B1G/PAC Merger Idea

[CoastAtlantic]

I would be surprised if there wasn't any talk of this at some point in the last ten years. From a distance, even taking into consideration the problems of travel for all sports, it makes all kinds of sense. The profiles are quite similar: State flagship or high-quality state schools and the private schools are quasi Ivies like Stanford and Northwestern. Combined endowments would be through the roof even when averaged out. The CIC would salivate over the likes of USC or UDub joining. Even Colorado and Arizona.

The biggest obstacle, obviously, is overcoming regional pride and egos such a proposed combination would run into. Here's how I see the way to do it:

Anything must first start in California. That is where the top schools are and a major recruiting state. The Rose Bowl would be the major prize (the Big Ten truly prize that bowl above all else) in any negotiation. Should the Cali 4 join almost certainly Washington follows. With Washington you probably have to include Oregon (BTN goes basic in Portland) in the mix. So half the conference already out and PAC on death bed. Colorado and Arizona to connect West Coast to Nebraska, forming a bridge. Arizona State would have to join as well to sew up the Phoenix market. So you need one more to get to 24. Best candidate left would be Utah (Salt Lake City market). Voilà. Most of PAC absorbed into the B1G.

UW, UO, Cal, Stanford, USC, UCLA, UA, ASU
UU, CU, UNL, IA, MN, WI, NU, IL
PU, IU, MSU, UM, OSU, PSU, MD, RU

Truly a behemoth if it ever happens. The ACC nor the SEC/XII would be able to match the academic profile of such a grouping. Probably why it won't happen.

 

[bingethinker]

This was attempted before the MD/RU expansion. B1G pushed hard for it. The Pac-12 decided against playing ball.

 

[billybud]

This was attempted before the MD/RU expansion. B1G pushed hard for it. The Pac-12 decided against playing ball.

Wasn't that the attempt to have a scheduling alliance?

I can see that sort of action....

 

[hexlub]

Didn't C-USA and Mountain West float this idea a few years back?

 

[Pudge]

Yes. There were extensive discussions of a "scheduling alliance" NOT a merger several years ago.

What's changed?

The BTN is a huge success. The Pac 12 Network moderate success. It doesn't seem that BTN needs the other 14 schools for content. I simply can't imagine how scale and strategic niche fits for additional incremental revenue for both. But, they are friendly.

 

[huskypantz]

One school could win their division and not make it to the B1G champ game (or the playoff). It would be interesting to see how they would parse that out with a 4 team playoff versus an 8 team playoff.

 

[Fishy]

The two conferences conceived a scheduling alliance.

The Big Ten viewed it as a way to stay at an eight-game conference schedule. The problem was that the Pac 12 was already at nine games - adding a mandatory Big Ten game every year would have made some rough sledding. About a third of the Pac 12 simply refused to accept a mandatory game and the alliance died.

 

[Seaa Blue]

Delany said something to the effect that it was a way to obtain some of the benefits of conference expansion without expanding.

PAC struggles with strength of schedule combined with the East-coast bias, and so at least a couple coaches came out against the idea.