramp time — the acclimatization period recommended by the NCAA and the Pac-12 medical team — and there was no way the conference could start before the SEC, ACC and Big 12 finished.
Then came the Quidel deal, orchestrated by commissioner Larry Scott with what appears to be an assist from his longtime friend and crisis communications advisor, Jeff Hunt.
That changed everything, as we have written frequently of the past few weeks:
It allowed the conference to scale the first of two obstacles, the daily testing, and set the stage for clearing the second: Gaining approval of public health officials.
But it also changed nothing.
The next day, Sept. 4, a Friday, should have brought a sounding of the trumpet at first light — a collective urgency to start the process of preparing for training camp.
Instead, it was met with relative silence and a lingering sense of purgatory.
Why? Because of the public health restrictions in California and Oregon — restrictions that the conference viewed as daunting.
Also, because the Big Ten remained on hiatus.
So Sept. 4 came and went, followed by a three-day weekend during which state agencies were closed and the wildfires raged.
Nothing could get done and, indeed, nothing got done. We won’t count those as lost days.
But then Tuesday, Sept. 8 arrived, and it was more of the same.
Conference and a smattering of campus officials in California continued to poke around with the restrictions — the strategy at that point was more about hope than action.
The exchanges between the universities and state/local health authorities unfolded, to a large degree, outside the athletic departments:
Each campus has government relations and campus health/safety officials to coordinate on matter that impact the entire community.
In addition, the conference office was communicating with advisors to California Gov. Gavin Newsom — without much progress. The wall of bureaucracy was as tall and sheer as El Capitan.
Four business days came and went, and the conference — at all levels — remained in neutral.
Some teams were working out in standard fashion under the NCAA’s 12-hour rule.
But in California and Oregon, there was stagnation.
What should have happened?
In our view, the conference should have been moving with all necessary urgency regardless of the Big Ten’s position.
What does that mean in relation to the public health restrictions?
It strikes the Hotline that three courses of action existed:
1. Continue to converse and exchange emails with state officials who had zero motivation to work with the schools because of cover from their bosses: Newsom and Oregon Gov. Kate Brown.
2. Appeal directly to Newsom and Brown.
3. Apply public pressure.
As the week of Sept. 8-11 unfolded, the conference stuck to its strategy — option 1 — and there was zero progress.
But that weekend, the Big Ten shifted to a higher gear, with media reports indicating the conference would vote on a return to play.
That sparked action — from USC.
Sept. 14, a Monday, counts in the loss column. But the next day, the Trojans took the fight public … and directly to Newsom.
Their open letter asked Newsom to work with the schools to establish a path through the restrictions and back to the field.
When players go public with pleas to government officials, it’s news.
The next day, the Big Ten made its return official, Scott spoke with Newsom about creating a path forward, and the Mercury News asked Newsom during a press conference what needed to happen (with the daily testing acquired) for an easing of restrictions.
Suddenly on the defensive, he responded that California guidelines were not preventing the teams from playing.
Technically, he was correct:
There was no rule in California prohibiting college football games, but the cohort limits for practice were so severe that proper game preparation was impossible.
Teams couldn’t conduct 11-on-11 workouts, but as an official told the Hotline, there was nothing stopping them from going 5-on-5 — or doing “mental exercises.”
It was as if Newsom had said: There’s your new car, fellas, but I have the keys, there’s no gas and the tires are flat … have a nice drive.
At the end of his remarks, Newsom vowed to work with the teams to raise the cohort levels to a practical level for 11-on-11.
With the governor giving clearance, the local health officials lost their cover. That evening, UCLA asked USC to join in a conversation with L.A. County officials, and the schools received assurances that they could move forward.
There was bureaucratic work left — changing the health restrictions in California is no simple process — but with Kate Brown joining Newsom in granting approval, the conference was on its way to scaling the second major obstacle.
Those four events … the Big Ten’s announcement, Scott’s conversation with Newsom, Newsom’s public clearance and L.A. County officials backing away … all happened on Sept. 15.
It was a day like no other for the conference, ever.
