USC and UCLA to the B1G

nic said:
I am seeing ND, Stanford, Oregon and then let Washington join.

Oregon and Stanford have remained quiet, correct?

Not sure how schedules will play out. Probably protected rivalries or pods.

PODS:

PAC - USC, UCLA, Stanford, Washington, Oregon 

West - Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Northwestern

East - Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers, Purdue, Notre Dame

Midwest - Michigan, Michigan State, OSU, Illinois, Indiana 

...or protected Games:

Mich: OSU, MSU, Minn

ND: USC, Stanford, Purdue

NU: Wiscy, Iowa, Wash 

USC: UCLA, ND, PSU

OSU: Mich, Illinois, PSU

UCLA: USC, MSU, Washington 

Wiscy: Minn, NU, Oregon 

Minn: Wiscy, Mich, Iowa 

Wash: Oregon, NU, UCLA

Oregon: Wash, Stanford, Wisconsin

Stanford: ND, NW, Oregon 

Purdue: Indiana, ND, Rutgers

Indiana: Purdue, MSU, Maryland

Illinois: NW, OSU, Rutgers 

NW: Illinois, Stanford, Iowa

Maryland: PSU, Rutgers, Indiana

PSU: Maryland, OSU, USC

Rutgers: Maryland, Illinois, Purdue 

Iowa: NU, Minnesota, NW

MSU: Mich, UCLA, Indiana

Divions:

Old School: Indiana, Iowa, Illinois, Michigan, MSU, Minnesota,  OSU, NW, Wisconsin, Purdue 
Newbies: NU, PSU, Maryland, Rutgers, ND, USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, Stanford
Click to expand...


I think divisions are out.  Probably out everywhere.

The three protected games seems to be the rage right now.  But I'm not sure they work with that many teams.  The idea is to protect the most important rivalries but still get to play everyone else every-other year.  I guess you could still do 4-5-5-5 with four protected games then play the other 15 teams every three years.  But that's basically a pods system.

I actually think the pods you posted look pretty good.  But I've been a fan of pods for awhile.

 
RichardHangslow said:
Careful some guy named Toe on a internet message board might question if you have a screw loose.  I know you, like me are seeking out his validation...
Click to expand...


I mean ... there does seem to be a pretty obvious distinction between teams that seem to be pretty likely candidates to be added and a team that had to back-door their way into a P5 conference in the first place and no one is talking about making another move.

 
I get that, but would the B1G wanting a slice of the Texas market come as a huge shock to anyone? This after all is about money and adding 900k viewers you previously did not have probably is not a bad thing. 

 
For as big and football-focused as the state of Texas is, there's really only two CFB teams that matter, and the ship has pretty much sailed on both of them. The next two biggest are both church-affiliated schools, and I don't see the Big Ten presidents going for any school in that category that isn't named Notre Dame.

 
I believe USC and UCLA asked to be members.  Not sure the Big Ten is sending out invitations yet.  Maybe it’s only a minor distinction but I think legally it’s important.  Big Ten is not wanting to be in the tampering business but sees itself open to considering offers.  I do think 2-4 more additions would really boost the Big Ten (time for a new league name too) in to top dog position in market strength / brand power.  SEC won’t sit still though. 
 

There are still some brand worthy schools to be had - FSU, Miami, Clemson, Ore, WU, ND, and UNC, and perhaps another dozen ???   It’s tough to say what schools cfb programs and fan bases are above the line.  
 

Imo, the upper limit # is probably around 64 but I can see the process ending up around 80.  Still too many but much better than 140ish.  There is big pot of $ but it can’t be split that many ways imo.  There are enough prime time players each year to earn big bucks for that many teams.  Just my sense of the macro economics of cfb at the top level.  

 
Mavric said:
 I guess you could still do 4-5-5-5 with four protected games then play the other 15 teams every three years.  But that's basically a pods system.

I actually think the pods you posted look pretty good.  But I've been a fan of pods for awhile.
Click to expand...
I put the divisions up to poke fun at the Big10.  :D  good point on the 4-5-5-5 being equivalent to the pods. I didn't think of that. I like the pods system too, and I can handle playing everyone every 3 years. That's better than it is now. ND would not like my pods though. 

The ND pod...because they are spoiled. :D

ND, USC, Stanford, Purdue, UCLA (pulled in for USC)

 
84HuskerLaw said:
I believe USC and UCLA asked to be members.  Not sure the Big Ten is sending out invitations yet.  Maybe it’s only a minor distinction but I think legally it’s important.  Big Ten is not wanting to be in the tampering business but sees itself open to considering offers.  I do think 2-4 more additions would really boost the Big Ten (time for a new league name too) in to top dog position in market strength / brand power.  SEC won’t sit still though. 
 

There are still some brand worthy schools to be had - FSU, Miami, Clemson, Ore, WU, ND, and UNC, and perhaps another dozen ???   It’s tough to say what schools cfb programs and fan bases are above the line.  
 

Imo, the upper limit # is probably around 64 but I can see the process ending up around 80.  Still too many but much better than 140ish.  There is big pot of $ but it can’t be split that many ways imo.  There are enough prime time players each year to earn big bucks for that many teams.  Just my sense of the macro economics of cfb at the top level.  
Click to expand...


The ending number of 80 is way too big. It's way more likely to only be around 54-60. There's going to be some schools within the P5 on the outside looking in. With TV being the ones driving the boat. Why on God's earth does it make sense to take a ton of schools in the same areas? It doesn't. 

There are 4 schools I think are for sure screwed and have to be worried about what's going to happen with their institutions and programs. I think these 4 have to be 100 percent crapping themselves with all these expansion rumors etc.

Oregon State

Washington State

Kansas State

Iowa State

 
IgniteTheSpark said:
The ending number of 80 is way too big. It's way more likely to only be around 54-60. There's going to be some schools within the P5 on the outside looking in. With TV being the ones driving the boat. Why on God's earth does it make sense to take a ton of schools in the same areas? It doesn't. 

There are 4 schools I think are for sure screwed and have to be worried about what's going to happen with their institutions and programs. I think these 4 have to be 100 percent crapping themselves with all these expansion rumors etc.

Oregon State

Washington State

Kansas State

Iowa State
Click to expand...




I'd add Colorado

 
IgniteTheSpark said:
I think these 4 have to be 100 percent crapping themselves with all these expansion rumors etc.

Oregon State

Washington State

Kansas State

Iowa State
Click to expand...


I would say that about pretty much everyone left in the Big 12. At this point their biggest brand for football is what, Oklahoma State? Cincinnati? I mean they're good teams, but not exactly valuable brands in the CFB world, right? And at this point, it's the brands that matter most, even more than geographical markets. (Being in a big cable TV market isn't as important in the streaming era. Maryland and Rutgers are lucky they got in when they did.)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top