USC vs the B1G teams? Absolutely that adds value. I know you want status quo but this is where it's going
Just poach USC and be done with it
- Thread starter Plum Street
- Start date
Who is coming with them? Who is adding value? Its about the $ not what they used to be. I am fine with adding. Certainly don't think it's necessary. USC isn't a good fit for many reasons.
Last edited:
The Big Ten is not raiding the Pac12. Not going to happen. Delaney didn't raid another conference; Warren doesn't even close to his mojo. The Pac12 no less? The conferences are joined at the hip. They coordinated their COVID strategy for crying out loud.
It makes all the sense in the world to fans, but to the Presidents, Chancellors and Commissioner, raiding the Pac12 is as taboo as incest.
It makes all the sense in the world to fans, but to the Presidents, Chancellors and Commissioner, raiding the Pac12 is as taboo as incest.
Not only that the conference is doing awful with TV ratings. Everyone on here wanting USC is living in a time warp like its 2008.
The answer is yes. The addition of Rutgers and Maryland to the Big Ten is a big part of why the B10 pays out over $50 mill in TV payments. USC would do the same. That's the whole point of realignment. USC has a huge fanbase and this is why the PAC 12 is so worried about keeping them happy. It's not about conference championships it's about what will make money on a TV contract. What's the last conference championship that Texas won?
Last edited:
USC, UCLA, Stanford and Cal-Berkley ... you corner the L.A. and San Francisco TV markets (actually, you basically get all of California with those four) and you get the four best academic schools that make an effort in football that are available (possible exception of Notre Dame). If Warren isn't already working on this (phone calls made), he should be fired. Bonus points for collapsing the Pac 10 (and probably forcing them into merging with what's left over of the Big 12).
I agree with most of what you have said on realignment. But we disagree on this issue.
that’s not what it’s about. It’s about getting TVs..whether they watch or not. (See Rutgers)
USC is a home run
USC is royalty. Without looking I think they have more National Championships in football this century than the B1G.
you just get the subscriptions. That’s 5 million TVs that will have the big then network. A year.
They aren't getting the subscription for the PAC 12 why would they opt for the Big Ten Network?
Did you read the article I posted. The PAC12 Network paid each school just $2.8 million in 2019. That's is it! USC isn't a home run!
Last edited:
I don’t think you understand how tv works. Big ten doesnt get money from subscribers. They get money from cable companies.
I know you don't understand how TV works because I posted an article about it. Sports networks aren't free. All of them are in higher priced tiers that the cable company supplies. No one in PAC12 country is paying more to move into the sports package Tier.
Let me repeat. THE PAC12 SCHOOLS MADE JUST $2.8MILLION PER SCHOOL IN 2019!
There is no $ gold mine bringing USC aboard.
Last edited:
exacrky. Which is why the big ten network will negotiate that it WONT be in the sports tier. It will be provided in normal tier…just as it is in all the big ten markets
when the discussion turns to personal insults..I know I’ve made my point.
That is the most truthful statement ever made on this site.
For the rest who might be confuse, Penn State is no more part of Philly Market than Pitt is, which is not at all. In order to be included you must be located in that area. It is the same reason why Cuse doesn't count for NYC TV but Rutgers does and Rutgers is in NJ and Cuse is in NY.
Just like in business mergers, bigger isn’t always necessarily better. I’m not saying a raid couldn’t work but pushing one forward right now might not be the best option in the long run. Especially if USC decided not to go through with it - then we’d have no leverage at all with partner conferences.
I don’t think an alliance with the ACC is helpful to the BIG for anything other than the playoff negotiations. The PAC12 would be different. It wouldn’t be OSU vs Washington State because the way it would be negotiated would (or at least should) be based on prior year record so that most of the time the top teams down the line would play each other. It should be set up kind of like the bowl match ups down the line.
Agree the top teams would play each other. But that also means that the bad teams would be playing each other as well. And that creates inventory no one wants to see. I agree an alliance is helpful for voting block interests against the SEC. But beyond that, just take what we want instead of messing around with alliance.
pretty much and why you simply ignore some of the posters. It's really not worth getting in to any longer.
Just like I said to do . Get usc and whoever they wanted to bring with them . They should let me be commissioner !!
Plum does it again.
Prob the most accurate poster on board on long term calls
Most of these long term calls are easy to see . Wish I was more accurate in real life on things that mattered lol .
It's not genius to see some stuff possibly coming if you pay attention. I read sports biz news and such because I find it fun. Then you have an idea of what's got a good chance of happening if you're informed enough. I and other posted about this when Texas/OU left. Said the B10 could split their tier 1 rights between ESPN/Fox before that happened. Said this go around after the SEC left CBS there's a decent chance it could split 3 ways and that has decent chance of happening. Said there's a decent chance the B10 could scrap divisions before that came out as a strong possibility. Said RU still got a good chance to the B10 before their next tv deal despite every round of defections and this board going manic with each departure. I'm Joe Nobody idiot with no connections but I don't consider any of these foresights to be whoop dee doo. Just thoughts about what might happen given what's out there.
I don't start threads too often but this was my post in the Texas/OU leaving to the SEC thread in July of last year. Sounds a lot like what's happening could be happening now and the general gist of expansion to 20+ teams that could possibly snag ND.
Well they're already in the SEC it's not like they're being added as new members or something and the whole notion of OSU/Michigan leaving the richest conference or likely always close to it is crazy. Texas/OU are leaving the B12 because they've already been rebuffed by the networks on an extended deal and they know they would be falling behind in terms of money as time went on, that's not the case in the B10. They're not geographic outposts either like OSU/Michigan would be.
More surprising is names Kansas, ISU or Colorado on their own accords without bigger names alongside. You're not materially moving the needle, if you're moving the needle at all that is, with moves like that.
I keep saying it, nothing magic about 16 you've already become unwieldly as far as conference size at that number so go really big and get the cream off both coasts. PAC12 teams and ACC teams all know they're falling behind revenue wise so many will be predisposed to possible options. Get 6 from the PAC12 and go to 20, having a 2 team western outpost isn't earth shattering really and then lay the groundwork for ACC teams in a decade. UNC/UVA seem to be popular and then say FSU and then last spot see if ND with the ACC weakened, possibly by the SEC as well, has no choice but to join.
Now at that juncture maybe ND joins the ACC to try and save it and it might work for a bit, but I wonder if Texas/OU can't stop the B12 from falling behind in tv rights over time can ND do so for the ACC as a full member? I kind of think no, but I don't know.
Regardless there aren't really two teams available currently that will push the needle much if at all and 16 isn't some magic number. So if you really want to act now and actually push the needle in terms of revenue then you have to be bold and pioneer towards something that hasn't been done before...a national conference with big names, big fanbases, big markets and lots of inventory and content to carve up and package out. Anything short of that with Texas and OU off the table and ACC GORs in force for a decade isn't going to do much in terms of tv rights IMO.
BTW just to note as far I've read, the SEC schools are slated to make 60M when all their new deals come in force and Texas/OU will be getting the same so there's no big bump the conference would be getting with those additions. It'll just be status quo but obviously strengthens them for down the line. So if Texas/OU aren't moving the needle to renegotiate the SEC's current deals then no one out there is for the B10 either beyond what they would get anyway. Unless as I said if you see it as a zero sum and you weaken the PAC12 by taking 6 and then that's even more money to be thrown at the B10 and the PAC12/B12 leftovers get little.
If is genius if you tell the league to do it and then a year later they do it . The big question is what happens next ? So many possibilities
Poach ND and Stanford now.
Oregon, Washington , Berkeley (we had a nice rivalry with cal during Terry Shea days ) all on the table.
Oregon, Washington , Berkeley (we had a nice rivalry with cal during Terry Shea days ) all on the table.
I would have never thought you would say something like this. This didn't age well.
