UCLA cleared to join the B1G
- Thread starter JayWye
- Start date
Nice. Too many money involved for it not to eventually happen but that's great news. Hopefully it leads to additional expansion now.
I would put more money on Stanford no longer having a football team in 5 years over being in the big ten. Their coach just quit, their admission standards make it tough to get great football players in, they just lost 15 players to the portal and they refuse to use the portal to backfill, their graduate school doesn’t play well with the football program, and they have zero plans right now for NIL. They are on pace to possibly be one of the worst college football teams in the country.
Rutgers is voting for immediate access for Stanford to the Big Ten as we speak.
I think Oregon and Washington will be next, not sure how soon.
I would hope the only additions being considered from the PAC, (if any), would be Washington and Oregon. Then maybe focus on FSU and Miami?
With all respect to Stanford and Cal, they just don’t add up. They are great schools academically but they both have let their football, (and basketball), programs go.
With all respect to Stanford and Cal, they just don’t add up. They are great schools academically but they both have let their football, (and basketball), programs go.
Depends how large the conference gets...if it maxes out at 20 then yeah--if it goes beyond that...
There’s pretty much zero chance Cal would get a Big Ten invite any time soon (if ever).
Fantastic! I’m looking forward to taking my son and dad, to see UCLA at the Bryce Jordan Center. Wasn’t around for the Wooden era, but old enough to respect those 4 letters, in a bball gym.
I see that the regents conditioned ucla entry on sharing money with Cal. One wonders whether, if round 2 gets done, the BiG does UCLA a solid and pairs Cal with one of those northern teams. Even though Cal isn't much of a name on the sports front, it is in SFO, and it ain't too shabby on the academic side of things. Oh, and rugby. I'd then pair it with UW. Screw Oregon.
The missing pieces of the west coast TV market footprint, which Cal and Stanford do not accomplish.
The next question is does UCLA get its own set of regents/ BoT or will they still be stuck with the current regents?
If there’s no change the big Ten will have a school controlled by regents who are PAC oriented. Anything discussed with UCLA will be immediately passed on to the PAC schools/ office.
How often over the years will the UC regents decide life isn’t fair for Cal and raid UCLA/ Big Ten money to subsidize Cal?
except that they didn't, because UCLA is still coming. They made some threats, had some meetings and then UCLA still came.
They already oversee schools in multiple athletic conferences, including multiple FBS conferences. San Jose State, San Diego State and Fresno STate are in the Mountain West.
I would like to see 6 total from the PAC to solidify that western presence. Utah and Colorado are interesting potentials and Washington and Oregon are must haves.
Isn't the SF/Oakland/San Jose market larger than the Seattle and Portland markets?
Wow. Really, dude? San Diego State, Fresno State and San Jose State are in the California State University ("Cal State") system, which is COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM AND INDEPENDENT OF the University of California ("UC") system. The only thing they have in common is that they are both public university systems located in California.
So no, the U.C. Board of Regents does NOT oversee schools in multiple athletic conferences.
Honest mistake, thought all the Cal publics were lumped together, but your last line is still incorrect. The UC system has schools in multiple conferences, albeit not FBS.
Once UCLA moves they'll have Pac-12, Big 10, Big West (UCSD, UCSB, UC Irvine, UC Riverside), Big Sky (UC Davis), Coast to Coast (UCSC), Calpac (Merced)
Maybe, though I think markets in isolation are less important than fanbases these days - and Cal's fanbase is relatively small despite being in a major market and being a decent size. The Bay Area just isn't a college sports town. Also, USC and UCLA have a good amount of alumni and fans in Northern Cal (as do many legacy Big Ten schools).
That being said, I'm firmly of the opinion that if the Big Ten wants to Bay Area market, they'll invite Stanford and only them. Too much dilution with Cal and Stanford and the Cardinal is the bigger sports brand. And better academically for whatever that is worth.
Normally I would have no problem with Utah or Colorado too, but financially I’m not sure of the finances with adding them. (Ideally I’d love to see the conference drop some dead weight and add Utah/ Colorado but the Big Ten will never do that).
Boulder would be a great road trip but they need to seriously get their athletic department in order.
It would be nice to have a contiguous boundary from West coast to East coast. Add an Arizona school and Colorado to do this. Of course along with Oregon & Washington.
Well, they have Coach Prime….
Recent history is obviously awful there, but their last period of being elite closely corresponds with the last time we were elite at PSU. The difference obviously is that we’re much more stable and consistent in performance with a far richer history.
Given that prospective new members have to pass muster with current member prexy's, a lot depends on how much additional revenue the newbies would generate from updated TV contracts. It's conceivable the prexy's might OK slightly lower payouts to bring in schools with outstanding academic credentials...Stanford and Cal, for instance. Then there are the possible complications from state legislatures weighing in on the side of left-behinds (e,g. Oregon State and Washington State). Lots of moving parts which can slow things down.
Not sure the benefit on a program level from further expansion at this point. There is such thing as too many mouths to feed. The big 12 and pac 12 aren’t going to lose playoff access any time soon and the way things are currently setup has us situated to make it more often than not once it hits 12 teams.
I don’t review our athletic departments financial statements for entertainment. The new deal is worth what 100 million per school once ucla and usc join? Someone else joining and bumping that to 110 isn’t going to make Penn state football any more enjoyable.
I don’t review our athletic departments financial statements for entertainment. The new deal is worth what 100 million per school once ucla and usc join? Someone else joining and bumping that to 110 isn’t going to make Penn state football any more enjoyable.
B1G alum are all over the county, particularly the west coast. It gives them access to more games. Personally I would like to see a 20-24 team coast to coast super conference with its own 4 - 8 game conference championship tournament and an overall better schedule replacing the Central Michigans and Ohio Us with a longer conference schedule of the USC’s, Oregons, etc. It would be more compelling.
You won’t get the conference championship tournament or extra conference games replacing the ooc against Mac teams though. You’ll maybe see one more game and it’ll replace your Auburns and West Virginia's.
We've played Nebraska 3 times in the past 10 seasons, once in the last 5...
Would love to see the big ten go 12 conference games while the SEC sticks to 9 after adding OU and UT and everyone wonders why the big ten never gets more than 1 or 2 teams into the final 12 when the committee still prioritizes W-L record over everything else.
Last edited:
This only happens if FBS is cut to the Big Ten/SEC. Both conference should have an 8 team playoff with the winners playing for the title.
It will very likely be both or none. My guess is both. TV markets are no longer that important as you said but they are still important. What is more important is putting the Big Ten conference in front of many more people and get the Big Ten's best assets (Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State) into those markets regularly. That is why Rutgers and Maryland were admitted. Penn State largely owns the DC and roughly half of the New York markets. They are small markets relative to their size but the point is to grow them. The same would apply to the Bay Area and Seattle markets. The people I know in the athletic department, strongly feel we are headed to what amounts to a four division (pods if you prefer that term) 24 to 28 team conference in the very near future with 5 to 6 team divisions that roughly resemble the footprints of the old Pac-8/Southwest, Big Eight, Big Ten and Big East conferences with who joins from the west determining final membership. I have been told folks are working on getting Texas to opt for the Big Ten vs. SEC.
Last edited:
Doesn’t Texas have a large exit fee from the SEC or does that not take effect until they officially join the SEC?
Don’t think so. At least before the SEC network - the conference had no financial hit to leaving. Didn’t need it.
The SEC doesn’t have any grant of rights (GOR) of TV rights but I think it does still has a requisite exit fee.
One of the speculation posts I stumbled on said Texas joining finally convinces Notre Dame to join along with Florida State & Miami and Washington & Oregon. Rumors/speculation of course, but Wow that would be fun.
Similar threads
