USC and UCLA to the BIG Ten | Page 9 | The Boneyard

USC and UCLA to the BIG Ten

Joined
Oct 25, 2018
Messages
1,581
Reaction Score
6,487
Those 4 may, but why would they be next? Fear of SEC moving first? Those 4 are the equivalent of UConn in last days of BE - there if BIG wants, but of no value to others.

I see the BIG pulling on the ACC string next, first thru ND and then looking to jump SEC for valued properties like UVA and UNC. The B12 has no valuable properties left and the most valuable piece of PAC is already in BIG. The only turkey left to carve up is the ACC.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2016
Messages
1,101
Reaction Score
1,581
The B1G definitely has no urgency to add additional PAC schools, unless the SEC shows interest.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
5,006
Reaction Score
10,810
The B1G definitely has no urgency to add additional PAC schools, unless the SEC shows interest.
They actually have an incentiv adding more schools provides more content that can be offered to Amazon or Apple. It also gets Gov Newsome to stand down, and it destroys the Pac-12.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,124
Reaction Score
32,902
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.

Streaming could make the top programs Re-evaluate why they are creating incentives for teams in their conference to mail it in. These super conferences are predicated on the top teams being willing to subsidize the rest. Why on earth would they do that? Sooner or later, USC, Michigan and/or Ohio State is going to demand more.
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2014
Messages
16,669
Reaction Score
19,802
Streaming could make the top programs Re-evaluate why they are creating incentives for teams in their conference to mail it in. These super conferences are predicated on the top teams being willing to subsidize the rest. Why on earth would they do that? Sooner or later, USC, Michigan and/or Ohio State is going to demand more.
I don't disagree but one thing the top teams are getting is wins. As they invite other top programs, the schedule gets more difficult and That's where the bottom feeders come in. If they had a conference full of perennial ranked teams none would make the play-offs. No doubt the top of the conference will figure out a way to get more of the pie at some point though.
 
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
7,418
Reaction Score
27,703
Streaming could make the top programs Re-evaluate why they are creating incentives for teams in their conference to mail it in. These super conferences are predicated on the top teams being willing to subsidize the rest. Why on earth would they do that? Sooner or later, USC, Michigan and/or Ohio State is going to demand more.
I've thought the same thing which is why every time I envisioned a football breakaway, it would be an entirely new thing and not just expanding certain conferences. I pictured the five biggest name brands from each of the P5 forming a new league with geographic divisions and playoffs without the bottom feeders. Those schools will always want more and more money and eventually they won't be able to grow the pie anymore so they will look to getting a bigger slice.
 

Hondo 77

The voice of reason
Joined
Sep 11, 2021
Messages
129
Reaction Score
431
I've thought the same thing which is why every time I envisioned a football breakaway, it would be an entirely new thing and not just expanding certain conferences. I pictured the five biggest name brands from each of the P5 forming a new league with geographic divisions and playoffs without the bottom feeders. Those schools will always want more and more money and eventually they won't be able to grow the pie anymore so they will look to getting a bigger slice.
You’ll end up with league where everyone goes either 7-5 or 5-7.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,124
Reaction Score
32,902
I don't disagree but one thing the top teams are getting is wins. As they invite other top programs, the schedule gets more difficult and That's where the bottom feeders come in. If they had a conference full of perennial ranked teams none would make the play-offs. No doubt the top of the conference will figure out a way to get more of the pie at some point though.

Why does the Big 10 need to pay Rutgers $75 million a year to be a doormat? Rutgers would probably do it for $10MM/year, definitely $15MM. Michigan and Ohio State are just handing Rutgers a bag of cash and getting nothing in return.
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2018
Messages
1,581
Reaction Score
6,487
I don't disagree but one thing the top teams are getting is wins. As they invite other top programs, the schedule gets more difficult and That's where the bottom feeders come in. If they had a conference full of perennial ranked teams none would make the play-offs. No doubt the top of the conference will figure out a way to get more of the pie at some point though.
Somehow the SEC has navigated this just fine. The SEC West is perennially chock full of top 25 teams. They not only make the playoffs, they dominate by typically being 1/2 the field.
 

Online statistics

Members online
419
Guests online
3,117
Total visitors
3,536

Forum statistics

Threads
156,871
Messages
4,068,406
Members
9,949
Latest member
Woody69


Top Bottom