USC, UCLA looking to leave Pac-12 for Big Ten in 2024, though deal not yet finalized

College football is eating itself and I am here for all of it. I wonder how long people will pay 40-50k for tuition while the athletic department is trying to become a media conglomerate?
 
College football has always been my favorite sport. The pageantry, youthful energy and most importantly the mystique of the regionalism. Each major conference had its own style and culture, so when they met in huge non-league games and big bowl games it was special. That’s all gone and though younger fans will roll with the changes I find myself less and less interested in college football. I never thought that would happen. The game will survive, but to me it’s lost what made it special.
 
College football has always been my favorite sport. The pageantry, youthful energy and most importantly the mystique of the regionalism. Each major conference had its own style and culture, so when they met in huge non-league games and big bowl games it was special. That’s all gone and though younger fans will roll with the changes I find myself less and less interested in college football. I never thought that would happen. The game will survive, but to me it’s lost what made it special.
I agree. Made a similar post. I want FSU out of the acc so they can compete. But even then it won't be the same
 
I was thinking through the 2 leagues at 24. Just can't see the sec allowing the big to invade the south. Could go like this

BIG:. Notre Dame , Oregon , Washington, Cal, Stanford, Colorado , Kansas , Syracuse

SEC:. Florida State , Clemson , Miami , north Carolina , Duke , Virginia , Virginia tech , NC state / g tech .



Football drives it but basketball could be secondary as this would give power over the NCAA tournament too
 
BIG is not intrerested in blue bloods. Rutgers, Maryland, UCLA (football) are not blue bloods, with the BIG it is about eye balls and if the BIG expands more it will be into markets that have just that viewers. The markets that the BIG could go after are Atlanta, Houston, San Fran, Dallas - Fort Worth, Miami, maybe Seattle.
I think it is balanced a little more this time around between brands, brand potential and markets than when Rutgers and Maryland were brought in, i.e. just markets, namely for cable penetration within specific markets. Millions of Americans are and have been cord cutting over the last decade in favor of streaming options. Saw something today where it's projected that next year there will be roughly 30% fewer cable subscribers nationwide than in 2013.

I don't think they could get away with say a Georgia Tech (Atlanta) or a TCU (DFW) and get to write it off as a huge financial success as they could have when they added Maryland and Rutgers at the peak of the cable subscription model. There have to be actual eyeballs watching, whether it's big alumni bases, national fan bases, or markets with rabid college football viewership and/or a large presence of Midwest/Big Ten transplants.
 
This is awful for college football and more importantly the conferences. It really bothers me how these schools just chase the money. USC and UCLA do not have any money issues, and they leave the conference, and really put the other teams in a difficult spot moving forward. Many Pac-12 schools struggle financially and USC and UCLA are the anchor programs who keep the conference afloat. It would be like Ohio State and Michigan leaving the big ten.
My guess is in another few years, you may see two divisions of college football, maybe a 50-60 team division and the rest in another division.
Big Time College Football is and always has been about the money!!
 
To my point above, I'd argue that if the Big Ten is willing to go to 18 (or beyond) with other PAC 12 schools it should happen very quickly...and if it doesn't happen very quickly, then there is a money problem in regards to the valuation of what those schools offer between brand/brand potential and eyeballs, and they require having a "bigger fish" to pave their road of entry later on.

ACC on line 2 with folks trying to figure out if there is a legal loophole to get out of that disaster of a media rights deal. All things being remotely equal, IMO Notre Dame and UNC are probably at the top of the Big Ten wish list at this point. I believe it was Pete Thamel I heard on Finebaum earlier, and he stated he thought UNC is the line where the Big Ten/SEC fight begins over who's left on the board. Arguably the most attractive of who's left between having more of a national brand and being the main brand in what's now the 9th largest state with over 4 million residents added in the last 30 years and still growing.
 
Last edited:
I can see the B1G setting up regional divisions and bringing in more Pac 12 schools along with some key schools from other footprints.

The above is an incorrect statement. UCLA is bleeding $s in their Athletic Department, they have to pay rent to the Rose Bowl for football games and Pauley Pavilion is an outdated arena that doesn't provide much in revenue streams. UCLA lost $62.5 million LY on sports:

https://www.themightybruin.com/p/ucla-athletics-posts-huge-loss-for-2021#:~:text=The Athletic Department has now,$100 million over three years.&text=After incurring a budget deficit,Pac-12 columnist Jon Wilner.

USC is private so their figures are not public but many specualte they are not doing well for similar reasons, renting a facility to play football games and not a great hoops arena.
After seeing this mentioned in a few places and reading up a bit, UCLA at the moment seems to be similar to Maryland when they made the jump: up a creek without a paddle financially. They are in really bad shape after the last few years.

Moving to the Big Ten fixes their financial problems, allows for near future facility upgrades, and with the track their finances were headed athletically, guarantees they won't have to eliminate some non-revenue sports to try to stop the bleeding financially.
 
Same guy who broke the news yesterday threw out a few additional names: Oregon, UNC, Duke and Missouri. He also mentioned how it currently stands, the Big 10s new media deal should generate about $100m for each school. Good lord.

Another important prerequisite for Big 10 membership is AAU status. So while I don’t think GT would happen for a number of reasons, they could be a target. Houston never will be though.
 
One of the marketing interns I work with sent over this slogan:

B1G: Big brands, big cities, big revenue dollars.
 
Same guy who broke the news yesterday threw out a few additional names: Oregon, UNC, Duke and Missouri. He also mentioned how it currently stands, the Big 10s new media deal should generate about $100m for each school. Good lord.

Another important prerequisite for Big 10 membership is AAU status. So while I don’t think GT would happen for a number of reasons, they could be a target. Houston never will be though.
I don't think massive movement is going to happen quickly. I still believe the acc GOR isn't going to be crushed with 15 years left in the near future (unfortunately)

Notre Dame won't feel the need to move until absolute chaos happens eventually

Doubt Missouri leaves the sec but id be all for another spot opening.
.

I could see 2 more from the pac going to the big 10 soon such as Oregon and Washington. The rest from the sec and big 10 I think they'll wait until the acc big brands can be had down the line. And weigh their options as a whole

My scenario I laid out above was for eventual 24 team conferences. It won't all happen in a year .

Movements from others besides the big 10 or sec could happen somewhat soon though
 
There is also talk now that a certain group of academic schools might take a route of deemphasizing big time sports and creating a brainiac conference akin to the Ivy League. Kind of like going back in time to a shorter schedule with just a couple bowl games to play in. Stanford, Cal, Duke, Georgia Tech, Boston College, Wake Forest, North Carolina, Virginia, Rice, Tulane, and play to the academic guys at Northwestern and Vandy as this is the place they really should be.
 
So what’s next? If I were the Big Ten I’d go after maybe TCU and I’d get myself into the Texas market.

I’ve also heard suggestions of them going after North Carolina and Duke.
 
My feeling is that it will eventually land at 2 super conferences: BIG10 & SEC. The travel budgets for those West Coast Schools are going to be ridiculous. Lol. Also, those Cali teams better get ready for that 9AM Big Noon kickoff on Fox. ?

I think we will end up with four mega conferences, though not necessarily equal in quality and stature. It will be the Big Ten, SEC and two not as stacked conferences.

Then likely an 8 team playoff with 2 teams from each conference.
 
The thing that I can’t wrap my head around is to what extent the schools in Pullman, Corvallis and Tempe could handicap the departure of U-Dub, Oregon and ‘Zona. Are these schools with similar board of regents politics that supposedly have Lawrence and KSU joined at the hip?
 
I don't think massive movement is going to happen quickly. I still believe the acc GOR isn't going to be crushed with 15 years left in the near future (unfortunately)
I still think there are ways to wrangle around that.

1) The Big Ten and SEC could raid 8+ schools from the league and send the ACC to the trash bin. ESPN isn't going to want to honor that deal with the most valuable brands gone and the bottom 6-8 schools adding West Virginia and mid-majors, and they would probably be happy to kill that deal if it pumped up the value and inventory of the SEC for them.

2) Any ACC expansion would probably force a deal renegotiation, i.e. being able to change exit terms as a part of revaluing the TV money.

At the end of the day, I think this all hinges around what is good for the networks, i.e. Fox and ESPN. It's not to ESPN's benefit to watch Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, etc. get left behind financially for the next 15 years, which will eventually result in those brands weakening even if they have a "cheap" deal to cover them.
 
Same guy who broke the news yesterday threw out a few additional names: Oregon, UNC, Duke and Missouri. He also mentioned how it currently stands, the Big 10s new media deal should generate about $100m for each school. Good lord.

Another important prerequisite for Big 10 membership is AAU status. So while I don’t think GT would happen for a number of reasons, they could be a target. Houston never will be though.
The Purdues, Indianas, Minny, get a windfall while providing very little to the BIG in football. While some schools like Okie St, Iowa St, and others who have actual football teams are left in the dust.
 
I still think there are ways to wrangle around that.

1) The Big Ten and SEC could raid 8+ schools from the league and send the ACC to the trash bin… the bottom 6-8 schools adding West Virginia and mid-majors, and they would probably be happy to kill that deal if it pumped up the value and inventory of the SEC for them.

2) Any ACC expansion would probably force a deal renegotiation, i.e. being able to change exit terms as a part of revaluing the TV money.

At the end of the day, I think this all hinges around what is good for the networks, i.e. Fox and ESPN. It's not to ESPN's benefit to watch Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, etc. get left behind financially for the next 15 years, which will eventually result in those brands weakening even if they have a "cheap" deal to cover them.
To this point, the die was likely cast for the ACC when Miami & VTech fell off in football and the best singular “brand” program they ended up acquiring in recent moves was… uh… Syracuse basketball?

I would argue that the ACC came out too messy even before the additions of UofL, Pitt et al. Four specific regions (Florida, the Carolinas, the Mid-Atlantic, New England) with schools / fanbases representing various attitudes toward sports — in what world did BC, Wake Forest or UVA ever make FSU, Miami or UNC better brands?
 
I still think there are ways to wrangle around that.

1) The Big Ten and SEC could raid 8+ schools from the league and send the ACC to the trash bin. ESPN isn't going to want to honor that deal with the most valuable brands gone and the bottom 6-8 schools adding West Virginia and mid-majors, and they would probably be happy to kill that deal if it pumped up the value and inventory of the SEC for them.

2) Any ACC expansion would probably force a deal renegotiation, i.e. being able to change exit terms as a part of revaluing the TV money.

At the end of the day, I think this all hinges around what is good for the networks, i.e. Fox and ESPN. It's not to ESPN's benefit to watch Clemson, Florida State, North Carolina, etc. get left behind financially for the next 15 years, which will eventually result in those brands weakening even if they have a "cheap" deal to cover them.
I'm on anyone's side who thinks it could speed up. Would be torture to have to wait 15 years and could be damaged with there revenue gap

But do you really think the wake Forrest and bc types who could get left out would be dumb enough to renegotiate exit terms when a team like wvu or Cincy is added via expansion?

Theyd be starting their own demise. Hopefully the people in charge of those types are dumber than I think
 
Someone else brought up the point that AAU status and Football are big driving points in these mergers but the bigger component that may be driving this financially is Research money. USC and UCLA are 2 of the biggest institutions of research money in the country at $1.6 and $1.4 billion dollars.

In comparison Ohio State is at $968 Million, Penn State $1.57 billion, Michigan $1.67 billion, and Wisconsin $1.36 billion.

If we're looking at those numbers some of the other schools who could be in play in my opinion could be Stanford $1.2 billion and Washington $1.23 billion

Rankings by total R&D expenditures
 
I thought of this as a format for the big 10 and sec in the future. They could be the two leagues for the upper echelon of college football.

Would be like the college versions of the afc and nfc. They each have an internal 8 team playoff. The two winners play for the national title.

If each had 30 teams , you could have 6 divisions of 5 teams each. Play your 4 divisional games plus another 6 team division each year. You'd play everyone in a 5 year span that way.

Gives 10 regular season games. Maybe have a wild card game or play fcs or local for game 11. So if you played for the national title you'd play 15 games a year just like they do now. It would be 3 to win the 8 team internal playoff plus the title game
 
.
Top