The bylaws of some conferences require near unanimity to admit a new member. Two no votes would have stopped Cal, Stanford and SMU from joining the ACC. To admit them they had to eliminate resistance from UNC and Clemson.
They were when they joined. AAU kicked them out after.
UC doesnât bring anything incremental to the big ten. So I would think OSU really didnât have to throw a hissy fit blocking themâŚ.everyone else saw no value there because UC doesnât bring the viewers.
Same couldâve been said for Cal/Stanford/SMUâŚâŚ no real material viewers added there. Those schools donât bring hoops either, so I think the ACC was an âus tooâ move.
Pitt is different to me. Does a perennial top 10 program really worry about owning their state recruiting when 60% of their roster is out of state? If Penn State is fighting tooth and nail with Pitt to âdominateâ PA recruiting then theyâve got serious problems
I could entertain the argument that thereâs too much geographical saturation from a tv audience perspective, which to me lends itself more to the other members voicesâŚ.dont dilute the shares
I dunno folksâŚâŚ
1 Like
OSU and PSU would never allow it.
Absolutely agree. sUCks has had some on and off again football success this century but nothing before that. They had some long ago basketball success but not much since. They add no media markets or recruiting grounds. Theyâre not AAU. Hell, OSU would probably give them a yes vote for political reasons knowing full well that the rest of the B1G would shoot them down.
You can count to 13, right? Is that a hey dey for you? How about 10 years ago, when they beat an SEC team for the national title?
Texas A&M didnât want Texas but they still voted them in the SEC.
Eventually. I canât imagine Ohio State ever voting to admit UC to the Big 10.
1 Like