Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

With Southern California and UCLA working toward an exit from the Pac-12 to join the Big Ten, college football is poised to take an irreversible step toward the construction of two major conferences at the expense of tradition and the remaining Power Five leagues.

While viewed in administrative circles as a possibility since the first round of significant conference realignment a decade ago, the birth of these super leagues would create a chasm of space between the rest of the current Football Bowl Subdivision and the SEC and Big Ten.

USC and UCLA attempting to leave the Pac-12 is the clearest signal yet that the top level of college football will center on dozens of teams married not by geography, rivalry or history but the chase for increasingly large media-rights payouts and broadcast deals.

https://www.usatoday.com/story...lignment/7780419001/

All about the ðŸ’ĩ 💰 ðŸ’ĩ


They really need to add Stanford. I realize that all of this has almost nothing to do with academics, but a conference with Stanford, Northwestern, and Michigan (and maybe Wisconsin) and then several other really good academic schools would be the best academic one in the county outside the Ivy League. Several top 10 medical schools and law schools among the conference members. In terms of academics, the SEC has Vanderbilt and Texas and then a bunch of schools that you don't want your family members going to.

I love how some of the talking heads just assume that U$C will step right in and challenge Ohio $tate for supremacy in football.  How’d that work out for Nebraska and Penn State?

The Trojans certainly have tradition, but Oregon and Washington have been more relevant in football in the last 30 years than SC.  

UCLA hasn’t been relevant for decades now in football.  

But the Big Ten loves So Cal and it’s a huge media market.

@Tschmack posted:

I love how some of the talking heads just assume that U$C will step right in and challenge Ohio $tate for supremacy in football.  How’d that work out for Nebraska and Penn State?

The Trojans certainly have tradition, but Oregon and Washington have been more relevant in football in the last 30 years than SC.  

UCLA hasn’t been relevant for decades now in football.  

But the Big Ten loves So Cal and it’s a huge media market.

Pete Carroll was at USC from 2001-2009 and went 109-19 and won two National titles. They ended the season #3 in the country as recently as 2016. They'll be relevant.

You are right about wanting Oregon in your conference as well. There is a LOT of Nike money tied up in that program.

I think you try to snap up Oregon, Stanford, Washington, and Cal to go with USC and UCLA. That gets you to 20 schools with 9 conference game in each side of the bracket. Of course, the remaining big fish are Notre Dame, Clemson, Miami, North Carolina, and Duke (the later two for basketball alone).

You remove the Pete Carroll years and it’s been a slightly better than average to solid program going all the way back to the early 80s.  Yes, they’ve had a few good seasons mixed in, but they don’t come close to Ohio State.  Certainly not Michigan level and honestly maybe not even Penn State.  More like Michigan State.  

That being said, So Cal is there to expand the BT market and Riley could help them get back to being a top 15 program.   Top 3-5 in the country playing in the BT is a pipe dream.  

UCLA is tagging along for the ride.  That’s about it.

Oregon and Washington have been decent in most major sports over that same timeframe.  

Last edited by Tschmack

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×