Quote:At the assembly, Schill and the panelists also discussed UCLA and USC joining the Big Ten Conference. The two schools will enter the Big Ten in August 2024.

Schill said he is “not really thrilled” with the inclusion of UCLA and USC in the Big Ten. While he remains “skeptical about the initial decision,” he believes adding more West Coast teams to the Big Ten, in addition to UCLA and USC, could result in less overall travel time for all teams in the conference.

https://dailynorthwestern.com/2023/05/23...-assembly/

Reminder that he used to be the Oregon President before going to Northwestern. So keep that in mind when opining.

The article also had some reactions to the NLRB decision with respect to USC and the Pac-12.

This confirms he was a plant for Oregon.

(05-23-2023 02:22 PM)Alanda Wrote:  This confirms he was a plant for Oregon.

When they change the name of the school to Nikewestern it will be obvious :)

More teams cannot possibly mean less travel overall, unless the PAC schools and the 14 B1G schools simply don't play each other.

(05-23-2023 02:34 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  More teams cannot possibly mean less travel overall, unless the PAC schools and the 14 B1G schools simply don't play each other.

If you have 6-8 teams out west it definitely means less travel.

(05-23-2023 02:34 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  More teams cannot possibly mean less travel overall, unless the PAC schools and the 14 B1G schools simply don't play each other.

Perspective. It's less overall travel for USC and UCLA if they have 2 or 4 other West Coast schools in the Big 10 with them. Make them a division and that's 5 Big 10 games played on the West Coast for each West Coast school. In a 9 game conference schedule the West Coast schools travel East twice each. And the 12 East Coast teams travel west 1 time every season. If you add 4 more to the East to go to 24 it lessens travel for those in the East even more.

(05-23-2023 02:40 PM)PicksUp Wrote:  

(05-23-2023 02:34 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  More teams cannot possibly mean less travel overall, unless the PAC schools and the 14 B1G schools simply don't play each other.

If you have 6-8 teams out west it definitely means less travel.

Yes - need a critical mass. Although adding just Washington and Oregon doesn't save much on travel - still 3 hour flight from LA to Seattle - LA to Chicago is 4 hours.

(05-23-2023 02:34 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  More teams cannot possibly mean less travel overall, unless the PAC schools and the 14 B1G schools simply don't play each other.

Travel remains the same but the distance of travel reduces if those destinations are closer. You're welcome.

(05-23-2023 02:40 PM)PicksUp Wrote:  

(05-23-2023 02:34 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  More teams cannot possibly mean less travel overall, unless the PAC schools and the 14 B1G schools simply don't play each other.

If you have 6-8 teams out west it definitely means less travel.

This is the key here.

4 west coast teams doesn't make less travel than 2. I think someone earlier broke it out and showed that it reduced slightly at 6, then more at 8, and then stayed about the same after that.

So simply adding in Washington and Oregon won't be enough for travel, which is why people are talking about adding 4 more west coast teams when they get to expanding again.

(05-23-2023 02:34 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  More Western teams cannot possibly mean less travel overall...

Assuming 9 conference games and that all Western teams play each other every year . . .

2 Western teams = 8 Western trips for the OG B1G.

4 Western teams = 12 Western football trips for the OG B1G

6 Western teams = 12 Western football trips for the OG B1G.

8 Western teams = 8 Western football trips for the OG B1G.

10 Western teams = 0 Western football trips for the OG B1G

==========
Increasing the number of Western Teams to 4 or 6 really helps USC and UCLA more than the OG B1G.

(05-23-2023 03:08 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(05-23-2023 02:34 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  More Western teams cannot possibly mean less travel overall...

Assuming 9 conference games and that all Western teams play each other every year . . .

2 Western teams = 8 Western trips for the OG B1G.

4 Western teams = 12 Western football trips for the OG B1G

6 Western teams = 12 Western football trips for the OG B1G.

8 Western teams = 8 Western football trips for the OG B1G.

10 Western teams = 0 Western football trips for the OG B1G

==========
Increasing the number of Western Teams to 4 or 6 really helps USC and UCLA more than the OG B1G.

Thank you for supplying the math. Schill can believe whatever he wants, but unless the B1G adds the whole PAC10 there is no way it's less overall travel. Because math and geography.

I tell you what's so damned funny. These issues should have been hashed and rehashed before the additions were made. The initial plan should have included to the total possible schools that the Big 10 was willing to commit to out West. If it was only ever two they should have dropped the concept.

So, we have an addition with no clue as to final assimilation and the perpetual cost of travel.

We have a contract the details of which were never fully ironed out.

We have money lost from the failure to start during the COVID season.

There was the put to sell another 10% of the BTN to cover those losses and the resultant revenue losses which would come from holding less of the BTN than before.

Likely the move for USC and UCLA was more in response to the loss of value in the BTN than to keep up with the SEC. L.A. specifically and California in general was probably the only move that could restore lost BTN revenue.

This has been a massive foul up since the get go for Warren and he didn't act in a vacuum. This means presidents weren't on the same page either.

There needs to be a summit meeting in Chicago to get everyone on the same page before you do anything else.

Poor Petitti, what a mess!

Does the whale spit Jonah and his bud back up on the Pacific beach?

(05-23-2023 03:08 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(05-23-2023 02:34 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  More Western teams cannot possibly mean less travel overall...

Assuming 9 conference games and that all Western teams play each other every year . . .

2 Western teams = 8 Western trips for the OG B1G.

4 Western teams = 12 Western football trips for the OG B1G

6 Western teams = 12 Western football trips for the OG B1G.

8 Western teams = 8 Western football trips for the OG B1G.

10 Western teams = 0 Western football trips for the OG B1G

==========
Increasing the number of Western Teams to 4 or 6 really helps USC and UCLA more than the OG B1G.

The bigger travel concerns are for Olympic sports. What do the number of western trips for the original Big Ten women's basketball and volleyball teams look like with the different western expansion scenarios?

(05-23-2023 03:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I tell you what's so damned funny. These issues should have been hashed and rehashed before the additions were made. The initial plan should have included to the total possible schools that the Big 10 was willing to commit to out West. If it was only ever two they should have dropped the concept.

So, we have an addition with no clue as to final assimilation and the perpetual cost of travel.

We have a contract the details of which were never fully ironed out.

We have money lost from the failure to start during the COVID season.

There was the put to sell another 10% of the BTN to cover those losses and the resultant revenue losses which would come from holding less of the BTN than before.

Likely the move for USC and UCLA was more in response to the loss of value in the BTN than to keep up with the SEC. L.A. specifically and California in general was probably the only move that could restore lost BTN revenue.

This has been a massive foul up since the get go for Warren and he didn't act in a vacuum. This means presidents weren't on the same page either.

There needs to be a summit meeting in Chicago to get everyone on the same page before you do anything else.

Poor Petitti, what a mess!

Does the whale spit Jonah and his bud back up on the Pacific beach?

Warren is definitely a fool. Didn't he go to the Bears? Not the best franchise to move to.

(05-23-2023 03:08 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(05-23-2023 02:34 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  More Western teams cannot possibly mean less travel overall...

Assuming 9 conference games and that all Western teams play each other every year . . .

2 Western teams = 8 Western trips for the OG B1G.

4 Western teams = 12 Western football trips for the OG B1G

6 Western teams = 12 Western football trips for the OG B1G.

8 Western teams = 8 Western football trips for the OG B1G.

10 Western teams = 0 Western football trips for the OG B1G

==========
Increasing the number of Western Teams to 4 or 6 really helps USC and UCLA more than the OG B1G.

I’m glad someone took the time to illustrate this. 4 or 6 more west coast teams doesn’t actually improve travel for the 14 eastern/central teams. It only reduces the travel for the western block.

(05-23-2023 04:40 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(05-23-2023 03:08 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(05-23-2023 02:34 PM)BeepBeepJeep Wrote:  More Western teams cannot possibly mean less travel overall...

Assuming 9 conference games and that all Western teams play each other every year . . .

2 Western teams = 8 Western trips for the OG B1G.

4 Western teams = 12 Western football trips for the OG B1G

6 Western teams = 12 Western football trips for the OG B1G.

8 Western teams = 8 Western football trips for the OG B1G.

10 Western teams = 0 Western football trips for the OG B1G

==========
Increasing the number of Western Teams to 4 or 6 really helps USC and UCLA more than the OG B1G.

I’m glad someone took the time to illustrate this. 4 or 6 more west coast teams doesn’t actually improve travel for the 14 eastern/central teams. It only reduces the travel for the western block.

Less travel per team? Meaning distributed over more schools. Less travel for each team that has to go west.

(05-23-2023 02:33 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(05-23-2023 02:22 PM)Alanda Wrote:  This confirms he was a plant for Oregon.

When they change the name of the school to Nikewestern it will be obvious :)

Facts

But this also explains that leaked logo pic I found.

(05-23-2023 03:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I tell you what's so damned funny. These issues should have been hashed and rehashed before the additions were made. The initial plan should have included to the total possible schools that the Big 10 was willing to commit to out West. If it was only ever two they should have dropped the concept.

So, we have an addition with no clue as to final assimilation and the perpetual cost of travel.

We have a contract the details of which were never fully ironed out.

We have money lost from the failure to start during the COVID season.

There was the put to sell another 10% of the BTN to cover those losses and the resultant revenue losses which would come from holding less of the BTN than before.

Likely the move for USC and UCLA was more in response to the loss of value in the BTN than to keep up with the SEC. L.A. specifically and California in general was probably the only move that could restore lost BTN revenue.

This has been a massive foul up since the get go for Warren and he didn't act in a vacuum. This means presidents weren't on the same page either.

There needs to be a summit meeting in Chicago to get everyone on the same page before you do anything else.

Poor Petitti, what a mess!

Does the whale spit Jonah and his bud back up on the Pacific beach?

They could always pull back the invites. I mean, nobody's joined yet

(05-23-2023 03:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I tell you what's so damned funny. These issues should have been hashed and rehashed before the additions were made. The initial plan should have included to the total possible schools that the Big 10 was willing to commit to out West. If it was only ever two they should have dropped the concept.

So, we have an addition with no clue as to final assimilation and the perpetual cost of travel.

We have a contract the details of which were never fully ironed out.

We have money lost from the failure to start during the COVID season.

There was the put to sell another 10% of the BTN to cover those losses and the resultant revenue losses which would come from holding less of the BTN than before.

Likely the move for USC and UCLA was more in response to the loss of value in the BTN than to keep up with the SEC. L.A. specifically and California in general was probably the only move that could restore lost BTN revenue.

This has been a massive foul up since the get go for Warren and he didn't act in a vacuum. This means presidents weren't on the same page either.

There needs to be a summit meeting in Chicago to get everyone on the same page before you do anything else.

Poor Petitti, what a mess!

Does the whale spit Jonah and his bud back up on the Pacific beach?

What if the NBC deal really isn’t done, though?

I know I’m one for crazy speculation, but what’s to stop USCLA from coming back if Apple offered them 80 million a piece to leave the B1G and return to the PAC? You could probably work out an unequal revenue model for 6-7 years. Also, make the incumbent PAC schools cover the 50 million overpayment by Comcast. USCLA can literally milk even more out of this.

(05-23-2023 06:02 PM)RUScarlets Wrote:  

(05-23-2023 03:33 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I tell you what's so damned funny. These issues should have been hashed and rehashed before the additions were made. The initial plan should have included to the total possible schools that the Big 10 was willing to commit to out West. If it was only ever two they should have dropped the concept.

So, we have an addition with no clue as to final assimilation and the perpetual cost of travel.

We have a contract the details of which were never fully ironed out.

We have money lost from the failure to start during the COVID season.

There was the put to sell another 10% of the BTN to cover those losses and the resultant revenue losses which would come from holding less of the BTN than before.

Likely the move for USC and UCLA was more in response to the loss of value in the BTN than to keep up with the SEC. L.A. specifically and California in general was probably the only move that could restore lost BTN revenue.

This has been a massive foul up since the get go for Warren and he didn't act in a vacuum. This means presidents weren't on the same page either.

There needs to be a summit meeting in Chicago to get everyone on the same page before you do anything else.

Poor Petitti, what a mess!

Does the whale spit Jonah and his bud back up on the Pacific beach?

What if the NBC deal really isn’t done, though?

I know I’m one for crazy speculation, but what’s to stop USCLA from coming back if Apple offered them 80 million a piece to leave the B1G and return to the PAC? You could probably work out an unequal revenue model for 6-7 years. Also, make the incumbent PAC schools cover the 50 million overpayment by Comcast. USCLA can literally milk even more out of this.

When there is any confusion at all with a deal there is opportunity for retrenchment. So, while the odds are they follow through, I think there is a window where anything could still happen.

NBC could spend on Notre Dame and walk away. USC and UCLA may be able to work a side deal of their own apart from staying with their PAC schedule. What if they returned to the PAC 12 as independents with a scheduling agreement and ESPN picked them up for late night? There's a lot of room for skullduggery in this mess.

For that matter ESPN may have a shot at a total steal. Notre Dame and Penn State to the ACC in full, Ohio State and Michigan to the SEC. USC and UCLA to a scheduling agreement as independents.

Now you have your two super conferences and both are under ESPN. Farfetched? Yep Impossible? Not for the right money!