It’s not so much the Bay Area itself that bothers me, it’s the two schools that reside there and think their shit don’t stink that I dislike.
The Big 18
- Thread starter IndianSooner4
- Start date
I understand all of that, and I don't disagree with all of your points. Those are totally valid. The person I replied to said "Oregon won't panic jump to the Big 12" and my point was they may not have a choice but to do that. Sure, they could hold out and see about joining the B10 or SEC, but there's no guarantee in that either. Too many moving parts for Oregon to get too comfortable. Especially if the ACC ends up dissolving which isn't that far fetched, because many of those teams will end up going to B10 or SEC. I realize Oregon is a sexy program that any conference would want to add, regardless if there aren't many spots available.
And while this is probably a stretch, there would be some B10 and SEC teams that would NOT want Oregon joining because it would hurt their recruiting some. And dilute the revenue share some. If I'm tOSU, Meeshigan, PSU, Bama, UGA, etc. I sure as shit don't want Oregon hopping aboard.
I'm just saying Oregon may not want to play the waiting game too long because it could bite them in the ass potentially.
I think Oregon would be welcomed with open arms more in the Big 12 than the B10 and SEC. But that's just my opinion. I'm not saying that's true, that's just my feeling of the situation.
I personally wish we would change our mind and stay. I like the big 12 with new additions and potential for some of the remaining Pac12
I can understand that feeling to some extent. There is something I don't find attractive about the SEC...though I don't know exactly what.
But there is something to be said about not playing in 50K stadiums with 1/3rd of it empty. I also think in the end you just can't ignore the pay gap. Even if the new Big 12 could manage to get a deal worth $60M annually per program...that is still $40M+ annually per year. Which when we are talking about $400M+ over the course of a decade it's the difference between the west side of the stadium getting updated & it not...between a new softball and baseball stadiums being built & not.
The basketball in that league would be brutally tough though… having Arizona, KU, Baylor, Tech, Houston, Oregon, and Osu.
I’m sending the missionaries over right now.
Just because it has a bunch of orphans doesn’t make it a ”Super” conference. There is a reason they were all left behind.
It’s polishing a turd. That group will still be lagging way behind from a $ standpoint and I would be surprised if Oregon and Washington are there long-term, if they are ever there at all.
I don’t disagree, just hate to see college sports get relegated to two regions and 32-36 schools. I know I’m in the minority on this and that’s fine.
If they add those 6 schools I could see wvu really rooting for the acc to lose a few teams so that them and Pitt could join and save crazy money on travel. I mean how would all other sports handle the amount of travel required for the new big 18
100% correct. We need to get out when the getting is good. I'll be very happy if we're gone even 1 year early
My biggest concern with the the sec is will our administration do what it takes to remain competitive in that league.
Venables taking the job was contingent on them committing to do just that.
This repeated reference to a watered down Big 12 as a "super conference" reminds me of when Derrick Rose called the Knicks a "super team" the same summer the Warriors signed KD.
I was just thinking, it is unfortunate it took us going to the SEC to get UCLA and USC to get scared and move. What if those 2 had agreed to come to Big xii while we were still there? That could have made for a very attractive conference that competes with the SEC and B1G. And it further opens the doors to California for us.
Nah, still a huge step behind the SEC.
There is actually some really quality match ups in here. Count me in for a match up with Baylor vs. Oregon or OSU vs. Cincy or even Utah vs. OSU...
However, does this move the needle enough to guarantee a playoff spot? An undefeated team in the Big 18 vs. a one loss non-conf champion in the Big 10 or SEC would be really hard to put in there IMO.
Let's say a Bama goes undefeated and Georgia is a one loss
Ohio St. wins the Big 10 and is a one loss and Mich or Penn St. is runner up with one loss.
I don't know how you can deny the Big 10 and SEC runner ups auto bids vs. a Big 18 champ. The SOS is going to matter exponentially now. Unless you just give auto bids to the super-conf champs and one at large conf champ from the ACC and then a team like ND.
Even now, if the Big 18 comes to fruition, it's not going to really bolster the league into respectable super-conf territory.
Last edited:
Well, if they aren't allowed in the Big 10 where they gonna go?
I think the playoffs will expand at some point. And you have to wonder if these realignment moves played a role in the delay.
Expansion directly hits automatic qualifiers and number of teams for everyone involved. You don't want super conferences eating up all the spots, it's not good for the sport.
Not until at least 2025 unfortunately. That's why I'm more prone to staying in this wack ass league while until then.
if UW and UO commit to stay i think that is what is going to happen
This is a phenomenal listen. (Def recommend it at 2x speed due to length.)
Fascinating deep dive into what schools bring value and what they value and how it plays into realignment.
Also paints a clear picture of why the B1G and lot of pac-12 schools are aligned. And where SEC places values
Fascinating deep dive into what schools bring value and what they value and how it plays into realignment.
Also paints a clear picture of why the B1G and lot of pac-12 schools are aligned. And where SEC places values
I make jokes all the time about the Big 12 being stupid but if the PAC 12 enters another alliance after one alliance just got them raided. Well that’s just a new level of dumbassery.
That was a fascinating listen. Thanks for posting. Obviously the guy has a ton of knowledge. I will say that his perspective is definitely influenced by what the schools want you to believe. Not saying he is wrong, but the fact of the matter is the way this is actually played out has made perfect sense from an athletics perspective. What I mean by that is that it would be pretty serendipitous for all of this to align perfectly for football when it was really done for academic reasons behind the scenes. Sounds a bit like spin control to me. Just my opinion.
Last edited:
This guy once reported that Boise St turned down an invite to the Big12.
Not disagreeing with your premise, but--academically--USC and UCLA to the B1G is pretty much a lateral move. The B1G is academically elitist in their own right.
It’s a move to another very good academic conference, but it is not a lateral move. Stanford and Cal are in an academic class all their own.
Thank you for posting this. To me, perhaps the most fascinating part of this whole discussion is the idea that these same problems have come up in the past, even before my time (and I'm an Old). The headline of USC and UCLA bolting the PAC-12 being almost identical to the one when they bolted the old Pacific Coast Conference--mind blowing! I'm interested to read Games Colleges Play and What If, books he suggested. (Roses From The Ashes is far too expensive.) Maybe I'll post a book report, if anyone's interested.
