USC/UCLA to the Big Ten?
- Thread starter HaydenHawk56
- Start date
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Banking on Oregon and Washington, huh? Wonder what the odds are that they will end up in the Big 10? All eyes seem to be on them and I think will be the last piece of the puzzle to determine where all the snowballs roll to. Well, at least pertaining to the Big 10, Big 12 and old Pac 10.
I agree that the Big 12 might benefit more than the last shift in power, when Texas and OK announced they were moving. At that time, it was looking pretty grim for the Big 12 but Bowslby was able to put a band-aid on the situation. At least now you'd have a large conference with some formidable teams which would help with a decent TV deal package.
I'm getting a little nervous about the PAC 12 trying to make it work. Not best case scenario but I'd be perfectly happy if OR and Wash went to the Big 10 tomorrow. That would be the deathblow and then the Big 12 can get the 4 schools closest to us and call it good.
That said, I don't think you'll see Oregon or Washington in the Big 10.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
My first choices for the Big would be Stanford and ND. National identity, TV viewing, and both would be a natural fit in the BIG 10 academically. Stanford would help to bring that San Francisco market in.
But, I also in another thread stated I don't care if ND joins as they've had their chance on multiple occasions. My answer above is for strategic reasons for the conference.
beavdawg8216
Well-Known Member
prestige doesnt go away they still have all the national championships and wins. There is no such thing as modern prestige and has been prestige.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
?? Nebraska ??
racerhawk
Well-Known Member
I would see Oregon and Washington vastly preferring the big ten over the Big 12 if they have any choice in the matter, for the same reasons that OU/TX, UCLA/USC left their respective conferences. Timing with all of this, in terms of what ND does, what the SEC does next, etc might matter.
It will be interesting for sure.
thedukeofearl
Well-Known Member
The bling the football team wears is a potent weapon
Reflecting the sunlight into the opponents' eyes and all
Fryowa
Administrator
nebraska says hi
Every team not in the Big 10 or SEC would vastly prefer to be in either of those two leagues.
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
Take what Cowherd says with a grain of salt, his job is to get people to listen to his bullshit. Grabbing Oregon & Washington would be big not only to grab the Portland and Seattle markets but the amount of resources they have to be competitive, especially Oregon with their Nike relationship.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Rich Eisen stated this very same thing on his podcast. He's says eventually, we'll end up with two large leagues similar to how the NFC and AFC started or ended up. He thinks the playoff will mimic what the NFL does and each will have their separate playoff with the two ending up in the National Championship game.
kicker22
Well-Known Member
You may be right. However the state of the program and its national recognition is currently nothing near what it was in the 90s. Nebraska was also a household name in every home across the country in the 90s. Not putting ND at Nebby level, but how a program is viewed now isn't necessarily influenced by who they were then. While I agree with you that they're still considered prestigious, IMO today's perception of ND football is right there with Miami and FSU. Programs that historically were once dominant, but who's dominance and relevance have faded over time.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Also, just because they are the most well-known Catholic university, doesn't make them prestigious. I know die-hard Catholics that that claim they are fans and just drool over them.
And I've been Catholic the last 22 years of my life. To people who are non-Catholic, ND is just another mediocre to decent team. But in their eyes, they are on this pedestal. It's weird.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
No, the perception of those three programs is that they were once powerful programs when they could cheat and not get caught but as compliance became of increasing importance to schools, they faded into oblivion. Whatever, their winning days are ancient history in the modern world. FSU won the title in 2014 behind the prowess of Jameis Winston. The kids being recruited today were 9 years old when that happened. The last time Miami or Nebraska were relevant was when all the recruits were negative years old, so it doesn't matter. I remember Iowa playing Miami a few times in the '90's and they were on a different planet. I want to play Miami in a bowl game now because I think Iowa will absolutely paste them and I hate those asswipes for the lack of class they showed. And Standford's band can kiss my ass while we're at it.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
I saw ND play in person once and their helmets are really amazing. Aside from that, on the field I think they are probably somewhere near the Wisconsin-Iowa-Michigan State tier of program, but they get a big boost by controlling their own schedule with 5 ACC games and USC sucking ass.
SwirlinLingerie
Well-Known Member
I was traveling some last week and only read up on it a little, but isn't the primary factor (by a lot) for all this is how many people would watch that school's football team on TV? So market size, prestige, history of success, etc. are really only secondary factors, and only important in the sense they can influence whether or not a person stops flipping channels and stays with that game. (Or tunes in for that game specifically).
In my opinion, I might put Oregon over UCLA. I wonder what the average TV ratings have been for each school over the past 10 years? I'm Pac-NW based (so maybe I am biased), but if I see a Ducks game on I'm more compelled to leave it on that game compared to any other Pac-12 game (in general). The Ducks have had a solid run of being relevant nationally, the change in uniforms is intriguing, the offense is usually fun, and the atmosphere at pretty solid.
Not sure what Phil Knight/his kids/Nike's involvement with the program will be down the road, but assuming it will still be impactful. If so, I'd probably try to scoop them up if I were the Big Ten before the SEC does.
In my opinion, I might put Oregon over UCLA. I wonder what the average TV ratings have been for each school over the past 10 years? I'm Pac-NW based (so maybe I am biased), but if I see a Ducks game on I'm more compelled to leave it on that game compared to any other Pac-12 game (in general). The Ducks have had a solid run of being relevant nationally, the change in uniforms is intriguing, the offense is usually fun, and the atmosphere at pretty solid.
Not sure what Phil Knight/his kids/Nike's involvement with the program will be down the road, but assuming it will still be impactful. If so, I'd probably try to scoop them up if I were the Big Ten before the SEC does.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
I'm not going to disagree with your opinion on Oregon today, but I think the biggest issue is that the Big Ten only cares about one metric in analyzing expansion, which is money. Oregon's population checks in at about four and a quarter million. Their fanbase is decent, but not gigantic. While adding Oregon would be good from a competitive sense, it is not clear that they would be accretive to the Big Ten media rights, so they are left out, at least for now. The problem is Phil Knight could die tomorrow, Oregon could tossed on probation and they could fall to a 3-9 program that suddenly has no national appeal. National appeal comes and goes. See, the Big Ten isn't opposed to a 3-9 program joining the conference, just look at Rutgers. But after the Nebraska debacle, I think the Big Ten is far more critical about modeling revenue contribution than they were with that Nebraska deal. If they could get a mulligan on that and trade Nebraska for ND, Oregon or Washington I'm sure they'd do it in a heartbeat.
