USC/UCLA to the Big Ten in 24?

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
1,244
1,221
113
35
If true, very interesting near future. I still want the B12 commissioner to be ultra aggressive.
Even before all this chaos blew up cfb on Thursday I have said that I believe that the Big12 will be fine. If the pac disappears in the next year before the get a new media deal it’s even better for the Big12. The only risk the Big12 has is if the P2 try to keep the playoff only to themselves
 

WhoISthis

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2010
5,080
3,096
113
If true, very interesting near future. I still want the B12 commissioner to be ultra aggressive.

We all do, but ND to the Big 12 is not even worth talking about on CF, and that's saying something.

How do we pull the plug on the P10 is the aggressive question. Poach and help remove the Pac12 before the end of B12 GOR would be great. Rinse and repeat with the ACC.

Dream scenario is new commissioner gets a couple P10 schools to say **** you to UW and Oregon, and join the Big 12, then BIG later says "not now" to UW and Oregon. It would not be for long, but a Big 12 consisting of the R8+4 plus the top 8 of the Pac10 schools would be good.

Said schools may want to wait to see if 6+ P12 schools end up BIG, but depending on what happens with the ACC, they could end up in the Mountain West instead.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FriendlySpartan

HoopsTournament

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 12, 2006
6,478
2,553
113
50
St. Joseph, MO
www.hoopstournament.net
Even before all this chaos blew up cfb on Thursday I have said that I believe that the Big12 will be fine. If the pac disappears in the next year before the get a new media deal it’s even better for the Big12. The only risk the Big12 has is if the P2 try to keep the playoff only to themselves
How will they keep the playoff to themselves?

The only way I can think about that is a complete break from FBS. Otherwise, right now SEC has one vote and BIG Ten has one vote.
 

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
1,244
1,221
113
35
How will they keep the playoff to themselves?

The only way I can think about that is a complete break from FBS. Otherwise, right now SEC has one vote and BIG Ten has one vote.
Don’t think it happens until the ACC gets broken up but once they do, and if the teams go where everyone assumes they go I could see it happening.

Which btw is a pivot that I never would have thought possible before Thursday.
 

cyIclSoneU

Well-Known Member
Apr 7, 2016
2,798
3,779
113
There is a huge difference between finding teams that don't cost you money on your current deal, and an opportunity cost from not having the optimal mix of additions included in your new deal. The BIG presidents would be willing to give up some amount increase on the new deal if it gets them those academic brands along with preserving some tradition. The BIG will be at the top, or right there, regardless.

They already are giving up some opportunity cost in taking UCLA with USC, if they stop there. And most acknowledge they'd take Stanford if it got them ND, even though ND plus UW or Oregon would be more of a revenue increase.

Seems like wishful thinking to me. Conference realignment decisions have never been made on “academic brands” and never, ever, ever on “preserving some tradition.” It’s money.

I agree that there can be some mixes like if UCLA will cost them but USC + UCLA will make them money and USC won’t come alone. Then the decision is 2 or 0 and the choice is made based on money regardless. This is the only way IMO that Stanford gets in the B1G: if Notre Dame demands it and that is also a 2 or 0 addition scenario. I could see ND wanting to play Stanford, USC, and Michigan or Michigan State every year in their conference slate.

Any take about realignment that is not grounded in “does this make more money for its existing membership” is probably wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FriendlySpartan

WhoISthis

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2010
5,080
3,096
113
Don’t think it happens until the ACC gets broken up but once they do, and if the teams go where everyone assumes they go I could see it happening.

Which btw is a pivot that I never would have thought possible before Thursday.
It definitely would have to come after the ACC is broken up, which my guess is soon after the P12 resolution occurs. The (delusional) dream in the ACC of ND joining the ACC is done now. Time to find a future.

But I think we'll have a formal P3 world for awhile. Great way to avoid anti-trust is to invite the schools making half of the P2, and that were just a couple years ago peers, to the CFP.

The networks will want that, as "potential" invites to post season is super cheap way to keep interest despite paying for a P2 world.
 

Acylum

Well-Known Member
Nov 18, 2006
9,864
9,297
113
Don’t think it happens until the ACC gets broken up but once they do, and if the teams go where everyone assumes they go I could see it happening.

Which btw is a pivot that I never would have thought possible before Thursday.
Still wouldn’t happen if CFB is still under the purview of the NCAA.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: FriendlySpartan

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
1,244
1,221
113
35
It definitely would have to come after the ACC is broken up, which my guess is soon after the P12 resolution occurs. The (delusional) dream in the ACC of ND joining the ACC is done now. Time to find a future.

But I think we'll have a formal P3 world for awhile. Great way to avoid anti-trust is to invite the schools making half of the P2, and that were just a couple years ago peers, to the CFP.

The networks will want that, as "potential" invites to post season is super cheap way to keep interest despite paying for a P2 world.
I’ll readily admit that I know almost nothing about antitrust lawsuits but is that even a real concern?
 

WhoISthis

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2010
5,080
3,096
113
Seems like wishful thinking to me. Conference realignment decisions have never been made on “academic brands” and never, ever, ever on “preserving some tradition.” It’s money.

I agree that there can be some mixes like if UCLA will cost them but USC + UCLA will make them money and USC won’t come alone. Then the decision is 2 or 0 and the choice is made based on money regardless. This is the only way IMO that Stanford gets in the B1G: if Notre Dame demands it and that is also a 2 or 0 addition scenario. I could see ND wanting to play Stanford, USC, and Michigan or Michigan State every year in their conference slate.

Any take about realignment that is not grounded in “does this make more money for its existing membership” is probably wrong.
Oh yes, the never before talk. History is poor sample here- I get it is the only sample we have, and we then try to justify its relevance. Similar talk was made when people protested the notion USC was going to the BIG.

Preserving tradition is about revenue when you're taking about preserving the Rose Bowl and inter-regional ties. . That's hugely important to the networks and those running the conference, which is why I 've been beating the USC and Pac12 schools to the BIG drum (some believe the value of 6-8 Pac 12 rolled into the BIG, maintain Rose Bowl as conference title, has better macros for the conference than adding 4).
It is wrong to think tradition isn't inherent to realignment. Tradition is big in branding, big in consumer interest and habits, and brand value is big in realignment. You just have to know when it adds value.

You're confusing "does it make more money" with "does it make max possible money". The combo of top6-8 Pac 12 schools is about opportunity costs, the BIG will make more either way. The Pac 12 valuations are much higher if members of the BIG, and unequal revenue sharing on P12 has been discussed.
 

CascadeClone

Well-Known Member
Oct 24, 2009
5,899
5,667
113
There is no way ND would join the Big12. This is one of the most scorching hot takes I have ever seen. They will remain independent until one of the P2 gives them an ultimatum like keeping them out of the playoff or not allowing member schools to schedule games with them.
I mean, MAYBE they would want to take the high road on student athletes and tradition and avoid the Superleague type money driven nfl lite scenario. They would be the undisputed leader of the NCAA2.0 which would look more like traditional cfb.

I highly doubt it, but its slightly possible.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: FriendlySpartan

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
8,162
11,450
113
To be clear this is if Oregon and or Washington stay
It’s not and/or. If Oregon leaves the PAC is dead and is going to get poached. Again people actually watching matters now. And UW has been surpassed by ISU in ability to draw viewers, yet you think they can be a flagship team that poaches the Big 12?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Acylum

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
1,244
1,221
113
35
Oh yes, the never before talk. History is poor sample here- I get it is the only sample we have, and we then try to justify its relevance. Similar talk was made when people protested the notion USC was going to the BIG.

Preserving tradition is about revenue when you're taking about preserving the Rose Bowl and inter-regional ties. . That's hugely important to the networks and those running the conference, which is why I 've been beating the USC and Pac12 schools to the BIG drum (some believe the value of 6-8 Pac 12 rolled into the BIG, maintain Rose Bowl as conference title, has better macros for the conference than adding 4).
It is wrong to think tradition isn't inherent to realignment. Tradition is big in branding, big in consumer interest and habits, and brand value is big in realignment. You just have to know when it adds value.

You're confusing "does it make more money" with "does it make max possible money". The combo of top6-8 Pac 12 schools is about opportunity costs, the BIG will make more either way. The Pac 12 valuations are much higher if members of the BIG, and unequal revenue sharing on P12 has been discussed.
Yeah you had USC to the big ten awhile ago. I pushed back hard against it because I was hearing the big ten was done with expansion. While it looks like USC approached the big ten and gave them an ultimatum it still caught me off guard so good call on that one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cyfanatic

WhoISthis

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2010
5,080
3,096
113
I’ll readily admit that I know almost nothing about antitrust lawsuits but is that even a real concern?
Increasingly less so, and quickly

Sounds like it is just viewed as too easy/beneficial to avoid by allowing access CFP to schools making half, which make the networks more.

Makes sense- if it was better to give G8 access, I imagine it is even more so in a P3 setup. The networks don't necessarily want less inventory people care about, they are already desperate for inventory. They just want to have more efficient groupings so the marginal costs are better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psychlone99

CascadeClone

Well-Known Member
Oct 24, 2009
5,899
5,667
113
Even before all this chaos blew up cfb on Thursday I have said that I believe that the Big12 will be fine. If the pac disappears in the next year before the get a new media deal it’s even better for the Big12. The only risk the Big12 has is if the P2 try to keep the playoff only to themselves
They wont at first, but they will make it so the P2 gets all or near all the spots.
Eventually they will justify making it just P2. I give it 5 years or less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Walter

WhoISthis

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2010
5,080
3,096
113
Yeah you had USC to the big ten awhile ago. I pushed back hard against it because I was hearing the big ten was done with expansion. While it looks like USC approached the big ten and gave them an ultimatum it still caught me off guard so good call on that one.
It's the school side. Could always be wishful thinking, but the wish was there.

I give Warren credit for not being a tradition maximalist. I'm guessing we heard the same things- it wasn't quick, universal yes. But it is the best way forward- I'm not sure exactly what happens if the BIG was a staunch "no", but it is likely worse for the BIG and most of the Alliance. ESPN getting USC out of the P12 get messy for everyone

I don't like the P2 for obvious reasons, but if it is going to happen, and in terms of revenue tt already has, there is a lot of appeal to a Pac12 pod/division in the BIG.

If it adds some decent P5 brands to the Big 12 as the "3", I don't think the change is that bad.

Now, NIL and transfer rules is the real issue imo
 

RustShack

Chiefs Dynasty
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jan 27, 2010
11,429
5,253
113
Adventureland
Can someone dumb it down for me? I don’t understand how anyone thinks it’s possible for the “P2” to have their own playoff. Did I miss the court ruling where three P5 conferences lost their autonomy status and the rest of the other conferences lost their votes in the matter as well?
 

FriendlySpartan

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
1,244
1,221
113
35
Can someone dumb it down for me? I don’t understand how anyone thinks it’s possible for the “P2” to have their own playoff. Did I miss the court ruling where three P5 conferences lost their autonomy status and the rest of the other conferences lost their votes in the matter as well?
Considering close to half this board thinks that at some point the big ten will kick out schools like northwestern because they aren’t bringing in as much money as OSU it’s not much of a leap from there to say that the P2 would just create their own playoff using that logic.

I personally don’t think the PAC and ACC will be around in a decade so at that point things get weird
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: WhoISthis and 1776

HoopsTournament

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 12, 2006
6,478
2,553
113
50
St. Joseph, MO
www.hoopstournament.net
Considering close to half this board thinks that at some point the big ten will kick out schools like northwestern because they aren’t bringing in as much money as OSU it’s not much of a leap from there to say that the P2 would just create their own playoff using that logic.

I personally don’t think the PAC and ACC will be around in a decade so at that point things get weird
But if they kick the lesser teams out and break off, then there will still have to be losing teams in the new league. Mathematically, only half the teams can win each game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kinch

Big Daddy Kang

Active Member
Mar 20, 2021
135
196
43
46
Considering close to half this board thinks that at some point the big ten will kick out schools like northwestern because they aren’t bringing in as much money as OSU it’s not much of a leap from there to say that the P2 would just create their own playoff using that logic.

I personally don’t think the PAC and ACC will be around in a decade so at that point things get weird
Half the board wants to kick out you because you say the same thing over and over and won't shut up.
 

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron