B1G Expansion

bison13

Well-Known Member
Dec 22, 2007
7,498
6,651
1
Assuming the PAC teams go Big12, who matches with ND if they come to the BIG?
 

PSUSignore

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
6,529
4,508
1
Houston has money. Houston >>>> Texas Tech.
And the SEC supposedly want UVa, UNC, Clemson and FSU. There's reasons behind that. It's not just about "elite programs" or "academics" or "rabid fan bases". In the past, I would have agreed with you.
Hell, the Big Ten should consider Houston and Baylor truthfully
What do Houston and Baylor add? Financially, adding them would mean a net loss to the annual per program payout. They aren't a big media draw despite their locations, UT and A&M dominate the Texas market.
 

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
501
378
1
What do Houston and Baylor add? Financially, adding them would mean a net loss to the annual per program payout. They aren't a big media draw despite their locations, UT and A&M dominate the Texas market.
This is the problem--you're still looking at it as a conference and not what's happening. It isn't a net loss. You do realize the SEC and Big Ten plan on destroying college football as we know it. You're post indicate you think the Big Ten and SEC are going to make one or two more moves. That's not what's happening here at all.

I don't understand why people seem to be in denial.
 

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
501
378
1
I'm curious what you're basing that on because the Big 10 keeps targeting AAU members and there's a lot of chatter from CFB sources that it does matter and ND keeps coming up as the lone possible exception.
And once Notre Dame joins it doesn't matter any more. That's the point of adding them first.

I really don't understand what's going on here. Are people just living in the past? Do they not want to accept what's going on? Do they really think this is even close to done?
 

LMTLION

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2008
2,550
2,647
1
End of the day, if things take a decidedly academic turn, and I know people that expect just that to happen, we'll likely see some combination of ACC teams Georgia Tech, North Carolina, Duke, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Boston College and Syracuse joining Notre Dame from the east, while Stanford, Cal, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, and possible Oregon State and/or Arizona State from the west with Texas, Missouri, Colorado, Kansas and maybe Missouri from the fly over states. I think a new league is coming that will return college football closer to the roots rather than the money obsessed spectacle it is now. Think about a 4 conference league with 8 - 10 teams aligned geographically with an inter-region game played pitting the 1 seed against the 4 and the 2 against the 3 with the winners playing the Big Ten championship in the Rose Bowl and the preservation of the bowl system. You preserve traditional rivalries across the board, you continue to play the key smaller conferences and cut out the SEC and let them wither and die as there isn't nearly as much interest in SEC football outside the southeast as ESPN thinks there is.

Pacific Coast

UCLA
Stanford
USC
California
Oregon
Washington
Arizona
Oregon State
Washington State

Big 8

Texas
Texas A&M
Missouri
Nebraska
Kansas
Colorado
Arizona State
Baylor

Big Ten

Michigan
Michigan State
Ohio State
Indiana
Purdue
Northwestern
Illinois
Iowa
Minnesota
Wisconsin

East Coast Conference

Penn State
Maryland
Notre Dame
Virginia
Virginia Tech
North Carolina
Duke
Syracuse
Boston College
Georgia Tech
Are you on crack? None of that nonsense is happening. Revenue, not academics, will dictate how this plane lands.
 

LMTLION

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2008
2,550
2,647
1
I wouldn't be surprised if UW and Oregon end up in an enlarged Big 12 with other Pac-12 schools, but I would be surprised if they would make any long term commitment (i.e. signing a GOR for an extended period) while the Big Ten is seemingly in play for them.

The four corners PAC-12 schools probably already realize that the Big Ten isn't going to come a calling anytime soon and would trade over their rights for stability though.
Phil Knight would never accept Oregon heading to the Big 12. Oregon and Washington to the Big 10 and Or St and Wa St to the Big 12. And in this crazy world I doubt UCLA and USC departed the PAC 12 without assurances from other west coast schools they are to follow. I am sure the result will be a west coast pod of 6 schools in the Big 10.
 

Sullivan

Well-Known Member
Nov 24, 2001
16,676
12,525
1
Phil Knight would never accept Oregon heading to the Big 12. Oregon and Washington to the Big 10 and Or St and Wa St to the Big 12. And in this crazy world I doubt UCLA and USC departed the PAC 12 without assurances from other west coast schools they are to follow. I am sure the result will be a west coast pod of 6 schools in the Big 10.

The only assurance UCLA and USC wanted was $$$.
 

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Sep 4, 2007
2,745
1,395
1
Phil Knight would never accept Oregon heading to the Big 12. Oregon and Washington to the Big 10 and Or St and Wa St to the Big 12. And in this crazy world I doubt UCLA and USC departed the PAC 12 without assurances from other west coast schools they are to follow. I am sure the result will be a west coast pod of 6 schools in the Big 10.

Actually I'm increasingly getting the sense that USC and UCLA don't want other west coast schools and feel they can prosper more by being the only Big Ten schools on the west coast. Probably don't like other Pac-12 schools coming to southern California and getting recruits either. If the Big Ten ends up adding any other schools from the Pac-12, I expect it will be limited to only 2 or 3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bison13

Ian

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 8, 2001
9,544
10,376
1
64
State College, Pa
Over the next 5-10 yrs the B1G will only take AAU schools and ND. End of story. No Wash St, Ore St, or AZ State from out west. Only Iowa St and Kansas from the B12. Only GTech, UNC, Duke, UVA and sPitt from the ACC. The rest of the schools fall to the SEC or lower levels. That’s 15 teams and the SEC and the B1G become like the NFL is with two conferences and a super bowl every year. The delay is the ACC TV rights which is 10 yr deal but someone will test it and break it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wilbury

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Sep 4, 2007
2,745
1,395
1
Over the next 5-10 yrs the B1G will only take AAU schools and ND. End of story. No Wash St, Ore St, or AZ State from out west. Only Iowa St and Kansas from the B12. Only GTech, UNC, Duke, UVA and sPitt from the ACC. The rest of the schools fall to the SEC or lower levels. That’s 15 teams and the SEC and the B1G become like the NFL is with two conferences and a super bowl every year. The delay is the ACC TV rights which is 10 yr deal but someone will test it and break it.

FWIW, Iowa St left the AAU earlier ths year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ian

sandiegohawk

Active Member
Oct 1, 2001
37
38
1
Over the next 5-10 yrs the B1G will only take AAU schools and ND. End of story. No Wash St, Ore St, or AZ State from out west. Only Iowa St and Kansas from the B12. Only GTech, UNC, Duke, UVA and sPitt from the ACC. The rest of the schools fall to the SEC or lower levels. That’s 15 teams and the SEC and the B1G become like the NFL is with two conferences and a super bowl every year. The delay is the ACC TV rights which is 10 yr deal but someone will test it and break it.
I don't disagree on the AAU debate, but no way the Big Ten takes Iowa State or PITT (by the way Iowa State is no longer an AAU school). I suppose Kansas is an outside possibility but I highly doubt they would ever get a Big Ten invite.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Booooyah

LMTLION

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2008
2,550
2,647
1
Even the Big 12 is not desperate for these 2 schools as unfortunately for them they just don't bring enough to the table for the Big 12. If the Pac 12 can not figure our a way to stay tougher, IMO those 2 schools are destined for the Mountain West.
That is a shame for those schools. Washington State has a cool ESPN game day flag tradition.
 

LMTLION

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2008
2,550
2,647
1
The only assurance UCLA and USC wanted was $$$.
I doubt they would come solo but I suppose it is anyone’s guess. At least when we came to this conference we were contiguous with the footprint. Too bad Joe’s east coast conference never happened, though. We have more in common with North Carolina than Michigan. Hopefully the Big 10 absorbs the Virginia and North Carolina schools to get partially there in a super conference.
 

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
501
378
1
I doubt they would come solo but I suppose it is anyone’s guess. At least when we came to this conference we were contiguous with the footprint. Too bad Joe’s east coast conference never happened, though. We have more in common with North Carolina than Michigan. Hopefully the Big 10 absorbs the Virginia and North Carolina schools to get partially there in a super conference.
Are you still trying to pretend going to the ACC would have been better than the Big Ten?
 

sandiegohawk

Active Member
Oct 1, 2001
37
38
1
That is a shame for those schools. Washington State has a cool ESPN game day flag tradition.
With the $$ that is going to the B1G, a school like Penn State can hire that guy to fly the PSU flag instead. Of course after all this shakes out 90% of Big Ten fans will be watching Fox pregame on Saturdays as ESPN is going all in with the SEC.
 

ryoder1

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2007
1,490
1,158
1
It is very clear that there are two major conferences: SEC and B1G. There is a single secondary conference in the ACC (basketball, Clemson, and half of ND). This brings up several questions:
  1. can the ACC sustain with basketball and Clemson?
  2. If not, that leaves Clemson and ND (football) without a chair when the music stops. Natural fit is ND to B1G and Clemson to the SEC.
  3. It is now being reported the Big 12 is in negotiations to add Cincy, Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, Oregon, Washington and Utah potentially.
  4. Now you have a bunch of mid-grade teams but simply none of them have the strength of the new B1G and SEC.
  5. If the B1G adds ND and SEC adds Clemson what is left? Oregon & Stanford would be the last true football powers on the board.
  6. These teams are simply not going to drive TV revenues. While teams like Oregon, Stanford and Utah jump up from time to time, they just don't have the TV or stadiums to sustain what the big two can do.
  7. Even mid-tier B1G teams like Sparty, Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Iowa will drive more revenue playing a PSU/tOSU/UM/USC/UCLA than Oregon vs Stanford.
That is why I think there is still a lot of sorting out yet to come but it is really over. We see where this is going. The only other possibility is that a conference like the Big 12 adds everyone that is left.
You can look at it this way, for the foreseeable future what school that is NOT currently in the B10 or SEC has a legit shot at the NC? Clemson and ND obviously then it drops off a cliff. Clearly ND and Clemson will end up in either the B10 or SEC or ND stubbornly hangs on as an Indie. Either way you are left with no schools outside of the B10 or SEC with a realistic shot to win it all. Yes, I know you could say only a handful of schools ever do but does anyone really think Oregon is going to win a natty in the next 5 years? They are probably third after Clemson and Notre Dump in terms of marquee programs left on the big board.

I think the ACC is done. Notre Dump will bail then they go under and every man for himself. I think you have a death battle between the Pac 10 and Big 12 happening now. The loser goes under while the winner cobbles enough together to be a remote competitor the B10/SEC juggernaut. Both have new commissioners who will be aggressive to essentially save their job. If one conference (and I think it will be one) other than the B10 and SEC can corral Okie State, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Baylor, Texas Tech, Kansas, Stanford that would be enough to survive albeit a very poor relative to the B10 and SEC.

The problem is I think all the strong brand names either in football, basketball or academics or all of the above go to either the B10 or SEC. So that would be Oregon, Washington, Stanford, Notre Dame, FSU, Clemson, Duke, UVA, Va Tech, UNC, Miami and I will throw Kansas in here because of basketball and it is a pretty good academic institution. If all those dominoes fall then I think you don't have a legit 3rd conference because I think at that point Okie State and probably Baylor go to the SEC. Then you have table scraps after that.
 
Last edited:

ryoder1

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2007
1,490
1,158
1
I am not sure where things are going but have been hearing things form well placed people. I think we are heading towards 36 to 40 team league that crowns its own championship in football, a more exclusive basketball tournament and revamped Olympic sports and with it, severely limiting the portal, a common standard for NIL and a return to the bowl system for the post season.
A resuscitation of the bowls is an interesting thought. The Rose Bowl cannot be happy that their two golden boys bailed to the B10. Their marquee bowl matchup just became a B10 regular season game. They are probably up to something to save their beloved Granddaddy of them all.
 

Obliviax

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 21, 2001
107,155
56,017
1
A resuscitation of the bowls is an interesting thought. The Rose Bowl cannot be happy that their two golden boys bailed to the B10. Their marquee bowl matchup just became a B10 regular season game. They are probably up to something to save their beloved Granddaddy of them all.
Agree. But with more and more players opting out, the marquee players, the bowls are in trouble. This really opens the door to a 16 team championship with the bowls participating. With meaningful games perhaps players will play
 
  • Like
Reactions: bytir and MacNit07

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
501
378
1
Agree. But with more and more players opting out, the marquee players, the bowls are in trouble. This really opens the door to a 16 team championship with the bowls participating. With meaningful games perhaps players will play
Agreed--players would be criticized by NFL teams for sitting out playoff games as opposed to a glorified scrimmage for SWAG.

Both the Big Ten and SEC expand to 20 or 24--both conferences get 8 playoff teams with the winner of each making the final game which could be the Rose or Fiesta Bowl.

It sucks that we're losing tradition but I'll watch ever second of those playoff games whether or not Penn State is involved whereas i won't watch of a bowl game now other than the playoff because it's pointless. Including Penn State.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bytir

PSUSignore

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
6,529
4,508
1
This is the problem--you're still looking at it as a conference and not what's happening. It isn't a net loss. You do realize the SEC and Big Ten plan on destroying college football as we know it. You're post indicate you think the Big Ten and SEC are going to make one or two more moves. That's not what's happening here at all.

I don't understand why people seem to be in denial.
I do think we are on a trajectory to having 2 major conferences, likely separated from the NCAA. Houston and Baylor aren't needed to do that. What's the case for adding teams that hurt the other schools financially and add very little from a viewership, marketability, or athletic perspective? You keep saying it's going to happen but haven't provided any rationale why. What is the upside for the other 20 schools in an expanded Big 10 to vote in favor of adding teams like Baylor or Houston when doing so will remove millions of dollars from the annual payout of existing conference members?
 
Last edited:

GSPMax

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2018
2,239
3,255
1
For some reason I started seeing posts on Facebook about the b1g expansion. This one started it. The author was an announcer for Michigan sports. One reply blamed the current expansion on adding PSU. Now I see additional threads from MSU traditionalists.

Jim Brandstatter

July 1 at 9:33 PM ·

So, welcome to the new world order of collegiate athletics. UCLA and USC are joining the Big 10. As I said to a newspaper reporter late last year who was doing a story on my retirement from the broadcast booth, I told him we may be entering a very dark time in college football. This latest move of the Big Ten to move UCLA and USC into the conference is part of the unraveling of what we knew of college football.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming the Big Ten or the two University's. They are doing their best for their survival. It is in their best interest, and I don't blame them a bit. That doesn't mean that the move isn't chipping away at the foundation of the collegiate football landscape that we've lived with for the last half century.
When you look back a little bit in time, this move shouldn't surprise anyone. When Texas and Oklahoma left the Big Twelve, it was just a matter of time for others to join the moving party. When Texas and Oklahoma bolted for the SEC, the Big Twelve was gutted. With USC and UCLA leaving the Pac 12, that conference is gutted. The next move may be Washington, Oregon, Stanford, and maybe California following suit and moving to the Big Ten, making the Big Ten a 20 team super-conference.
I mean seriously, without USC, UCLA, Washington, Oregon, and Stanford,--the Pac 12 is what? Who could they possible add to have the same strength and influence? The answer is nobody.
I'm not a clairvoyant, but if I had to predict, I'd suggest this move by the Big Ten, USC and UCLA is just the second salvo in a realignment into a group of superpowers in collegiate football splitting the television money pie. The first salvo, as I mentioned earlier, was Texas and Oklahoma moving to the SEC. And, don't for a second think the SEC is done. Right now, the SEC and the Big 10 are aggressively strengthening their footprint and number of television sets their conference can deliver. The best teams of the other conferences that are still hanging on, (you listening ACC and Clemson?) are going to have some suitors coming their way with very tempting and lucrative sales pitch's.
Look, I don't now how it's all going to shake out, but I will tell you that in my opinion, college football as we knew it even 10 years ago is gone forever. Conference championships that used to be coveted are going to take a back seat to a spot in a national playoff. With the transfer portal and name image and likeness dollars gathering steam and gaining ever more influence on the recruiting process for elite athletes, we are in the wild wild west. The rules are being made up as they go along. There is precious little management or governance over this runaway train right now.
To be honest, there are some that I am sure kind of like the chaos that's going on these days in college football. I am not one of them. To me, college football is losing a lot of it's allure in the name of progress. I'm a guy who likes tradition. The current direction cares nothing for tradition or history. In my humble opinion that's a step backwards, not forward.
Stay well to all of you. Go Blue
 

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
501
378
1
I do think we are on a trajectory to having 2 major conferences, likely separated from the NCAA. Houston and Baylor aren't needed to do that. What's the case for adding teams that hurt the other schools financially and add very little from a viewership, marketability, or athletic perspective? You keep saying it's going to happen but haven't provided any rationale why. What is the upside for the other 20 schools in an expanded Big 10 to vote in favor of adding teams like Baylor or Houston when doing so will remove millions of dollars from the annual payout of existing conference members?
You keep falsely stating it will remove millions--it will not. There will be a new contract worth far more than what it is now and there won't just be 32 teams involved. Likely 48. Have you been following this at all or just want to believe things play out like you want them to?
 

Sullivan

Well-Known Member
Nov 24, 2001
16,676
12,525
1
You keep falsely stating it will remove millions--it will not. There will be a new contract worth far more than what it is now and there won't just be 32 teams involved. Likely 48. Have you been following this at all or just want to believe things play out like you want them to?

Of course there will be a lot more money with the next contract for the existing teams. It's has been suggested that the next contract will bring more than $100 million per year, per team.


The point that you don't get is that most of the new teams that you're proposing aren't good additions. They will take money away from the existing conference teams.

You seem to suggest that schools such as BC are a good addition. When in fact, they aren't.

Let's do this as a simple exercise for you: If each current team gets $50 million, and the next contract goes to $100 million. If we add BC, and each team now gets $95 million, is that an increase or decrease by adding BC???
 
Last edited:

Lion84

Well-Known Member
Apr 10, 2015
3,757
4,934
1
For some reason I started seeing posts on Facebook about the b1g expansion. This one started it. The author was an announcer for Michigan sports. One reply blamed the current expansion on adding PSU. Now I see additional threads from MSU traditionalists.

Jim Brandstatter

July 1 at 9:33 PM ·

So, welcome to the new world order of collegiate athletics. UCLA and USC are joining the Big 10. As I said to a newspaper reporter late last year who was doing a story on my retirement from the broadcast booth, I told him we may be entering a very dark time in college football. This latest move of the Big Ten to move UCLA and USC into the conference is part of the unraveling of what we knew of college football.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming the Big Ten or the two University's. They are doing their best for their survival. It is in their best interest, and I don't blame them a bit. That doesn't mean that the move isn't chipping away at the foundation of the collegiate football landscape that we've lived with for the last half century.
When you look back a little bit in time, this move shouldn't surprise anyone. When Texas and Oklahoma left the Big Twelve, it was just a matter of time for others to join the moving party. When Texas and Oklahoma bolted for the SEC, the Big Twelve was gutted. With USC and UCLA leaving the Pac 12, that conference is gutted. The next move may be Washington, Oregon, Stanford, and maybe California following suit and moving to the Big Ten, making the Big Ten a 20 team super-conference.
I mean seriously, without USC, UCLA, Washington, Oregon, and Stanford,--the Pac 12 is what? Who could they possible add to have the same strength and influence? The answer is nobody.
I'm not a clairvoyant, but if I had to predict, I'd suggest this move by the Big Ten, USC and UCLA is just the second salvo in a realignment into a group of superpowers in collegiate football splitting the television money pie. The first salvo, as I mentioned earlier, was Texas and Oklahoma moving to the SEC. And, don't for a second think the SEC is done. Right now, the SEC and the Big 10 are aggressively strengthening their footprint and number of television sets their conference can deliver. The best teams of the other conferences that are still hanging on, (you listening ACC and Clemson?) are going to have some suitors coming their way with very tempting and lucrative sales pitch's.
Look, I don't now how it's all going to shake out, but I will tell you that in my opinion, college football as we knew it even 10 years ago is gone forever. Conference championships that used to be coveted are going to take a back seat to a spot in a national playoff. With the transfer portal and name image and likeness dollars gathering steam and gaining ever more influence on the recruiting process for elite athletes, we are in the wild wild west. The rules are being made up as they go along. There is precious little management or governance over this runaway train right now.
To be honest, there are some that I am sure kind of like the chaos that's going on these days in college football. I am not one of them. To me, college football is losing a lot of it's allure in the name of progress. I'm a guy who likes tradition. The current direction cares nothing for tradition or history. In my humble opinion that's a step backwards, not forward.
Stay well to all of you. Go Blue
Yeah and get off my lawn. Times change so if you don't like it don't watch or go to the games. You can blame whoever but like almost everything they change over time and usually money is the key driver of it.
 

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
501
378
1
Of course there will be a lot more money with the next contract for the existing teams. It's has been suggested that the next contract will bring more than $100 million per year, per team.

The point that you don't get is that most of the new teams that you're proposing aren't good additions. They will take money away from the existing conference teams.

You seem to suggest that schools such as BC are a good addition. When in fact, they aren't.

Let's do this as a simple exercise for you: If each current team gets $50 million, and the next contract goes to $100 million. If we add BC, and each team now gets $95 million, is that an increase or decrease by adding BC???
At no point did I say I wanted BC. Notre Dame very well might request BC in the league though. You keep using made up figures to try to justify things. Fox/ESPN say to do this we want 48 teams there will be 48 teams.
 

Sullivan

Well-Known Member
Nov 24, 2001
16,676
12,525
1
At no point did I say I wanted BC. Notre Dame very well might request BC in the league though. You keep using made up figures to try to justify things. Fox/ESPN say to do this we want 48 teams there will be 48 teams.

They are in your plan that you stated on Monday, at 6:28 PM.

I don't need to make things up. I'm not the one who is throwing about teams that you've convinced yourself will be joining the Big 10.

 

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
501
378
1
They are in your plan that you stated on Monday, at 6:28 PM:

My words--which I said again today
Big Ten--Stanford, Colorado, Georgia Tech & Boston College (ND would love Stanford and BC joining)
Never once said I wanted BC

Then you said this nonsense because contrary to what you claim you're not accepting what is happening here.
Unless a school can add at least $125+ million annually to the Big 10, they aren't getting an invitation.
 

Sullivan

Well-Known Member
Nov 24, 2001
16,676
12,525
1
My words--which I said again today
Big Ten--Stanford, Colorado, Georgia Tech & Boston College (ND would love Stanford and BC joining)
Never once said I wanted BC

Then you said this nonsense because contrary to what you claim you're not accepting what is happening here.
Unless a school can add at least $125+ million annually to the Big 10, they aren't getting an invitation.

Yes, you're adding BC....just like I said you did.

Again, they don't make sense. Fwiw, most of the other teams you mentioned don't make financial sense either.
 
Last edited:

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
501
378
1
Yes, you're adding BC....just like I said you did.

Again, they don't make sense. Fwiw, most of the other teams you mentioned don't make financial sense either.
I explained why. You said "You seem to suggest that schools such as BC are a good addition" which is not what I said. Stop reading into things and take them at face value.

ESPN/Fox/etc are going to want so many games a week. They will expand more and it will be 100% worth it with that TV contract. Maybe you're not understanding how much more money a 48 team league with a 16 team playoff brings in???

You only think a handful of schools will be added. That's not what is happening here.
 

Sullivan

Well-Known Member
Nov 24, 2001
16,676
12,525
1
I explained why. You said "You seem to suggest that schools such as BC are a good addition" which is not what I said. Stop reading into things and take them at face value.

ESPN/Fox/etc are going to want so many games a week. They will expand more and it will be 100% worth it with that TV contract. Maybe you're not understanding how much more money a 48 team league with a 16 team playoff brings in???

You only think a handful of schools will be added. That's not what is happening here.

I don't think that a only a handful of schools will be added. I know that at most only a handful of schools will be added, because it doesn't make financial sense (to the existing conference teams) to add most of the other teams that you mentioned.
 

LandoComando

Well-Known Member
Nov 29, 2021
501
378
1
I don't think that a only a handful of schools, I know that only a handful of schools will be added. It doesn't make financial sense to do otherwise.

You couldn't be more wrong. You don't "know" anything--you're assuming it and literally ignoring the writing on the wall pretending that the TV money won't benefit them to add teams.
 

Sullivan

Well-Known Member
Nov 24, 2001
16,676
12,525
1
You couldn't be more wrong. You don't "know" anything--you're assuming it and literally ignoring the writing on the wall pretending that the TV money won't benefit them to add teams.

I don't need to pretend. We are discussing BC, Georgia Tech, Colorado, etc. None of them are $100 million+ per year.
 

SheldonJoe2215

Well-Known Member
Oct 3, 2015
4,122
4,302
1
Portland, OR
You keep falsely stating it will remove millions--it will not. There will be a new contract worth far more than what it is now and there won't just be 32 teams involved. Likely 48. Have you been following this at all or just want to believe things play out like you want them to?
The Big10 is not adding Rapelor or Houston. Not in a million years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sullivan