USC/UCLA to the Big Ten in 24?

CloneGuy8

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2017
11,856
23,175
113
37
Utah-BYU is not much different than Iowa State-Iowa in some ways. BYU and Iowa have more historical success and massively inflated egos.

Imagine if Ohio State and Michigan had decided to join the SEC ten years ago or something and Iowa was below us. I know ISU fans would talk a lot of smack about those tables turning. Then if our league took a blow and we were forced to seek an invite to their league, we would be pushing back. Same for the Utes.
The Holy War is CyHawk on crack. Our rivalry with Iowa is tame compared to BYU-Utah
 

nfrine

Well-Known Member
Mar 31, 2006
6,786
6,913
113
Nearby
Oregon State is definitely a step above WSU. But then we have two "OSU"s in the conference. Too confusing. Maybe we could have them designated OSU(e) for Okie Lite and OSU(w) for the Beavs.
How about the Beavers and the Mullets?
 

Tornado man

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2007
11,765
-74
113
60
Ames, IA
USC and UCLA are much different than Oregon. Apples and oranges comparison.

Phil Knight's money only benefits Oregon, not anybody else in the conference.

Quite frankly I'm not worried about it.
Uh, I believe Knight is Stanford's biggest donor.
 

WhoISthis

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2010
5,236
3,251
113
USC and UCLA are much different than Oregon. Apples and oranges comparison.

Phil Knight's money only benefits Oregon, not anybody else in the conference.

Quite frankly I'm not worried about it.

It’s also a completely different dynamic, P2 era vs P5.

Anyone outside the P2 having their eyes on the P2 isn’t exactly destabilizing once you’re in a P3 setup (ACC just on its death march). There is no illusion anyone “wants” to be in the 3 over the P2. If the Big 12 is the “3” and has an out clause for P2, it’s stable.

More stable because it’s where top leftovers want to be due to the clause

It’s only an issue now because it gives the Big 12 leverage to make them come to us. If the Big 12 were also going through OUT this week, the first conference to offer schools a GOR with a P2 out is the conference that consolidates and survives.
 

Cloneon

Well-Known Member
Oct 29, 2015
2,169
2,158
113
West Virginia
Because the Big 10 has been very good at not getting excited and adding a bunch of teams right away. They sit back, add a team, then wait two to three years and add another. Phil knight could get pissed in two years and straight up offer the big 10 money to add them. So I could see the Big 10 sitting back and waiting, then poaching Oregon in 3 years.
I, respectfully, disagree. The UCLA/USC add was motivated by the OUT add to maintain dominance. So, in essence, they didn't 'wait'. They 'reacted'.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: WhoISthis

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
9,301
13,334
113
Five years ago did you think USC and UCLA would be in the Big Ten?

The SI report I read yesterday says that Phil Knight, one of the top 30 richest people in the world and Oregon mega-benefactor, wants Oregon in the Big Ten, and if that doesn't work out, the SEC is his next choice. Knight is going to be moving whatever he can move to make that happen, and he will probably eventually be successful.

The wake of those actions might be relatively peaceful, or they might be turbulent and wreak havoc on anything in the way (i.e. the Big 12 if Oregon joins up for a couple of years). Not worth the risk, IMO, for a short-termer. Do you think Phil Knight cares what happens to the Big 12?

The "bring them in" mentality is misguided. Oregon isn't ISU...they don't have to panic every time realignment rolls around. They can wait it out because they have a billionaire benefactor that can string them along and open doors for them. If Oregon would even consider a Big 12 invite, I can't imagine there is any way they would sign a long term GOR.
Realistically Knight could throw a couple $B at Oregon, and they could join the Big10 and forego media dollars for several years without losing ground.

That was the big payoff for the Big 10 in adding Rutgers, Maryland and Nebraska.

Hell, considering the value they got dumping the Big 10 network into the NY market and the years prior to getting a full media cut, Big 10 has banked tons of cash from Rutgers joining. It's going to take MANY years before Rutgers' low value will ever chew up that banked revenue and make that add a net negative.

That's the other thing all conferences need to consider on potential adds. Maybe a little bit less attractive school is willing to take a much lower cut for a longer period of time. As a conference you could gamble that either long-term that program will increase it's value and/or by the time that school is at full payout that all of this is blown up again and moot.

Let's say a school takes a reduced cut for 5 years. You then estimate it will take 5 years or so of them getting a full cut before the net over that period ends up hurting the per team revenue for your existing members. That's a 10 year period before it starts to become a bad investment. Do the current conferences even exist in 10 years?

So it is more complicated than whether or not a school brings average value or not. Frankly not many do for the SEC and Big 10. I would say ND is the only one left.

People talk about Clemson as incredibly valuable, but I'm not convinced. If you look at their ratings over the years, given their crazy success and constant placement in good time and network slots, they have underperformed from a TV perspective. They are obviously a great program as long as Dabo is there and the SEC would love to have them, but they are team that draws OK in great slots in a market that SEC already owns. I'm sure SEC wants them and will add them, but I don't see the value being such that any network is going to pay a huge GOR price to get them early.
 

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
9,301
13,334
113
USC and UCLA are much different than Oregon. Apples and oranges comparison.

Phil Knight's money only benefits Oregon, not anybody else in the conference.

Quite frankly I'm not worried about it.
At Knight's net worth he could set up an endowment at Oregon that could fund their AD at Big 10 school levels without taking any Big 10 media dollars. I have no idea how badly he wants Oregon in the big 10, but if he wanted it that badly, he could do it. Oregon adds to the gross media contract without taking any media $. That's a huge benefit to the rest of the conference.
 

Pope

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Feb 7, 2015
3,816
8,531
113
Five years ago did you think USC and UCLA would be in the Big Ten?

The SI report I read yesterday says that Phil Knight, one of the top 30 richest people in the world and Oregon mega-benefactor, wants Oregon in the Big Ten, and if that doesn't work out, the SEC is his next choice. Knight is going to be moving whatever he can move to make that happen, and he will probably eventually be successful.

The wake of those actions might be relatively peaceful, or they might be turbulent and wreak havoc on anything in the way (i.e. the Big 12 if Oregon joins up for a couple of years). Not worth the risk, IMO, for a short-termer. Do you think Phil Knight cares what happens to the Big 12?

The "bring them in" mentality is misguided. Oregon isn't ISU...they don't have to panic every time realignment rolls around. They can wait it out because they have a billionaire benefactor that can string them along and open doors for them. If Oregon would even consider a Big 12 invite, I can't imagine there is any way they would sign a long term GOR.
Fine, Oregon can refuse our offer and be stuck in gutted PAC conference for the next few years at least. Jeez.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bestaluckcy

iahawks

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2012
10,150
6,930
113
People talk about Clemson as incredibly valuable, but I'm not convinced. If you look at their ratings over the years, given their crazy success and constant placement in good time and network slots, they have underperformed from a TV perspective. They are obviously a great program as long as Dabo is there and the SEC would love to have them, but they are team that draws OK in great slots in a market that SEC already owns. I'm sure SEC wants them and will add them, but I don't see the value being such that any network is going to pay a huge GOR price to get them early.
I've been hearing a lot lately that Clemson really doesn't offer any value to the SEC since they already have South Carolina in the conference and Clemson won't up their TV money.
 

BryceC

Well-Known Member
Mar 23, 2006
24,368
15,144
113
At Knight's net worth he could set up an endowment at Oregon that could fund their AD at Big 10 school levels without taking any Big 10 media dollars. I have no idea how badly he wants Oregon in the big 10, but if he wanted it that badly, he could do it. Oregon adds to the gross media contract without taking any media $. That's a huge benefit to the rest of the conference.

I mean that’s possible. If that’s the direction they are willing to go the PAC and Big 12 will both have no option.

What stopped him from doing it until now? He could have done that at any point.
 

JM4CY

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Aug 23, 2012
27,531
51,040
113
America
I've been hearing a lot lately that Clemson really doesn't offer any value to the SEC since they already have South Carolina in the conference and Clemson won't up their TV money.
That’s dumb. Clemson is a national brand.
 

iahawks

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2012
10,150
6,930
113
That’s dumb. Clemson is a national brand.
I agree for the most part, but as always it has to make financial sense first and foremost. I can see where adding Clemson doesn't do much for the SEC since they already own that entire market and state.