Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
Author Message
Maize Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,272
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 542
I Root For: Athletes First
Location:
Post: #21
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 10:11 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 09:38 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  It's going to work. This is the BIG getting into bed with two of the single biggest brand names in college sports and pushing its footprint into the second largest city and most populus state. This isn't like the B12 having multiple schools stranded on multiple islands - Hello UCF, WVU, BYU. Now to the OP question. I'm sure that if for some reason it does not work out, the BIG will allow USCLA to buy themselves out.
I do think that eventually the BIG will bring in four more PAC schools and form a six team PAC Division in a twenty-four school conference.

I agree. I know the traditional fans want/wish/hope for this not to work… but it’s going to work insanely well. The Big Ten just added a critical massive market that’s the entertainment capital of the world (and actually has a real history of caring about college sports, unlike the NYC market), a recruiting hotbed for all sports, a major center for Big Ten alums, and ultimately, USC and UCLA playing the other big brands in the Big Ten in football and basketball (along with excellence in all sports across the board). LA is a market whose economy is literally fueled by TV production and the Big Ten just created a national college football TV product. It’s the single most valuable move the Big Ten could have possibly made outside of adding Notre Dame. I don’t know why it’s OK for the SEC to go after UT and OU while the Big Ten is supposed to be OK with thinking smaller with schools like Kansas and Colorado. The SEC may still have the on-field football advantage, but the Big Ten now has a lock on the media and cultural power centers of the US. The latter is why the Big Ten keeps over-performing in its media deals compared to the SEC and the USC/UCLA expansion is really the capstone on that point.

^^^^
This …
01-21-2023 10:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
djsuperfly Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 283
Joined: Sep 2021
Reputation: 38
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #22
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 10:30 AM)Section 200 Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 10:12 AM)djsuperfly Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 09:20 AM)World Wide Swag Wrote:  So they’ll make four roundtrips 2-3 time zones away? Any way you slice it, it’s tough. WVU in the Big 12 has consistently bitched about how awful the travel burden was; as stated above, their farthest roadtrip in the current Big 12 configuration is about the same distance as USC/UCLA’s closest trip outside of each other in the Big Ten. USC and UCLA will be at a considerable competitive disadvantage.

Morgantown to Fort Worth is only 100 more miles than LA to Seattle.

So maybe the real takeaway here is that we shouldn't be taking West Virginia's complaining too seriously?

So you want to blame the victim? 9pm East time game tip in Ft Worth, get on plane at 1am East time, land at 4am - seems great for WVU. You want that when you had 7pm game time tip in NYC, get on plane at 11pm, land at midnight?? Significant difference to your quality of life

Not blaming anyone. And if the QOL was all that important, WVU could have just joined the AAC. You can talk how great the Big East was for WVU, but it doesn't really exist for them anymore, now does it? So....not sure what the point there is.

The point is: the PAC is considered to make geographic "sense," and yet their longest conference road trip is just as long as the current XII's, which people think is some geographic "insanity."
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2023 10:52 AM by djsuperfly.)
01-21-2023 10:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,910
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 495
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #23
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-20-2023 10:26 PM)bullet Wrote:  So I think men's and women's basketball are the only sports where travel will be an issue for the athletes. ...

Seems like the Big Ten office is going to be asked to use travel partner scheduling for USC's and UCLA's basketball scheduling.

Though if it is for competitiveness rather than cost saving reasons, they might ask to start a trip with a Central TZ school and end with an Eastern TZ team, where practical.
01-21-2023 10:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RUScarlets Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,043
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 95
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #24
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
There are only a handful of road travel pairs that work in the current B1G. NWU + Madison. Purdue/Illinois/Indiana (any 2/3 in that triangle). MSU/UM. Minn/Iowa OR Iowa/UN. That means UCLA and USC would have to play @NWU or @Iowa every year in BBall just to hit the aforementioned pairs. NWU and Iowa versus LA are not attractive BBall matchups for Fox. But that's just how you are going to have to do it to minimize the door to door time. Everything else is a 4hr plus bus trip...

Happy Valley to Columbus??? Nope
Madison to St Paul??? Brutal
Rutgers/Happy Valley/Maryland... difficult but you are forced to do it.

So let's say you're playing 19 games. That's 11/4/4. UCLA has to play three pairs every year on the road. Again, NWU/Iowa groups plus Indianas/Illinois plus UM/MSU plus Rutgers/PSU/Maryland. Ohio St Minn and UN are potential solo road games every year among others. Of course, they can still play only 17 conference games with an 11/3/3 and cut a two-game road trip, but it doesn't change the facts above.
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2023 11:26 AM by RUScarlets.)
01-21-2023 11:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 43,666
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 610
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #25
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 10:26 AM)Section 200 Wrote:  It depends on your definition of "work". Will USC & UCLA win as much - not a chance. Even the NFL groups teams into geographically logical divisions to minimize travel to improve the product. Since UCLA & USC are 2 of the richest schools in the world, they should not be subjecting their athletes & fans to brutal travel. West Virginia took on bad travel to survive in the P5. UCLA & USC will always be in the P5. The schools will always have a home. Stupid decision by greedy admins that aren't impacted by the travel. All this move does is give paper pushers raises & the ability to hire more administrators so here we are.

Only reason why they won't win as much is the Big Ten is a much tougher conference than the Pac 12 is.
01-21-2023 11:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
*

Posts: 7,516
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 576
I Root For: VanMemUNC Indiana DePaul
Location: Nashville
Post: #26
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 10:34 AM)Maize Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 10:11 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 09:38 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  It's going to work. This is the BIG getting into bed with two of the single biggest brand names in college sports and pushing its footprint into the second largest city and most populus state. This isn't like the B12 having multiple schools stranded on multiple islands - Hello UCF, WVU, BYU. Now to the OP question. I'm sure that if for some reason it does not work out, the BIG will allow USCLA to buy themselves out.
I do think that eventually the BIG will bring in four more PAC schools and form a six team PAC Division in a twenty-four school conference.

I agree. I know the traditional fans want/wish/hope for this not to work… but it’s going to work insanely well. The Big Ten just added a critical massive market that’s the entertainment capital of the world (and actually has a real history of caring about college sports, unlike the NYC market), a recruiting hotbed for all sports, a major center for Big Ten alums, and ultimately, USC and UCLA playing the other big brands in the Big Ten in football and basketball (along with excellence in all sports across the board). LA is a market whose economy is literally fueled by TV production and the Big Ten just created a national college football TV product. It’s the single most valuable move the Big Ten could have possibly made outside of adding Notre Dame. I don’t know why it’s OK for the SEC to go after UT and OU while the Big Ten is supposed to be OK with thinking smaller with schools like Kansas and Colorado. The SEC may still have the on-field football advantage, but the Big Ten now has a lock on the media and cultural power centers of the US. The latter is why the Big Ten keeps over-performing in its media deals compared to the SEC and the USC/UCLA expansion is really the capstone on that point.

^^^^
This …

Agree on all of this. USC and UCLA will be fine in the Big Ten. As fans, we'll get use to it. I recall well when the SEC added South Carolina and Arkansas. As a Vanderbilt fan, I was a bit concerned at first. But I was proved wrong over time. Those two schools have been fine members of the league.

Similarly, Rutgers and Maryland to the Big Ten has made sense over time.

Change is inevitable. Embrace it.

In time, we'll likely come to see how the USC and UCLA additions have worked fine for the Big Ten and for those two schools.
01-21-2023 11:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 11,611
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 615
I Root For: Rameses
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #27
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 10:11 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I agree. I know the traditional fans want/wish/hope for this not to work… but it’s going to work insanely well. The Big Ten just added a critical massive market that’s the entertainment capital of the world (and actually has a real history of caring about college sports, unlike the NYC market), a recruiting hotbed for all sports, a major center for Big Ten alums, and ultimately, USC and UCLA playing the other big brands in the Big Ten in football and basketball (along with excellence in all sports across the board). LA is a market whose economy is literally fueled by TV production and the Big Ten just created a national college football TV product. It’s the single most valuable move the Big Ten could have possibly made outside of adding Notre Dame. I don’t know why it’s OK for the SEC to go after UT and OU while the Big Ten is supposed to be OK with thinking smaller with schools like Kansas and Colorado. The SEC may still have the on-field football advantage, but the Big Ten now has a lock on the media and cultural power centers of the US. The latter is why the Big Ten keeps over-performing in its media deals compared to the SEC and the USC/UCLA expansion is really the capstone on that point.

I consider myself a traditional fan. The Rose Bowl was a cool tradition, I respected the Big Ten as a tight knit academically mindful midwestern conference, I also respected them as an adversary. But, I am also a realist. Those two schools of thought can coexist, especially when considering one of the main attractions to college sports are traditions and pageantry for old alma mater etc.

"Insanely well"? Sure, the Big Ten is going to make a lot of money off these expansion teams. And let's be real, that's what they are. This was a professional sports expansion move. There is no pageantry or tradition between UCLA/USC and the Big Ten besides the once in a blue moon Rose Bowl match-ups, and that's what made them special. So "insanely well" comes with the death of traditions, like the Rose Bowl. But hey, you know we'll get some prefabricated rivalry trophies lol.

Speaking of the Rose Bowl. UCLA is hedging their bets that the sheer volume of west coast Big Ten alums will fill up that stadium 26 miles off their campus. Talk about pageantry.
01-21-2023 11:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Offline
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 11,611
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 615
I Root For: Rameses
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #28
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 11:35 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 10:34 AM)Maize Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 10:11 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 09:38 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  It's going to work. This is the BIG getting into bed with two of the single biggest brand names in college sports and pushing its footprint into the second largest city and most populus state. This isn't like the B12 having multiple schools stranded on multiple islands - Hello UCF, WVU, BYU. Now to the OP question. I'm sure that if for some reason it does not work out, the BIG will allow USCLA to buy themselves out.
I do think that eventually the BIG will bring in four more PAC schools and form a six team PAC Division in a twenty-four school conference.

I agree. I know the traditional fans want/wish/hope for this not to work… but it’s going to work insanely well. The Big Ten just added a critical massive market that’s the entertainment capital of the world (and actually has a real history of caring about college sports, unlike the NYC market), a recruiting hotbed for all sports, a major center for Big Ten alums, and ultimately, USC and UCLA playing the other big brands in the Big Ten in football and basketball (along with excellence in all sports across the board). LA is a market whose economy is literally fueled by TV production and the Big Ten just created a national college football TV product. It’s the single most valuable move the Big Ten could have possibly made outside of adding Notre Dame. I don’t know why it’s OK for the SEC to go after UT and OU while the Big Ten is supposed to be OK with thinking smaller with schools like Kansas and Colorado. The SEC may still have the on-field football advantage, but the Big Ten now has a lock on the media and cultural power centers of the US. The latter is why the Big Ten keeps over-performing in its media deals compared to the SEC and the USC/UCLA expansion is really the capstone on that point.

^^^^
This …

Agree on all of this. USC and UCLA will be fine in the Big Ten. As fans, we'll get use to it. I recall well when the SEC added South Carolina and Arkansas. As a Vanderbilt fan, I was a bit concerned at first. But I was proved wrong over time. Those two schools have been fine members of the league.

Similarly, Rutgers and Maryland to the Big Ten has made sense over time.

Change is inevitable. Embrace it.

In time, we'll likely come to see how the USC and UCLA additions have worked fine for the Big Ten and for those two schools.

One of my best friends is a Maryland fan, good luck telling him it makes sense. I think people don't realize how much UMd fans hate Duke and miss that rivalry. Fans don't get that game (nor UVa) anymore and they don't get the Big Ten media money.

07-coffee3
01-21-2023 11:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jimrtex Online
1st String
*

Posts: 1,667
Joined: Aug 2021
Reputation: 114
I Root For: Houston, Tulsa, Colorado
Location:
Post: #29
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 12:52 AM)stever20 Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 12:04 AM)World Wide Swag Wrote:  
(01-20-2023 10:26 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(01-20-2023 10:09 PM)World Wide Swag Wrote:  The logistical challenges are pretty obvious. Bob Huggins and WVU complained for years about the travel issues in the Big 12, and I think their farthest road trip is about equal to what USC and UCLA’s closest road trip will be outside of each other. This will create a massive competitive disadvantage, not to mention an enormous burden on student athletes that I think will hurt recruiting.

Football will be the easiest sport for the travel issues, and it will still be a bear. UCLA will not be competitive. USC will be, but four trips a year to Big Ten country (plus perhaps ND depending on how the schedule rotation shakes out) is going to be really tough on a team. And if they slip up and lose games they should win and it costs them a CFP spot or a bye in the playoff, the fans obviously won’t be thrilled. Speaking of fans, relatively easy road trips to Phoenix, Salt Lake City and the Bay Area have been replaced with Champaign, Piscataway, State College and East Lansing.

Yes, the money will be better, but UCLA will have to pay their toll to Cal and who knows where these media rights valuations go in the next cycle as more people cut the cord and non-sports fans no longer subsidize ESPN’s insane carriage rates. Lastly, if you haven’t been paying attention to Europe, they’re going insane over climate change…gluing themselves to airport runways and literally restricting citizens’ movement. That will soon come to America and California will be an early adopter, which will lead a lot of people to ask why all of an LA university’s sports teams are being flown to New Jersey, Maryland, Pennsylvania, etc for games.

The easy solution is add Oregon and Washington to alleviate the travel burden, but they’re likely dilutive to the revenue pie and thus apparently nonstarters for the current Big Ten membership. So what if it doesn’t work out?

They already fly to Boulder or Seattle. Football is not an issue. Most sports are not an issue because they basically just compete at a conference meet. The only sports that will be an issue are baseball/softball, basketball/women's basketball, soccer/women's soccer and women's volleyball. Baseball, softball and soccer are basically weekend sports, so like football, it won't be impacted much.

Looking at this year's volleyball schedule, only 25 of the 140 conference games were NOT on a Friday, Saturday or Sunday. I imagine they will schedule the LA schools to play on the weekend except when playing each other.

So I think men's and women's basketball are the only sports where travel will be an issue for the athletes.
LOL no one cares about non-revenue sports in terms of whether they can compete. They’re meaningless in this discussion, albeit expensive.

UCLA football will not be competitive.
UCLA basketball (a marquee blue blood) will be significantly hindered by nine (9) road trips 2+ time zones away

USC football will have 4+ away games 2+ time zones away each year. This will, in my opinion, materially affect their ability to access the CFP and earn a bye
No one cares about USC basketball but it will have the same issues as stated above for UCLA

Basketball won't have 9 road trips. They'll have like 4 2 game swings where they play @ one team on Wednesday or Thursday, and then @ another team on Saturday or Sunday. Sort of similar to what they do now playing at Washington on Thursday and at Washington State on Saturday for example. They'll have like 1 single trip, which they would likely do in December during OOC timeframe.
The Pac-12 and B1G do basketball scheduling different. In the B1G, teams generally play one home game and one away game each week, so that there is a lot of mid-week content, and teams play one game away per week. Since the schools are closer they can fly out the morning of the game and be ready to play that night.

In the Pac-12 teams travel to a distant school (e.g. UCLA to Utah, USC to Colorado) play on a Thursday/Friday and then swap (e.g. UCLA to Colorado, USC to Utah) and play two days later (Saturday/Sunday). The next weekend UCLA and USC are at home, and might host Washington and WSU.

The B1G+ could do a hybrid. The visiting pair does not have to be a hosting pair. So you could have Minnesota and Ohio State fly out to play USC and UCLA on a Friday, swap and play UCLA and USC on Sunday then fly home.

The week USC plays UCLA, you can have a single eastern team fly out. Indiana @USC, Indiana@UCLA, UCLA@USC. The UCLA@USC could even follow the midweek format used in the east.

When USC and UCLA go east, they could go to different schools USC@Wisconsin, USC@Iowa; and UCLA@Rutgers, UCLA@Maryland. Wisconsin, Iowa, Rutgers, and Maryland could maintain the B1G style of scheduling with their next/previous game 3 or 4 days apart (these can either be at home or on the road. B1G schools do play consecutive games at home or away, but they are several days apart.
01-21-2023 11:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,910
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 495
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #30
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 11:12 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  There are only a handful of road travel pairs that work in the current B1G. ...

Yes, with a few exceptions (That School Up North / Michigan State, Northwestern / Wisconsin, etc.), it's obvious that travel partner scheduling for the West Coast schools is not about bus travel ... they would be three air trips, a long one from the west cost to one Big Ten school, a shorter hop to another Big Ten school, and then a long one back to the west coast.
01-21-2023 11:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 57,918
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 2477
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #31
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 10:26 AM)Section 200 Wrote:  It depends on your definition of "work". Will USC & UCLA win as much - not a chance. Even the NFL groups teams into geographically logical divisions to minimize travel to improve the product. Since UCLA & USC are 2 of the richest schools in the world, they should not be subjecting their athletes & fans to brutal travel. West Virginia took on bad travel to survive in the P5. UCLA & USC will always be in the P5. The schools will always have a home. Stupid decision by greedy admins that aren't impacted by the travel. All this move does is give paper pushers raises & the ability to hire more administrators so here we are.

Cowboys in the NFC East?

Geography in the NFL is for rivalries. What used to be nicknamed the Black and Blue Division (-for bruises--Detroit, Chicago, Green Bay, Minnesota) had 4 teams that had been playing since 1960 with 3 of them playing since the 1920s.
01-21-2023 12:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,739
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 1232
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #32
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 11:12 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  There are only a handful of road travel pairs that work in the current B1G. NWU + Madison. Purdue/Illinois/Indiana (any 2/3 in that triangle). MSU/UM. Minn/Iowa OR Iowa/UN. That means UCLA and USC would have to play @NWU or @Iowa every year in BBall just to hit the aforementioned pairs. NWU and Iowa versus LA are not attractive BBall matchups for Fox. But that's just how you are going to have to do it to minimize the door to door time. Everything else is a 4hr plus bus trip...

Happy Valley to Columbus??? Nope
Madison to St Paul??? Brutal
Rutgers/Happy Valley/Maryland... difficult but you are forced to do it.


So let's say you're playing 19 games. That's 11/4/4. UCLA has to play three pairs every year on the road. Again, NWU/Iowa groups plus Indianas/Illinois plus UM/MSU plus Rutgers/PSU/Maryland. Ohio St Minn and UN are potential solo road games every year among others. Of course, they can still play only 17 conference games with an 11/3/3 and cut a two-game road trip, but it doesn't change the facts above.

Here’s the classic East Coast bias where people in the East overestimate distances between Eastern/Central Time Zone schools and underestimate the distances between schools in the West.

The Pac-12 has used a travel pair system with all of the natural in-market/state/region pairs.

Washington to Washington State is only around 20 minutes shorter than Columbus to State College for a bus ride and actually *longer* than every single one of the other Big Ten pairs that you’ve mentioned (including Iowa to Nebraska and the supposedly “brutal” Wisconsin to Minnesota trip).

Colorado-Utah is also a travel pair for the Pac-12, yet that’s an even longer distance than any distance between two primary rivals in the Big Ten.

Are USC and UCLA going to need to take *more* longer road trips? Yes.

However, the distance between any two natural travel pairs in the Big Ten isn’t going to be any issue compared to what USC and UCLA already see in the Pac-12 travel pairs.

The Big Ten travel pairs are pretty simple (with Google Maps time travel inserted):

Rutgers - Maryland (2 hours 52 minutes)
Penn State - Ohio State (4:53)
Michigan - Michigan State (0:54)
Indiana - Purdue (1:55)*
Illinois - Northwestern (2:32)
Wisconsin - Minnesota (3:54)
Iowa - Nebraska (4:12)

* If IU-PU is a travel pair, a team would likely stay in Indianapolis as midpoint with the distance being about an hour each to IU and PU in opposite directions along with a large number of hotels plus the airport access. That’s actually as easy or easier than the Stanford/Cal (getting through 40 miles of Bay Area traffic), Oregon/Oregon State and Arizona/Arizona State pairings in the Pac-12.

Compare this to the Washington - Washington State (4:30) and Colorado - Utah (7:19) travel pairs that USC/UCLA already deal with in the Pac-12.

I’m not discounting the number of flights and crossing time zones for USC/UCLA. That’s going to be difficult. However, we shouldn’t be overstating the distances between the travel pairs in the Big Ten assuming that the league uses that travel structure at least for USC/UCLA basketball (and maybe baseball) games. Once again, what Eastern people think is a “far” distance in the East is considered “close” in the West.

Plus, I doubt buses are going to be used in the longer pairs like Ohio State - Penn State (at least for basketball where there are chartered flights) anyway.

I’m not sure where you’re going with 17/19 conference games. There are 20 conference games and that’s ironclad with the Big Ten’s commitment to their TV partners. If that means USC and UCLA each have one stray single game non-travel pair road game per year, then that’s what will happen.
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2023 12:28 PM by Frank the Tank.)
01-21-2023 12:07 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 43,666
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 610
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #33
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 12:07 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 11:12 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  There are only a handful of road travel pairs that work in the current B1G. NWU + Madison. Purdue/Illinois/Indiana (any 2/3 in that triangle). MSU/UM. Minn/Iowa OR Iowa/UN. That means UCLA and USC would have to play @NWU or @Iowa every year in BBall just to hit the aforementioned pairs. NWU and Iowa versus LA are not attractive BBall matchups for Fox. But that's just how you are going to have to do it to minimize the door to door time. Everything else is a 4hr plus bus trip...

Happy Valley to Columbus??? Nope
Madison to St Paul??? Brutal
Rutgers/Happy Valley/Maryland... difficult but you are forced to do it.


So let's say you're playing 19 games. That's 11/4/4. UCLA has to play three pairs every year on the road. Again, NWU/Iowa groups plus Indianas/Illinois plus UM/MSU plus Rutgers/PSU/Maryland. Ohio St Minn and UN are potential solo road games every year among others. Of course, they can still play only 17 conference games with an 11/3/3 and cut a two-game road trip, but it doesn't change the facts above.

Here’s the classic East Coast bias where people in the East overestimate distances between Eastern/Central Time Zone schools and underestimate the distances between schools in the West.

The Pac-12 has used a travel pair system with all of the natural in-market/state/region pairs.

Washington to Washington State is only around 20 minutes shorter than Columbus to State College for a bus ride and actually *longer* than every single one of the other Big Ten pairs that you’ve mentioned (including Iowa to Nebraska and the supposedly “brutal” Wisconsin to Minnesota trip).

Colorado-Utah is also a travel pair for the Pac-12, yet that’s an even longer distance than any distance between two primary rivals in the Big Ten.

Are USC and UCLA going to need to take *more* longer road trips? Yes.

However, the distance between any two natural travel pairs in the Big Ten isn’t going to be any issue compared to what USC and UCLA already see in the Pac-12 travel pairs.

The Big Ten travel pairs are pretty simple (with Google Maps time travel inserted):

Rutgers - Maryland (2 hours 52 minutes)
Penn State - Ohio State (4:53)
Michigan - Michigan State (0:54)
Indiana - Purdue (1:55)*
Illinois - Northwestern (2:32)
Wisconsin - Minnesota (3:54)
Iowa - Nebraska (4:12)

* If IU-PU is a travel pair, a team would likely stay in Indianapolis as midpoint with the distance being about an hour each to IU and PU in opposite directions along with a large number of hotels plus the airport access. That’s actually as easy or easier than the Stanford/Cal (getting through 40 miles of Bay Area traffic), Oregon/Oregon State and Arizona/Arizona State pairings in the Pac-12.

Compare this to the Washington - Washington State (4:30) and Colorado - Utah (7:19) travel pairs that USC/UCLA already deal with in the Pac-12.

I’m not discounting the number of flights and crossing time zones for USC/UCLA. That’s going to be difficult. However, we shouldn’t be overstating the distances between the travel pairs in the Big Ten assuming that the league uses that travel structure at least for USC/UCLA basketball (and maybe baseball) games. Once again, what Eastern people think is a “far” distance in the East is considered “close” in the West.

Plus, I doubt buses are going to be used in the longer pairs like Ohio State - Penn State (at least for basketball where there are chartered flights) anyway.

I’m not sure where you’re going with 17/19 conference games. There are 20 conference games and that’s ironclad with the Big Ten’s commitment to their TV partners. If that means USC and UCLA each have one stray single game non-travel pair road game per year, then that’s what will happen.
I would think like I said that single one would be in December during OOC play- where it probably would be combined with a 2nd OOC game as well. Say play at Maryland and then play a few days later at Georgetown or something along those lines.
01-21-2023 12:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Skyhawk Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,208
Joined: Nov 2021
Reputation: 154
I Root For: Big10
Location:
Post: #34
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 09:14 AM)XLance Wrote:  
(01-20-2023 11:49 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  It isn't going to not work out.

The B1G was greedy. They should have taken Kansas and Colorado instead.

Could still happen...

04-cheers
01-21-2023 12:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Skyhawk Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,208
Joined: Nov 2021
Reputation: 154
I Root For: Big10
Location:
Post: #35
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 10:11 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 09:38 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  It's going to work. This is the BIG getting into bed with two of the single biggest brand names in college sports and pushing its footprint into the second largest city and most populus state. This isn't like the B12 having multiple schools stranded on multiple islands - Hello UCF, WVU, BYU. Now to the OP question. I'm sure that if for some reason it does not work out, the BIG will allow USCLA to buy themselves out.
I do think that eventually the BIG will bring in four more PAC schools and form a six team PAC Division in a twenty-four school conference.

I agree. I know the traditional fans want/wish/hope for this not to work… but it’s going to work insanely well. The Big Ten just added a critical massive market that’s the entertainment capital of the world (and actually has a real history of caring about college sports, unlike the NYC market), a recruiting hotbed for all sports, a major center for Big Ten alums, and ultimately, USC and UCLA playing the other big brands in the Big Ten in football and basketball (along with excellence in all sports across the board). LA is a market whose economy is literally fueled by TV production and the Big Ten just created a national college football TV product. It’s the single most valuable move the Big Ten could have possibly made outside of adding Notre Dame. I don’t know why it’s OK for the SEC to go after UT and OU while the Big Ten is supposed to be OK with thinking smaller with schools like Kansas and Colorado. The SEC may still have the on-field football advantage, but the Big Ten now has a lock on the media and cultural power centers of the US. The latter is why the Big Ten keeps over-performing in its media deals compared to the SEC and the USC/UCLA expansion is really the capstone on that point.

Agreed.

People can complain that these are "professional" deals, but last I checked espn, fox, et al, are professional companies.

Either come to the table aware of what's in front of you, or you'll be left behind.
01-21-2023 01:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Skyhawk Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,208
Joined: Nov 2021
Reputation: 154
I Root For: Big10
Location:
Post: #36
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 11:45 AM)esayem Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 11:35 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 10:34 AM)Maize Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 10:11 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 09:38 AM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  It's going to work. This is the BIG getting into bed with two of the single biggest brand names in college sports and pushing its footprint into the second largest city and most populus state. This isn't like the B12 having multiple schools stranded on multiple islands - Hello UCF, WVU, BYU. Now to the OP question. I'm sure that if for some reason it does not work out, the BIG will allow USCLA to buy themselves out.
I do think that eventually the BIG will bring in four more PAC schools and form a six team PAC Division in a twenty-four school conference.

I agree. I know the traditional fans want/wish/hope for this not to work… but it’s going to work insanely well. The Big Ten just added a critical massive market that’s the entertainment capital of the world (and actually has a real history of caring about college sports, unlike the NYC market), a recruiting hotbed for all sports, a major center for Big Ten alums, and ultimately, USC and UCLA playing the other big brands in the Big Ten in football and basketball (along with excellence in all sports across the board). LA is a market whose economy is literally fueled by TV production and the Big Ten just created a national college football TV product. It’s the single most valuable move the Big Ten could have possibly made outside of adding Notre Dame. I don’t know why it’s OK for the SEC to go after UT and OU while the Big Ten is supposed to be OK with thinking smaller with schools like Kansas and Colorado. The SEC may still have the on-field football advantage, but the Big Ten now has a lock on the media and cultural power centers of the US. The latter is why the Big Ten keeps over-performing in its media deals compared to the SEC and the USC/UCLA expansion is really the capstone on that point.

^^^^
This …

Agree on all of this. USC and UCLA will be fine in the Big Ten. As fans, we'll get use to it. I recall well when the SEC added South Carolina and Arkansas. As a Vanderbilt fan, I was a bit concerned at first. But I was proved wrong over time. Those two schools have been fine members of the league.

Similarly, Rutgers and Maryland to the Big Ten has made sense over time.

Change is inevitable. Embrace it.

In time, we'll likely come to see how the USC and UCLA additions have worked fine for the Big Ten and for those two schools.

One of my best friends is a Maryland fan, good luck telling him it makes sense. I think people don't realize how much UMd fans hate Duke and miss that rivalry. Fans don't get that game (nor UVa) anymore and they don't get the Big Ten media money.

07-coffee3

Just wait, I think your friend may see Duke (and Virginia), again. : )
01-21-2023 01:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Just Joe Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 213
Joined: Oct 2020
Reputation: 25
I Root For: Bama
Location:
Post: #37
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-20-2023 11:49 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  It isn't going to not work out.

This.

No it will not be fun or easy on athletes, but it will make bus loads of cash, and that’s the only metric that will be used to decide if it “works out.”
01-21-2023 01:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 15,739
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 1232
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #38
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 12:33 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 12:07 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 11:12 AM)RUScarlets Wrote:  There are only a handful of road travel pairs that work in the current B1G. NWU + Madison. Purdue/Illinois/Indiana (any 2/3 in that triangle). MSU/UM. Minn/Iowa OR Iowa/UN. That means UCLA and USC would have to play @NWU or @Iowa every year in BBall just to hit the aforementioned pairs. NWU and Iowa versus LA are not attractive BBall matchups for Fox. But that's just how you are going to have to do it to minimize the door to door time. Everything else is a 4hr plus bus trip...

Happy Valley to Columbus??? Nope
Madison to St Paul??? Brutal
Rutgers/Happy Valley/Maryland... difficult but you are forced to do it.


So let's say you're playing 19 games. That's 11/4/4. UCLA has to play three pairs every year on the road. Again, NWU/Iowa groups plus Indianas/Illinois plus UM/MSU plus Rutgers/PSU/Maryland. Ohio St Minn and UN are potential solo road games every year among others. Of course, they can still play only 17 conference games with an 11/3/3 and cut a two-game road trip, but it doesn't change the facts above.

Here’s the classic East Coast bias where people in the East overestimate distances between Eastern/Central Time Zone schools and underestimate the distances between schools in the West.

The Pac-12 has used a travel pair system with all of the natural in-market/state/region pairs.

Washington to Washington State is only around 20 minutes shorter than Columbus to State College for a bus ride and actually *longer* than every single one of the other Big Ten pairs that you’ve mentioned (including Iowa to Nebraska and the supposedly “brutal” Wisconsin to Minnesota trip).

Colorado-Utah is also a travel pair for the Pac-12, yet that’s an even longer distance than any distance between two primary rivals in the Big Ten.

Are USC and UCLA going to need to take *more* longer road trips? Yes.

However, the distance between any two natural travel pairs in the Big Ten isn’t going to be any issue compared to what USC and UCLA already see in the Pac-12 travel pairs.

The Big Ten travel pairs are pretty simple (with Google Maps time travel inserted):

Rutgers - Maryland (2 hours 52 minutes)
Penn State - Ohio State (4:53)
Michigan - Michigan State (0:54)
Indiana - Purdue (1:55)*
Illinois - Northwestern (2:32)
Wisconsin - Minnesota (3:54)
Iowa - Nebraska (4:12)

* If IU-PU is a travel pair, a team would likely stay in Indianapolis as midpoint with the distance being about an hour each to IU and PU in opposite directions along with a large number of hotels plus the airport access. That’s actually as easy or easier than the Stanford/Cal (getting through 40 miles of Bay Area traffic), Oregon/Oregon State and Arizona/Arizona State pairings in the Pac-12.

Compare this to the Washington - Washington State (4:30) and Colorado - Utah (7:19) travel pairs that USC/UCLA already deal with in the Pac-12.

I’m not discounting the number of flights and crossing time zones for USC/UCLA. That’s going to be difficult. However, we shouldn’t be overstating the distances between the travel pairs in the Big Ten assuming that the league uses that travel structure at least for USC/UCLA basketball (and maybe baseball) games. Once again, what Eastern people think is a “far” distance in the East is considered “close” in the West.

Plus, I doubt buses are going to be used in the longer pairs like Ohio State - Penn State (at least for basketball where there are chartered flights) anyway.

I’m not sure where you’re going with 17/19 conference games. There are 20 conference games and that’s ironclad with the Big Ten’s commitment to their TV partners. If that means USC and UCLA each have one stray single game non-travel pair road game per year, then that’s what will happen.
I would think like I said that single one would be in December during OOC play- where it probably would be combined with a 2nd OOC game as well. Say play at Maryland and then play a few days later at Georgetown or something along those lines.

Yes, makes sense to me.
01-21-2023 01:17 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,052
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 219
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #39
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 10:26 AM)Section 200 Wrote:  It depends on your definition of "work". Will USC & UCLA win as much - not a chance. Even the NFL groups teams into geographically logical divisions to minimize travel to improve the product. Since UCLA & USC are 2 of the richest schools in the world, they should not be subjecting their athletes & fans to brutal travel. West Virginia took on bad travel to survive in the P5. UCLA & USC will always be in the P5. The schools will always have a home. Stupid decision by greedy admins that aren't impacted by the travel. All this move does is give paper pushers raises & the ability to hire more administrators so here we are.

People who make this argument act like USCLA never subjected their student athletes to travel. Big time college athletes in any sport travel a LOT. If you're on a coast then you'll travel more, that's just how it goes. And when you're in the bottom left corner of the country, you're going to travel the most, even if you decide to stay in the Pac. So, it wasn't a decision of "never leave LA vs insane travel 24/7/365", but more like "800 miles average flight per conference game vs 1500 miles average flight per conference game".

UCLA in basketball this year played at Maryland on Dec 14, then they played Kentucky at MSG on Dec 17. You don't think they'll be able to economize basketball travel like that once they join the B1G? It will end up being 4-5 big trips per year, vs the 2-3 big trips per year they've been taking to the PNW every year in the Pac.

All they did was add 90 minutes to 4 or 5 flights per year for their football and basketball teams. Is it a struggle? Yes. Is it that much greater of a struggle than their current travel? No, it's a small increase that helps to ensure that they can continue to fund women's beach volleyball, women's soccer, lacrosse, etc etc, whatever sports they want, while also helping them to remain nationally relevant in basketball and football.
01-21-2023 01:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,052
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 219
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #40
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 11:18 AM)stever20 Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 10:26 AM)Section 200 Wrote:  It depends on your definition of "work". Will USC & UCLA win as much - not a chance. Even the NFL groups teams into geographically logical divisions to minimize travel to improve the product. Since UCLA & USC are 2 of the richest schools in the world, they should not be subjecting their athletes & fans to brutal travel. West Virginia took on bad travel to survive in the P5. UCLA & USC will always be in the P5. The schools will always have a home. Stupid decision by greedy admins that aren't impacted by the travel. All this move does is give paper pushers raises & the ability to hire more administrators so here we are.

Only reason why they won't win as much is the Big Ten is a much tougher conference than the Pac 12 is.

Based upon what, exactly? Media bias? The Pac had 6 teams in the top 20 in the Final AP poll this year. They've won as many MNC as the B1G in the past 50 years. The B1G always looks good on paper in basketball then they "choke" in the tournament...or perhaps they're just overrated every year?

The SEC gets the same media bias that the B1G does, but at least we've earned it. The Pac is generally just as competitive as the B1G.
01-21-2023 01:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2023 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2023 MyBB Group.