There’s still non-conference.
The BIG needs Arizona State for hockey!
1 Like
My thoughts exactly! There is a Pacific 8 conference that a lot of PAC 12 teams have in place. This would fit the big10’s issue of playing the same 6 other teams.
NCAA hockey would benefit having more of a west coast presence
1 Like
i’m not sure i see 5 “power” conferences remaining with each filling their membership to either 16 or 20 schools. today there are 65 P5 schools, 68 if you include BYU, UC and UH. I think the next round will be about having less schools dipping into network revenue deals, not more. i think “relegation” is much more likely, where we see 4 super conferences of existing P5 schools, as opposed to 5 conferences “promoting” ~20 schools from G5 (assuming 16 schoos per conference is a magic number) and diluting revenue
i actually think the USC/UCLA move will hasten a merge between the B12-2+3 and PAC12-2…i also see the ACC potentially taking 2 schools…UC & WVU depending on what they can do with ND.
i think that newly merged conference gives first dibs to BYU and the Texas schools? I think TV is the driver and oddly schools like OkState, KU/KSU, IaState are all on the outside
i dont think ACC loses any members because i thought their member rules are very prohibitive for exits?
1 Like
For the hockey fans, hockey is not even an afterthought in this. It is all driven by football. Not even basketball matters. The Big 12 has won the last two NCAA basketball championships. The Big Ten has not won a national championship in over 20 years. Yet no one is interested in Baylor or Kansas, the last two national basketball champions.
4 Likes
USC and Michigan State better be playing for a Trojan Horse trophy. But besides that meme potential this entire charade is ridiculous.
Domers to the MAC!
Notre Dame reportedly in negotiations with the B10. Oregon and Washington waiting in the wings.
2 Likes
The question is who’s paired with ND if they’re added? Doubt they go with Oregon/Washington by themselves without a Pacific NW partner.
It’s a long shot, I agree. But I called it as an academic counterbalance to taking WVU, a school they’ve passed up at least once for academic reasons. SMU, far superior to WVU academically would give them a foot in the important Dallas market…could be TCU, as well.
Blackbird - With Stanford a possibility to give ND two of their traditional rivals right in the conference.
2 Likes
Agree - Stanford would be the pick if ND added to move to 20 with 2 others.
SMU and TCU are not even remote possibilities for the BIG greed. Stanford is also an AAU school and very good at many sports so they fit nicely into the puzzle.
SMU, TCU, and WVU are not AAU (that has some significant meaning for the BIG) so they are out. OSU has the “veto” power and will never let PITT, UC, or WVU anywhere near consideration.
It is an overall sad mess the SEC and BIG10 have created by ruining college sports.
2 Likes
Good point. I bet this is a significant part of the discussions.
1 Like
Agree on everything. If ACC loses a school it might just hold its nose and let WVU in. SMU aggressively trying to climb into P5 somewhere - strong academics, new stadium investments and the Dallas market make them somewhat attractive - possibly to the ACC.
2 Likes
Smu to the Big 12/Pac12 combo sandwich seems more likely to me. SEC will raid some ACC and so will the Big.
PAC 12 has always shyed away from schools with religious affiliations. ACC has historically Baptist Wake Forest already in the fold.
LA Times reporting today that UCLA’s athletic department was actually $102.5 million in debt, that the B1G deal is expected to pay $100 million a year when rights are renegotiated, and that joining the B1G basically kept UCLA from cutting all non-revenue sports.
This thing is all kinds of sour math. If they are this sideways, who else is? Wow.
UCLA has some program-specific issues that other places don’t face, with the possible exception of Cal for the basketball arena:
-
The athletic department rents the Rose Bowl from the Tournament of Roses Committee and basically only gets to keep only regular ticket sales. The Committee keeps the vast majority of luxury ticket sales, concession sales, merchandise sales, and sponsorship money, giving a tiny percentage to the athletic department.
-
Pauley Pavilion is technically owned by the Regents of the University of California, not the athletic department. The athletic department has to pay the Regents a per-game usage fee plus a regular practice fee per sport. Despite this ownership structure, the Regents required the athletic department to take out the loans to pay to renovate Pauley Pavilion, and the athletic department, not the Regents, is responsible for servicing the debt. (But the Regents are ultimately guarantors, which was causing systemic issue due to the athletic department’s debts.)
-
Whatever ticket revenue the athletic department would have gotten from its marquee sports totally evaporated in the pandemic with California’s closure orders.
-
Media rights payments went way down as well, with the Pac 12 playing a significantly reduced schedule.
-
Under Armor canceled a huge, lucrative apparel deal (paying something like $8 million a year). It was replaced by a Nike deal paying $500K/year.
-
In addition to the Pauley renovations, the athletic department is paying for a whole lot of other renovations and new facilities.
-
And they’re on the hook for like three different coach buyouts I think.
2 Likes
El Charles, I appreciate the detail here. This is bleak! That said, Tyou.