Oregon to the Big Ten?
- Thread starter Chickadee34
- Start date
The only thing that will save the PAC12 is fast tracking PITT into the conference.😆😁😄😃😀
Colorado board voting to leave PAC10
The PAC10 is crumbling. CFB will look completely different, for better or worse. Oregon and Washington will be in the B1G. I am sure Arizona follows Colorado, but what does Utah do?
The PAC10 is crumbling. CFB will look completely different, for better or worse. Oregon and Washington will be in the B1G. I am sure Arizona follows Colorado, but what does Utah do?
Its for the best in terms of college football
Just waiting for the ACC/Big XII to merge next once this round sorts out.
Next up, the Big Ten will add several more Pac Ten teams, announce a new structure for the soon to be 20/22 team Big Ten.
Yeah and I think the Hail to Pitt dude is leading the charge but doesn't have enough time as he spends all of his time on this board living vicariously through PSU fans.
This link of most watched CFB programs is the guide on who the conference likely adds next .
Oregon, Washington are great value adds. I think Stanford would make the cut just being an academic trophy for the existing B1G conference presidents. It only makes sense to get to 20, and it would eventually make sense to go to 10 conference games if we are between 20 and 24 schools in total.
Oregon, Washington are great value adds. I think Stanford would make the cut just being an academic trophy for the existing B1G conference presidents. It only makes sense to get to 20, and it would eventually make sense to go to 10 conference games if we are between 20 and 24 schools in total.
I believe the Big Ten already said “not ready to invite you”
Oregon is concerned about its future with the Pac12 going down the toilet.
A few surprises to me there but with Rutgres at 58th, why were they added to this conference?
Contrary to what most things, with the Big Ten, it isn't all about money.
Rutgers and Maryland weren't added to self fund themselves. They were added for academic reasons. Both are great schools and both provide avenues to new research funding sources due to their differences as compared to most other Big Ten schools. Maryland has a top notch public policy program which taps into a sizeable source of research funding otherwise minimally available to the Big Ten as a whole. In case you don't understand how the academic side of the Big Ten works, all schools (plus Johns Hopkins and Chicago) can easily work together to field multi-school research teams to go after work collaboratively.
Secondly, Rutgers and Maryland allows the Big Ten to bring their marquee properties to two very important markets and drive exposure. The current Big Ten footprint has more than 40% of the US population. Even if the schools can't cover the cost of admission, the league is willing to take a risk to expand (or dominate) an underdeveloped market). Just wait until they bring in a couple of Carolina schools and a few more west coast schools.
Several west coast schools provide the same impact on research funding that Rutgers and Maryland did to include teams most here have dismissed as viable candidates. I think four pods is the future. I am not the only one based on what people at Penn State and another member school have told me. By pods, I mean four 6 to 8 team regional pods. Think about a west coast pod led by USC and Oregon. A Midwest pod led by a resurgent Nebraska. A Great Lakes pod led by Michigan and Ohio State and an East Coast pod led by Penn State and Notre Dame.
In that scenario, the Big Ten would have 60% of Americans in its footprint. They could run their own playoff without the cheaters from the SEC, control NIL, coaching pay and the portal if congress does not do anything about it while bringing college athletics back to its roots which is very important to every current member school, Notre Dame, the Virginia schools, North Carolina, Duke and several Pac-Ten schools.
I agree with everything you said except for your first sentence
Everything you pointed out = money
Perhaps Syracuse would’ve been a better option than Butgers, but I don’t know if Syracuse met the criteria at that time of opening up new markets. That list does demonstrate that other than Florida State and Clemson, the ACC lacks meaningful TV viewership. I would love to see a number of those ACC schools in our conference, but it may not make any financial sense to do so. For example, the two Virginia schools offer no value to the conference whatsoever. Even if you pair one up with North Carolina, I still think they dilute the value of the conference.
Pitt is the Typhoid Mary of football conferences.
Syracuse is not better than Rutgers. Rutgers sisnt goof but let's please stop pretending Syracuse has any shot of surviving this next round of expansion. Unless the Big XII goes all in on basketball they're dead.
I should have explained myself better, I apologize. I was referring to the ability of a specific athletic department to bring in revenue equal to their share. Many people think this is the primary factor when it is pretty far down the list.
OK, I agree then. MD and Rutgers were brought in to allow the B1G to cover a very lucrative NE market. That's it.
From a nefarious football standpoint, Maryland and Rutgers may have been brought aboard to insure a couple of annual in conference tomato cans. MD may upset that applecart. But as Humphrey Bogart said in Casablanca “We’ll always have Rutgers”.
It's all about TV. Once USC and UCLA joined the Big 10, the Big 10 always was going to have to add a few more West Coast schools to have some travel balance, especially for the non-revenue sports which are most of them. If the Big 10 adds Oregon and Washington, which I fully expect, it then will have schools covering four of the six largest USA markets (NY, LA, Chicago and Philly), the DC and Baltimore areas, the Seattle/Tacoma/Portland Pacific Northwest corridor, the smaller Midwest Rust Belt markets of Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Detroit and Indianapolis, and also the Twin Cities areas. None of the other conferences, including the SEC, would be able to compete with that monetarily.
Last edited:
| West | W. Central | E. Central | East |
| USC | Notre Dame | Michigan | Penn St |
| UCLA | Wisconsin | Ohio St | N. Carolina |
| Oregon | Iowa | Mich St | Maryland |
| Washington | Northwestern | Illinois | Duke |
| Arizona St | Nebraska | Indiana | UVA |
| Stanford | Minnesota | Purdue | Rutgres |
Well, I think the numbers say otherwise. Viewership for Syracuse 841K and Rutgres 618k. Obviously, both are mediocre #s but certainly Syracuse has a pretty sizable lead in tv viewers despite being in a less visible conference. I would say the Big Ten made a big mistake with Rutgers. The conference did not make a mistake with Maryland, who has respectable football viewership numbers despite being mediocre performance on the field and has a very respectable bball program
Another factor for MD and Rutgers was locking down fertile recruiting areas. Ultimately recruiting is the lifeblood to having top notch programs, top notch programs draw viewership.
Virginia and North Carolina would offer the same. Their share of revenue can be a ramp like Maryland's and Ruthers' were. Also, one thing to keep in mind as the B1G and SEC separate to become the AFC and NFC of college football, they will take share from the second tier of conferences ACC, B12, PAC12. So the pie automatically grows for the B1G and SEC whether a specific school can bring a full share+ by themselves or not as the other conferences diminish. There is value in a school leaving those conferences for the B1G or SEC as their leaving continues the devaluation of the remaining conferences.
This whole thing is annoying AF. We are headed right back where we started. Not enough teams play each other to effectively determine a national champion without an actual playoff and instead relying on eye test and voting.
Now, when we finally have a playoff, it will end up to be unable to determine conference champions for the same reasons.
Now, when we finally have a playoff, it will end up to be unable to determine conference champions for the same reasons.
New Jersey adds more than upstate NY when talking value to a conference. I'm fine with saying Rutgers was a mistake but not if alternative is Syracuse. I feel like people just want Syracuse because they used to kind of be a rival.
This isn't hurting that. We don't need conference titles games. Never have.
The LA schools are really screwed(really all 4). If the other two schools are Oregon and UW, that makes the two closes trips ~1000 miles. Everything else is between 1500-2750 miles.
Meanwhile, the original B2G has a longest trip of 750mi with most being driveable.
I like that except there might be a possibility Utah takes Arizona States' spot.
I am confused. Why would Air Force be annoyed? 🤓Why should we care if Air Force is annoyed?🧐
Utah replaces Arizona State
Georgia Tech replaces Duke
I hate it for Penn State as I don't want those to be our 5 locked in games yearly but if we can't win that group we don't deserve to be in the playoffs. I'd want an annual game with Michigan, Ohio State or Oregon (USC-Notre Dame would be a locked in cross division rival).
Because they have jets armed with bombs?
Enough with your nonsense. Everyone knows that the BIG was on the brink of bankruptcy at that time, and was desperately seeking a lifeline. Why the USC of the East with their successful and rich History of football excellence wasn’t admitted over 50 years ago is a travesty.
With their enormous fan base and total dominance of the metropolitan NYC viewing audience, their belated BIG admission is a HUGE deal. Plus, they allowed the BIG further financial breathing room by magnanimously agreeing to a reduced income share.
