Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
Author Message
jimrtex Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,668
Joined: Aug 2021
Reputation: 114
I Root For: Houston, Tulsa, Colorado
Location:
Post: #41
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.
Do you think USC busses between Colorado and Utah, or for that matter between Seattle and Pullman?

You have two days to get between the road games. It just as easy to fly LA-Minneapolis-West Lafayette-Los Angeles as LA-Bloomington-West Lafayette-Los Angeles. You are flying charter. You might be sharing the trip with USC. So fly LA to Minneapolis, drop off UCLA, and fly on to Iowa City to let off to USC.

After the USC-Iowa game, fly up to Minneapolis, pick up UCLA, fly UCLA to West Lafayette, and then on to Bloomington with USC.
01-21-2023 01:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hokie Mark Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,507
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 1146
I Root For: VT, ACC teams
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #42
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.

NOT(NOT(TRUE))
07-coffee3
01-21-2023 01:50 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,053
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 219
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #43
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.

I think it's funny that we all have this notion that the Athletic Conference's composition was set in stone they day we were born. So, for me, it's weird that the SWC is gone. It's weird that Arkansas and A&M are in the SEC. It's weird that we spent 14 years with a bunch of big 8 schools, too. I enjoy it, don't get me wrong, it's just that I was used to hating schools 90 minutes away instead of 9 hrs away. And it's super weird that USCLA are joining the B1G, and OUT are joining the SEC. But fast forward a decade and those will be the new status quo, the weird thing will be that school XX is joining conference YY.
01-21-2023 02:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,053
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 219
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #44
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 11:36 AM)esayem Wrote:  
(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.

They've been to 46 Rose Bowls between the 2 of them. That's more like "40% of the moons".
01-21-2023 02:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,053
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 219
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #45
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

If only it were possible to schedule a hated rival OOC every year. Oh, wait, UF-FSU, USC-Clemson, UGA-GT...it IS possible! Cool!

We weren't there with Texas, but in another 5-10 years we would have started playing them annually I suspect. Our hate for LSU and bama is strong, but the hatred for Texas runs deep.
01-21-2023 02:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,052
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 493
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #46
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 12:59 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(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

I still don't believe any conference will go beyond 16.
If the B1G wanted to cede Rutgers and Maryland to the ACC and add Kansas and Colorado, that would tend to balance out the ACC and move the center of the B1G closer to the west coast.
01-21-2023 02:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bryanw1995 Offline
+12 Hackmaster
*

Posts: 3,053
Joined: Jul 2022
Reputation: 219
I Root For: A&M
Location: San Antonio
Post: #47
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 12:01 PM)bullet 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.

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.

Yeah, and we wouldn't have it any other way. It's easier to keep hating the Giants/Eagles/Redskin Commandos when we play them twice a year.
01-21-2023 02:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GarnetAndBlue Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 680
Joined: Aug 2021
Reputation: 135
I Root For: FSU & Michigan
Location:
Post: #48
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 02:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 12:59 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(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

I still don't believe any conference will go beyond 16.
If the B1G wanted to cede Rutgers and Maryland to the ACC and add Kansas and Colorado, that would tend to balance out the ACC and move the center of the B1G closer to the west coast.

Oh how I wish I could place a bet on this. It's just a matter of when.

Regarding the USC/UCLA to the B1G decision...I'm not optimistic about it turning out great. It'll bring in more cash of course. But it's just an odd arrangement and I don't buy into the idea that it won't cause logistical pains. I am a bit biased...since watching USC or UCLA games is of very low interest to me 99% of the time. I just find the game atmosphere generally pitiful compared to the majority of SEC games.
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2023 02:37 PM by GarnetAndBlue.)
01-21-2023 02:27 PM
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: #49
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 02:13 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(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:  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

If only it were possible to schedule a hated rival OOC every year. Oh, wait, UF-FSU, USC-Clemson, UGA-GT...it IS possible! Cool!

We weren't there with Texas, but in another 5-10 years we would have started playing them annually I suspect. Our hate for LSU and bama is strong, but the hatred for Texas runs deep.

I get you’re trying to be contrarian and that’s cute and all. That’s sort of been your MO towards me since you joined. But those games meant a lot to the ACC standings and the ACC tournament. AFAIK, that can’t be scheduled OOC. Unless you in your almighty wisdom know better?
01-21-2023 02:34 PM
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: #50
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 02:11 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 11:36 AM)esayem Wrote:  
(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.

They've been to 46 Rose Bowls between the 2 of them. That's more like "40% of the moons".

I’m not USC has played Ohio State 24 times. I’m guessing half were Rose Bowls. What exactly are you arguing here? That the same teams have played enough to warrant a conference-like rivalry?
01-21-2023 02:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
World Wide Swag Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 162
Joined: Jun 2017
Reputation: 12
I Root For: $MU and Vols
Location: Big D
Post: #51
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.

I don't think anyone is disputing that they're going to make more money and access bigger markets. But USC and UCLA are putting themselves at a considerable competitive disadvantage. Think about if USC makes the conference championship, they have to travel ~2,000 miles to play Michigan or Ohio State in Chicago or Indy for a shot at a bye in the CFP? That will be a road game for them.

I get it more for UCLA because their bottom line was hurting. But this will cost USC berths and byes in the CFP. If you're a USC fan, are you OK with that knowing that your admin is getting $25M or so more per year from your media deal to spend on who knows what while you're missing out on the CFP and traveling to West Lafayette and Iowa City for road games instead of Seattle and Phoenix? That seems like it could get old fast. USC would have been able to stamp their ticket to the expanded CFP virtually every year going forward in the Pac.
01-21-2023 03:41 PM
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: #52
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 01:33 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  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.

There are certainly things you can do to ease the logistics. Is women's volleyball traveling with the men's BBall team? If it's co-ed that may lead to off field issues. But let's talk about the traveling issues for every sport, not just men's BBall... what is the B1G playing fall/winter/spring where you can overlap or combine the travel for the LA schools.

BBall and Volleyball overlap.
Soccer (co-ed travel or may partially overlap with BBall but not sure)
Hockey probably not relevant for LA schools
Gymnastics and individual sports? Again, all the schedules have to align with the sporting events in terms of time of year played plus the scheduling for the respective schools involved.

So we need to know what sports are being cut as a result of this move (or added) and who is playing what and where. While it's not an impossible problem, it's a logistical nightmare that will require A LOT more personnel and overhead. We'll see just how profitable the move becomes in the years ahead.
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2023 03:57 PM by RUScarlets.)
01-21-2023 03:52 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: #53
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 02:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 12:59 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(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

I still don't believe any conference will go beyond 16.
If the B1G wanted to cede Rutgers and Maryland to the ACC and add Kansas and Colorado, that would tend to balance out the ACC and move the center of the B1G closer to the west coast.

Warren postulated 20, but he's leaving. I think 18 could still be on the table.

I think Kansas/Stanford is the most likely. But OR, WA, and Colorado could all also be possibles as well.
01-21-2023 04:01 PM
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: #54
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 02:09 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  I think it's funny that we all have this notion that the Athletic Conference's composition was set in stone they day we were born. So, for me, it's weird that the SWC is gone. It's weird that Arkansas and A&M are in the SEC. It's weird that we spent 14 years with a bunch of big 8 schools, too. I enjoy it, don't get me wrong, it's just that I was used to hating schools 90 minutes away instead of 9 hrs away. And it's super weird that USCLA are joining the B1G, and OUT are joining the SEC. But fast forward a decade and those will be the new status quo, the weird thing will be that school XX is joining conference YY.

See, OU had the right to leave. CU and Mizzou left. UN left before that. The Big 8 was no more. Those former schools decided to make a change.

As far as the SWC, I can't speak to that. I know a documentary came out (30 for 30 or whatever). Politics. Culture. Whatever the case was, that was probably a messy breakup, but slightly before my time. My heart goes out to fans of that group of schools. Certainly, many were permanently left behind, perhaps at their own faults, but many of those programs never fully recovered.
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2023 04:06 PM by RUScarlets.)
01-21-2023 04:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
World Wide Swag Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 162
Joined: Jun 2017
Reputation: 12
I Root For: $MU and Vols
Location: Big D
Post: #55
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 04:01 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 02:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 12:59 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(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

I still don't believe any conference will go beyond 16.
If the B1G wanted to cede Rutgers and Maryland to the ACC and add Kansas and Colorado, that would tend to balance out the ACC and move the center of the B1G closer to the west coast.

Warren postulated 20, but he's leaving. I think 18 could still be on the table.

I think Kansas/Stanford is the most likely. But OR, WA, and Colorado could all also be possibles as well.
The question to ask is which two schools collectively add $150M in value annually to the media rights deal so as to not be dilutive? Any combo that doesn't include Notre Dame is an incorrect response. It sure as heck isn't some combo of Cal, Colorado, Kansas, Stanford, Oregon or Washington. My best guess would be UNC/ND.
01-21-2023 04:08 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: #56
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 02:27 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 02:13 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 12:59 PM)Skyhawk Wrote:  
(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

I still don't believe any conference will go beyond 16.
If the B1G wanted to cede Rutgers and Maryland to the ACC and add Kansas and Colorado, that would tend to balance out the ACC and move the center of the B1G closer to the west coast.

Oh how I wish I could place a bet on this. It's just a matter of when.

Regarding the USC/UCLA to the B1G decision...I'm not optimistic about it turning out great. It'll bring in more cash of course. But it's just an odd arrangement and I don't buy into the idea that it won't cause logistical pains. I am a bit biased...since watching USC or UCLA games is of very low interest to me 99% of the time. I just find the game atmosphere generally pitiful compared to the majority of SEC games.

Adding a couple schools to allow each year's schedule to minimize that pain of distance travel, is why I think nearer schools are possible.

The rumor that USC and UCLA (and others) don't want more west coast schools for recruiting reasons, is believable.

I think they only swallow one or two more, and only if it helps out travel and the schedule.

Stanford, Colorado, the Arizona schools and Kansas all do that potentially. WA and OR, though AAU, do not help travel.

Stanford is a guilty opportunity, but may turn them down without more PAC schools (which apparently is currently a "no"), Kansas provides several benefits, and so does Colorado.

So it's really just a matter of guessing which 2 schools that the B10 picks.
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2023 04:10 PM by Skyhawk.)
01-21-2023 04:09 PM
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: #57
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 03:41 PM)World Wide Swag 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.

I don't think anyone is disputing that they're going to make more money and access bigger markets. But USC and UCLA are putting themselves at a considerable competitive disadvantage. Think about if USC makes the conference championship, they have to travel ~2,000 miles to play Michigan or Ohio State in Chicago or Indy for a shot at a bye in the CFP? That will be a road game for them.

I get it more for UCLA because their bottom line was hurting. But this will cost USC berths and byes in the CFP. If you're a USC fan, are you OK with that knowing that your admin is getting $25M or so more per year from your media deal to spend on who knows what while you're missing out on the CFP and traveling to West Lafayette and Iowa City for road games instead of Seattle and Phoenix? That seems like it could get old fast. USC would have been able to stamp their ticket to the expanded CFP virtually every year going forward in the Pac.
How many NY6 bowls has USC been to? Only 3. They've won one Pac 12 title since 2008. The Pac hasn't been in the CFP since 2016.

What you are saying flies completely in the face of what has really happened.
01-21-2023 04:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
World Wide Swag Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 162
Joined: Jun 2017
Reputation: 12
I Root For: $MU and Vols
Location: Big D
Post: #58
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 04:11 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 03:41 PM)World Wide Swag 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.

I don't think anyone is disputing that they're going to make more money and access bigger markets. But USC and UCLA are putting themselves at a considerable competitive disadvantage. Think about if USC makes the conference championship, they have to travel ~2,000 miles to play Michigan or Ohio State in Chicago or Indy for a shot at a bye in the CFP? That will be a road game for them.

I get it more for UCLA because their bottom line was hurting. But this will cost USC berths and byes in the CFP. If you're a USC fan, are you OK with that knowing that your admin is getting $25M or so more per year from your media deal to spend on who knows what while you're missing out on the CFP and traveling to West Lafayette and Iowa City for road games instead of Seattle and Phoenix? That seems like it could get old fast. USC would have been able to stamp their ticket to the expanded CFP virtually every year going forward in the Pac.
How many NY6 bowls has USC been to? Only 3. They've won one Pac 12 title since 2008. The Pac hasn't been in the CFP since 2016.

What you are saying flies completely in the face of what has really happened.
They made poor hires and had sanctions. This has certainly been a down period for USC football but they're back with Riley.

As for the Pac not making the CFP since 2016; not sure if you'd heard but the playoff is expanding to 12 teams after next year. In a 12-team setup, USC likely would have made the playoff twice under Helton (who was, uh, not a good coach)
01-21-2023 04:15 PM
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: #59
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 03:52 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 01:33 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  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.

There are certainly things you can do to ease the logistics. Is women's volleyball traveling with the men's BBall team? If it's co-ed that may lead to off field issues. But let's talk about the traveling issues for every sport, not just men's BBall... what is the B1G playing fall/winter/spring where you can overlap or combine the travel for the LA schools.

BBall and Volleyball overlap.
Soccer (co-ed travel or may partially overlap with BBall but not sure)
Hockey probably not relevant for LA schools
Gymnastics and individual sports? Again, all the schedules have to align with the sporting events in terms of time of year played plus the scheduling for the respective schools involved.

So we need to know what sports are being cut as a result of this move (or added) and who is playing what and where. While it's not an impossible problem, it's a logistical nightmare that will require A LOT more personnel and overhead. We'll see just how profitable the move becomes in the years ahead.

As I pointed out, you people are just way overestimating how many sports will be impacted by this. Going to a conference meet at the end of the season is not an issue. Everybody travels some.

Football, basketball, soccer, baseball/softball and volleyball. That's it. And football is not a big change from the Pac. Looked up flight times-LA to Seattle is 2:43. LA to Chicago is 3:57. They just have a little longer flights the day before and the day after the game. With weekend scheduling, soccer, baseball/softball and volleyball don't have much more impact than football.
01-21-2023 04:17 PM
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: #60
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 04:08 PM)World Wide Swag Wrote:  The question to ask is which two schools collectively add $150M in value annually to the media rights deal so as to not be dilutive? Any combo that doesn't include Notre Dame is an incorrect response. It sure as heck isn't some combo of Cal, Colorado, Kansas, Stanford, Oregon or Washington. My best guess would be UNC/ND.

Correct but also misleading. How much is 75 million with 4% inflation rates compounded? You could easily see stagnation or decline in football viewership (and participation) at the collegiate level by 2030 (we've already seen such). Declining participation means higher costs to incentivize more athletes. Declining viewership affects everyone's bottom line. Couple that with inflation? Middling schools like Stanford and Kansas may be forced to be bumped up to 60 million plus just to stay afloat, as crazy as that sounds, by 2030.

Most of football's growth going forward will be internationally based. Goodell understands this, hence the push to 17 games. The domestic markets are saturated (aside from a successful spring league which has yet to come to fruition, and that's saying something).
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2023 04:22 PM by RUScarlets.)
01-21-2023 04:20 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.