USC & UCLA will become members of the Big Ten Conference in about one year--on August 2, 2024. Both schools announced their intended departure from the Pac-12 to move to the Big Ten Conference on June 30, 2022--a bit over 13 months ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Media rights may also not be as valuable in the future. ESPN is no longer a cash cow; heck, Disney is practically begging for additional investors and has had multiple rounds of layoffs. Connected TV ad revenue and the impact of sports on streaming services numbers are still in their infancy. I wouldn't bank on the pot always growing like it has.

Football is the largest media audiences. Doesn’t matter who ponies up.

ESPN already told the SEC that they don't want a 9th game. CFB isn't the NFL. Titans at Cardinals will still generate ratings; the same doesn't hold for Purdue at Rutgers. The B1g can try to renegotiate now that they've brought in more teams, but of those 4, only Oregon will generate ratings. Does anyone think CBS is popping champaign because they now have rights to air Cal games? I think that we're moving towards super conferences, because eventually OSU and Alabama will wonder why they are splitting money with Minnesota and South Carolina and that's how you get a super league. Regionalism is dead and it's all about money. Right now the money is in large conferences, but when only a handful of teams in those conferences are driving the revenue, those who aren't shouldn't feel comfortable.

OSU & Alabama need lesser teams to achieve winning records.

Also, there are other sports which need conference competitors.

Your final point is why the NFL has a draft with the worst teams getting the earliest picks in an attempt to create a more equal level of competition.

You can get patsies without an equal payout

Phil Knight of Nike fame & wealth wants U Oregon in the Big Ten Conference. He has lobbied to get U Oregon an offer from the Big Ten Conference hard ever since the USC & UCLA move was announced about a year or so ago.

Both Oregon & Washington understand that full membership in the Big Ten Conference under the newly negotiated media rights contract is not realistic. The Big Ten Conference needs to be higher than the Big 12's $32 million per year payout.

Multiple news sources--such as The Athletic.com--are taking the bait and reporting that U Arizona, U Oregon, & U Washington may not leave the Pac-12 after all. I don't buy it; I see it as a last minute ploy for more money from the Big Ten Conference in their offers to U Oregon & to U Washington.

Current offer is at about $35 million each for Oregon & Washington. Oregon & Washington claim that the move will entail an additional $10 million in extra travel costs for each school. This is one reason that I favored offering Stanford & UCAl-Berkeley as well as Oregon & Washington. With 6 West Coast teams, the travel burden on new members Oregon & Washington would be lessened significantly.

Is U Arizona engaging in a ploy to help U Oregon & U Washington negotiate higher payouts from the Big Ten Conference during the next 6 years ? They are all friends & the presidents of the three universities know each other well.

Maybe the Big Ten Conference needs to think about offering $40 million in order to seal the deal. What's the rush ? The reason to do the deal now is that USC does not want U Oregon in the Big Ten Conference because U Oregon raids the Southern California recruiting market--and recruiting is of paramount importance in college football. But, USC doesn't get a vote in Big ten Conference matters until next year after it leaves the Pac-12. So, there is a short window for the Big Ten Conference to get its coveted target school--the University of Oregon. USC will not back out of its decision to move to the Big Ten Conference because both USC & UCLA are entering as full share members--an offer not extended to U Oregon or to U Washington.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Media rights may also not be as valuable in the future. ESPN is no longer a cash cow; heck, Disney is practically begging for additional investors and has had multiple rounds of layoffs. Connected TV ad revenue and the impact of sports on streaming services numbers are still in their infancy. I wouldn't bank on the pot always growing like it has.

Football is the largest media audiences. Doesn’t matter who ponies up.

ESPN already told the SEC that they don't want a 9th game. CFB isn't the NFL. Titans at Cardinals will still generate ratings; the same doesn't hold for Purdue at Rutgers. The B1g can try to renegotiate now that they've brought in more teams, but of those 4, only Oregon will generate ratings. Does anyone think CBS is popping champaign because they now have rights to air Cal games? I think that we're moving towards super conferences, because eventually OSU and Alabama will wonder why they are splitting money with Minnesota and South Carolina and that's how you get a super league. Regionalism is dead and it's all about money. Right now the money is in large conferences, but when only a handful of teams in those conferences are driving the revenue, those who aren't shouldn't feel comfortable.

OSU & Alabama need lesser teams to achieve winning records.

Also, there are other sports which need conference competitors.

Your final point is why the NFL has a draft with the worst teams getting the earliest picks in an attempt to create a more equal level of competition.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Media rights may also not be as valuable in the future. ESPN is no longer a cash cow; heck, Disney is practically begging for additional investors and has had multiple rounds of layoffs. Connected TV ad revenue and the impact of sports on streaming services numbers are still in their infancy. I wouldn't bank on the pot always growing like it has.

Football is the largest media audiences. Doesn’t matter who ponies up.

ESPN already told the SEC that they don't want a 9th game. CFB isn't the NFL. Titans at Cardinals will still generate ratings; the same doesn't hold for Purdue at Rutgers. The B1g can try to renegotiate now that they've brought in more teams, but of those 4, only Oregon will generate ratings. Does anyone think CBS is popping champaign because they now have rights to air Cal games? I think that we're moving towards super conferences, because eventually OSU and Alabama will wonder why they are splitting money with Minnesota and South Carolina and that's how you get a super league. Regionalism is dead and it's all about money. Right now the money is in large conferences, but when only a handful of teams in those conferences are driving the revenue, those who aren't shouldn't feel comfortable.

Anonymous wrote:Media rights may also not be as valuable in the future. ESPN is no longer a cash cow; heck, Disney is practically begging for additional investors and has had multiple rounds of layoffs. Connected TV ad revenue and the impact of sports on streaming services numbers are still in their infancy. I wouldn't bank on the pot always growing like it has.

Football is the largest media audiences. Doesn’t matter who ponies up.

Media rights may also not be as valuable in the future. ESPN is no longer a cash cow; heck, Disney is practically begging for additional investors and has had multiple rounds of layoffs. Connected TV ad revenue and the impact of sports on streaming services numbers are still in their infancy. I wouldn't bank on the pot always growing like it has.

Anonymous wrote:Can we kick a few schools out? Some of the old guard schools don't add much value. Being a secondary rival that doesn't add a separate major media market or high number of streaming eyeballs seems like dead weight. Since it is pretty much all about money now, I'm surprised getting rid of schools hasn't also become a thing. It would increase the $$ share for the others or they could be replaced by schools that add more value. Does anyone know how a school would be removed?

Washington and Oregon would both be more valuable than Purdue!

Oregon has risen behind Knight's money but what happens when he is gone (and he isn't getting any younger)? The Nike connection will still be there but I question the longer-term value of adding Oregon.

Can we kick a few schools out? Some of the old guard schools don't add much value. Being a secondary rival that doesn't add a separate major media market or high number of streaming eyeballs seems like dead weight. Since it is pretty much all about money now, I'm surprised getting rid of schools hasn't also become a thing. It would increase the $$ share for the others or they could be replaced by schools that add more value. Does anyone know how a school would be removed?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:(OP here):

The Big Ten Conference will go with U Oregon & U Washington because those are the teams (especially U Oregon) that the broadcast media partners want.

No they don’t. The media was cold to the big ten bringing them on and offered zero increased revenue. Only Notre Dame increased the money.

Within the next 7 to 10 days you will be proven wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At these prices, I think that the Big Ten needs to consider adding ASU (Arizona State University). Not on equal footing with the current 16 Big Ten member schools, but at a significant payout over every other option that ASU has now or in the near future.

The Big Ten Conference should not hesitate about offering U Washington & U Oregon. If that is the end of Big Ten expansion, then all Big Ten member schools are winners. But, a true coast-to-coast conference along with the possible purchase of ESPN from Disney by the Big Ten Conference is a victory that few, if any, saw coming.

U-Arizona is the better academic fit for the B1G.

Just sayin'

("Just sayin'" ???? Not an impressive expression.)

Yes, U Arizona is a better academic fit, but ASU has an enormous alumni base and is located in a significant media market.

Arizona, UNC, Uva all have a split market with larger state schools. They have issues.

Agree.

Much depends upon the Big Ten Conference's long-term vision.

How much control does the Big Ten want ?

If the vision is to replace ESPN and the NCAA, then schools such as ASU, UNC, & Virginia become more valuable to the Big Ten Conference.

The Big Ten research money dwarfs athletic money. UMD for example 1.2 billion vs about 100 million. Research money is king with or without the NCAA. Washington May get an invite just as a research giant and a huge school with big alumni base.

Yeah, I'm sure the NIH is awarding grants on the basis of athletic conference affiliation.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Ten_Academic_Alliance

And where does it say NIH is awarding grants to institutions based on this? Nowhere?

Anonymous wrote:(OP here):

The Big Ten Conference will go with U Oregon & U Washington because those are the teams (especially U Oregon) that the broadcast media partners want.

No they don’t. The media was cold to the big ten bringing them on and offered zero increased revenue. Only Notre Dame increased the money.

Anonymous wrote:Grrrrrr. All of this makes me so mad. NONE of these schools deserve to be in the Big 10. They are not Big 10. Only the original schools are Big 10. All the loser wannabes need to take their schtick and shove it. Just sayin'.

Disagree.

The University of Washington is a classic Big Ten school. Will add academic prestige re: R&D (behind only U Michigan) and has a solid Big Ten style football program.