Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
Author Message
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 57,918
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 2477
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #61
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 04:15 PM)World Wide Swag Wrote:  
(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)

You claim they would give up home field advantage and byes. Well, the Pac has only made the top 4 twice. And never USC. So that comment wasn't based on reality.
Lots of schools are "back." Only time tells. But USC didn't win the Pac this year and didn't win their bowl.

Going to the Big 10 is probably a big help to their recruiting being in premier TV slots and in a conference that isn't an afterthought. So their chances of being "back" are better in the Big 10. It will probably be a plus for both USC and UCLA competitively in football. It also gives them something else to differentiate themselves from the other western schools.
01-21-2023 04:22 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: #62
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 04:17 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(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.
You're cherry picking the farthest trip USC/UCLA have to make in the PAC which they each make, what, maybe once a year for football if you include Wazzu as well. It's also 1:30 to Phoenix and SF, 1:55 to SLC, 2:25 to Denver and 2:30 to Portland; all very manageable.

Every Big Ten road trip outside of the crosstown game is going to be 2-3 time zones. As you said, it's 4 hours to Chicago. 4:20 to Detroit. 4:25 to Columbus. 4:40 to Pittsburgh. 4:45 to DC. 5:20 to NYC. Also you can tack on about 40 minutes to an hour on those return flights back to LA due to jet streams.
01-21-2023 04:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SeaBlue Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,084
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 39
I Root For: Michigan
Location: Indy
Post: #63
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:  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.

Yes, I think they take the $25M, and the NIL deals, and the merch deals, and the additional visitors to SoCal, and the the mostly full stadiums.

UCLA and USC were ok with the Rose Bowl being played in their back yard. Times change. There weren't many complaints from the Big Ten on that location. Further, I bet future B1G championships will occasionally be played in the Rose Bowl (unfortunately, for Indianapolis).

The Big Ten will do what they can to ease the scheduling for them. PAC was never as cozy as the original Big Ten or SEC anyway, and now, more of those trips will be by air. It won't be easy, but we do live in an age where parents drive their kids ~4 hours to participate in youth sports.
(This post was last modified: 01-21-2023 04:42 PM by SeaBlue.)
01-21-2023 04:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
The REAL BillyBobby
*

Posts: 11,719
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 475
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #64
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
If your definition of will it work means will they make more money? Yes.
But they will be wildly unsuccessful in winning. They will make WVU look like the king of the big 12. That’s how bad it will be.
01-21-2023 04:40 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: #65
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
WVU has been in the NCAA tourney 5 times since being in the Big 12 and finished as high as 8 in the final polls. They are right at .500 in conference play.
So you are saying UCLA and USC will never make the NCAA and win about 1/3 of their conference games? Seriously?
01-21-2023 05:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mikeinsec127 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,698
Joined: Jul 2009
Reputation: 91
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #66
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

Nobody liked the BIG expansion with PSU when it happened, not BIG fans and not PSU fans. Yet it has worked out well. The same was true with the Nebraska expansion and the RU UMd expansions. I'd say the one exception was RU fans were ecstatic to be rescued from the AAC. It was like being on a sinking fishing vessel, being picked up by the Queen Mary 2 and allowed to stay for the rest of the trip. USCLA will have the same growing pains in the BIG. Twenty years from now, when a whole generation of fans know nothing but all these schools being in the BIG, with whoever else it takes, it will feel as normal as Dallas in the NFC East.
01-21-2023 06:02 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: #67
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 06:02 PM)mikeinsec127 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

Nobody liked the BIG expansion with PSU when it happened, not BIG fans and not PSU fans. Yet it has worked out well. The same was true with the Nebraska expansion and the RU UMd expansions. I'd say the one exception was RU fans were ecstatic to be rescued from the AAC. It was like being on a sinking fishing vessel, being picked up by the Queen Mary 2 and allowed to stay for the rest of the trip. USCLA will have the same growing pains in the BIG. Twenty years from now, when a whole generation of fans know nothing but all these schools being in the BIG, with whoever else it takes, it will feel as normal as Dallas in the NFC East.

I could make a strong case that joining the B1G was a bad move for PSU over the past 30 years. Call it bad luck or whatever. If I was a Nittany Lion, I'd darn well wonder if things would have turned out better if they'd remained Indy, joined the ACC, etc...then been ready to jump to the B1G or SEC right about now if needed. They were sitting pretty in the late 80's/early 90's.
01-21-2023 06:07 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: #68
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 06:07 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 06:02 PM)mikeinsec127 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:  ^^^^
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

Nobody liked the BIG expansion with PSU when it happened, not BIG fans and not PSU fans. Yet it has worked out well. The same was true with the Nebraska expansion and the RU UMd expansions. I'd say the one exception was RU fans were ecstatic to be rescued from the AAC. It was like being on a sinking fishing vessel, being picked up by the Queen Mary 2 and allowed to stay for the rest of the trip. USCLA will have the same growing pains in the BIG. Twenty years from now, when a whole generation of fans know nothing but all these schools being in the BIG, with whoever else it takes, it will feel as normal as Dallas in the NFC East.

I could make a strong case that joining the B1G was a bad move for PSU over the past 30 years. Call it bad luck or whatever. If I was a Nittany Lion, I'd darn well wonder if things would have turned out better if they'd remained Indy, joined the ACC, etc...then been ready to jump to the B1G or SEC right about now if needed. They were sitting pretty in the late 80's/early 90's.
I also wonder if the Big Ten wouldn't like to rescind that Rutgers invite back in retrospect.
01-21-2023 06:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AztecNation Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 70
Joined: Oct 2021
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Aztecs
Location:
Post: #69
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
Their options would be:

1. Ask B1G to invite more western schools (probably Cal/Stanford if UCLA is still forced by the UC regents to pay Cal)
2. Return to the PAC and get a sweetheart deal (similar to Boise St.)
3. Independence

Obviously the PAC option only works if the PAC is still together in another 5-10 years or however long in the future we're talking about. I would be surprised to see USC back out but UCLA maybe if the payments to Cal becomes a yearly thing that could become pretty burdensome and negate the benefits of the B1G.

It would really come down to whether or not the B1G presidents cared about keeping USC/UCLA happy and/or if they would be ok with losing UCLA if USC stuck around.
01-21-2023 06:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
penguino Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 251
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 15
I Root For: rutgers
Location:
Post: #70
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 06:11 PM)World Wide Swag Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 06:07 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 06:02 PM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 11:45 AM)esayem Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 11:35 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  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

Nobody liked the BIG expansion with PSU when it happened, not BIG fans and not PSU fans. Yet it has worked out well. The same was true with the Nebraska expansion and the RU UMd expansions. I'd say the one exception was RU fans were ecstatic to be rescued from the AAC. It was like being on a sinking fishing vessel, being picked up by the Queen Mary 2 and allowed to stay for the rest of the trip. USCLA will have the same growing pains in the BIG. Twenty years from now, when a whole generation of fans know nothing but all these schools being in the BIG, with whoever else it takes, it will feel as normal as Dallas in the NFC East.

I could make a strong case that joining the B1G was a bad move for PSU over the past 30 years. Call it bad luck or whatever. If I was a Nittany Lion, I'd darn well wonder if things would have turned out better if they'd remained Indy, joined the ACC, etc...then been ready to jump to the B1G or SEC right about now if needed. They were sitting pretty in the late 80's/early 90's.
I also wonder if the Big Ten wouldn't like to rescind that Rutgers invite back in retrospect.

Let me think for a micro-second….no
01-21-2023 07:02 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: #71
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 07:02 PM)penguino Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 06:11 PM)World Wide Swag Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 06:07 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 06:02 PM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 11:45 AM)esayem Wrote:  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

Nobody liked the BIG expansion with PSU when it happened, not BIG fans and not PSU fans. Yet it has worked out well. The same was true with the Nebraska expansion and the RU UMd expansions. I'd say the one exception was RU fans were ecstatic to be rescued from the AAC. It was like being on a sinking fishing vessel, being picked up by the Queen Mary 2 and allowed to stay for the rest of the trip. USCLA will have the same growing pains in the BIG. Twenty years from now, when a whole generation of fans know nothing but all these schools being in the BIG, with whoever else it takes, it will feel as normal as Dallas in the NFC East.

I could make a strong case that joining the B1G was a bad move for PSU over the past 30 years. Call it bad luck or whatever. If I was a Nittany Lion, I'd darn well wonder if things would have turned out better if they'd remained Indy, joined the ACC, etc...then been ready to jump to the B1G or SEC right about now if needed. They were sitting pretty in the late 80's/early 90's.
I also wonder if the Big Ten wouldn't like to rescind that Rutgers invite back in retrospect.

Let me think for a micro-second….no
I was asking if the Big Ten would want to, not Rutgers. Rutgers is just another mouth to feed, in a post cable box era it's hard to see what value they add
01-21-2023 07:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
penguino Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 251
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 15
I Root For: rutgers
Location:
Post: #72
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 07:12 PM)World Wide Swag Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 07:02 PM)penguino Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 06:11 PM)World Wide Swag Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 06:07 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 06:02 PM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  Nobody liked the BIG expansion with PSU when it happened, not BIG fans and not PSU fans. Yet it has worked out well. The same was true with the Nebraska expansion and the RU UMd expansions. I'd say the one exception was RU fans were ecstatic to be rescued from the AAC. It was like being on a sinking fishing vessel, being picked up by the Queen Mary 2 and allowed to stay for the rest of the trip. USCLA will have the same growing pains in the BIG. Twenty years from now, when a whole generation of fans know nothing but all these schools being in the BIG, with whoever else it takes, it will feel as normal as Dallas in the NFC East.

I could make a strong case that joining the B1G was a bad move for PSU over the past 30 years. Call it bad luck or whatever. If I was a Nittany Lion, I'd darn well wonder if things would have turned out better if they'd remained Indy, joined the ACC, etc...then been ready to jump to the B1G or SEC right about now if needed. They were sitting pretty in the late 80's/early 90's.
I also wonder if the Big Ten wouldn't like to rescind that Rutgers invite back in retrospect.

Let me think for a micro-second….no
I was asking if the Big Ten would want to, not Rutgers. Rutgers is just another mouth to feed, in a post cable box era it's hard to see what value they add

I know what you were asking....the answer is the same...
01-21-2023 08:20 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: #73
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 02:34 PM)esayem Wrote:  
(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:  ^^^^
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?

I just call it like I see it, and I often find myself disagreeing with things you post. Rather than be rude and abrasive, I think that humor with a bit of sarcasm is more called for on this board.

You didn't mention the ACC standings in your earlier post, and I doubt that Duke had much of a negative impact on anybody's standing in the ACC (football). I know that I sure miss playing some of our old SWC and big 12 "rivals" for the easy W.
01-21-2023 09:00 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: #74
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.

I assumed that they were going to move the CCG to the Rose Bowl, or at least put it in the rotation. It's great weather, great for recruiting purposes, and will really solidify their hold upon SoCal.
01-21-2023 09:04 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: #75
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.

How many more people does it take to handle an extra 50-75 or so trips per year across all sports? Maybe give the current Logistics honcho an extra student intern, possibly even a paid position. So, at worst, 1 more person and $60k more per year. The potential extra cost on the logistical side is a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of all those extra trips.
01-21-2023 09:08 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: #76
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.

UW is the best possible add left for the B1G other than UNC, and even that is only b/c of UNC's superior geography. Elite Academics, better than any current B1G school, Elite Athletics, pretty close to a pro rata add from a Brand perspective, too.
01-21-2023 09:10 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: #77
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 04:05 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  
(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.

Everyone from the old SWC is in a better conference today other than Rice and SMU, and it's not hard to imagine one or both of them moving to the P5 soon. The post-SWC road was pretty rocky for some, however.
01-21-2023 09:12 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: #78
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 04:15 PM)World Wide Swag Wrote:  
(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)

Riley is a mirage, he'll be exposed after Rattler leaves after 2023. He can't compete with similarly-talented teams, he has to out-talent the competition. And that's a scary place to be in the day of 2000 transfers and huge NIL coops at every single school. USC has wealthy alums? Well, so does the rest of the Pac and B1G, and a lot of those schools had wealthy alums who weren't willing to constantly flaunt the rules in the past. Now, all of a sudden, everybody Riley faces can spend as much as, or nearly as much as he can on recruits and transfers.
01-21-2023 09:18 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: #79
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 06:07 PM)GarnetAndBlue Wrote:  
(01-21-2023 06:02 PM)mikeinsec127 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:  ^^^^
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

Nobody liked the BIG expansion with PSU when it happened, not BIG fans and not PSU fans. Yet it has worked out well. The same was true with the Nebraska expansion and the RU UMd expansions. I'd say the one exception was RU fans were ecstatic to be rescued from the AAC. It was like being on a sinking fishing vessel, being picked up by the Queen Mary 2 and allowed to stay for the rest of the trip. USCLA will have the same growing pains in the BIG. Twenty years from now, when a whole generation of fans know nothing but all these schools being in the BIG, with whoever else it takes, it will feel as normal as Dallas in the NFC East.

I could make a strong case that joining the B1G was a bad move for PSU over the past 30 years. Call it bad luck or whatever. If I was a Nittany Lion, I'd darn well wonder if things would have turned out better if they'd remained Indy, joined the ACC, etc...then been ready to jump to the B1G or SEC right about now if needed. They were sitting pretty in the late 80's/early 90's.

PSU's issues over the past 30 yrs have a lot more to do with Sandusky's creepiness and Paterno's failure as a human being than they do with the B1G.
01-21-2023 09:24 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: #80
RE: What If the USC/UCLA move to the Big Ten doesn’t work out?
(01-21-2023 09:00 PM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  I just call it like I see it, and I often find myself disagreeing with things you post. Rather than be rude and abrasive, I think that humor with a bit of sarcasm is more called for on this board.

Got to admire the brattish ACC snobbery that comes through there. It does liven the board a bit though... haha.

But yeah, Rutgers has paid for itself to address the earlier point. Certainly, their BBall brand has given the B1G network a boost more recently and if they can sustain that success, it may be enough. Football is a bonus at this point.

But the whole idea of a new generation of fans growing up USCLA B1G football is garbage. There has to be a new generation of fans first. With universities being ever more expensive and alumni that just don't prioritize being ardent fans of their alma mater (a lot of these alums end up living in major pro sports metroplex areas), you have to wonder where the legion of new fans will come from.
01-21-2023 09:31 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.