Realignment talk not going away

[bullet 1596]

3 hours ago, Deej said:

PAC 12 should just grab the University of Phoenix and be done with it. 

They want a Tier I research university that's really highly rated, bring up Cal-Davis.

Probably do every bit as well on TV as UNLV and Colorado St.  Maybe almost as well as Fresno, SDSU, Rice, Tulane and Tulsa.

[Eugene11 375]

3 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

"EMERGENCY PODCAST!" god damn need that pod cast on the 9-1-1!

18 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

 

I was asked what I thought and I elaborated.  It's relevant to this thread because Oregon played a part in the sanctions, Oregon is angling for a B1G invitation and USC has a say on whether or not Oregon gets in.  Therefore, USC's grievances with Oregon are likely affecting realignment.

 

 

aggy-USC 
tomato-tomato

same same

thats how i bet a lot of people on this site read that.....

Edited July 28, 2023 by Eugene11

[bullet 1596]

3 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

Yeah that was nearly all Nebraska.   They lived off prop kids and died the moment they were gone.

One of their great teams had 23.  #2 in the country was Virginia Tech with 8.  Nebraska had more than any other CONFERENCE in the country.

They did have some great teams 94-97.

[USC Traveler 488]

19 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

It's funny though, isn't it, that the conferences that either had unequal revenue sharing or argued over it significantly are falling apart while those that have been staunchly equal in their revenue for years are the two premiere conferences?  

It's true, but imo that's because there was such a big drop-off in tv value from UT and OU to the rest of the B12, and from USC to the rest of the PAC.

As opposed to the SEC, with Bama, UGA, LSU, UF, Auburn and Tenn all bringing ratings.

Same with the BIG- OSU and UM are the big dogs, but PSU, Wiscy, Iowa, MSU, NU all bring ratings.

The PAC schools never took the threat of USC leaving seriously because the PAC Presidents have collectively been clueless for decades.

They never understood CFB is a business.  Stanford rejecting the addition of UT back in the day is a prime example.

All of the schools not named USC and UCLA rejecting the LHN b/c of equal revenue sharing is another.  Same with not partnering with ESPN/FOX on PACNet.

Ironic that the weak sisters in the PAC killed the conference because of their demand for equal revenue, and now they'll end up with much less than they would have gotten had they approved a tier 3 structure like the B12 had.  PAC16 would have been competitive with the SEC and the BIG.  Now, the PAC schools that don't make it into the B12 will be making MWC money.  

Karma is a bitch.

[South Austin 52105]

So how long before Nebraska comes to the Big 12 saying, “Yeah, we fucked up, too. Can we come back?”

[UTDD 362]

1 hour ago, USC Traveler said:

ND is going to bring Stanford in with them.  There's a reason they play them every year, and the BIG will let ND bring in whoever they want as a partner.

USC and UCLA will strongly support it, whereas they've lobbied against the PNW schools from day 1.

The BIG Presidents would love to add Stanford, and if they come in with ND, they will all still make more money because ND brings so much value.

All the BIG schools want to recruit CA more and engage with their massive alum base in the Bay Area.  

Bay Area will also bring in big $$$ for BTN, and getting Stanford into their research consortium would be a huge coup.

None of those things apply to UO.  It's the exact opposite situation in all those categories- bad recruiting, small market, weak academics, no BIG alums nearby.

And to top it all off, for the lower and mid-tier BIG schools, Stanford is a school they can compete against, whereas most will lose to UO.

And not even the big dogs in the BIG want to deal with Nike-funded hyper-aggressive NIL recruiting as a part of their conference.

I definitely hope Stanford gets a little Fighting Irish luck to get them at the big boy table...I think ND would have a lot of pull to fight for them.

[mdmost 42827]

1 minute ago, South Austin said:

So how long before Nebraska comes to the Big 12 saying, “Yeah, we fucked up, too. Can we come back?”

How about never. They're getting two to three times more revenue than the Big 12 schools and now get games in Los Angeles every few years. They also no longer have to worry about divisions. 

[BachelorTrek 2933]

4 minutes ago, Eugene11 said:

"EMERGENCY PODCAST!" god damn need that pod cast on the 9-1-1!

aggy-USC 
tomato-tomato

I say Tormato.  Lulz.

[Dbeasy 14961]

Good grief is there not one homer who doesn’t defend their program to the death despite mountains of evidence their program is as corrupt as they come? You would think at some point they would realize what morons they sound like. 

[South Austin 52105]

Just now, mdmost said:

How about never. They're getting two to three times more revenue than the Big 12 schools and now get games in Los Angeles every few years. They also no longer have to worry about divisions. 

They still have to worry about relevance, and with Texas and OU out of the league they might have a shot at producing decent records again. But yeah, money.

[locodos 5330]

3 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

Ironic that the weak sisters in the PAC killed the conference because of their demand for equal revenue, and now they'll end up with much less than they would have gotten had they approved a tier 3 structure like the B12 had.  PAC16 would have been competitive with the SEC and the BIG.  Now, the PAC schools that don't make it into the B12 will be making MWC money.  

Karma is a bitch.

Hubris killed the PAC, inaction and hubris.  Maybe throw in a dash of shitty fan support.

['stache 21744]

Just now, South Austin said:

They still have to worry about relevance, and with Texas and OU out of the league they might have a shot at producing decent records again. But yeah, money.

Who needs relevance when you're drowning in that sweet sweet cash?

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, 'stache said:

So at USC, the buck stops . . . nowhere. 

It moves to Seattle.

[Deej 76524]

53 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

Good grief is there not one homer who doesn’t defend their program to the death despite mountains of evidence their program is as corrupt as they come? You would think at some point they would realize what morons they sound like. 

Apparently it's as difficult to earn a USC degree as it is for Reggie Bush's parents to find housing. 

Edited July 28, 2023 by Deej

[BachelorTrek 2933]

Just wild speculations now. Lulz.

[tx ind 6997]

36 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

 

I was asked what I thought and I elaborated.  It's relevant to this thread because Oregon played a part in the sanctions, Oregon is angling for a B1G invitation and USC has a say on whether or not Oregon gets in.  Therefore, USC's grievances with Oregon are likely affecting realignment.

People act like Pete Carroll gave Bush a mansion in Beverly Hills and a Ferrari to get him to sign with USC.  Bush's parents had a few rent-free months of housing hours away from campus and Bush received a used car (it was a Jeep Cherokee or something similar, not a real fancy car).  All benefits were from a felon with zero affiliation to USC and whose primary motivation was to get him to leave USC for the NFL.  It's a goddamn joke USC was hammered for that while other schools, mainly SEC schools, get a slap on the wrist for far worse.  Just like it's a goddamn joke people are still clutching their pearls over what would nowadays be a mediocre NIL deal.  Players who couldn't hold Bush's jockstrap are now getting more money and nicer cars than he did.

 

[n64ra 1076]

11 minutes ago, mdmost said:

How about never. They're getting two to three times more revenue than the Big 12 schools and now get games in Los Angeles every few years. They also no longer have to worry about divisions. 

You're right about never, but NU wouldn't have to worry about divisions in the Big 12 anymore either.

[Al_4_ISU 12409]

How about never. They're getting two to three times more revenue than the Big 12 schools and now get games in Los Angeles every few years. They also no longer have to worry about divisions. 

That last sentence isnt an argument in favor of staying.

[Trojan Man 429]

10 minutes ago, Texas Wahoo said:

I'll step off my soapbox and leave a link

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/31889336/former-usc-trojans-assistant-todd-mcnair-ncaa-settle-defamation-lawsuit

9 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I don't think anyone here is gonna take the NCAA's side on anything. I just think its bizarre to claim that it wasn't that bad and that Oregon is at fault for the punishment. At the end of the day, if the networks say that UO brings value and makes everyone richer, USC ain't gonna be given veto power. If UO doesn't get in its because they don't bring enough value, not because of a 20 year old beef with USC fans.

If the networks say adding Oregon gets everyone a substantial raise then sure, it will happen.  And as I said before I know that day is likely coming and I'd be happy just to keep them out for a decade.  But if they aren't making everyone richer, like if the networks say "We'll provide 1 new share for Oregon and Washington to split 50/50 while the rest of your payouts stay the same" then I do think USC and UCLA would be able to affect that outcome.  If you poached the two best employees from another company and they gave you a bad reference for a former longtime coworker that is now applying at your company wouldn't that play a part in your decision making?

13 minutes ago, mdmost said:

How about never. They're getting two to three times more revenue than the Big 12 schools and now get games in Los Angeles every few years. They also no longer have to worry about divisions. 

Nebraska and everyone else in the West benefited from divisions because all the good teams were in the East.  Life is about to get a lot harder for West schools in 2024 (and a little easier for the East's have nots).

['stache 21744]

1 minute ago, Trojan Man said:

I'll step off my soapbox and leave a link

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/31889336/former-usc-trojans-assistant-todd-mcnair-ncaa-settle-defamation-lawsuit

If the networks say adding Oregon gets everyone a substantial raise then sure, it will happen.  And as I said before I know that day is likely coming and I'd be happy just to keep them out for a decade.  But if they aren't making everyone richer, like if the networks say "We'll provide 1 new share for Oregon and Washington to split 50/50 while the rest of your payouts stay the same" then I do think USC and UCLA would be able to affect that outcome.  If you poached the two best employees from another company and they gave you a bad reference for a former longtime coworker that is now applying at your company wouldn't that play a part in your decision making?

Nebraska and everyone else in the West benefited from divisions because all the good teams were in the East.  Life is about to get a lot harder for West schools in 2024 (and a little easier for the East's have nots).

I really don’t think Oregon brings that kind of value and why I’m really optimistic that they’ll join the XII. I also think that 16 is the magic number. They’re only expanding if it’s ND/Stanford.

[BurntOrange&White 39567]

Savage

 

[bullet 1596]

1 hour ago, USC Traveler said:

ND is going to bring Stanford in with them.  There's a reason they play them every year, and the BIG will let ND bring in whoever they want as a partner.

USC and UCLA will strongly support it, whereas they've lobbied against the PNW schools from day 1.

The BIG Presidents would love to add Stanford, and if they come in with ND, they will all still make more money because ND brings so much value.

All the BIG schools want to recruit CA more and engage with their massive alum base in the Bay Area.  

Bay Area will also bring in big $$$ for BTN, and getting Stanford into their research consortium would be a huge coup.

None of those things apply to UO.  It's the exact opposite situation in all those categories- bad recruiting, small market, weak academics, no BIG alums nearby.

And to top it all off, for the lower and mid-tier BIG schools, Stanford is a school they can compete against, whereas most will lose to UO.

And not even the big dogs in the BIG want to deal with Nike-funded hyper-aggressive NIL recruiting as a part of their conference.

Their Stanford series has only been going on since 1988.  They only played a handful of times before that.  Notre Dame doesn't care about anyone but USC and Navy.

They had decades long series with Purdue and Michigan St. they dropped.  They had a heated series with Michigan for many years they dropped.  They had Catholics vs. Convicts and dropped that.  Notre Dame only cares about Notre Dame, but their fans do care about the USC and Navy games.

[DanTheHorn 4896]

1 hour ago, Samson's Wig said:

It's funny though, isn't it, that the conferences that either had unequal revenue sharing or argued over it significantly are falling apart while those that have been staunchly equal in their revenue for years are the two premiere conferences?  

That is because the PAC 10, BIG 12 and ACC where the conferences with only one or two big fish at any one time and tons of dead weight and thay needed to get paid. The BIG 10 was similar but other than Michigan State, Northwestern and Purdue they were made up of a state flagship institutions, so I guess the big fish felt those guys carried their weight. In the summer of 2010 Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, USC, UCLA, FSU and Miami as institutions all missed out on the opportunity to have some real vision . They should have gotten together and formed their own conference then invited state flagships or their preferred dead weight. Conference would have probably started in 2012 if what I am reading about TV contract timelines is correct.

In the old way of thinking:

East: FSU, Miami, North Carolina, Duke

Midwest: Nebraska, Colorado, Kansas, Clemson/Virginia Tech (based on the times)

Southwest: Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech

West: USC, UCLA, Arizona, Oregon (They were the PAC 10 champ at the time)

I think that would have left the BIG 10 scrambling and the SEC would have taken some nice left overs. Also, the last damn decade would not have happened because I think such a conference would have been the place to be and the SEC would have not dominated as much.

Edited July 28, 2023 by DanTheHorn

[bullet 1596]

1 hour ago, Trojan Man said:

I think a few things.

-"Should have known" is a ridiculous justification to nuke a football program.  The NCAA decided to use that justification by wholeheartedly trusting the word of a spurned felon wannabe agent who provided Bush's family with illegal benefits to get him to leave for the NFL (Bush signed with a real agent once he left for the draft, which pissed off the felon so he squealed).  The NCAA has not used "should have known" in any investigations since then.  Keep in mind this is the same organization that somehow couldn't connect Cam Newton to his own father who was selling him to the highest bidder during his recruitment, yet they believed USC's coaches in LA should know what a player's parents are doing at all times hours away in San Diego.

-To make it even better, the pompous dickhead leading the investigation who coined "should have known" and "high profile athletes need high profile compliance" while wagging his finger at USC was the AD at Miami while booster Nevin Shapiro was gifting their football players hookers and abortions and cocaine.  To my shock neither of those zingers were anywhere to be found in that investigation.  If there was any fairness in the NCAA somebody from USC would have been part of Miami's investigation.

-After 5 years of investigating and grinding their ax the only dirt the NCAA found on any of USC's coaches was the RB coach, and it was weak.  He ended up winning a lawsuit and a settlement vs the NCAA because of the way they railroaded him and effectively ended his college coaching opportunities.

-To bring it back to the topic of this thread, fuck Oregon for voting for sanctions to prop themselves up.  I can think of no better way to get even than cockblocking them out of the B1G.  And fuck all the Pac 12 fans that blame USC's subpar 2010s decade for hurting the value/reputation of the Pac 12, as if the sanctions they loved so much and the parity at all costs they pushed for weren't primarily responsible for that.  USC is a juggernaut and Pac 10 fans whine about USC being too good then applaud the NCAA's sanctions, USC struggles and Pac 12 fans whine that USC isn't performing well enough to carry the conference.  When dealing with people who only put you in lose-lose situations the winning move is to walk away, which is exactly what happened.  I don't think B1G teams and coaches and fans will act like little bitches if USC goes undefeated and waxes Oklahoma's ass in the title game like Pac 10 fans did.

This is an example of what is wrong with the NCAA.  The biggest offense was players getting involved with agents.  They forced Georgia Tech to forfeit an ACC championship because 1 player took $300 of clothing from an agent, which he paid back after the investigation started.  USC got no benefit from an about to go pro Reggie Bush being involved with agents.  Yet when UNC has fictional classes to keep their "student"-athletes eligible, NCAA decides not to do anything about it.

[bullet 1596]

1 hour ago, DanTheHorn said:

During their pre-BIG12 run in which they were ranked no lower than 20 when they played Texas teams they knew the value of being in the state every year. Then they got shut out because they left the conference. After joining the PAC 12 they played Texas State in 2017 so that is one Texas opponent between 2011 and 2019 and it was on the PAC12 Network.

September 4, 1989 5:30 pm Texas* No. 14 Folsom Field Boulder, Colorado ESPN W 27–6 47,269
September 22, 1990 5:30 pm at No. 22 Texas* No. 20 Texas Memorial Stadium Austin, TX ESPN W 29–22 77,373
September 14, 1991 12:00 pm No. 23 Baylor* No. 12 Folsom Field Boulder, Colorado KCNC L 14–16 50,754
September 12, 1992 11:00 am at Baylor* No. 12 Floyd Casey Stadium Waco, TX KCNC W 57–38 34,202
September 4, 1993 5:30 pm Texas* No. 11    Folsom Field Boulder, Colorado ESPN W 36–14 52,125
September 11, 1993 12:00 pm No. 24 Baylor* No. 10 Folsom Field Boulder, Colorado KCNC W 45–21 50,281
October 1, 1994    1:30 pm    at No. 16 Texas* No. 5 Texas Memorial Stadium Austin, TX ABC W 34–31 77,809
September 23, 1995 1:30 pm No. 3 Texas A&M* No. 7 Folsom Field Boulder, Colorado (College GameDay) ABC W 29–21 53,849 (Poooor Aggggy)

In addition to playing in Texas they were playing Notre Dame and Michigan with lots of national exposure. The above run is why us olds remember Colorado as a really good program instead of the garbage they are today.

Was reading an article around 2010.  Every one of the Big 8 schools increased their recruiting in Texas after joining the Big 12---except Colorado.  They had a slight decrease.

Maybe that had something to do with their decline.

[bullet 1596]

43 minutes ago, USC Traveler said:

It's true, but imo that's because there was such a big drop-off in tv value from UT and OU to the rest of the B12, and from USC to the rest of the PAC.

As opposed to the SEC, with Bama, UGA, LSU, UF, Auburn and Tenn all bringing ratings.

Same with the BIG- OSU and UM are the big dogs, but PSU, Wiscy, Iowa, MSU, NU all bring ratings.

The PAC schools never took the threat of USC leaving seriously because the PAC Presidents have collectively been clueless for decades.

They never understood CFB is a business.  Stanford rejecting the addition of UT back in the day is a prime example.

All of the schools not named USC and UCLA rejecting the LHN b/c of equal revenue sharing is another.  Same with not partnering with ESPN/FOX on PACNet.

Ironic that the weak sisters in the PAC killed the conference because of their demand for equal revenue, and now they'll end up with much less than they would have gotten had they approved a tier 3 structure like the B12 had.  PAC16 would have been competitive with the SEC and the BIG.  Now, the PAC schools that don't make it into the B12 will be making MWC money.  

Karma is a bitch.

I agree.  The equal revenue sharing was a sign that the conferences were relatively equal in value and pretty similar institutions.  The Big 10 was for many years.  The SEC schools were pretty similar for many years as institutions even though some were football powers.  And nobody has ever been as unequal with new members as the Big 10.  Nebraska had over a $50 million buy-in.  I think year they will finally come out ahead of Iowa St. since they left the Big 12.  Rutgers had a buy-in over $200 million.  Maryland, I'm not sure of the amount, but it was less than Rutgers but closer to them than to NU.

[DanTheHorn 4896]

6 minutes ago, bullet said:

Was reading an article around 2010.  Every one of the Big 8 schools increased their recruiting in Texas after joining the Big 12---except Colorado.  They had a slight decrease.

Maybe that had something to do with their decline.

[Trojan Man 429]

Just now, bullet said:

Their Stanford series has only been going on since 1988.  They only played a handful of times before that.  Notre Dame doesn't care about anyone but USC and Navy.

They had decades long series with Purdue and Michigan St. they dropped.  They had a heated series with Michigan for many years they dropped.  They had Catholics vs. Convicts and dropped that.  Notre Dame only cares about Notre Dame, but their fans do care about the USC and Navy games.

Their fans don't really care about Stanford, but Notre Dame likes playing Stanford because it lets them end each season with a game in California.  It's a nice vacation from the shitty weather at home and since they never have a CCG the next week to start planning for some of their coaches can hang around for an extra day or two recruiting.  They also have plenty of fans/alumni in California so this series guarantees a yearly game in front of that audience.  Also every university president gets hot and bothered thinking about rubbing shoulders with Stanford.  Lastly, Notre Dame doesn't like being thought of as a small town Midwestern school in the heart of B1G country.  They like having a national image and a national schedule.  Playing Stanford every year helps with that and it's also one reason why they cut a deal with the ACC.

4 minutes ago, bullet said:

This is an example of what is wrong with the NCAA.  The biggest offense was players getting involved with agents.  They forced Georgia Tech to forfeit an ACC championship because 1 player took $300 of clothing from an agent, which he paid back after the investigation started.  USC got no benefit from an about to go pro Reggie Bush being involved with agents.  Yet when UNC has fictional classes to keep their "student"-athletes eligible, NCAA decides not to do anything about it.

Basketball schools are untouchable because March Madness is how the NCAA makes most of its money.  UNC basketball getting a postseason ban takes money out of the NCAA's pocket so the NCAA is incentivized to look the other way, like they also did when it came out Duke paid Zion Williamson and Kansas had Adidas funneling 5* recruits their way.  Basketball schools get away with even more shit than SEC football.  USC football receiving a postseason ban doesn't really matter to the NCAA because FBS postseason money goes to the schools, not the NCAA.

[tx ind 6997]

10 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

 

[The Original Greaser Bob 2785]

Wow, I'd be in heaven if Stanford can finagle the Big 10. 

Big 10 wanting a baseball school?

[LTtxfan 48952]

1 minute ago, The Original Greaser Bob said:

Wow, I'd be in heaven if Stanford can finagle the Big 10. 

Big 10 wanting a baseball school?

Academics and Learfield Directors Cup Winner...

 

https://nacda.com/news/2023/6/28/directorscup-stanford-captures-learfield-directors-cup.aspx

[Hagbard Celine 10749]

i am multiple pages behind, but had to post this in case no one has yet

wilner

the costanza plan

(yes, that's his article title)

https://www.textise.net/showText.aspx?strURL=https%3A//www.mercurynews.com/2023/07/28/pac-12-survival-time-for-commissioner-george-kliavkoff-and-the-presidents-to-take-swift-bold-action-i-e-the-costanza-plan/#content

[Hurtlocker 2208]

2 hours ago, Uncle Nate said:

 

They are Zack Mayo.  They have no where else to go!  Of course they will remain loyal to the Pac until they have to merge with the MWC.

 

Zack Mayo.   You're fucking old.

[Dbeasy 14961]

I wonder if the Big 10 is concerned about bringing in Oregon because they have a multibillionaire who can single-handedly fund all the NIL Oregon needs, even though so far he hasn’t. Everyone wants teams that can produce revenue, but letting that billionaire into your club could be a bit risky.   

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

32 minutes ago, bullet said:

Was reading an article around 2010.  Every one of the Big 8 schools increased their recruiting in Texas after joining the Big 12---except Colorado.  They had a slight decrease.

Maybe that had something to do with their decline.

Their decline had everything to do with their recruiting scandal, along with the female kicker telling the story about how she was raped by her teammates and Gary Barnett chiming in that she was an awful player. At that point, the school cared enough to not drop football, but they stopped caring enough to be competitive.

[Hurtlocker 2208]

1 hour ago, USC Traveler said:

USC big cigars wants to obliterate the Zeros program the way Rome obliterated Carthage after the Third Punic War.

[Jasper_Jester 356]

Is this topic just USC fans airing their grievances every other post now?

[Hurtlocker 2208]

1 hour ago, mdmost said:

They also no longer have to worry about divisions. 

That's actually a downside considering how certifiably terrible the Big Ten West is.

[Hurtlocker 2208]

59 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I really don’t think Oregon brings that kind of value and why I’m really optimistic that they’ll join the XII. I also think that 16 is the magic number. They’re only expanding if it’s ND/Stanford.

Delaney has said in the past that 16 is the magic number where once you cross it you start to cease to be a conference.    Now, he's been out for a while now, but the B1G probably requires daily worship to his altar.

[billfromlaketravis 11357]

So Oregon and UW have to leave right? Go make $190 million while they wait out the Big Ten in 2031. Are they waiting for Arizona to make the move to avoid blame?
 

I listened to The Athletic’s pod on Colorado, and it was a meh across the board from the national talking heads. “The PAC loses Colorado but if they replace them with SDSU that’s probably a net positive.” Uh what?

[Hurtlocker 2208]

16 minutes ago, LTtxfan said:

Academics and Learfield Directors Cup Winner...

 

https://nacda.com/news/2023/6/28/directorscup-stanford-captures-learfield-directors-cup.aspx

And look where that got them.

[Samson's Wig 3175]

7 minutes ago, Jasper_Jester said:

Is this topic just USC fans airing their grievances every other post now?

Yes, and most of the hot takes are as obtuse and myopic as you would expect.  

[camel at sea 589]

8 minutes ago, Dbeasy said:

I wonder if the Big 10 is concerned about bringing in Oregon because they have a multibillionaire who can single-handedly fund all the NIL Oregon needs, even though so far he hasn’t. Everyone wants teams that can produce revenue, but letting that billionaire into your club could be a bit risky.   

I think it's more that there are only so many spots to go around, and the B1G doesn't necessarily want to add schools that don't make everyone else (potentially) better.  Oregon and Washington both make travel harder and neither really adds much to the league's recruiting turf.  Stanford is a better travel partner for the L.A. schools and has good recruiting turf surrounding it.  Several ACC schools are much better for travel (for existing members) than anyone in the PAC and they could make recruiting easier for an existing members.

Arizona State is a possibility for the B1G.  Arizona's local HS recruiting turf has improved year over year for a while.  ASU is travel-friendly for the two L.A. schools - unlike Oregon and Washington.  ASU plays hockey.  But ASU has very little brand value or historical success in either revenue sport.  Maybe they'd be a backup plan if preferred ACC targets didn't work out.      

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

6 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

Delaney has said in the past that 16 is the magic number where once you cross it you start to cease to be a conference.    Now, he's been out for a while now, but the B1G probably requires daily worship to his altar.

Really, every addition beyond 10 makes the conference feel like less of a conference.

[billfromlaketravis 11357]

6 hours ago, Evil Bill Obrien said:

Would have been the most Coog High thing ever had they gotten a Pac 12 invite a few years ago, finally getting their long wanted return to P5... only for the conference to burn down immediately.

Tilman was pushing it HARD. PAC incompetence saved them from themselves. 

[nineliveslost 2710]

56 minutes ago, bullet said:

  Notre Dame only cares about Notre Dame, but their fans do care about the USC and Navy games.

Notre Dame will forever be grateful/indebted to and care about Navy. It's not just the fans. 

 

[USC Traveler 488]

54 minutes ago, bullet said:

Their Stanford series has only been going on since 1988.  They only played a handful of times before that.  Notre Dame doesn't care about anyone but USC and Navy.

They had decades long series with Purdue and Michigan St. they dropped.  They had a heated series with Michigan for many years they dropped.  They had Catholics vs. Convicts and dropped that.  Notre Dame only cares about Notre Dame, but their fans do care about the USC and Navy games.

Correct- ND cares about ND.

They don’t play Stanford out of charity.  

They play Stanford every year b/c they want to end the season in CA every year for recruiting and exposure to alums, and because they like being associated with Stanford’s academic standing.

They will want that to continue as a conference game, and they will want to be announced to be joining the BIG with Stanford to draft off Stanford’s academic rep.

[DanTheHorn 4896]

1 hour ago, BachelorTrek said:

"Big 12 still in play for Oregon, but the Ducks may prefer the Big 10."

Just wild speculations now. Lulz.

May says it all, without a doubt wild speculation

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

1 minute ago, DanTheHorn said:

May says it all, without a doubt wild speculation

Well, we don't want to assume. Maybe they feel like they'd just spend all of their Big 10 money like lottery winners do.

[USC Traveler 488]

1 hour ago, 'stache said:

if the networks say that UO brings value and makes everyone richer, USC ain't gonna be given veto power. If UO doesn't get in its because they don't bring enough value, not because of a 20 year old beef with USC fans.

This is 100% true, which is why the Zeros are still on the outside looking in after begging for a year to get in.

Does USC and UCLA lobbying help at the margins ?  Sure.  But if UO had ND’s brand it wouldn’t matter.

 

But the reason two people posted about it was because you thought it was weak that USC doesn’t want the Zeros in the BIG.  We were just trying to give you the background.

 

ok, back to how bad PAC leadership has always been….