B1G, Pac12, ACC in Discussions about Forming Alliance

[RURM85]

But Rutgers and the BIG are on the NFL minor league side.

Literally every defense of "Alliance" has been - get more networks involved to bring in more money.

More money doesnt equal "traditional college sports".

Who here wants Rutgers to make less money going forward?

I say align with the SEC actually and stay as a Top 2 conference.

?

The Big Ten Conference is nothing like the SEC other than similar TV revenues. Culturally it could not be any more different.

Not my words below:

"Schools within the three conferences believe they are like-minded, that they want to continue to prioritize broad-based sports offerings and that the academic profile of their institutions matters — as does graduating athletes."

Penn State AD Barbour - "The Big Ten really prides itself on being more than just an athletics conference."

Does the above sound like something spoken by an SEC Conference member?

For the Big Ten, it's a lot more than throwing a pigskin around on Saturdays. For the SEC, I'm surprised they bother to have classes during Football season.

At the end of the day, the approaches are vastly different, however, the Big Ten Conference will continue to either remain in the No. 1 or the No. 2 position for TV revenue. The differences in revenue will not cause a Big Ten school to jump to the SEC Conference and it's different viewpoint on life.

 

[mosito]

When people say PAC12, they seem to be referring to USC and a couple of other schools.

When people say ACC, the reference is to Clemson and Florida St.

Does anyone here actually believe that there is a world where USC and 3 others just dump the PAC12 to go to the SEC. NO, they would call the BIG10 up and say, give us a lifeline or the SEC is our solution.

Does Florida St. and Clemson increase the $$$ to the SEC? I can't see how. And why would the SEC do this aside from purposely destroying the financial viability of the ACC. Sure you get 2 big Brands, but all that does is make more brands losers... you need some teams to boost your record.


So yes, for 20+ ACC/PAC12 schools, this is their lifeline. For the BIG10 that presumably doesn't want college football to turn into the Mini NFL, getting a voting block and alliance and keeping the ACC and PAC12 in the conversation helps them.

Otherwise it will be an expensive Arms Race between the BIG10 and the SEC and in the process taking out another 20+ Schools. 8 are pretty much gone already. The Alliance knows that. No point in giving the BIG12 a lifeline when Texas/OK was that and they are gone.



I am all for Poaching USC and 3 others..... and making more money than the SEC, but that will come at a cost of almost 30 schools when all is said and done.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

I've said this before the B10 won't be the ACC/PAC12 30-40M behind if they don't take action. It will still be fine, especially if they make sure more networks get involved in the playoffs which will lead to more players for tier 1/2 rights for everyone including the B10. They may not be the top dog though as far as revenue as they have been. You realize the B10 has been about 9-10M in front of the SEC the last couple "normal" years. I could see that reverse somewhat in the future if the B10 doesn't act but not to the point where they are 30-40M behind.

Just flipping it from -10M to +10M per team for the SEC means an additional 320M per year revenue needed for the league and don't forget the B10 isn't locked into a long contract into the 2030s. The SEC's bad CBS contract is going to be unstuck in the next few years but not the ESPN one. The B10 could possibly have 2 deals done by then depending on how long they make their next contract.

I like the idea of a national conference and expansion to make the B10 a premier sports property at the forefront but at the same time not acting doesn't mean they become the ACC/PAC12.

BTW with regards to OOC. This year's looks pretty good. I don't know how future years look but hopefully more of the same with even a more concerted effort from the alliance and more teams scheduling good games annually. Regardless of alliance or not I think gonna see as many as 10-11 scheduled power vs power in the future be they inter or intra conference.

Washington at Michigan, Oregon at OSU, ND/Wisconsin in Chicago, Auburn at PSU, Nebraska at OU

Georgia/Clemson, Alabama/Miami, LSU at UCLA, Cincy at ND, Cincy Indiana, Boise UCF, Boise Ok State

 

[Scarlet_Scourge]

Dates to keep in mind:
Big Ten television deal expires in 2023.
Pac-12 television deal expires after the 2024 season

If The Big Ten will add anyone it will be after this season is over or at the latest next season or not at all.

 

[Eagleton95.99]

it does nothing to curb the coming onslaught of expansion to super leagues. It may buy time for the BIG but unless we target and go after premier names for a true national league, we become ACC like

Yes it does. If the voting block limits how many bids each conference gets in the playoff, then that limits how many top teams will want to be in each conference.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

When people say PAC12, they seem to be referring to USC and a couple of other schools.

When people say ACC, the reference is to Clemson and Florida St.

Does anyone here actually believe that there is a world where USC and 3 others just dump the PAC12 to go to the SEC. NO, they would call the BIG10 up and say, give us a lifeline or the SEC is our solution.

Does Florida St. and Clemson increase the $$$ to the SEC? I can't see how. And why would the SEC do this aside from purposely destroying the financial viability of the ACC. Sure you get 2 big Brands, but all that does is make more brands losers... you need some teams to boost your record.


So yes, for 20+ ACC/PAC12 schools, this is their lifeline. For the BIG10 that presumably doesn't want college football to turn into the Mini NFL, getting a voting block and alliance and keeping the ACC and PAC12 in the conversation helps them.

Otherwise it will be an expensive Arms Race between the BIG10 and the SEC and in the process taking out another 20+ Schools. 8 are pretty much gone already. The Alliance knows that. No point in giving the BIG12 a lifeline when Texas/OK was that and they are gone.



I am all for Poaching USC and 3 others..... and making more money than the SEC, but that will come at a cost of almost 30 schools when all is said and done.

You know I heard on one these sports reporters podcasts I put up in the past that FSU/Clemson isn't as popular to tv guys as us fans think. If they're playing well sure maybe but if not then not as certain, specifically Clemson.

Also what happens when Dabo retires can they keep it up. I mean that's something that's not going to happen any time soon but when you're talking about conference level moves, it has to look beyond any single coach or snap shot in time. These are "life long" moves essentially. What was Clemson before Dabo and what would they be after Dabo. Do they still have national appeal if they're not playing for national championships and would whatever "natural" appeal they do have be enough? Look at FSU now since the end of Bowden...do they still have the draw they did as they fell off at the end of his tenure til now? They're bigger state school so I think they still have some draw, does Clemson without the accompanying performance? I don't know.

 

[mosito]

You know I heard on one these sports reporters podcasts I put up in the past that FSU/Clemson isn't as popular to tv guys as us fans think. If they're playing well sure maybe but if not then not as certain, specifically Clemson.

Also what happens when Dabo retires can they keep it up. I mean that's something that's not going to happen any time soon but when you're talking about conference level moves, it has to look beyond any single coach or snap shot in time. These are "life long" moves essentially. What was Clemson before Dabo and what would they be after Dabo. Do they still have national appeal if they're not playing for national championships and would whatever "natural" appeal they do have be enough? Look at FSU now since the end of Bowden...do they still have the draw they did as they fell off at the end of his tenure til now? They're bigger state school so I think they still have some draw, does Clemson without the accompanying performance? I don't know.

Agreed.

I am not sure what the SEC would want with anything in the ACC except maybe NC / VA if we assume Clemson and FL St do nothing? does that even move a needle.

TX and OK came crying and the SEC took them.... It would have been healthier for College football if they stayed in the BIG12 or went to the PAC12. But they chose their path. The BIG10 can choose to continue an arms race to attempt to keep college football the way they would like it to be. And that seems to be with this alliance.

Whether the SEC was being predatory or just doing what any conference might have done, they have Brand Power and Money... So you either handfcuff them a little or get BIGGER...

 

[RUTGERS95]

Yes it does. If the voting block limits how many bids each conference gets in the playoff, then that limits how many top teams will want to be in each conference.

this isn't investing quarter to quarter

 

[Scarlet_Scourge]

You know I heard on one these sports reporters podcasts I put up in the past that FSU/Clemson isn't as popular to tv guys as us fans think. If they're playing well sure maybe but if not then not as certain, specifically Clemson.

Also what happens when Dabo retires can they keep it up. I mean that's something that's not going to happen any time soon but when you're talking about conference level moves, it has to look beyond any single coach or snap shot in time. These are "life long" moves essentially. What was Clemson before Dabo and what would they be after Dabo. Do they still have national appeal if they're not playing for national championships and would whatever "natural" appeal they do have be enough? Look at FSU now since the end of Bowden...do they still have the draw they did as they fell off at the end of his tenure til now? They're bigger state school so I think they still have some draw, does Clemson without the accompanying performance? I don't know.

Clemson was so bad, that choking in big games used to be called Clemsoning.
When he leaves that will go back to their spot like Baylor did. Unless they can hire as good or better than him.

ACC doesn't have any Blue Bloods in Football, they have a few in MBB but not football.

Having success under one coach and having a great run and being a needle moving Blue Blood are two different things.

Blue Bloods are always Blue Bloods even during down periods. It is like the difference between someone with generational wealth vs some poor guy who won the lottery.

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

The alliance move is smart.

The SEC and ESPN need the rest of the nation to want to watch their games. If an alliance like this means bigger interconference matchups for everyone EXCEPT the SEC.. that would help. Then see what ESPN does when their ratings tank. ANd when more people watch non-SEC games the recruits will know they can go to non-SEC schools. THEN the talent will flow back from the SEC.

 

[RUTGERS95]

The alliance move is smart.

The SEC and ESPN need the rest of the nation to want to watch their games. If an alliance like this means bigger interconference matchups for everyone EXCEPT the SEC.. that would help. Then see what ESPN does when their ratings tank. ANd when more people watch non-SEC games the recruits will know they can go to non-SEC schools. THEN the talent will flow back from the SEC.

let's hope

 

[Eagleton95.99]

The alliance move is smart.

The SEC and ESPN need the rest of the nation to want to watch their games. If an alliance like this means bigger interconference matchups for everyone EXCEPT the SEC.. that would help. Then see what ESPN does when their ratings tank. ANd when more people watch non-SEC games the recruits will know they can go to non-SEC schools. THEN the talent will flow back from the SEC.

I think it’s smart. But once the situation is stabilized, I do think the B1G should be thinking about the next move. And should be the entity that moves first. This is definitely a game where the aggressor generally wins.

 

[graystork]

When people say PAC12, they seem to be referring to USC and a couple of other schools.

When people say ACC, the reference is to Clemson and Florida St.

Does anyone here actually believe that there is a world where USC and 3 others just dump the PAC12 to go to the SEC. NO, they would call the BIG10 up and say, give us a lifeline or the SEC is our solution.

Does Florida St. and Clemson increase the $$$ to the SEC? I can't see how. And why would the SEC do this aside from purposely destroying the financial viability of the ACC. Sure you get 2 big Brands, but all that does is make more brands losers... you need some teams to boost your record.


So yes, for 20+ ACC/PAC12 schools, this is their lifeline. For the BIG10 that presumably doesn't want college football to turn into the Mini NFL, getting a voting block and alliance and keeping the ACC and PAC12 in the conversation helps them.

Otherwise it will be an expensive Arms Race between the BIG10 and the SEC and in the process taking out another 20+ Schools. 8 are pretty much gone already. The Alliance knows that. No point in giving the BIG12 a lifeline when Texas/OK was that and they are gone.



I am all for Poaching USC and 3 others..... and making more money than the SEC, but that will come at a cost of almost 30 schools when all is said and done.

I think the best endgame for the Big Ten is taking 6 Pac 12 schools. This makes it the Big 20 and allows four 5 team divisions. USC, UCLA, Washington, Oregon, and Utah stay in the West, Colorado plays with Nebraska, Minny, Iowa, and Wisky in the midwest, Ohio State, Michigan State, Michigan, NW, and Illinois in the mideast and Rutgers, Penn State, Maryland, Indiana and Purdue in the east. Not only does this keep the West together, it also addresses the alleged problem of Penn State not being happy being in the same division as Ohio State and Michigan (this was supposedly the basis for the earlier Penn State to ACC rumors which were BS). With that lineup the B10 is bulletproof for all time, a TV juggernaut for the networks in all time zones, and an AAU-based, academically-focused response to anything the SEC can come up with. Also all these schools are big money makers/pie increasers except for maybe UCLA and Colorado which you take to keep USC happy and for divisional balance. Maybe Ore State, Wash State, Arizona, ASU, Cal and Stanford join the rump of the Big 12 to make it probably the top of the Group of "6" conferences.

Why would these 5 Pac 12 schools do this? Well at least $20 Mill extra/year in TV money. Some estimate that this could result in distributions of $100 mill per team/year. Also all of their other sports can continue to play each other in their own division.

At present nobody's willing to take this big a leap. That changes if the SEC keeps expanding or USC decides it wants the money.

 

[Southern Gentleman]

?

The Big Ten Conference is nothing like the SEC other than similar TV revenues. Culturally it could not be any more different.

Not my words below:

"Schools within the three conferences believe they are like-minded, that they want to continue to prioritize broad-based sports offerings and that the academic profile of their institutions matters — as does graduating athletes."

Penn State AD Barbour - "The Big Ten really prides itself on being more than just an athletics conference."

Does the above sound like something spoken by an SEC Conference member?

For the Big Ten, it's a lot more than throwing a pigskin around on Saturdays. For the SEC, I'm surprised they bother to have classes during Football season.

At the end of the day, the approaches are vastly different, however, the Big Ten Conference will continue to either remain in the No. 1 or the No. 2 position for TV revenue. The differences in revenue will not cause a Big Ten school to jump to the SEC Conference and it's different viewpoint on life.

The SEC has classes during football season? Who’d a thunk it?

 

[RURM85]

A really interesting article about the ACC and the challenges they face by joining the Alliance. However, it finally clicked for me about why the Alliance is important to the ACC.

Pretty clear that the Alliance is important for both the B1G and Pac-12 due to upcoming media contract negotiations. Thought how this can even benefit the ACC in the slightest.

It comes down to if the Alliance can structure the College Playoffs making it very difficult for Notre Dame to gain access, the ACC then forces Notre Dame into at least considering joining the ACC which would result in a larger PayDay for the Conference from ESPN. That and the fact that Commish Phillips has nothing to lose as the ACC will make half of what the SEC makes, is their motivation.

Other than ESPN, I totally believe that the unsettling state of College Football is mainly the result of 2 schools - Texas and Notre Dame. There's a reason why the Big 12 has been a dysfunctional sh*tshow for the last decade, and it's clearly due to Texas. As for Notre Dame, stop being selfish pricks and join a Conference already.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/acc-faces-balancing-act-college-191248581.html

 

[Rufaninga]

As we all see PAC12 TV expiration date, so does the SEC. If the B1G waits, SEC could try and grab USC, UW, Arizona & Oregon. & Go for Clemson & FSU. SEC would buy out GOR for ACC to make more $.

(I get academics, but leave out UCLA, Standford & some others and get Football schools first)

BIG then goes to minor league status. So does the alliance serve us long term?

 

[i'vegotwinners]

A really interesting article about the ACC and the challenges they face by joining the Alliance. However, it finally clicked for me about why the Alliance is important to the ACC.

Pretty clear that the Alliance is important for both the B1G and Pac-12 due to upcoming media contract negotiations. Thought how this can even benefit the ACC in the slightest.

It comes down to if the Alliance can structure the College Playoffs making it very difficult for Notre Dame to gain access, the ACC then forces Notre Dame into at least considering joining the ACC which would result in a larger PayDay for the Conference from ESPN. That and the fact that Commish Phillips has nothing to lose as the ACC will make half of what the SEC makes, is their motivation.

Other than ESPN, I totally believe that the unsettling state of College Football is mainly the result of 2 schools - Texas and Notre Dame. There's a reason why the Big 12 has been a dysfunctional sh*tshow for the last decade, and it's clearly due to Texas. As for Notre Dame, stop being selfish pricks and join a Conference already.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/acc-faces-balancing-act-college-191248581.html

where that article lost credibility, is that if ND ever felt pressured enough to join a conference, it's naive to think the ACC would be that conference.

ND only aligned with the ACC because they were the only major conf willing to allow ND to remain independent in football.

 

[Scarlet_Scourge]

About ND. While they do not make as much money as some schools from their NBC TV contract, that is not where most of their money comes from. It actually comes from their big money donors, who have said many times before that if ND ever joined a conference, they would no longer donate.

 

[rucoe89]

I think the best endgame for the Big Ten is taking 6 Pac 12 schools. This makes it the Big 20 and allows four 5 team divisions. USC, UCLA, Washington, Oregon, and Utah stay in the West, Colorado plays with Nebraska, Minny, Iowa, and Wisky in the midwest, Ohio State, Michigan State, Michigan, NW, and Illinois in the mideast and Rutgers, Penn State, Maryland, Indiana and Purdue in the east. Not only does this keep the West together, it also addresses the alleged problem of Penn State not being happy being in the same division as Ohio State and Michigan (this was supposedly the basis for the earlier Penn State to ACC rumors which were BS). With that lineup the B10 is bulletproof for all time, a TV juggernaut for the networks in all time zones, and an AAU-based, academically-focused response to anything the SEC can come up with. Also all these schools are big money makers/pie increasers except for maybe UCLA and Colorado which you take to keep USC happy and for divisional balance. Maybe Ore State, Wash State, Arizona, ASU, Cal and Stanford join the rump of the Big 12 to make it probably the top of the Group of "6" conferences.

Why would these 5 Pac 12 schools do this? Well at least $20 Mill extra/year in TV money. Some estimate that this could result in distributions of $100 mill per team/year. Also all of their other sports can continue to play each other in their own division.

At present nobody's willing to take this big a leap. That changes if the SEC keeps expanding or USC decides it wants the money.

and the SEC takes AZ, ASU, Cal and Stanford. That gets them access to rich California football talent and expand westward. TV/eyeball market is big enough that they can stay ahead of the B1G.

If B1G takes all the PAC-12 Cal Schools and AZ schools they lockout the SEC. California has strong media markets and Arizona is growing. This may allow B1G to leapfrog SEC.

 

[topdecktiger]

where that article lost credibility, is that if ND ever felt pressured enough to join a conference, it's naive to think the ACC would be that conference.

ND only aligned with the ACC because they were the only major conf willing to allow ND to remain independent in football.

The Big 12 also offered Notre Dame the same deal.

 

[Doctor Worm]

where that article lost credibility, is that if ND ever felt pressured enough to join a conference, it's naive to think the ACC would be that conference.

ND only aligned with the ACC because they were the only major conf willing to allow ND to remain independent in football.

If ND chooses to relinquish its independence, it is contractually bound to the ACC.

 

[fsg2_rivals]

The Big 12 also offered Notre Dame the same deal.

So?

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

Schools within the three conferences believe they are like-minded, that they want to continue to prioritize broad-based sports offerings and that the academic profile of their institutions matters — as does graduating athletes.

Big Ten and Pac-12 both currently require that members play nine conference games apiece. The appeal of cross-country (and cross-conference) scheduling is particularly enticing for the Pac-12, which would then be able to play games in the Central and Eastern time zones, more major markets and fertile recruiting regions.

One scheduling option could be that the Big Ten would drop from nine conference games to eight and each school would play one game with each of the Pac-12 and the ACC annually, sources say.

There is a strong feeling among administrators in the Big Ten, Pac-12 and the ACC that Playoff expansion — in whatever form it takes — should not take place until the end of the current contract with ESPN, in 2026.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

Andy Staples mentioned something that is different from impressions given from things I've read and heard in podcasts in the past including from the Athletic, his company. I mean if you expand and ESPN doesn't have exclusive rights to those extra games then I'd say not a bad idea to expand the playoffs and make sure those early round games go to the other networks on a shorter contract and line up all the playoff games for bidding for after 2025 and make sure it's always broken up among multiple networks. So if what he tweets is true then I'd say expanding the playoffs sooner isn't so bad as long as those early games go to networks other than ESPN but if he's wrong then wait until it all can be bid on by everyone.

 

[WhichReligionIsRight]

How about scrapping the conference championships for the alliance conferences? Conference championship week could include the same six schools, but make the games cross-sectional. USC versus Wisconsin, Oregon versus Clemson and Ohio State plays North Carolina. I think that would be pretty cool. And a nice starting point to an eventual expanded playoff.

 

[Panthergrowl13]

For the most part college football games fans/alums viewing interest are regional in nature.

If Pitt is playing Rutgers or UCLA, I would watch that game no mater what the SEC slate is for that day and time slot.

It is also time to get rid of some of those crappy OOC games that are scheduled by coaches to build their W/L records.

Some on this Board have criticized "Bowl Games" but at least those games are better than some of the crappy OOC games.

Bring on more OOC games (provided they are from the B1G and PAC).

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

 

[LOU-RU85]

For the most part college football games fans/alums viewing interest are regional in nature.

If Pitt is playing Rutgers or UCLA, I would watch that game no mater what the SEC slate is for that day and time slot.

It is also time to get rid of some of those crappy OOC games that are scheduled by coaches to build their W/L records.

Some on this Board have criticized "Bowl Games" but at least those games are better than some of the crappy OOC games.

Bring on more OOC games (provided they are from the B1G and PAC).

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

I agree with you. I watch RU games no matter what other games are on but do channel surf. I hate the crappy OOC games. Dropping them would be good IMHO.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

For the most part college football games fans/alums viewing interest are regional in nature.

If Pitt is playing Rutgers or UCLA, I would watch that game no mater what the SEC slate is for that day and time slot.

It is also time to get rid of some of those crappy OOC games that are scheduled by coaches to build their W/L records.

Some on this Board have criticized "Bowl Games" but at least those games are better than some of the crappy OOC games.

Bring on more OOC games (provided they are from the B1G and PAC).

HAIL TO PITT!!!!

I think that’s going to happen. There will probably be like 10-11 power vs power games be they inter or intra conference.

You’ll still see the cream puffs once a year or even I’ve read maybe as a spring game scrimmage (help those small school budgets). Hopefully all in the start of the season and then on to the good games the rest of the year.

This year actually has a nice slate of OOC games on paper a least. Want more of that in the future.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

I agree with him if this is true. I support expanding the playoffs and let first round and quarterfinals go to other networks besides ESPN and then line up all the contracts for everything to come open after 2025. At that time split it just like the NFL. All these networks being involved is a rising tide that lifts all conference boats.

Good point he brings up about the hand in hand of improving the regular season schedule an the expanded playoffs. Before you're trying extremely hard to stay undefeated or at 1 loss so might shy away from scheduling bigger opponents. With an expanded playoff there's a little extra leeway for a stumble but still being able to get in the playoffs.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

Good article with possible scenarios. Like the idea of conferences controlling some of the playoff games rather than the bowls. You might actually see southern teams come up into cold weather possibly. Something I've always wanted but never thought would happen in college. Also mention of in state ACC/SEC games continuing but other teams in the SEC possibly being squeezed out from top OOC games.

With college football Alliance near, what could it ultimately mean for Big Ten, Pac-12 and ACC?

The Alliance will mean the three leagues can form a voting block that will blunt the growing influence of an expanded SEC.

sports.yahoo.com

Under such a plan, the Big Ten could drop its conference schedule from nine games to eight, and require each school to play one game against an ACC and a Pac-12 team each year. Wisconsin, for example, would play Virginia and Oregon one year, Florida State and UCLA the next. Big Ten schools would be allowed to schedule the additional non-conference games as they see fit.

If adopted, the Big Ten’s conference season would consist of six games within either the East or West Division and two crossover games. There are currently three crossover games.

ACC teams, which already play eight conference games, would schedule a Big Ten and a Pac-12 opponent annually.

The ACC adding value to its television rights is the tricky part, as it is stuck in a lopsided deal with ESPN until 2036 that it signed in order to obtain a television network. The Alliance is not expected to help the conference get out of the ESPN deal.

The Pac-12, which currently has nine league games, would consider dropping down to eight as well, or just use two of the three non-conference games in the Alliance.

Any Big Ten or Pac-12 team already playing Notre Dame, which has its own scheduling deal with the ACC, would be able to count the Irish as its ACC opponent.

A possible wrinkle the group could propose would be a push for some playoff games to be controlled by conferences, not necessarily bowl games.

That would allow, say, the Big Ten to stage a playoff game at a neutral site within its footprint. That could happen inside the domed stadiums of Indianapolis and Detroit, or maybe outdoors in Cleveland or Chicago. This would replace using only traditional bowl games, which are located in the South or West.

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

I think the best endgame for the Big Ten is taking 6 Pac 12 schools. This makes it the Big 20 and allows four 5 team divisions. USC, UCLA, Washington, Oregon, and Utah stay in the West, Colorado plays with Nebraska, Minny, Iowa, and Wisky in the midwest, Ohio State, Michigan State, Michigan, NW, and Illinois in the mideast and Rutgers, Penn State, Maryland, Indiana and Purdue in the east. Not only does this keep the West together, it also addresses the alleged problem of Penn State not being happy being in the same division as Ohio State and Michigan (this was supposedly the basis for the earlier Penn State to ACC rumors which were BS). With that lineup the B10 is bulletproof for all time, a TV juggernaut for the networks in all time zones, and an AAU-based, academically-focused response to anything the SEC can come up with. Also all these schools are big money makers/pie increasers except for maybe UCLA and Colorado which you take to keep USC happy and for divisional balance. Maybe Ore State, Wash State, Arizona, ASU, Cal and Stanford join the rump of the Big 12 to make it probably the top of the Group of "6" conferences.

Why would these 5 Pac 12 schools do this? Well at least $20 Mill extra/year in TV money. Some estimate that this could result in distributions of $100 mill per team/year. Also all of their other sports can continue to play each other in their own division.

At present nobody's willing to take this big a leap. That changes if the SEC keeps expanding or USC decides it wants the money.

no.. the PAC 12 is undesirable because of TV times and national audience and, of course, travel expenses and time. If it were all about political power or sway over the NCAA your point would be fine.. but its all about TV revenue and revenue in-general and rankings based on games seen by most people who get a vote in such things and select the CFP teams.

If the money is there for Clemson and Fla State then they will stay in the ACC (as long as they can recruit against the SEC teams not named Bama). They will have a better shot at the CFP from the ACC than the SEC. Texas and Oklahoma just increased their chances by joining the SEC.. assuming their recruiting can improve... and I am not convinced it can unless they win in the SEC right away. They will both get some marquee matchups vs big SEC teams.. their fans and boosters will be happy with that.. for a time.. but the losing will grind on them.

 

[rutgersguy1_rivals]

Scheduling issues at least in the short term unless you buy out a bunch of games which probably isn't feasible. I don't know how feasible getting rid of FCS games might be for the short term.

 

[Tango Two]

AP source: ACC, Big Ten, Pac-12 to announce alliance plans​

https://fox4kc.com/sports/ap-source-acc-big-ten-pac-12-to-announce-alliance-plans

 

[topdecktiger]

no.. the PAC 12 is undesirable because of TV times and national audience and, of course, travel expenses and time. If it were all about political power or sway over the NCAA your point would be fine.. but its all about TV revenue and revenue in-general and rankings based on games seen by most people who get a vote in such things and select the CFP teams.

If the money is there for Clemson and Fla State then they will stay in the ACC (as long as they can recruit against the SEC teams not named Bama). They will have a better shot at the CFP from the ACC than the SEC. Texas and Oklahoma just increased their chances by joining the SEC.. assuming their recruiting can improve... and I am not convinced it can unless they win in the SEC right away. They will both get some marquee matchups vs big SEC teams.. their fans and boosters will be happy with that.. for a time.. but the losing will grind on them.

I don't see that Oklahoma and Texas increased their chances. Oklahoma has made it four times already out of six years. I'm not sure they do that out of the SEC.

 

[HeavenUniv.]

Panthergrowl, are you saying you and other Pitt fans wouldn’t be excited about UConn or Maine coming into Heinz Field ?

 

[HeavenUniv.]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cb...fluence-expected-to-be-announced-tuesday/amp/

 

[HeavenUniv.]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/wolver...pansion-expected-to-be-announced-tuesday/amp/

 

[cicero grimes]

I think the best endgame for the Big Ten is taking 6 Pac 12 schools. This makes it the Big 20 and allows four 5 team divisions. USC, UCLA, Washington, Oregon, and Utah stay in the West, Colorado plays with Nebraska, Minny, Iowa, and Wisky in the midwest, Ohio State, Michigan State, Michigan, NW, and Illinois in the mideast and Rutgers, Penn State, Maryland, Indiana and Purdue in the east. Not only does this keep the West together, it also addresses the alleged problem of Penn State not being happy being in the same division as Ohio State and Michigan (this was supposedly the basis for the earlier Penn State to ACC rumors which were BS). With that lineup the B10 is bulletproof for all time, a TV juggernaut for the networks in all time zones, and an AAU-based, academically-focused response to anything the SEC can come up with. Also all these schools are big money makers/pie increasers except for maybe UCLA and Colorado which you take to keep USC happy and for divisional balance. Maybe Ore State, Wash State, Arizona, ASU, Cal and Stanford join the rump of the Big 12 to make it probably the top of the Group of "6" conferences.

Why would these 5 Pac 12 schools do this? Well at least $20 Mill extra/year in TV money. Some estimate that this could result in distributions of $100 mill per team/year. Also all of their other sports can continue to play each other in their own division.

At present nobody's willing to take this big a leap. That changes if the SEC keeps expanding or USC decides it wants the money.

I agree with you 100 percent. However, the B1G may not want to disturb the decades long relationship with the PAC. The y might encourage the PAC to expand with TTU and OSU and sit tight.
The reason for this might be to move into the southeast in 2035. FSU and VA Tech or UNC might be available under the right circumstances given you access to southeast athletes and growing demographic markets.
The great white whale for the B1G is ND. IIRC the B1G offered membership to ND as far back as 1989. If the ACC destabilized after the 2035 GOR expires you might be able to get three ACC teams and ND. With a PAC scheduling alliance and membership in the B1G ND would be able to play most of their traditional rivals on a yearly or bi-yearly basis.
I still prefer the idea of adding 6 PAC teams now and forming a coast to coast conference and be done with it. Such a super conference would be in an unassailable position money wise. You also maintain academic integrity with the B1G presidents as the selected schools would be AAU members. The only question is would the B1G be willing to gut the PAC?

 

[Raritan83]

Scheduling issues at least in the short term unless you buy out a bunch of games which probably isn't feasible. I don't know how feasible getting rid of FCS games might be for the short term.

That is certainly the daunting part though I will note they already have 20 of the 70 games scheduled with the B1G looking at future schedules. That said they have none with PAC outside of ND

 

[LBusDoor90_rivals]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/wolver...pansion-expected-to-be-announced-tuesday/amp/

I hope this article is correct and that all of these things are part of it.
Seeing imbalanced years against the Big West (like this year - 2 away, 1 home) go away is a very good thing to me. Yes, it might be an "on the road" year against a PAC/ACC team but it doesn't count in the B10.