That would be nice - wrt Rutgers (won't happen, of course). As for "more"? If they can't do better than 2 rag-tags from the PAC12 (and even Oregon or Washington would be financial rag-tags), then no.Now let’s kick out Rutgers and Maryland. make room for two more Pac12 teams.
IMO, look Southeast for the next expansion targets. Perhaps midwest if Notre Dame finally gets its head on straight. Its future as an independent is DOA.That would be nice - wrt Rutgers (won't happen, of course). As for "more"? If they can't do better than 2 rag-tags from the PAC12 (and even Oregon or Washington would be financial rag-tags), then no.
Instead of CJF to USC rumors the reality was USC coming to CJF all along.I guess this means yet another new contract for CJF.
More than twice as many high school wrestlers in California than in any other state. Just sayin".So let's talk pros & cons:
PROS are academics line up, athletic commitments to Olympic sports line up and there would definitely be a huge revenue increase from TV rights.
Positive for recruiting
Positive for B1G baseball & softball as they can play early Spring schedule in SoCal with more favorable weather.
Basketball & Olympic sports like soccer, swimming/diving, volleyball, track, etc can lump multiple games on a east, west or midwest swing for a week @ a time.
CONS are scheduling, predominantly for football would be very challenging with constantly going across these major time zones during the season.
Other Con: I don't think USC & UCLA have ice hockey and wrestling teams.
Additional comments welcome.
WE ARE...PENN STATE!!!
CONS are scheduling, predominantly for football would be very challenging with constantly going across these major time zones during the season.
Scheduling is a CON for USC and UCLA, not for current Big Ten teams.
And why predominantly for football? It's the same distance teams have to travel regardless of the sport. Plus football is almost always played on Saturday and one day of classes are missed. Other sports have games throughout the week which could mean multiple days missed.
And who would be the last? Doubt it is Oregon without OSU. Doubt UW without WSU. Doubt ASU with UA. Maybe Stanford like someone said.Notre Dame. C’mon down!
In this age of ginormous not-really-even-a-conference conferences, the need for "even numbers" is no more. 15 or 17 works just as well/not well as 16 or 18.And who would be the last? Doubt it is Oregon without OSU. Doubt UW without WSU. Doubt ASU with UA. Maybe Stanford like someone said.
THIS ^^^^ is also what I’m wondering. I find it hard to believe that the U.C. board of Regents would allow the Bruins to go. But we all know money talks.Also, wondering if UCLA has the autonomy to do what it wants since it’s part of the Cal system. Would think the state government folks there might have concerns.
Fox Sports sits in LA, any coincidence?Also, it's interesting that this is going down right around when the Big Ten is negotiating their new TV deal (and the Pac-12 is next which this would torpedo in terms of value).
So let's talk pros & cons:
PROS are academics line up, athletic commitments to Olympic sports line up and there would definitely be a huge revenue increase from TV rights.
Positive for recruiting
Positive for B1G baseball & softball as they can play early Spring schedule in SoCal with more favorable weather.
Basketball & Olympic sports like soccer, swimming/diving, volleyball, track, etc can lump multiple games on a east, west or midwest swing for a week @ a time.
CONS are scheduling, predominantly for football would be very challenging with constantly going across these major time zones during the season.
Other Con: I don't think USC & UCLA have ice hockey and wrestling teams.
Additional comments welcome.
WE ARE...PENN STATE!!!
<consults google translator>
Not a huge fan of UCLA, but USC is really the only blue blood program that is attainable for the Big Ten and is absolutely the right move if the conference feels it needs to expand. UCLA might be the cost of admission to get USC.
I'd be really leery of getting other teams from the Pac-12 though. Maybe 2 more if USC insists to have more "local" teams. If so, I would grab Washington and Oregon. They bring the most to the table of any of the remaining teams. Most of the Pac-12 teams are great school, even good athletically (in some things) but not good for revenue and would only lessen the payout per school for the Big Ten.
Grabbing four total also probably works best for football schedules as it would give all of them 3 opponents to be permanent and then rotation through the rest of teams.
All I know is that the USC fans at the Rose Bowl were really **** people. All my willpower not to kick the crap outta a handful of them.PSU has a fairly sizable alumni base in SoCal. Have to think that some other schools would want to make a jump also. If they could get Colorado/Utah, Arizona/Arizona State in the mix, then you could drive from the East Coast to the West Coast and be entirely in Big Ten Country.
Everyone I know from UCLA is smart, classy, cool. Every person I know from USC is a loudmouth ****, putz. I know quite a lot of people from both. I wish UCLA would go back to those powdery, light blues from days gone by. Those were waaay cool vs the darker blue todayUCLA has 118 national championships. USC has 107. For comparison, Penn State has 51 (most in the Big Ten). Michigan is next with 35. Both are home run additions.