USC Traveler

Actually, I didn't know that you had read it. Canzano isn't exactly must-read for most of the country. Considering the fact that Thompson is an Oregon grad, and was talking to Canzano, who is a massive PNW homer, don't you think he'd put as positive of a spin as possible on Oregon's merits ? The fact that he didn't speaks volumes. Thamel and some of the Athletic folks have all reported that UW and OU would be dilutive for revenue in the BIG, and that the smaller schools don't want their games pushed onto streaming. So I have three questions for you: 1. If the PNW schools are worth as much as you think, why haven't they been added already ? 2. Which schools in the BIG are voting to add the PNW schools ? 3. However much BTN will make from being in Seattle, they'll make much more money by being in VA, NC, GA and FL. There is an opportunity cost to filling up slots with other schools before the BIG gets their shot at the ACC, so why would the BIG add PNW schools before they see who they can get from the ACC ? I'll hang up and listen.

Well done sir- very well done. You nailed every team except I think USC will get NW and UM will get Rutgers. I think the BIG will be very sensitive to not having an East Coast team as a permanent rival for USC. They're not going to want the "student athletes having to fly coast to coast every year" stories in the media, and they won't want the "BIG added USC to play Rutgers ?" jokes either. LAX-ORD looks much better than LA-EWR on a map. Also- NW and USC will be the only two private schools in the BIG. And with UM already playing Rutgers every year, and UM recruiting well in NJ, giving UM Rutgers as their cupcake won't raise any eyebrows. // All of that said, Rutgers would actually be my first choice for a 3rd rival/cupcake. Alternately staying in NY and Philly every two years would be great. So if you're right, I'd be very happy. I'd much prefer them over someone like IL. I just can't see it happening. // The only other potential fly in the ointment to your matrix would be if they made UM-MN rivals (Little Brown Jug). It's a historic series, but since they haven't played every year since Leaders and Legends ended, I don't think they'll make it annual now, because it would create a ripple effect in the rivals matrix. The way you have it laid out is pretty much perfect at first glance, and I'll be shocked if it differs substantially from your projection.

Correct. Those numbers are more in the range of what the two schools are worth together. If they were worth $70m each, they'd already be in the BIG.

According to Bob Thompson, former President of Fox Sports and Oregon grad, he placed Oregon's tv value at $30m/year, and Stanford at $45m/year.

Based on attendance and tv ratings over the last 10 years or so, Cal's local fanbase is actually smaller than Stanford's. The days when Cal drew fans seem to have passed, and I don't see them ever coming back, given the admin's outright hostility to football, the Cal student body, and the culture in Bezerkley. Stanford's admin is ambivalent about football, but they know it holds value- even for a place like Stanford. There were a number of articles about how their applications increased substantially when they had it going last decade, which I found stunning when I first read them, given the draw of the degree alone. But I can see how it could play a big role when kids are choosing between an Ivy league school vs Stanford. // On paper, Cal has the perfect BIG profile- flagship school with elite academics. But up close, all of the negatives far outweigh the positives for the BIG. The BIG will eventually want a school in the Bay Area, given the size of the market, recruiting access and massive BIG alum bases there, but if you're a BIG President wanting to engage with alums in Silicon Valley, it's much easier and infinitely more pleasant to do so on Leland Stanford's Farm than in the shithole that is Berkley. And with ND and USC wanting Stanford, they will get the call when ND joins. What's interesting to me is what does Stanford do in the meantime, given that ND will be on their own timetable. I'm assuming they'll ride it out in the PAC as long as they can, but if they announce they are going independent and have a scheduling agreement with the BIG, we'll know ND is joining sooner rather than later.

Yeah- schools like OSU will form the backbone of the third conference that emerges, which imo will be a coast to coast B12, with the PAC and ACC schools that don't get into the P2 joining in different waves over the next 10-12 years. There will be too many good programs with fans who care consolidated in one place for the networks to ignore, so there will be good value in the tv deal. It won't make as much money as the P2, but it will be a fun league to watch, and it will make enough $$$ that it will enable teams to field strong squads with the right type of coach who can evaluate and develop. Fickell at Cincy and Rhule at Baylor are perfect examples. There will be some years where one of those teams makes some noise in an early round playoff game or two. How far would that Cincy squad have gotten in a 12 team playoff if they didn't get Bama in the first round ? // P2 will probably end up somewhere between 36-44 teams- not necessarily the same number in BIG as in SEC. Could be BIG24 and SEC 20 for example. B12 could land anywhere between 20 all the way up to maybe 28 or 32 teams, depending on how many teams the tv partners say are worth adding.

Not only do you alienate those fanbases if they get left behind in a super league, you also create a lot of unhappy fanbases within the super league, as teams that formerly posted 9-10 wins annually now go 4-8 a lot of years. Miss St, arky, IU, Purdue, etc all serve a purpose in the P2- they take most of the Ls in a given year, with the top teams getting a certain number of fairly easy wins, setting up more "Clash of the Titans" top games between the big brands. 10-1 USC vs 11-0 UM, or 11-0 UT vs 10-1 Bama both sound a lot more exciting than if all the teams had 3 losses NFL-style. And when the stars align, like when Dak was at MSU, or in 2020 at IU, those long-suffering fanbases get to go on a magic carpet ride that is great for the whole sport. // I'm not an NFL fan. I watch the playoffs, but don't care about the regular season. I like the passion, energy and tradition of CFB. And even though the average game in CFB is less competitive than the average NFL game, that's what makes the CFB upsets resonate so loudly. App St over aggy ? Are you kidding me ? On paper, that should have never happened. But it did, and there's nothing like it.

The magical thinking is hilarious. That "heard it from my buddy at the gym" post is a truly epic fail. For no revenue increase, existing BIG schools are going to play West Coast games that are streaming-only with 9:30pm CT starts ? 😂 The same BIG schools that don't want to add the PNW schools because they don't want their games moved onto streaming platforms ? The same BIG ADs who have said they don't want to take more than one trip to the West Coast per season ? Can you imagine a BIG President or AD trying to sell their donors on this ? 😂😂😂

Agree on the ACC part, and would love to see the second part take place.

Agreed on NE's 3 rivals. That's who I think it will be also. Also agree that Rhule is their best hire (by far imo) since Osborne, for the reasons you listed. // As far as UW and the Zeros from Eugene, you're spot on with the CA recruiting angle- the other BIG schools want to get those CA recruits. The Zeros have no recruiting grounds for BIG schools to access, but are very aggressive in NIL. They almost got Kaydn Proctor out of Iowa before Bama did. NE and the other mid-lower tier programs (MN, PU, IL, IN, Rutgers, etc) won't want them in the mix for the rare blue chip recruits they have in their home states. The lower-mid tier BIG schools also don't want to take additional Ls while taking less money, and per Thamel and others, they don't want their games shifted onto streaming due to having too many conference games for their broadcast partners to handle. Plus, per Thamel and others, OSU, UM, PSU, MSU, Wiscy are not taking pay cuts to add trips to Eugene to their schedules. And oh btw, USC has been lobbying from day 1 UW and UO, according to Feldman and the LAT. I've heard it's the same for UCLA. There's a reason the PNW schools didn't get an invite with USC and UCLA. UW is the more attractive of the two- much better tv market, academics and research, but the revenue dilution and fear of getting shoved down another peg among the middle tier is still there. Kevin Warren wanted to keep expanding, and the schools told him it wasn’t happening, so fans of the PNW saying that the new commissioner is going to get them in makes me laugh. I can't think of one school in the BIG that would support adding the PNW schools. Certainly not before they see how things play out with ND and the ACC in 10-12 years. UNC, UVA, GT, Miami and FSU are all much more attractive than UW or the Zeros. The only other West Coast school that I think gets in will be Stanford. ND and USC will both want Stanford to come in with ND, and BIG Presidents would be thrilled to add Stanford for a variety of reasons, especially since they wouldn't dilute revenue as ND's partner, since ND will bring so much value on their own.

Agreed. That's what I'd been thinking. It makes much more sense. I was just saying in that other post that if a merger did somehow invalidate the GOR, there wouldn't be enough votes to make the merger happen in the first place.

I'm with you. If they add teams, that would be covered under whatever expansion provisions are in the contract. If a merger would somehow invalidate the GOR, schools like Wake, BC, Cuse, etc aren't going to vote for it, as FSU, Clemson, etc would bolt at the first opportunity, with some of the remnants getting left behind entirely. Schools like VT and NC St aren't assured of a landing place in the P2. If UNC and UVA go SEC, they're not getting into the BIG. Louisville, Pitt no shot. I don't think the votes are there for anything that would allow teams to escape.

Well played my friend. I was there in Vegas. It was brutal.

Nah- it's perfectly fitting. The conference has been WAC for the last decade and a half- at least. It's the perfect name for the Presidents that hired Tennis Larry and then wouldn't relent on LHN, launched PACN without ESPN or FOX, rejected OU, didn't take USC seriously when the AD said "All options are on the table" regarding realignment, completely misunderstood who had the leverage in their lates tv negotiations, etc, etc, etc.

TK- see my post above. You and I are in agreement about BIG not wanting to overload the top programs, and the Athletic reported USC and UCLA won't be getting OSU or UM as a rival. Multiple BIG ADs have said that the top priorities with the schedule are maximizing playoff slots, competitive balance, and frequent rotation (3-6-6 model). I think UCLA will get Neb. Rhule will make them much better, but they've been down for so long, they're in the BIG's middle tier, along with UCLA, Iowa, MN, Purdue and IL. Plus, UCLA has played NE more than any other BIG team. I'd be fine with USC also getting Neb, but I doubt the other BIG teams want to give Neb that type of recruiting exposure in CA. Besides too much schedule strength with UM, OSU, PSU and MSU all playing two of the other three schools every year, I can't see USC getting any of the Eastern time zone schools as a permanent rival for a few other reasons: BIG will want closer schools for travel, bodyclock and PR reasons. They're not going to want to see a million stories about how much the "student athletes" are traveling across country. They're going to get some of those stories no matter what, but they're going to try and minimize it. LA to Madison looks a lot better on a map than LA to Columbus or State College. Fans are a minor consideration, but PSU would be brutal from LA. Wiscy and NW are the easiest schools for fan travel to and from LA. // I agree with you about PSU getting MD as their 3rd rival, and Rutgers becoming someone else's cupcake. UM might lobby for them for recruiting exposure.

According to the Athletic, USC won’t be getting OSU or UM as a protected rival. I don't think we'll get PSU or MSU either. BIG won’t want top teams getting too many guaranteed losses. At some point, it’s just math. OSU will get UM, PSU and a cupcake. UM will get OSU, MSU and a cupcake. PSU and MSU will get each other on rivalry weekend (there's no one else for them to play that makes sense), plus the above games. For any of those teams, having USC as their 3rd game would give them brutal schedules. // For USC, I want Wiscy and NW, and that's who I think we'll get. If you break the BIG down into tiers of five (excluding USC): Wiscy is in the top tier, along with OSU, UM, PSU and MSU. Wiscy and USC make good partners in that sense- gives each of the other two programs with the highest likelihood of winning the BIG a game vs each other. TV can sell Wiscy vs USC, and Fickell vs Riley, as a big-time matchup, and I think Fickell would love the CA exposure for recruiting. Wisc would be USC's top-tier annual BIG game, UCLA would be our mid-tier game, and NW would be our cupcake. USC and NW are the only two private schools in the BIG, and are the only two in huge urban areas besides UCLA. Nonstop flights for fans between LA to both Wiscy and NW. Wiscy and NW might sound easy, but WI will be tough, and with ND as an annual opponent, the calculus is different for USC. BIG wants to maximize CFP spots, and USC-ND will impact the CFP race in most years, so the BIG will factor that into our rivals selection. We'd still getting something like OSU and PSU one year, then UM and MSU the next year, plus WI and UCLA, so there's no cakewalk in any year. I think UCLA gets Corn- they've played them more than any other school in the BIG, although if I was Corn, I'd lobby to get both USC and UCLA as rivals and get a game in LA every year for recruiting. // from the Athletic (3-17-23): "At this point, it doesn’t look like USC or UCLA will have Ohio State or Michigan as a protected game, two sources who attended last week’s meetings said. But the newcomers will still see the two Big Ten mainstays at least twice over a four-year span (and on both campuses) in any of the formats still in the mix. Big Ten ADs have asked the league that it not require any current member to travel twice to Los Angeles in the same season — an ask that should be able to be accommodated. Multiple administrative sources expect that the Big Ten will have its conference scheduling model chosen and announced by the summer. A scheduled in-person meeting of the ADs in May is likely the latest this decision-making process will stretch. The conference will likely also announce the fixed and rotational opponents for each school at that time."

Outstanding! Well done, sir.

I’d bet that the Zeros from Eugene Community College never get in. UW has a much better case, but they’re 50/50 imo depending on how the BIG does in raiding the ACC. If BIG gets all the schools they’ll want, they won’t need any other WAC10 schools, other than adding Stanford when ND joins.

I would love that. I grew up playing in snow games, and they’re awesome to watch on tv. I have my doubts that USC is on the road that much late in the season, though. I’m thinking BIG schools’ admin and fans will be looking forward to coming to LA when the weather is starting to get cold in the Midwest. Can’t wait for the 2024 BIG schedule release to see how it plays out. We get to see who everyone’s fixed rivals are first though.

That tweet is hilarious. It really shows the depth of delusion that a lot of WAC10 types live in. UW vs Eugene Community College is top 10 nationally?😂 In no particular order, rivalries above UW-UO historically and at present (UT vs aggy and Arky coming back in ‘24): USC-ND USC-UCLA RRS UT-aggy UT-Arky Iron Bowl The Game FSU-Miami UF-FSU UGA-UF UGA-Auburn LSU-Bama OSU-PSU UM-MSU Bedlam Tenn-UF Bama-Tenn That’s 17 off the top of my head without putting any thought into it. So glad to be leaving the WAC10 in the dust.

Bama scheduling FCS teams is truly pathetic- no doubt. But Stoops can’t have it both ways- he’s improved UK to the point that he wants to be known as a football school, so he can’t then turn around and act like they’re Vandy. They have more resources by far than UL. It’s laughable that he wants to drop them so they can schedule another cupcake. I’d say the same thing if I was one of their boosters or had season tickets there.

Mark Stoops burner account ? edit: Maybe not- Stoops will never have to worry about whether to rest his players in an SEC CCG.

So they’ve always been pussies. “We’ll have to drop Louisville”, but Stoops wants to puff out his chest and say UK is a football school- what a fucking joke. Dear Stoops and UK admin: STFU about 10 P5 games- USC and UT have been playing at least 10 P5 games for over a decade. USC had years with 11 P5 games, and will again next year, with a BIG schedule, ND and LSU. But UK has to drop Louisville ? Drop down to FCS you fucking pussies.

Incredible. Rick George has done idiotic things on multiple occasions, so this is on brand for him.

That was still on Larry Scott and the WAC-PAC Presidents. They were the ones who decided launching a conference network without ESPN was a good idea in the first place. The combination of naivete, hubris, and arrogance was deadly in the short and long run. If ESPN was their partner from the get-go, that whole scenario plays out very differently. Also- if they had relented on unequal revenue for T3, they could have still closed the deal to get UT and friends into a PAC16, even with LHN.