USC and UCLA to the BIG10 in 2024

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

LS1 Z28

Territorial Marshal
Oct 30, 2007
5,352
4,200
1,743
Why UCLA and not Oregon? BIG10 wanted to lock SEC out of L.A. market. Which tells me it’s not all about TV ratings, there is some strategy here. Once you put Ohio St, Penn St, Mich on your schedule, your viewers go up substantially on average. The same way ours do with TX and ou. So if viewers don’t matter, who gets the last few seats at the big boy football table? Clearly Oregon is the most interesting, then who?
Don't overlook the part that academics play in B1G expansion. UCLA's academics rank 20th nationally. They're considered to be one of the best P5 schools in the country.

Oregon isn't bad academically. They're ranked 99th, and they're an AAU member. But they don't bring the same level of prestige that UCLA brings.
 
Mar 30, 2005
2,341
674
1,743
7 Island Suite
Dec 7, 2006
515
284
1,613
You are thinking to narrow. A good lawyer could figure out how Clemson would not get any SEC TV money (so zero to the ACC) but Clemson would get $50MM/yr in "payments in kind" that are not linked (at least on paper) to the TV revenue that they generate by being part of SEC.
Heck, a good lawyer could call Force Majeure and blow the current Grant of Right out of the water.
So don't count on the GOR as OSUs savior.
The ACC's grant of rights are not ironclad even if they hold up in court because it's also not accurate to state that the ACC owns all of their TV rights: They own the TV rights to the home games. This is much bigger than the conferences now. If Fox/Apple/Amazon or whoever gets the Big 10's media rights wants to air Clemson-Michigan at the Big House, then they might be comfortable having Clemson-Rutgers in Death Valley be aired on the ACC Network (or whatever the lawyers work out).

Point is that the Big 10 and SEC are entering a different stratosphere financially. They will double up the non-Power 2 conferences in money and then it's just a bidding war between the networks for who gets what properties. This will be settled in boardrooms and courtrooms, not on the field.

I highly doubt any property in the Bottom 3 is safe anywhere, even if they're contractually obligated to someone. There's a price attached to them all and it's just a matter of whether the SEC/Big 10 will match that price because it increases their own value in a bidding war.
 
Sep 2, 2014
297
113
593
42
The ACC is fine through the 2030s with their tv deal, so I don’t see them getting raided YET. Big 12 needs to act now. Oregon and Washington will also go big.

The obvious answer is the right one: Arizona schools, Utah, Colorado. Look to add Louisville and pitt to get to 18 maybe Miami and NC State to get to 20. We will be second tier but the 3rd beet conference with a coupe of the biggest schools in the country
But their TV Deal is horrendous. If they can't renegotiate (and not sure why ESPN would since they own all of it) then I could see this going to court if Clemson, FSU, and/or Miami want out bad enough.
 
Mar 30, 2005
2,341
674
1,743
7 Island Suite
They were talking about this on Danny and Dusty on ESPN Radio.
Nice to be mentioned. I would disagree with it though, unless the ACC GoR is enforceable. If it is, will be interesting to see what happens considering the current CFP deal ends a decade before the ACC GoR.

And also consider the sources. Kanell played at Florida State and Dusty is pandering to the rest of Oklahoma.
 
Jun 28, 2011
1,106
944
1,743
55
Auburndale, Florida
If not a part of the Big 2, I want no part of playing for the fbs division 2 championship.

If it gets to that I would be for dropping football or going div 3. That would separate us enough from the others where winning would matter and feel right.
 
Sep 2, 2014
297
113
593
42
Pipe dream would be the SEC expanding with us, Clemson, FSU and Miami.

The other question is UNC...where do they want to be? Because if the others in the ACC move, so will they. They stink in football, but the North Carolina market is big and their academics would make them valuable to both conferences.
 
Mar 30, 2005
2,341
674
1,743
7 Island Suite
The other question is UNC...where do they want to be? Because if the others in the ACC move, so will they. They stink in football, but the North Carolina market is big and their academics would make them valuable to both conferences.
Thamel said on Finebaum yesterday that when you look at the numbers, North Carolina is actually the most valuable school in the ACC and what’s left of the Big 12 and Pac 12. And they could go either way to the B1G or SEC and while it would be tough, they wouldn't blink an eye to leave Duke behind.
 
Aug 7, 2006
1,638
1,137
1,743
The other question is UNC...where do they want to be? Because if the others in the ACC move, so will they. They stink in football, but the North Carolina market is big and their academics would make them valuable to both conferences.
With the way UNC views itself, I have no doubts they would prefer to be in the BIG 10.
 

LS1 Z28

Territorial Marshal
Oct 30, 2007
5,352
4,200
1,743
Thamel said on Finebaum yesterday that when you look at the numbers, North Carolina is actually the most valuable school in the ACC and what’s left of the Big 12 and Pac 12. And they could go either way to the B1G or SEC and while it would be tough, they wouldn't blink an eye to leave Duke behind.
I wonder what numbers they're looking at. Their football TV viewership ranks 45th in the country, and they rank 4th in the ACC in revenue.

1656686912085.png
 
Last edited:
Mar 30, 2005
2,341
674
1,743
7 Island Suite
I wonder what numbers they're looking at. Their football TV viewership ranks 47th in the country, and they rank 4th in the ACC in revenue.

View attachment 96188
It’s what their value would be in the next media contract. Has nothing to due with the schools’ individual operating budgets or revenues.

Edit: And their source was from the consultants that are advising media companies on these contracts.
 
Last edited:

LS1 Z28

Territorial Marshal
Oct 30, 2007
5,352
4,200
1,743
It’s what their value would be in the next media contract. Has nothing to due with the schools individual operating budgets or revenues.
Total revenue is a reflection of how much money athletic departments generate. Clemson generates more money than UNC, because they're more successful. They average 2.67M viewers per game. UNC only average 749K.

The only way I can see someone valuing UNC higher than Clemson is if they factor in academics.
 
Sep 2, 2014
297
113
593
42
Total revenue is a reflection of how much money athletic departments generate. Clemson generates more money than UNC, because they're more successful. They average 2.67M viewers per game. UNC only average 749K.

The only way I can see someone valuing UNC higher than Clemson is if they factor in academics.
They do factor in academics. They took Maryland and Rutgers for crying out loud.
 

LS1 Z28

Territorial Marshal
Oct 30, 2007
5,352
4,200
1,743
They do factor in academics. They took Maryland and Rutgers for crying out loud.
I'm not talking about the conferences, I'm talking about Pete Thamel and Paul Finebaum. My assumption is that they're looking primarily at athletics with their valuations.

The B1G seemingly puts a much higher value on academics than the SEC. I could see them going after UNC if they thought they could get around the ACC grant of rights.
 
Sep 2, 2014
297
113
593
42
I'm not talking about the conferences, I'm talking about Pete Thamel and Paul Finebaum. My assumption is that they're looking primarily at athletics with their valuations.
Sorry, didn't realize we were discussing them, I guess I'm not to concerned with who they think should be in...more concerned with who the BIG 10 and SEC think should be in.