USC, UCLA to join the Big Ten in 2024

dgcrow · Jul 4, 2022

Guest said:
i don't disagree but I want ND to be "forced" (for want of a better word) into a conference such as the Big 10. They are always overrated at least 10 positions higher than they should be and play a weak schedule I mean, c'mon, playing Navy every year. Just have to look at this year's schedule, they start with OSU but it is the first game of the season and anything can happen in the first game of a season. In the Big Ten that game would be scheduled later when things are more settled, weaknesses are addressed, etc. Their next few opponents, Marshall, California, North Carolina, BYU, Stanford, and UNLV. I don't follow football much so I don't know if these teams are good this year but I still see this as a pretty weak schedule. I seem to remember that when Penn State joined the Big Ten Joe Paterno was all for it because he thought PSU football would dominate the Big Ten and they would win many championships. Didn't exactly work out although I am not saying PSU hasn't done well, just not as well as they thought and PSU is generally ranked where they should be. I think this will happen to ND. They will be good (in football) just not as good as they are usually regarded (wrongly). ND would just be another good football team but would not be overrated like they are every year. Sorry, just my rant about ND football.

I think the only way Notre Dame would join the Big Ten would be if the school is convinced it has to. It's way too arrogant to ever join voluntarily.

Ander1345 · Jul 4, 2022

Snoopy said:
Latest theory of mine, college football is actually retracting from a long era of over subsidized, over expansion.

Peak college football was probably pre-NFL when the 80K-100K stadiums were built and Red Grange played. Then I'd posit there was a long era of college football as cheap advertising. Lots of players, cheap stadiums, cheap coaching staffs, etc. led to every college and university in the country fielding a DI team whether they could fill the stands or not, just so Podunk State could claim to be "Big Time".

I'm too lazy to look up the data. But I'd be interested in seeing how college football's slice of American's entertainment dollars has tracked over time against the number of D1 schools.

As near as I can tell, the only reason small programs have survived as long as they have into the modern era is they could sign up to get pounded on for 3-4 games a year as practice material for the big programs. Not sure how healthy that was for college football as entrainment, let alone the players.

Nah I think secretly the game was a disparity nightmare then too, it just wasn't as easily identifiable because it was newer.

There was bad teams then too, just as there is bad teams now. I think all we've really seen over time is schools prioritized their interests. It's why the University of Chicago is now D3 with a focus of prestigious academics. There's also not always the same kind of funding that a school like Illinois has, which is the financial backing to push sports AND academics.

ChiefGritty · Jul 4, 2022

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1543969620578562048

This seems like an ill-considered panic move by those schools, though it would make a lot more sense if not for the Big XII's previous ill-considered panic move to add Cincy, Houston, UCF and BYU.

Everyone should just sit tight and wait until the Big Ten signs its TV deal. Then the opportunities to work with broadcasters who have swung and missed will reveal themselves.

Maybe someone has a taste for the huge inventory of a full-on Pac 12/Big XII merger. Maybe the cream of both crops have a way to wriggle themselves free and create a fully new entity. Maybe something more creative germinates as I'd suggested earlier.

These schools are lunging from a position of weakness with incomplete information, abandoning Phil Knight (never a good idea in sports), and Arizona, Colorado and ASU are letting their interests get lumped in with Utah's.

If this is in fact their best move, that will be much clearer and beyond any doubt still available to them in six months. Take a breath fellas.

Mr. Tibbs · Jul 4, 2022

good or bad football programs is not just good or bad luck
some schools make it really important to have excellence in sports and some dont. thats not all of the reason, but it certainly is a large one. The last time it was really emphasized from the top down was with Ikenberry. I saw it first hand, and spoke to him about it many times as I was good friends with a mega donor who took me along to many functions down there then.

I mean he wasnt like the guy leading Ohio State, but he knew we could replicate Michigan's program if we really wanted to. He saw it at Penn State for years.

Mr. Tibbs · Jul 4, 2022

ChiefGritty said:
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1543969620578562048

This seems like an ill-considered panic move by those schools, though it would make a lot more sense if not for the Big XII's previous ill-considered panic move to add Cincy, Houston, UCF and BYU.

Everyone should just sit tight and wait until the Big Ten signs its TV deal. Then the opportunities to work with broadcasters who have swung and missed will reveal themselves.

Maybe someone has a taste for the huge inventory of a full-on Pac 12/Big XII merger. Maybe the cream of both crops have a way to wriggle themselves free and create a fully new entity. Maybe something more creative germinates as I'd suggested earlier.

These schools are lunging from a position of weakness with incomplete information, abandoning Phil Knight (never a good idea in sports), and Arizona, Colorado and ASU are letting their interests get lumped in with Utah's.

If this is in fact their best move, that will be much clearer and beyond any doubt still available to them in six months. Take a breath fellas.

it does sound a bit pre mature, then again they are privvy to a lot more information than you and I are .
everyone can see this merger of B12 and the recent additions/middlings of the PAC happening from a mile away.

some people are speculating Cal drops football altogether

Joel Goodson · Jul 4, 2022

Ander1345 said:
Nah I think secretly the game was a disparity nightmare then too, it just wasn't as easily identifiable because it was newer.

There was bad teams then too, just as there is bad teams now. I think all we've really seen over time is schools prioritized their interests. It's why the University of Chicago is now D3 with a focus of prestigious academics. There's also not always the same kind of funding that a school like Illinois has, which is the financial backing to push sports AND academics.

U of Chicago ALWAYS had a focus on academics. The deemphasis on athletics wasn't a factor in academic focus.

The state of Illinois has done a piss poor job at funding higher education for a loooong time (at least since Big Jim). Some administrations have been worse than others, no doubt, but it's been bad. As Illinois is at the top of the food chain, it's hit hasn't been as bad relative to its brethren. Thankfully, this sorry situation is finally being righted (due to large tax increases). But a LOT of damage has been done.

As to athletic funding, thank God we're in the BIG and that we have a large, engaged fanbase.

Ander1345 · Jul 4, 2022

Mr. Tibbs said:
good or bad football programs is not just good or bad luck
some schools make it really important to have excellence in sports and some dont. thats not all of the reason, but it certainly is a large one. The last time it was really emphasized from the top down was with Ikenberry. I saw it first hand, and spoke to him about it many times as I was good friends with a mega donor who took me along to many functions down there then.

I mean he wasnt like the guy leading Ohio State, but he knew we could replicate Michigan's program if we really wanted to. He saw it at Penn State for years.

Yeah there's a lot of factors too that led to the shaping if the current landscape.

Public vs private
Boosters
Geography
Marketability
Etc

Really it boils down to as long as it's about money, the most money generated wins. I kinda feel like the AAU thing is really just a pseudo-justification because most of the AAU schools also happen to be the best targets left.

ChiefGritty · Jul 4, 2022

Mr. Tibbs said:
it does sound a bit pre mature, then again they are privvy to a lot more information than you and I are .
everyone can see this merger of B12 and the recent additions/middlings of the PAC happening from a mile away.

Seems pretty short-sighted to me, I dunno.

The only time in this whole game of thrones we've seen schools identify peers amid the chaos with common interests and common values and worked together in a thoughtful, customer-focused way was the Catholic 7 as the old Big East was collapsing.

Not coincidentally that's the best example of making lemonade out of lemons that we've seen. UConn downgraded their football program just to get back.

Mr. Tibbs said:
some people are speculating Cal drops football altogether

My god, who could have possibly imagined such a thing?

ChiefGritty said:
The current power 5 schools that don't make it will probably drop football entirely rather than bother with sub-major status, especially the ones whose stadiums sit on valuable real estate.

Joel Goodson · Jul 4, 2022

Ander1345 said:
Yeah there's a lot of factors too that led to the shaping if the current landscape.

Public vs private
Boosters
Geography
Marketability
Etc

Really it boils down to as long as it's about money, the most money generated wins. I kinda feel like the AAU thing is really just a pseudo-justification because most of the AAU schools also happen to be the best targets left.

ND is by far the biggest target left and they're not AAU.

I think fit and academics/research, obviously, are still important to the Presidents. If ND wasn't a huge king, they wouldn't be getting consideration. Stanford really isn't bringing all the much, football wise, But I guarantee the Presidents are salivating over having them in the conference,

Mr. Tibbs · Jul 4, 2022

Joel Goodson said:
The state of Illinois has done a piss poor job at funding higher education for a loooong time (at least since Big Jim). Some administrations have been worse than others, no doubt, but it's been bad. As Illinois is at the top of the food chain, it's hit hasn't been as bad relative to its brethren. Thankfully, this sorry situation is finally being righted (due to large tax increases). But a LOT of damage has been done.

friends of mine who went to EIU, NIU or WIU tell me they dont even "recognize" the campuses anymore in that they are nothing like they used to be - and this is in a negative way.

I cant say anything about SIU, but all the kids in the 1970's - 1990's that used to go to a state directional school now go out of state - often times at not much extra money. I think ISU has been able to get through this, but EIU and WIU and NIU are all in trouble in many respects.

look for EIU or WIU to dramatically change.

ChiefGritty · Jul 4, 2022

Joel Goodson said:
ND is by far the biggest target left and they're not AAU.

I think fit and academic, obviously, are still important to the Presidents. If ND wasn't a huge king, they wouldn't be getting consideration. Stanford really isn't bringing all the much, football wise, But I guarantee the Presidents are salivating over having them in the conference,

What, are they gonna start an American Football program at Oxford and get invited to the Big Ten? Are we going to have Rutgers vs the Sorbonne in late November?

You guys gotta understand, the AAU thing isn't a talking point imposed BY the academic leadership of the current schools, it's a talking point imposed ON them.

The Presidents never wanted any of this, but they trust their AD's and conference commissioners, and know that they will catch an earful from their donors if athletics comes to harm on their watch.

Stanford being in or out of the Big Ten is totally inconsequential for its academics or ours. It is not inconsequential for the dollars flowing to the DIA, so it's not going to happen.

ChiefGritty · Jul 4, 2022

Mr. Tibbs said:
friends of mine who went to EIU, NIU or WIU tell me they dont even "recognize" the campuses anymore in that they are nothing like they used to be - and this is in a negative way.

I cant say anything about SIU, but all the kids in the 1970's - 1990's that used to go to a state directional school now go out of state - often times at not much extra money. I think ISU has been able to get through this, but EIU and WIU and NIU are all in trouble in many respects.

look for EIU or WIU to dramatically change.

NIU, EIU, WIU, SIU, ISU and Chicago State (and don't forget Governor's State!) all being completely separate and independent of one another and offering overlapping and competing course offerings has never made very much sense and isn't the way it's done in other states.

zentrails · Jul 4, 2022

jmwillini said:
Can we ever be relevant?

I think this helps recruiting and I also think we have the right HC for the first time in a very long time.

TheChief4Life · Jul 4, 2022

zentrails said:
I think this helps recruiting and I also think we have the right HC for the first time in a very long time.

It certainly feel like we have the right coach. At the very least, I can’t imagine Lovie trying to navigate this…

IlliniFaninHoosierLand · Jul 4, 2022

Mr. Tibbs said:
friends of mine who went to EIU, NIU or WIU tell me they dont even "recognize" the campuses anymore in that they are nothing like they used to be - and this is in a negative way.

I cant say anything about SIU, but all the kids in the 1970's - 1990's that used to go to a state directional school now go out of state - often times at not much extra money. I think ISU has been able to get through this, but EIU and WIU and NIU are all in trouble in many respects.

look for EIU or WIU to dramatically change.

Alright I'll bite since I'm an EIU alum and have went back there several times for homecoming. How they do not "recognize" the campuses?

Mr. Tibbs · Jul 4, 2022

they say it’s not at all like it used to be .

and they say enrollment is way down - they thought it might not be around in 5-10 years .

I’ve never been there so I don’t know

IlliniFaninHoosierLand · Jul 4, 2022

Mr. Tibbs said:
they say it’s not at all like it used to be .

and they say enrollment is way down - they thought it might not be around in 5-10 years .

I’ve never been there so I don’t know

"Not at all like it used to be" doesn't really tell me anything.

And yeah enrollment is down but that was more due to the budget impasse under Rauner. That nearly killed the school.

OrangeLife · Jul 4, 2022

ChiefGritty said:
NIU, EIU, WIU, SIU, ISU and Chicago State (and don't forget Governor's State!) all being completely separate and independent of one another and offering overlapping and competing course offerings has never made very much sense and isn't the way it's done in other states.

NIU,EIU, WIU,SIU, and ISU were all founded as teachers colleges and transitioned in the mid 1900s. UI is the land grant univ for Illinois and was founded as an agricultural and industrial school. They all transitioned looking for revenue and students. Chicago State also started as a teachers college and was taken over by the Chicago School District for several decades, which is why a degree from there is still semi-worthless.

PIT_ILL · Jul 4, 2022

Joel Goodson said:
ND is by far the biggest target left and they're not AAU.

I think fit and academics/research, obviously, are still important to the Presidents. If ND wasn't a huge king, they wouldn't be getting consideration. Stanford really isn't bringing all the much, football wise, But I guarantee the Presidents are salivating over having them in the conference,

Even in the world of superconferences you need some people to lose games. OSU fans don't want 9-10 tough games. They don't want to go 8-4 or 7-5. They need teams in their conference to ensure they finish 10-2 in a down year. If that team is wearing a Stanford jersey instead of a Toledo jersey all the better. On top of that if it is in California and some of their recruits can come watch even better. No sport in the world is competitive from top to bottom

Joel Goodson · Jul 4, 2022

PIT_ILL said:
Even in the world of superconferences you need some people to lose games. OSU fans don't want 9-10 tough games. They don't want to go 8-4 or 7-5. They need teams in their conference to ensure they finish 10-2 in a down year. If that team is wearing a Stanford jersey instead of a Toledo jersey all the better. On top of that if it is in California and some of their recruits can come watch even better. No sport in the world is competitive from top to bottom

FWIW, I wholly support adding Stanford.

ChiefGritty · Jul 4, 2022

PIT_ILL said:
Even in the world of superconferences you need some people to lose games. OSU fans don't want 9-10 tough games. They don't want to go 8-4 or 7-5. They need teams in their conference to ensure they finish 10-2 in a down year. If that team is wearing a Stanford jersey instead of a Toledo jersey all the better. On top of that if it is in California and some of their recruits can come watch even better. No sport in the world is competitive from top to bottom

The reigning best football team in the world went 12-5 last year. Which of course is easily understood as good in the NFL structure.

We're totally blowing up the notion that the best college football team has to be something close to undefeated, if that wasn't already clear.

This stuff about needing to provide for a steady stream of weaker schools is a weird way of backdooring in the (correct!) notion that the patterns and folkways of a college football season are central to its appeal.

PIT_ILL · Jul 4, 2022

ChiefGritty said:
The reigning best football team in the world went 12-5 last year. Which of course is easily understood as good in the NFL structure.

We're totally blowing up the notion that the best college football team has to be something close to undefeated, if that wasn't already clear.

This stuff about needing to provide for a steady stream of weaker schools is a weird way of backdooring in the (correct!) notion that the patterns and folkways of a college football season are central to its appeal.

I mean that is a pretty flawed argument. First off it is assuming the Superbowl winner is the best team. The 2007 Patriots would like to talk about that. Second it assumes that one season's success translates to the next season in the NFL. Third the salary cap in the NFL as well as the way scheduling works is set up to create parity.

The only time a team can have more than one loss in the CFP era is if they start the season in the top 5. A team starting near the bottom of the top 25 almost certainly has to go undefeated to have a hope at the CFP.

I actually think moving to the NFL model would be beneficial for the P5 schools. Create a salary cap and draft recruits. That would create much more parity and your school of choice would have a pretty good chance if your coach could develop talent.

Point-Illinois · Jul 5, 2022

PIT_ILL said:
I mean that is a pretty flawed argument. First off it is assuming the Superbowl winner is the best team. The 2007 Patriots would like to talk about that. Second it assumes that one season's success translates to the next season in the NFL. Third the salary cap in the NFL as well as the way scheduling works is set up to create parity.

The only time a team can have more than one loss in the CFP era is if they start the season in the top 5. A team starting near the bottom of the top 25 almost certainly has to go undefeated to have a hope at the CFP.

I actually think moving to the NFL model would be beneficial for the P5 schools. Create a salary cap and draft recruits. That would create much more parity and your school of choice would have a pretty good chance if your coach could develop talent.

The thing for me is, if I wanted to watch the NFL, I’d watch the NFL.

I don’t always know why, but my desire for watching college sports (99% Illinois) trumps any desire to really ever watch an NFL game.

Turning P5 football into an NFL-lite league has a high chance of losing my viewership/money.

But hey if they go that route, maybe I’m not the type of fan they are concerned with anymore?

GForce · Jul 5, 2022

Point-Illinois said:
The thing for me is, if I wanted to watch the NFL, I’d watch the NFL.

I don’t always know why, but my desire for watching college sports (99% Illinois) trumps any desire to really ever watch an NFL game.

Turning P5 football into an NFL-lite league has a high chance of losing my viewership/money.

But hey if they go that route, maybe I’m not the type of fan they are concerned with anymore?

I'm right there with you. My interest in football is almost entirely tied to the Illini. And it's not just the move toward semi-pro I'm wary about, it's the expansion that ends up watering down historic rivalries.

Part of the fun is also dreaming of a return to the type of relevance and success we enjoyed in the '80s. But with the expansion, the power and money is not only concentrated in the 2 superconferences, but IMO the top teams will only get richer and more powerful as well. So any dreams of a conference championship become more and more of a fantasy. And breaking into the cabal of teams that vie for the Nat'l Championship every year? That's more a pipe dream than ever.

BZuppke · Jul 5, 2022

illini80 said:
Ok. If you are Ohio State and the SEC offers you 120M to jump youre saying there’s no chance? I don’t care what number you want to use, but they are the most valuable brand in the conference and they share that media revenue with teams like Illinois. If they can get something closer to their actual value you know for a fact they wont consider it apparently? For the record, it was a hypothetical, and I’m as confident those conversations are taking place as you are they won’t leave. We can both be right.

Or share that revenue with Vanderbilt and Kentucky?