Oregon, Washington 'Vetted' And 'Cleared' To Join The Big Ten According To New Report
Conference realignment continues to be the story of college football, with the Big Ten leading the charge.
www.outkick.com
USC & UCLA to B1G by 2024; conferences react; TV contracts thread
- Thread starter Liontown
- Start date
www.outkick.com
Well, this is certainly big news. For optics, I would have preferred Stanford over Oregon. In any case, pretty significant gets if true.Oregon, Washington 'Vetted' And 'Cleared' To Join The Big Ten According To New Report
Conference realignment continues to be the story of college football, with the Big Ten leading the charge.
P.S. So I guess in 2024 Penn State will open conference play on the road at USC and the following week travel to Washington.
Last edited:
I think the "if true" are the operative words. I haven't seen this reported anywhere else.
Meaningless "change", actually.
Was never anything the B10 could enforce (scheduling a P5 OOC).
Look at PSU's 2026 schedule as Exhibit A. Thanks to the "WTF?"-ness of the Sandy Barbour regime (home and home with Temple?), PSU had already set up a schedule of OOC games of Temple, Marshall, and Buffalo.
And the Washington game will be on Thursday night
"Due to the winterizing process, in '24 Penn State will play an all-away schedule..."
Oregon/Washington cleared for jump to the Big 10. McMurphy is reporting they have been vetted and cleared just waiting to see if Pac 10 implodes... See link below
Link
Link
Last edited by a moderator:
Another team beginning with O that we can hate on. I just might dislike the western O more than the mid-western one.
Oh, gee, another gem from the Cuckoo's Nest escapee.
Big Ten should have hired the Yormark brother.
Really thought they would go after Georgia Tech for the Atlanta TV market. Much bigger bucks if B10 TV has a team in the market. Rutgers gave them NY, Maryland DC. USC/UCLA gives them LA. Also thought they would find a way to move into Boston market. Maybe BC but they supposedly don't fit in terms of type of school but why not, it's always about the money.
U of Oregon seems like it would be a fun trip. I‘ve been to Oregon once for a wedding and loved it. Beautiful. I’m actually heading there again in a month for my daughter to run track at a meet. Looking forward to it.
A conference doesn't "get" a market simply by virtue of school's location. The school has to have fans that actually watch it on TV in large numbers. Anyone in the ACC;s offices will tell you that BC was the biggest mistake it made. They'd pay the Big Ten to take it away. Likewise, GT isn't big draw, nowhere close to generating revenue at the level of the Big Ten's hurdle.
The Big 12 will take it. Can’t you just wait for those big Ohio State vs Texas Tech or UCF Rose Bowls?
I think it’s funny that people are taking this seriously. Sure, the Big Ten has “vetted” them. But they aren’t inviting them at this point and even the original McMurphy article says that.
If they had wanted OU and UW they would have signed them last summer before signing a new TV deal.
If they had wanted OU and UW they would have signed them last summer before signing a new TV deal.
The problem is that as you get to the big money contracts now the networks aren’t going to pay a fortune to show Georgia Tech vs Indiana, Purdue vs Boston College, Stanford vs Minnesota or California vs Rutgers. You have to have compelling matchups and content that is worth paying for.
just make the RoseThe Big 12 will take it. Can’t you just wait for those big Ohio State vs Texas Tech or UCF Rose Bowls?
Bowl the BIG championship game 
You should look into how the B10 network contract works with the cable companies. It has nothing to do with getting ratings or the quality of the teams or games. Nobody WANTS to see Rutgers. It has to do with how much the cable company has to pay per subscriber if there is a B10 team in that market. It's lots more when there is a B10 in the market. Doesn't matter if the team is good or stinks. At least that's how it used to I work. I'm not aware of a change.
Another one who believes the 15+ year ******** that the large cable companies pay more for BTN carriage rights in state where there is a Big ten team. That tiered pricing is long gone. BTN is no longer marketed as a discrete product, but comes as package with FS1 and FS2 and it's been that way for years.
And, FWIW, BTN revenue is peanuts compared to the media rights deals with Fox, CBS, and NBC.
Ok I stand corrected but this article seems to indicate that tiered pricing still exists.
Adding USC and UCLA could be huge for Big Ten Network
amp-awfulannouncing-com.cdn.ampproject.org
Last edited:
From a bunch of nimrods (Cole Fu@king Cubelic?) with no sources. Even SNL Kagan's numbers are estimates and they're off.Ok I stand corrected but this article seems to indicate that tiered pricing still exists.
Adding USC and UCLA could be huge for Big Ten Network
And for the three cents it's worth, the numbers being bounced around are not what the Big Ten gets from BTN.
Good question The same could be asked about Nebraska.
FWIW, BTN increased the rights fee by $14mm p.a. shortly after Rutgers and Maryland joined. Still dilutive even with the reduced payouts both schools initially received.
If it gets OSU's panties in bunch bring on the Ducks and Huskies.
True, but what matchups would Georgia Tech, BC, Stanford, or Cal bring to prime time tv? None really. I think we’re at a point now where content is key (as opposed to location near big cities, etc).
Largely agree, except for, possibly, Stanford. Put it this way, I'd rather Stanford than say, Nebraska.
There aren't many needle movers left, period. And with those who remain crowded together in the same conference, the club becomes more exclusive.
True, it’s getting to a point that no 1 school can increase the value enough on their own.
I’m waiting for the point when the main money makers realize that they can add schools of interest like FSU/ Clemson/ Oregon/ Washington and still increase revenue by dropping the dead weight from their conferences. Addition by subtraction.
A legitimate point, but it will never happen. Conference by-laws are probably a major impediment. Inevitably such a move would result in a lawsuit. Can you see the parade of university president's on the witness stand.
Counsel for East Podunk U: President Buttmunch, why did you vote to eject my client from the conference? Remember you are under oath.
Buttmunch: Money.
Also you need the lesser schools. Imagine playing nothing but elites for 8 games. Either the elites would fall (like Neb) or teams would have 3-4 losses (likeNFL) which would hurt. You need to ‘easier’ games.A legitimate point, but it will never happen. Conference by-laws are probably a major impediment. Inevitably such a move would result in a lawsuit. Can you see the parade of university president's on the witness stand.
Counsel for East Podunk U: President Buttmunch, why did you vote to eject my client from the conference? Remember you are under oath.
Buttmunch: Money.
You need games. Networks aren't paying as much for six game conference schedules. Could be accomplished by playing some teams home-and-home. Alternatively, the Big Ten could drop two teams (which would likely translate to $10mm per surviivor) and still accommodate a nine game conference slate. I might even pay to watch the consequences if they tried.
SEC football schedule: Opponents set for eight-game model in 2024 season with Texas, Oklahoma joining league
The SEC schedule will take on a new look in 2024 with the Longhorns and Sooners joining the conference
www.cbssports.com