USC and UCLA to the BIG Ten | Page 8 | The Boneyard

USC and UCLA to the BIG Ten

Joined
Mar 4, 2020
Messages
1,591
Reaction Score
1,455
With benefit of hindsight, I would have kept him over Diaco. Diaco recruited a roster of 6'5 250lbs guys who were slow and too small to play OL. Recipe for disaster.
And it was on Warde’s watch. I think Michigan wants to fire him but can’t because he was one of their playing legends. Michigan has had some embarrassing losses under his watch.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 29, 2015
Messages
19,682
Reaction Score
37,226
I think Duke is safe. For better or worse they've been a national brand thanks to men's hoops for the past 40 years. BCU and Wake could seriously be in jeopardy, especially Wake.
BCU's saving grace may be other conferences having access to the Boston market for their fans to travel to for games. It's a destination for their fans rather than being a place where Boston fans embrace BCU and their conference mates.
Wake is largely irrelevant in all sports, has a small alumni base and isn't in a geographically advantageous area.
I dont think Duke is remotely safe. The Big XII could take them but I don't think the SEC or B1G would
 

Chin Diesel

Power of Love
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
28,568
Reaction Score
45,303
Searching for UCONN and found a mention. Indie.

"Tyler: The ACC is what fascinates me here. They’re behind the eight ball already and are in real danger of falling behind further if they don’t make some big moves. I think you’ll see some sort of Big 12 and Pac-12 spare parts merger. It just makes sense. But the ACC? I’m not so sure where they go."

"J.J.: The pessimist in me says the Big 12 and Pac-12 will be raided for their premier programs and will then realign into some fusion of conferences that are distinctly above mid-majors but distinctly below the new Power Two. I think the ACC could hold out if they manage to bring in Notre Dame, but I really don’t see that happening. I think Notre Dame would rather be independent or be a Big Ten team. If the Fighting Irish don’t join the ACC, I would imagine it would get gutted as well- I’m sure the SEC would love to have Clemson, for instance- and the rest would join the new tier of Powerless Three schools. I suspect a lot of schools will go independent a la UConn.

To summarize, assuming the ACC doesn’t get Notre Dame, we’ll end with:

The Power Two: B1G and SEC, each with roughly 20-24 teams

The Powerless Three: whatever the rest of the ACC/Big 12/Pac-12 realigns to

And a whole bunch of new independents

Yay?"

I still think SEC would like UNC or UVA before they go after Clemson. With University of South Carolina and Georgia they have the Palmetto state is pretty well covered. Yes, the Clemson brand brings in exciting games but I don't think the SEC lacks for plenty of exciting, compelling match ups. North Carolina or Virginia bring in a bunch of new fans to the SEC market.
 

Chin Diesel

Power of Love
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
28,568
Reaction Score
45,303
I dont think Duke is remotely safe. The Big XII could take them but I don't think the SEC or B1G would

That's fine. I'm not betting any money on it, and I understand there are differing opinions on which schools will be left behind. Time will tell.
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2020
Messages
1,591
Reaction Score
1,455
I still think SEC would like UNC or UVA before they go after Clemson. With University of South Carolina and Georgia they have the Palmetto state is pretty well covered. Yes, the Clemson brand brings in exciting games but I don't think the SEC lacks for plenty of exciting, compelling match ups. North Carolina or Virginia bring in a bunch of new fans to the SEC market.
I think their football programs would be relegated to travel squads in the SEC, and if they go winless year after year all those new fans might lose interest.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
23,413
Reaction Score
19,807
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
1,204
Reaction Score
1,197
I think their football programs would be relegated to travel squads in the SEC, and if they go winless year after year all those new fans might lose interest.
That’s what is stupid about this whole process, because the same is true at the top. If you put 8 powerhouses in one league then 1/2 of them are going to finish in 5th-8th or even lower in bad years.Tx and OU freak out when they finish 2nd or 3rd in the Big 12 (OU legitimately does anyway, UT is just delusional and only think they are a top 1 or 2 team). Now imagine OU fourth or fifth in SEC and UT 7th to 9th. The fans will burn the place down in the 1st year and stop going by the 3rd.
 
Joined
Oct 22, 2013
Messages
187
Reaction Score
142
I dont think Duke is remotely safe. The Big XII could take them but I don't think the SEC or B1G would
You hit the nail on the head.

This is about football and eyeballs on football. That’s not Duke. The GOR seems to be keeping the ACC secure for years to come, so I don’t know that they should worry.

If they ever need an alternative, they would be best served by looking for a basketball-centric conference with other schools where football is secondary. Other basketball past national champions with a similar sports profile:

UConn
Kansas
Baylor
Syracuse
Louisville (?)
Virginia (?)
North Carolina (?)
NC State (?)
Arizona (?)
UNLV (?)
Cincinnati (?)
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
764
Reaction Score
1,236
If they ever need an alternative, they would be best served by looking for a basketball-centric conference with other schools where football is secondary. Other basketball past national champions with a similar sports profile:

UConn
Kansas
Baylor
Syracuse
Louisville (?)
Virginia (?)
North Carolina (?)
NC State (?)
Arizona (?)
UNLV (?)
Cincinnati (?)
Not that it will happen, but I’d sign up for that conference in a heartbeat. Looks like a blast for all revenue sports.
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
3,862
Reaction Score
6,626
I still think SEC would like UNC or UVA before they go after Clemson. With University of South Carolina and Georgia they have the Palmetto state is pretty well covered. Yes, the Clemson brand brings in exciting games but I don't think the SEC lacks for plenty of exciting, compelling match ups. North Carolina or Virginia bring in a bunch of new fans to the SEC market.
I think how schools are valued has changed. Schools were valued on markets, but they are now going to be valued on brand. The markets philosophy worked when the captive cable bundle drove conference realignment and added fees to the conference networks. As the cable bundle breaks down and streaming takes over, brands are much more important in driving value. Since football drives the bus, Clemson is a much bigger football brand than UNC or UVA which means they will be attractive to the SEC. I think people will want to watch games like Clemson/South Carolina (played 118 times), Clemson/Georgia (played 65 times), Clemson/Auburn (played 51 times), Clemson/Alabama (played 19 times), Clemson/Tennessee (played 19 times), Clemson/Florida (played 13 times).
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2011
Messages
2,084
Reaction Score
2,377
I think how schools are valued has changed. Schools were valued on markets, but they are now going to be valued on brand. The markets philosophy worked when the captive cable bundle drove conference realignment and added fees to the conference networks. As the cable bundle breaks down and streaming takes over, brands are much more important in driving value. Since football drives the bus, Clemson is a much bigger football brand than UNC or UVA which means they will be attractive to the SEC. I think people will want to watch games like Clemson/South Carolina (played 118 times), Clemson/Georgia (played 65 times), Clemson/Auburn (played 51 times), Clemson/Alabama (played 19 times), Clemson/Tennessee (played 19 times), Clemson/Florida (played 13 times).
And 3/4 of the country is going to turn to other entertainment
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Messages
334
Reaction Score
177

This stat caught my eye:

115 Current/Former athletes from USC and UCLA we’re Olympians in Tokyo last summer.

The other 14 B1G schools combined sent 155 Olympians to Tokyo last summer.

I know that’s not the reason why the schools were added, but wow, that’s an insanely high number of Olympians from only two schools.
 
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
439
Reaction Score
336
I think like a quarter of those athletes are in water polo and beach volleyball. I think basically the whole Aussie water polo team went to USC for instance. But the B10 doesn’t offer either sport.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
2,153
Reaction Score
2,590
There is zero chance of UCLA pulling out of the B1G. If UCLA does pull out, B1G will just invite Stanford to take their spot.

Governor Newsome is just using his power trying to get B1G to take UC Berkeley also. What will end up happening is B1G will take both Stanford and UC Berkeley so B1G can lock up CA. The consequence is PAC-12 will be destroyed.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Messages
334
Reaction Score
177
Doesn't sound like the UC Regents are going to do anything to stop UCLA from moving to the B1G. To the surprise of no one.



The regents, meeting in San Diego on Thursday, briefly discussed a proposal to bar the university president from delegating such authority if one UC campus’ proposed athletics transaction would cause a sister campus a “material adverse financial impact” — defined as 10% or greater of the operating revenue of the athletic department in question. The ban on delegating authority to campuses would also apply if a proposed deal would raise a “significant question” of university policy or create a “significant risk of reputational harm” to UC.

Board Chair Richard Leib emphasized the proposal is aimed at future campus actions. But it was triggered by widespread concerns among regents about the financial impact UCLA’s decision to leave the Pac-12 in 2024 could have on UC Berkeley.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
74,859
Reaction Score
129,389


-> Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff sent a letter to the University of California Board of Regents on Thursday in an attempt to overturn the UCLA chancellor’s decision to leave the Big Ten in 2024, a source confirmed to The Athletic. <-

->
He wrote that UCLA athletes could see their academic and health status decline due to increased time traveling on planes to road games. Family and friends of those athletes would also have a more arduous and expensive time seeing the Bruins compete further away from California. Kliavkoff stated travel costs — currently $8.1 in the Pac-12 — would jump to $23.7 million if flights were chartered in the Big Ten.

The letter additionally stated salaries for coaches and administrators would be forced to go up in the Big Ten despite the new seven-year, $7.5 billion media rights deal. <-

 

CL82

We some killers We some dogs It’s going to be fun
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
48,721
Reaction Score
92,743
He needs to move on from this.
Don’t you hate when your ex doesn’t get that message that it’s over?

Break Up GIF by Molly Kate Kestner
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Messages
334
Reaction Score
177
The B1G wouldn’t lower itself to sending a letter to the regents about the positives of moving to the B1G, but just off the top of my head:

  • Increased revenue
  • Increased nationwide exposure of the UCLA brand
  • Membership in the B1G Academic Alliance
  • Saving the Olympic sports that would have otherwise been eliminated
  • Increased access to the CFP with a stronger conference schedule resulting in an increased likelihood of getting an at-large bid


One other point on the revenue. The SEC and B1G are likely to split half of the CFP revenue between themselves with the next contract per past reports. UCLA will receive more CFP revenue as a member of the B1G than it would remaining in the PAC.

It’s also silly that one of the PAC’s five reasons to oppose the move is carbon neutrality. 20% of their case against the move is the carbon output of additional plane rides. That’s stretching to say the least.
 
Joined
Jul 28, 2021
Messages
83
Reaction Score
85
The Big Ten should just take four. This could be a dangerous game, tantrums are never pretty.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Messages
334
Reaction Score
177
The Big Ten should just take four. This could be a dangerous game, tantrums are never pretty.

I would be shocked if Oregon, Washington, Stanford and Cal do not end up in the B1G. It might not happen in 2024, but it will happen in my opinion. They likely will not receive a full conference payout for several years, though.

Then we sit back until the ACC nears the end of its grant of rights and see who the B1G and SEC target.

The real drama will be from the ACC schools that both the B1G and SEC want to add in terms of which conference they choose. North Carolina, for instance. Kevin Warren has already stated AAU membership is not a requirement for B1G membership. Florida State, Miami and Clemson might be targets for both conferences as well.
 

Online statistics

Members online
42
Guests online
346
Total visitors
388

Forum statistics

Threads
170,562
Messages
4,222,270
Members
9,130
Latest member
mludwig67


Top Bottom