Big Ten moving west?
- Thread starter Alan Smithee
- Start date
Game changer! Those schools are frightening elite in warm weather sports like swimming, tennis 🎾,etc!
1. I think all bets are off on geography at this point. Anything we thought was a longstanding priority from previous expansion talks is a misnomer - see also, "we'll never pay college athletes." With charter flights, a trip to LA might actually take less time than the bus to Iowa City or Bloomington.
2. I suspect the B1G powers-that-be aren't just interested in USC and UCLA, but they know they are the first two dominoes that need to fall. Would be stunned to think a conference like B1G isn't very interested in Stanford...a school that usually won't step on a lot of football toes but routinely adds NCAA championships in sports you didn't even know existed.
3. What I can't get my brain around is...what is the endgame here? At what point does expansion start costing more than it gains the conference and its member schools? This is the part, honestly, that perplexes me. Even if the conference innovates its own streaming service for $49.99 per month...once you start dividing that 24 ways...
2. I suspect the B1G powers-that-be aren't just interested in USC and UCLA, but they know they are the first two dominoes that need to fall. Would be stunned to think a conference like B1G isn't very interested in Stanford...a school that usually won't step on a lot of football toes but routinely adds NCAA championships in sports you didn't even know existed.
3. What I can't get my brain around is...what is the endgame here? At what point does expansion start costing more than it gains the conference and its member schools? This is the part, honestly, that perplexes me. Even if the conference innovates its own streaming service for $49.99 per month...once you start dividing that 24 ways...
Last edited:
That commercial on the BTN is going to be a lot longer now.
Does that also mean some basketball games are going to be starting at 10:30 pm for those of us out on the East coast?
Does that also mean some basketball games are going to be starting at 10:30 pm for those of us out on the East coast?
The good news: I get to see the Cats in SoCal.
The bad news: I have to breath the same stadium air as Trojans.
The bad news: I have to breath the same stadium air as Trojans.
Yeah, I don’t understand the end game either. I know financials are driving these decisions, but at a certain point, you can do more harm than good.
My interest in the college football has been waning for several years now. Imho, the game is becoming more and more cookie cutter with non-playoff affiliated bowls losing their importance, teams showing less schematic innovation/variety, and the same old schools now having an even larger advantage with the process (or lack thereof) surrounding how the NIL has been implemented. The product is becoming less interesting to me and it seems like it will only get worse as the conferences continue to consolidate.
Meanwhile, the pro game has become more diverse in style and pace as the league has slowly incorporated more analytically driven ideas/coaches/front office people. I always enjoyed that football on Saturday and Sunday were different. As the college game moves more toward a (mediocre) version of the pro model, it is hard for me to keep investing time in it.
Last edited:
The excellent commercial *already* starts at the Rose Bowl, so they just need to slap a few logos on.
I’m personally excited for a B1G college football schedule that stars at 11 central and ends at 1 a.m.
Was it prescient for the Big Ten to ignore any geographical signifiers all those years back, or was it a mistake to abandon the ‘Western Conference’ roots?
So, will this help or further confuse all those folks out there who still don't get that Northwestern is in middle America?
The BIG will increase significantly it's academic profile with the addition of UCLA and USC. The top four schools in the BIG in the US News rankings would be NU, #9, UCLA, #20, Michigan, #23, and USC, #27. Not bad!
Because they have to add USC/UCLA first.
Oregon/Washington probably need USC/UCLA to bolt first so they can ditch their little brothers.
The end game is a new division that leaves behind the NCAA and makes it own rules on NIL/transfers. Will have 36 to 40 teams who only play each other. Big money from TV and big money to players. Notre Dame and North Carolina will join the North. Florida State and Clemson will join the South. Pity to our rivals at Stanford and Duke. Northwestern emerges as the top academic option in the top athletic division and as the natural rival to Notre Dame.
You realize NW is receiving money that wasn't possible a few years ago. The addition of the very teams you dislike has added unimaginable money to the B1G bottom line. Now, the B1G is adding two more teams not connected to the conference in any way other than another money grab. Also, to one-up ESPN/SEC on their move to get Oklahoma and Texas. College sports are no longer based on geography.
I predict the semi-pro super league will land at 32 programs. Each will have a relationship with an existing NFL team. They will carve out some deal where the parent NFL team can exempt 3-5 players in its "college" team from the draft.
Ahem:
SupEr Conference talks have resumed. You were warned.
OK, so I got the green light from my buddy to share this on here. I will be scarce with details on who he is and why he knows, but we've been talking for months about this concept and things are coming to a head. The most likeliest outcome is "mostly status quo". The Big Ten will likely add...
northwestern.forums.rivals.com
I like MD and RU. I loved in Balt for seven years. I've been to both FB stadiums and MD Bball. But anyone that pretends that SC and UCLA aren't upgrades from that is delusional. And Nebraska is just annoying
During my years at NU, the Cats played both USC and UCLA.
In 1968 they lost to USC (including OJ) 24-7 at Dyche Stadium(as it was known then).
The next season they played both USC and ULCA and were pummeled in both games.
In September 1969 they almost upset UCLA (lost 12-7) on the road. That team went on to finish second in the Big Ten at 6-1.
In 1968 they lost to USC (including OJ) 24-7 at Dyche Stadium(as it was known then).
The next season they played both USC and ULCA and were pummeled in both games.
In September 1969 they almost upset UCLA (lost 12-7) on the road. That team went on to finish second in the Big Ten at 6-1.
It’s at 32 now. It has to increase to include ND. Unless someone voluntarily drops ala Chicago.
Would be an even better sentiment if you’d written “its” !! (ducks)
Don't see how Stanford gets the nod before Washington, much less Oregon (this is all about the Benjamins and Phil Knight has $$; granted, so does Stanford, but meant for a different purpose).
Adding 2 more schools from the WC makes sense (so that the LA schools aren't on an island), but the B1G has to keep an eye out on the long game (and how many schools they ultimately want to end up with).
Remaining football "power" schools not in or headed to the B1G or SEC...
Washington
Oregon
ND
Clemson
FSU
Miami
Not traditional power FB schools, but bring a lot else to the table...
UNC
UVA
Maybe Stanford
While Clemson and FSU have won national championships fairly recently, think academics still matter to the B1G (to a certain degree), so the SEC can have them if they want them.
I tuned into an Iowa podcast today and they started talking about USC and UCLA not being the only schools that were being considered. They mentioned 3 other schools that are just rumors at this point, which I only caught two, and those two were Oregon and TCU, with the other I think was possible Baylor, but not for sure on the Baylor. These teams are mere speculation as the pod caster had said he had heard through the grapevine that the BiG was also considering adding more then just USC and UCLA. Take if for what its worth.
Last edited:
I think there is little question that it doesn’t end with USC & UCLA; that move makes everyone else in the PAC 12, Big 12, and ACC potentially available. The time would be now to at least scoop up anyone else they want.
Baylor? **** that idea. That would be horrendous.
And we have yet another excuse for not going to games.
With basically the B1G and SEC being the 2 "super conferences" (likely ending up with 20 or more schools), they will be able to dictate the playoff format.
Personally, think a 6 team format makes a lot of sense with the B1G and SEC both guaranteed 2 teams with the conf champs getting a bye (need to have something worth playing for when it comes to the B1G and SEC championships) with the 2 other slots being open, including to the B1G and SEC (so theoretically, one conference can have 4 teams in the playoffs).
An alternative to this would be the B1G and SEC basically separating themselves from the other conferences like the Premier League in English football.
Then, you would have a playoffs within each conference and then have the 2 conf. champs play in the college equivalent of the SB.
Personally, think a 6 team format makes a lot of sense with the B1G and SEC both guaranteed 2 teams with the conf champs getting a bye (need to have something worth playing for when it comes to the B1G and SEC championships) with the 2 other slots being open, including to the B1G and SEC (so theoretically, one conference can have 4 teams in the playoffs).
An alternative to this would be the B1G and SEC basically separating themselves from the other conferences like the Premier League in English football.
Then, you would have a playoffs within each conference and then have the 2 conf. champs play in the college equivalent of the SB.
Yes, I prefer that we go back to the old days of regional rivalries. But you know what? I'm glad we're the Big Ten instead of the Pac-12, Big 12 or ACC.
I could see the Big Ten basically selling out on the states of Texas and Florida (unless FSU or Miami come to the table).
By settling on a Baylor or Texas Tech you are signaling to everyone in the State of Texas in perpetuity that the Big Ten is garbage compared to SEC.
The Big Ten/SEC map could easily start to mirror red/blue states.
This is why university presidents have the final say. They understand that research dollars and Institutional Cooperation yield as much benefit to their universities as the sports that open those doors.
Stanford, through the lens of idiot football fans may seem like a questionable decision, but anyone responsible for the bigger picture, I suspect, will see it differently...and cannot overlook the dozens of national titles they'd pile into the Big Ten every year like clockwork. To ignore those would imply that studios only want to produce blockbusters and don't care at all about academy prestige.
While the whole academic arm to the B1G is nice and all, simply adding Stanford wouldn't, so to speak, expand the pie when it comes to research $$.
ND is not a big research school, but there's no question that the B1G would take ND over Stanford (plus, schools like UCLA and Washington are big when it comes to research in their own right).
Hopkins is also a huge research school and I'm sure there is some cooperation with JHU being a member in one sport, but probably not much of an impact for NU when it comes to research (if anything, NU and JHU are competing for the same research $$).
Olympics sports have about zero impact on these decisions.
Even men's basketball has little impact which is why Kansas and possibly Dook (another big research school) in the future will be looking from the outside.
But the Bay area cares about Stanford sports as much as the Chicagoland area cares about Northwestern sports.
If anything, more people in the region care more about Cal sports, but if push comes to shove, think the B1G would take Stanford over Cal (can't see them taking both schools from the Bay area) unless maybe UCLA really pushes for Cal.
Last edited:
Word is that the conference is merging with NATO, now that Finland and Sweden are on board.
