UCLA and USC WILL Join the B1G in 2024

Redwood Forrest

Hall of Fame
Sep 19, 2003
10,885
641
137
75
Boaz, AL USA
I have the feeling this whole thing is out of control. TV markets, TV networks, Streaming services, NIL, Transfer Portal, Early signing day & etc., etc. The inmates are running the show while the Warden and staff falling all over themselves scurrying and jockeying for leverage and circling the wagons. Meanwhile the other circus in Washington D.C. is looking at "fixing it".
 
  • Like
Reactions: dtgreg and Toddrn

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
9,941
2,317
187
42
www.myspace.com
Yep, with Rutgers, B1G is now coast to coast. This is interesting from the Rutgers site:

"Tickets out" means the freebies, a la UAB...
I always felt that the Rutgers/Maryland addition was incredibly cynical. These were too programs that have accomplished very little in football and certainly didn't have two of the top athletic departments. It was all about the territory. I would wager the the fact that they were easy wins for the football powers didn't hurt.

In this sense, it was all about exporting the Big 10 product. They made things easier for Ohio State and the other Big 10 powers, expanded their network, and ultimately the move seems to have paid off financially even if it is kind of distasteful. Now, Rutgers and Maryland are like more valuable versions of Vanderbilt. They can't afford to leave but can't really achieve success either.

This does get into one inevitable fact though. There can only be so many football powers in a given conference. The Big 10 seems like it's willing to build everything around Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Penn State and USC. That makes a lot of sense. Those are the brands, and the rest is about reaching more people with those brands.

The SEC on the other hand has Oklahoma, Texas, LSU, Alabama, Auburn, Texas A&M, Georgia, Florida and Tennessee with the potential additional of Clemson and FSU. That might sound good, but once you start adding up the inevitable losses that brings us to the conclusion that there might not be enough Vanderbilts to go around. Who exactly is going to be sacrificed to bolster those brands? The Big 10 chose who was going to get the losses and it's worked out quite well financially because it bolstered their biggest brands.

The SEC might end up Rutgering what was previously seen as a valuable brand, in fact they kind of have to... otherwise you just have a lot of teams with mediocre records and the national media is not going to spend much time talking about how great a 6-6 SEC team is.
 

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
80,105
29,926
437
Huntsville, AL,USA
I always felt that the Rutgers/Maryland addition was incredibly cynical. These were too programs that have accomplished very little in football and certainly didn't have two of the top athletic departments. It was all about the territory. I would wager the the fact that they were easy wins for the football powers didn't hurt.

In this sense, it was all about exporting the Big 10 product. They made things easier for Ohio State and the other Big 10 powers, expanded their network, and ultimately the move seems to have paid off financially even if it is kind of distasteful. Now, Rutgers and Maryland are like more valuable versions of Vanderbilt. They can't afford to leave but can't really achieve success either.

This does get into one inevitable fact though. There can only be so many football powers in a given conference. The Big 10 seems like it's willing to build everything around Michigan, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Penn State and USC. That makes a lot of sense. Those are the brands, and the rest is about reaching more people with those brands.

The SEC on the other hand has Oklahoma, Texas, LSU, Alabama, Auburn, Texas A&M, Georgia, Florida and Tennessee with the potential additional of Clemson and FSU. That might sound good, but once you start adding up the inevitable losses that brings us to the conclusion that there might not be enough Vanderbilts to go around. Who exactly is going to be sacrificed to bolster those brands? The Big 10 chose who was going to get the losses and it's worked out quite well financially because it bolstered their biggest brands.

The SEC might end up Rutgering what was previously seen as a valuable brand, in fact they kind of have to... otherwise you just have a lot of teams with mediocre records and the national media is not going to spend much time talking about how great a 6-6 SEC team is.
You do realize this has being preached now for at least thirty years - and it hasn't happened yet. That said, we're heading for the B1G and the SEC basically dividing up the twelve team playoff between them, with a couple of wild cards? IOW, we're heading NFLdom, when the regular season means less and less, so long as you get into the playoffs. Then, it doesn't matter how badly OSU has beaten up MD and Rutgers (and UCLA), they still have to play real teams from the SEC...
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
30,145
17,811
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
Lots of rumors floating around out there that Clemson is looking to jump to the SEC, possibly in a package deal with Florida State and Miami.
Hard to know what’s what right now. I’ve also seen it reported that what TIDE-HSV mentioned earlier is being discussed. That is, an actual Big Ten/SEC break away with an 8 team playoff featuring only teams from those conferences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dtgreg and TIDE-HSV

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
31,056
22,615
187
South Alabama
Lots of rumors floating around out there that Clemson is looking to jump to the SEC, possibly in a package deal with Florida State and Miami.
I wouldn’t put any stock from rumors at this point. Especially ones that are being started by people like Dennis Dodd.

what people have to realize is 2 things. 1) the ACC survives as long as all 4 of ND, UNC, Virginia, and FSU are happy and 2) the current members of the SEC have a lot of say of who gets in. Everyone who keeps saying Clemson has to realize they have 3 automatic no votes and probably 4-5 others before negotiations happen. Florida St is probably the most likely of those 3 teams to make it in the SEC and it’s because the money they generate.
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
41,952
33,648
187
IMO, some of you may be overvaluing physical attendance at games. The money is in media contracts. The more media viewers you have, the more money your conference will make. And those viewers do not have to be die hard fans. They just have to tune in often enough to attract advertising dollars.

Attendance across most sports has been declining for a while now, yet profits and revenues continue to rise.

This expansion helps both the B1G and the SEC because it essentially wraps up the national TV audience in 2 conferences. These two conferences no longer need to bend to the will of the have-nots.
 

imauafan

All-American
Mar 3, 2004
3,430
722
132
Huntsville, AL
IMO, some of you may be overvaluing physical attendance at games. The money is in media contracts. The more media viewers you have, the more money your conference will make. And those viewers do not have to be die hard fans. They just have to tune in often enough to attract advertising dollars.

Attendance across most sports has been declining for a while now, yet profits and revenues continue to rise.

This expansion helps both the B1G and the SEC because it essentially wraps up the national TV audience in 2 conferences. These two conferences no longer need to bend to the will of the have-nots.
Today it's butts in seats that are decline and tomorrow it will be eyeballs in front of tv sets. IMHO attendance at games is a leading indicator that people are willing to stop watching due to a number of factors. I've never been convinced that adding teams due to the population of their state was a good idea. IMHO it is much better to create and nurture natural regional rivals because to get people outside of the normal viewing audience you have to have an intriguing matchup. UCLA-Rutgers at 11:00est is not going to attract anyone other than UCLA and Rutgers fans, regardless of the population of California and New Jersey and with attendance declining, that is an indication that even UCLA and Rutgers fans are less likely to watch than before.
 

dtgreg

All-American
Jul 24, 2000
2,073
773
232
Tuscaloosa
www.electricmonkeywrench.com
Today it's butts in seats that are decline and tomorrow it will be eyeballs in front of tv sets. IMHO attendance at games is a leading indicator that people are willing to stop watching due to a number of factors. I've never been convinced that adding teams due to the population of their state was a good idea. IMHO it is much better to create and nurture natural regional rivals because to get people outside of the normal viewing audience you have to have an intriguing matchup. UCLA-Rutgers at 11:00est is not going to attract anyone other than UCLA and Rutgers fans, regardless of the population of California and New Jersey and with attendance declining, that is an indication that even UCLA and Rutgers fans are less likely to watch than before.
It does appear that we're close to killing the goose to get the gold eggs. NASCAR had a good thing with the rivalries and the fandom that was naturally created from a labor of love, which was then sacrificed in the name of expanding the brand. Retaining the intense feelings of an Alabama / Tennessee or Alabama / Auburn when all that matters is a playoff berth will be a difficult thing.

Why would you ever agree to give up an annual rival? It doesn't make sense. Those are organic; it is what College Football IS, or was. This shiny thing we're being offered is going to prioritize what, exactly?
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
9,941
2,317
187
42
www.myspace.com
You do realize this has being preached now for at least thirty years - and it hasn't happened yet. That said, we're heading for the B1G and the SEC basically dividing up the twelve team playoff between them, with a couple of wild cards? IOW, we're heading NFLdom, when the regular season means less and less, so long as you get into the playoffs. Then, it doesn't matter how badly OSU has beaten up MD and Rutgers (and UCLA), they still have to play real teams from the SEC...
What also hasn't happened was adding the best teams in the ACC and the Big 12 to the already toughest conference. It's simple math, there will be more losses.. What has happened as I showed is that programs like FSU and Arkansas have actually lost a ton in terms of attendance. So, these brands are not all static, it's just that some programs are on top. Tennessee for example has fallen precipitously in terms of brand value. So, it has happened to Arkansas and Tennessee to some extent. Clemson's rise has also come at FSU's expense (they lost 20,000 attendance!).

There can not be and never has been (not even in the 23 team Southern Conference days) 10 programs in one conference all viewed as football elites. It can't happen because in order for there to be winners there has to be losers. Obviously someone will win, that's a given. That's how everything works. I'm saying that losing hurts brands, so it's about the value of an addition while they are losing that matters a great deal. What do they become then?

FSU lost 20,000 attendance. Arkansas lost 15,000 attendance. Virginia Tech lost 10,000. It's not just Rutgers who loses attendance and brand power once they lose more. So what I'm getting at is understanding what will retain the most overall value and what's best long term. If it's going to be the SEC Vs. the Big 10 you do not want to put yourself at a disadvantage.
 
Last edited:

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
30,145
17,811
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
If you go to 20-24 teams in one conference... the losses are not going be what you think they are. You're still only playing 8 or 9 conference games. There is going to be a lot of room to dodge the other elite teams in a given year, just like now. More so than now, actually. And that's actually their plan.

Add to that the whole end game, which is an 8 to 12 team playoff constructed or 4 or 5 teams from the SEC and Big Ten. Losses just don't matter like they do in a BCS or 4 team playoff world. The plan is to have 4 or 5 teams in each conference with 10-2 or 11-1 type records. And with 20 or so teams in a conference, you can easily set up the rotations where that is possible.

But let's be frank here. There is nothing left besides Notre Dame. You can dress up additions like UNC by looking at state populations, or you can dress up additions like FSU by looking at already present rivalries and a history of producing championships and big TV match ups. They are both still mediocre additions in the grand scheme. After Texas, OU, USC, and Notre Dame, there were no more great additions for either the Big Ten or the SEC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dtgreg and FaninLA

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
9,941
2,317
187
42
www.myspace.com
If you go to 20-24 teams in one conference... the losses are not going be what you think they are. You're still only playing 8 or 9 conference games. There is going to be a lot of room to dodge the other elite teams in a given year, just like now. More so than now, actually. And that's actually their plan.
It depends on who those additions are. If for instance, as some want the next round of additions are FSU, VT, Miami, and Clemson, you're simply adding football powers. Add that to Oklahoma and Texas and you've added not just the top ACC and Big 12 teams but let's review the list, Oklahoma, Texas, FSU, VT, Miami and Clemson. For every conference game involving those guys that will be one win one loss. So even if you just imagine those 6 teams playing each other, that's those teams on average going 2-3 or 3-2 in just those five games! That's already more losses than some of those teams are expected to get in a year, and they're only halfway through a conference schedule.

That's the other part, SEC teams are not going to give up rivalries so under this mega conference scenario they're going to add conference games. It might be 2. So, if you're Arkansas for example now you've just added Oklahoma and Texas to your schedule every single year.

Now, if you do it differently and you say ok, we're adding Virginia, North Carolina... then that counter balances Oklahoma and Texas and that's part of what I've been getting at this whole time. Someone will lose, but if you don't engineer that somewhat you are going to tarnish some of your bands because everyone likes a winner, losers not so much.

It actually makes more sense to counter-balance the valuable football brands with additions that offer other things (for example North Carolina's tier 3 rights are worth just as much as Alabama's, that's how valuable their basketball brand is). So you don't hurt your football brands, you get into a massive new state, and you gain revenue.
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
30,145
17,811
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
I won't argue which makes more sense, Krazy. I think you can make good arguments either way. I'm just saying that I do not think the additions are going to make as big a difference in the grand scheme of the ability for our teams to compete for championships. As the way of winning a title is going to change dramatically. It's going the way of the NFL... For example, I think it will get to a point that a 9-3 Alabama, who has played a really difficult schedule, will be included in the playoff.

You are digging down into the details and I'm simply looking at it from a 30k foot viewpoint.

I can see the plusses and minuses of UNC/UVA/Duke/Va Tech, as well as those for and against FSU/Clemson/Miami.

You know, we may see some kind of split between the two, such as UNC, Virginia, FSU, and Clemson. Then again, we may not stop at 20 and instead go all the way to 24 and pull in half the ACC. What I do not see happening is things staying at 16 teams. I think the Big Ten pulling in USC was a real game changer when it comes to the Notre Dame question. They could really cement that by pulling in Stanford as well but it seems they are giving ND time to make a decision now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KrAzY3

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
9,941
2,317
187
42
www.myspace.com
You know, we may see some kind of split between the two, such as UNC, Virginia, FSU, and Clemson.
That's actually along the lines of what I'd hope for realistically. I get that it will be hard to just add UNC and Virginia due to the grant of rights situation. I'm just more worried they fall into the hands of the Big 10, if it takes adding FSU and Clemson to seal the deal then that's better than letting the Big 10 snatch them up.

It's kind of hard to picture an 8 team ACC addition without Notre Dame though, probably something like Virginia, VT, FSU, Miami, Clemson, NC, Duke and Pitt. Even though I added a couple of my favorites that's still got some dubious additions.

If the Big 10 adds Notre Dame, Oregon, Stanford, and Washington the SEC might be poised to add Virginia, North Carolina, FSU and Clemson. But... I heard Miami is working on finding a way out of the ACC, to go where?
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
30,145
17,811
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
That's actually along the lines of what I'd hope for realistically. I get that it will be hard to just add UNC and Virginia due to the grant of rights situation. I'm just more worried they fall into the hands of the Big 10, if it takes adding FSU and Clemson to seal the deal then that's better than letting the Big 10 snatch them up.

It's kind of hard to picture an 8 team ACC addition without Notre Dame though, probably something like Virginia, VT, FSU, Miami, Clemson, NC, Duke and Pitt. Even though I added a couple of my favorites that's still got some dubious additions.

If the Big 10 adds Notre Dame, Oregon, Stanford, and Washington the SEC might be poised to add Virginia, North Carolina, FSU and Clemson. But... I heard Miami is working on finding a way out of the ACC, to go where?
I've seen the same reports on Miami. They are not an AAU member. They are a private school, and I do believe they've actually got a fine academic reputation, but I'm not sure the Big Ten would grant them the same exception to their informal AAU rule like they will Notre Dame. Which means they're angling for the SEC.
 

Latest threads

Shop the TideFans.shop !


Your purchase through our TideFans.shop links helps support the site! Thanks!