I would be shocked. Top academics but limited local interest, nevermind national. Less local interest than even Rutgers had. Not enough alums stay local to move the needle, same reason Duke won’t ever be a target. Adding these two would shrink the per school payout for sure.
Tulane would be a nice add. Good academics and a fun city to visit. I might go the USF route to get another large market in FL, a rival for UCF and a bigger presence in the sunshine state. I know USF is down sports wise but the school has potential as they proved when they first joined the BE. Obviously you take a current P5 like Zona first but if you are going group of 5 I like Tulane and USF better than Yukon.
Tulane IMO fits the Big 12 more than UConn. People say UConn carries the NYC market but let me say this, when's the last time anyone saw a UConn fan from around NYC/NJ/Philly? I live just outside of Philly and UConn has zero pull here, it's all Rutgers/Cult State/ND with a smaller following for schools like Nova/Temple/UDel. You'd think with hoops they'd attract students from South Jersey who are sports fans but nope.
I lived in midtown for the past 2 decades and probably met 2 UConn alums that actually cared about UConn athletics, and barely heard a peep when they won this past year from anyone in NYC in general. People just like the past names like Ray Allen, Rip Hamilton, Kemba, Lobo, etc but there aren't too many fans of program as a whole, more just like general Big East basketball fans. Even when Rutgers was at their very worst a few years ago, there has always been talk, regardless positive or negative, and when we were good in the mid 2000s Schiano through early Flood, Rutgers football became huge in NYC for a minute. UConn definitely does not "carry" NYC or NYC Metro, no one does from a college sports perspective, the only "carrying of NYC metro" that matters is DMA which only contain Rutgers and Army amongst the FBS.
I tend to agree with you.
You're far from the first person who says that the Big Ten does not want to be responsible for the death of the PAC. I don't see why the Big Ten would care, and the fact that the Big Ten took on USC and UCLA indicates that the Big Ten is willing at the least to inflict serious harm on the Pac. Your second point is very important. On your third, I doubt that the expansion candidates would be permanently limited to a lesser payout - probably there would be a transition period to full payout just as with Rutgers and Maryland. Having "have-nots" is not good for conference stability.
B1G can easily say we'll see you in 6 yrs. when your Big 12 contract expires and the B1G's new deal is to be renegotiated. Big 12 GOR is not being extended and when you're the top earning conference you can dictate when the right time is.
I don't feel the B1G is worried about being blamed for the PAC's demise , they
I should have clarified that one point on lessor payouts.
Disagree.....same reason B1G won't take Stanford or Duke (after), or even Northwestern if it had do-over. Academics don't matter. Eyeballs matter. Top private schools are smaller and the alums don't stay local.
Christ, when USC and UCLA announced he should have had a presser the next day announcing the addition of SDSU. Guy’s a total incompetent.
SDSU doesn't have anywhere near the prestige of UCLA and USC -- SDSU is part of the California State system, which is the second tier in California higher education below the University of California, which includes UCLA. It's kind of like dating the girl next door after the prettiest girl in town has dumped you.
He's claiming expansion will happen, but only after the TV rights deal will be done.
I just don't understand why any TV system would want to contract with a conference when it doesn't know if the conference will have enough members to be viable.He's claiming expansion will happen, but only after the TV rights deal will be done.
So when 3 programs are left because no one wants them and deal with cartoon channel finalized , expansion will go forward.
But the PAC need schools and SDSU might have given them a little more advantage in TV rights negioations because of southern cal tv viewership
You're probably right, but San Diego is a different media market than the rest of Southern California. My guess is that you're right in suggesting that the PAC asked if having SDSU (or SMU or UTSA) would make a big difference in the contract negotiations and didn't like the answer. There's also a "prestige" factor here -- just as the Big Ten wants a certain kind of school, so too does the PAC.
I suppose you can have a bunch of “if this then that” clauses in the contract for various configurations but it’s much easier and cleaner if the membership is set.He's claiming expansion will happen, but only after the TV rights deal will be done.
So when 3 programs are left because no one wants them and deal with cartoon channel finalized , expansion will go forward.
And said girl next door is a 5 at best, not the fantasy girl next door you see on TV or movies.
Yeah no ****. But beggars can’t be choosy. At least to add a southern Cal school with some ceiling to replace the two that left
Just keep in mind that one reason Rutgers' administration wanted the school in the Big Ten was so that it would be with academic peers. I'm sure it's not the only school administration that thinks that's important. San Diego State is a second-class citizen in California's higher education system, and you have to expect the flagship universities to be influenced by that.
I would date a 5, but it's hard after you've been married to [name the actress you find most beautiful].
Exactly. Rutgers aligns and wants to be aligned with schools like Michigan, OSU, Purdue, Wisconsin, and now USC and UCLA instead of random directional Floridas or Temple in the AAC or Catholic schools that RU has nothing in common with in the BE.
As far as athletics is concerned beggars can’t be choosers. It’s being too snooty or whatever and not killing off their competiton when they had the chance that’s put them in this position in the first place. If you’re going to be like that then don’t even bother competing.
Yep, and the moment it could, Rutgers jumped up. I suspect Rutgers wouldn't be enthused about being asked to jump down. Maybe you're right that a school in that position should,, but it's not an easy decision to make until you're convinced there's absolutely no alternative.
I don't dispute that the dollars come first. But, academics and value aren't mutually exclusive. As an example, a former President at Fox Sports is reported to have speculated that Stanford's media value was in the neighborhood of $45M while despite having vastly more successful football, Oregon "just" hovered around $30M. Stanford Worth More Than Oregon? If there's truth to this suggestion, Stanford adds to B1G revenue on Day One, expands the B1G footprint in a major west coast media market and would immediately become the conference's most prestigious academic institution. Win-win-win, even if it means also taking-on a travel partner that "only" pays for itself, while further expanding the footprint and holding its own academically, particularly if Cal or UW.
I'm not sure that it's academics that explains why Stanford might be more valuable. Stanford isn't very good now, but I'm sure you've heard of Jim Plunkett, John Elway and Andrew Luck, just to name great quarterbacks who have come out of the school. There's nothing like having a winning tradition, as Notre Dame illustrates. The easiest travel partner would be Cal, with which Stanford has had a rivalry for over a century -- but maybe UW would be more attractive because it would bring Seattle, an additional media market.
As I recall, Stanford also has the greatest number (or something close to it) of championships across all sports. Yes, these are all Olympic sports. But, it makes them winners nonetheless. Across the board athletic success helps. What probably helps more is location. Without checking, I'm sure that far more people live in the immediate Bay area as in the entire state of Oregon. Either way, Stanford just seem like a logical fit for the B1G. I agree that either Cal or UW would be the most logical traveling partners. UW presumably brings more to the table financially. But, Cal brings superior academics and would be more of logistical fit, locking-up California for the B1G. Maybe it's personal bias after years around academia. But, Stanford and Berkeley grads far-and-away disproportionally populate administrative circles at top research universities. They hold sway that isn't reflected on spreadsheets. There's no way these institutions end-up on the losing-side of conference realignment.
This is the same point I was making. You can’t hold your noses high up in the air in terms of athletics or don’t bother competing.
