Let's not have it seem like the Big Ten is some paragon of academic excellence that would be kind to accept the poor crumb eaters of Cal and Stanford. Or UW. Truth is that the BIG would be damn lucky and improved in academic reputation by adding two of the top schools in the nation. Cal as the top public school, surpassing any of the BIG, and Stanfurd as a top private. We may be a second tier football school, admittedly, but let's never hang our heads about our international reputation for being a WORLD leading university! Fiat Lux!
As a Big Ten alum, but also someone who wrote most of his MA thesis in the Stanford Library, I'd like to remind readers that the Big Ten is unlike other conferences because it is not just an athletic conference. All the schools are members of the Big Ten Academic Alliance (BTAA). Through the alliance, the schools do cooperative purchasing and licensing, collaborate on research programs, share courses and library resources, facilitate faculty networking and offer professional development programs. Together, they do about $9.8 billion in funded research. For the faculty and students, the alliance is an important reason for being a part of the Big Ten. This is why the conference is so adamant that members belong to the AAU (Nebraska had been at the time it was admitted and Notre Dame is always the exception to the rule).
While the athletic directors may be more open to adding non-AAU members, the university presidents, chancellors and faculty senates are intensely opposed to watering down the academic quality of the alliance. Uninformed writers will often suggest that the Big Ten is interested in schools such as Miami or Florida State that are not AAU members, but these folks have no idea of how the Big Ten operates. Also the Big Ten prefers to move slowly when considering new members because it takes time to integrate schools into the Alliance as well as the athletic conference. The more schools you bring in at the same time, the more difficult it is to integrate them into the system. Of course, when they are pushed to act quickly, such as in the case of USC and UCLA or earlier with Nebraska, they can. As for the new media contracts being negotiated by the Big Ten, I suspect the contracts will include clauses regarding how the addition of more schools would be handled.
Because Stanford, Berkeley, Oregon and Washington all have important academic connections with various of the Big Ten schools, there is more of a likelihood that the Big Ten presidents and chancellors would be receptive to adding them eventually to the Alliance and the Conference. Cal and Stanford need to pursue their academic connections with Big Ten presidents to build the case to join. In the interim, the fans in Palo Alto and Berkeley should start filling up the stadiums and arenas to show that their teams do have a strong, loyal following. Outside of the above mentioned PAC-12 schools, to my knowledge the only other universities of any interest to the Big Ten are Notre Dame (of course), Virginia and North Carolina. The latter two schools were approached back when Maryland joined the Big Ten, but preferred to stay with the ACC. Don't know if they now regret their decision.
By the way, Notre Dame plays in the Big Ten Hockey league and Johns Hopkins is an affiliate member whose lacrosse teams play in the league. Also former Big Ten member, Chicago remains affiliated with the Big Ten Academic Alliance. When you see the company that the Big Ten keeps, you can figure they might eventually want Cal, Stanford, Oregon and Washington to join them. Unfortunately, the other six PAC-12 schools had better have contingency plans should this happen.
Personally, I always have wished that the Big Ten and Pac-12 would follow the lead of the Ivy League and get out of Division 1. The two conferences could have still have had their champions play against each other in the Rose Bowl at the end of the year and forget about being part of the big money NFL minor league system. Alas, that's not happening.
To hell with B1G. Our fanbase has been running on the fumes of the peak Tedford years for well over a decade. At least with SonnyD we had some exciting shoot outs to keep things interesting, even if we were mediocre overall. Now with Wilcox we get boring "B1G-style" football while still being mediocre.
Moving to the B1G means we will forever be a basement dweller. There is no chance we stay remotely competitive in a "Western B1G" division that consists of the CA schools plus UO and W. And the east-west travel bias means the eastern division/teams would hold an unfair advantage even in the very rare case we make a run for a conference title. The extra TV revenue means little when every other school in the conference is getting the same money (in terms of competitiveness at least, stadium debt is another thing). And I wouldn't put it past the B1G to eventually adjust the revenue allocations towards the more successful schools, putting us in an even bigger competitive disadvantage.
At least with the Pac-12(10) we could dream of the occasional run at the conference championship. All we need right now is to field a respectable team, catch the conference in a down year, and catch a few lucky breaks. If we can string a few seasons like that together, that could be enough to get fan engagement back up again and start filling the stadium. I suspect a move to the B1G means we are going to be eternally doomed to watching our team struggle year in and year out, memorial stadium filled with opposing teams fans, and the slow asphyxiation of what is left of our fanbase. But hey, at least we will have paid off the stadium.
A major point made is that while all four schools are being considered, they're viewed more as necessary measures that won't carry as much value. There's the possibility (likelihood?) that any deal would result in us four taking lower revenue shares than other members of the B1G. You have to think Cal is a major source of that consideration, but at least we're being included.
What I don't understand is the incentive for B1G to wait on making offers. If they want the Pac, why give the conference time to shore things up and possibly lock schools in with a new media contract?
Cal aint going to the big ten! Washington, Oregon, and even Stanford will beat them out. Cal is far from a football school, and they should be talking to the big 12, or the wac!
The Big Ten universities are presently managing almost $10 billion in research funds. That’s about ten times whatever the next media contract will earn. Plus the media rights are primarily used in the athletic departments and have little direct benefit for the academic interests of the universities. Florida is an AAU school, but in my wildest dreams I can’t imagine the Big Ten wanting FSU or Miami. As I previously wrote, the Big Ten is run by people who put academics first. They aren’t going to lower their standards just so the athletic departments have more money to spend. The SEC is a far different animal, so they may be interested in FSU and Miami, but not the Big Ten. The Big Ten Commissioner never mentioned these schools. It was a reporter who proposed them as possible candidates.
So SEC does not have any school in the top 6 media markets (I believe aTm is in Houston market not Dallas-FW), and only 2 in the top 10 (Atlanta and Houston). They can generate that much money on football alone. I'm just impressed. Those in the SEC region can be so passionate about college football teams that they didn't even attend. That will never happen in California (or any other parts of the country).
I'm a cynic on these public pronouncements. Yeah, they have a 'short list', but I'd be big cyber-dollars that that list is really long. If the BiG (aka Fox Sports) could lock up other major markets to keep espn out, they'd do it. IMO this pronouncement is unserious. And note, teh Commish did not say Cal was on a short list, it was unknown, anonymous "Sources".....
Moreover, such a pronouncement (hopefully, for them) reduces the pressure on the Regents to twist UCLA's arm to funnel some $$ to Cal. If the Bruins have to cough up some sort of cash, that will hurt their competitiveness for a time, and that hurts the BiG brand.
Interesting that UVA and UNC are not on the short list, as they have been rumored targets for both the B1G and SEC for awhile now. FSU and Miami are new to me and a little more far flung alternatives. They feel like natural fits for the SEC. I could see UVA and UNC in either-at least culturally.
Let's not have it seem like the Big Ten is some paragon of academic excellence that would be kind to accept the poor crumb eaters of Cal and Stanford. Or UW. Truth is that the BIG would be damn lucky and improved in academic reputation by adding two of the top schools in the nation. Cal as the top public school, surpassing any of the BIG, and Stanfurd as a top private. We may be a second tier football school, admittedly, but let's never hang our heads about our international reputation for being a WORLD leading university! Fiat Lux!
As a Big Ten alum, but also someone who wrote most of his MA thesis in the Stanford Library, I'd like to remind readers that the Big Ten is unlike other conferences because it is not just an athletic conference. All the schools are members of the Big Ten Academic Alliance (BTAA). Through the alliance, the schools do cooperative purchasing and licensing, collaborate on research programs, share courses and library resources, facilitate faculty networking and offer professional development programs. Together, they do about $9.8 billion in funded research. For the faculty and students, the alliance is an important reason for being a part of the Big Ten. This is why the conference is so adamant that members belong to the AAU (Nebraska had been at the time it was admitted and Notre Dame is always the exception to the rule).
While the athletic directors may be more open to adding non-AAU members, the university presidents, chancellors and faculty senates are intensely opposed to watering down the academic quality of the alliance. Uninformed writers will often suggest that the Big Ten is interested in schools such as Miami or Florida State that are not AAU members, but these folks have no idea of how the Big Ten operates. Also the Big Ten prefers to move slowly when considering new members because it takes time to integrate schools into the Alliance as well as the athletic conference. The more schools you bring in at the same time, the more difficult it is to integrate them into the system. Of course, when they are pushed to act quickly, such as in the case of USC and UCLA or earlier with Nebraska, they can. As for the new media contracts being negotiated by the Big Ten, I suspect the contracts will include clauses regarding how the addition of more schools would be handled.
Because Stanford, Berkeley, Oregon and Washington all have important academic connections with various of the Big Ten schools, there is more of a likelihood that the Big Ten presidents and chancellors would be receptive to adding them eventually to the Alliance and the Conference. Cal and Stanford need to pursue their academic connections with Big Ten presidents to build the case to join. In the interim, the fans in Palo Alto and Berkeley should start filling up the stadiums and arenas to show that their teams do have a strong, loyal following. Outside of the above mentioned PAC-12 schools, to my knowledge the only other universities of any interest to the Big Ten are Notre Dame (of course), Virginia and North Carolina. The latter two schools were approached back when Maryland joined the Big Ten, but preferred to stay with the ACC. Don't know if they now regret their decision.
By the way, Notre Dame plays in the Big Ten Hockey league and Johns Hopkins is an affiliate member whose lacrosse teams play in the league. Also former Big Ten member, Chicago remains affiliated with the Big Ten Academic Alliance. When you see the company that the Big Ten keeps, you can figure they might eventually want Cal, Stanford, Oregon and Washington to join them. Unfortunately, the other six PAC-12 schools had better have contingency plans should this happen.
Personally, I always have wished that the Big Ten and Pac-12 would follow the lead of the Ivy League and get out of Division 1. The two conferences could have still have had their champions play against each other in the Rose Bowl at the end of the year and forget about being part of the big money NFL minor league system. Alas, that's not happening.
To hell with B1G. Our fanbase has been running on the fumes of the peak Tedford years for well over a decade. At least with SonnyD we had some exciting shoot outs to keep things interesting, even if we were mediocre overall. Now with Wilcox we get boring "B1G-style" football while still being mediocre.
Moving to the B1G means we will forever be a basement dweller. There is no chance we stay remotely competitive in a "Western B1G" division that consists of the CA schools plus UO and W. And the east-west travel bias means the eastern division/teams would hold an unfair advantage even in the very rare case we make a run for a conference title. The extra TV revenue means little when every other school in the conference is getting the same money (in terms of competitiveness at least, stadium debt is another thing). And I wouldn't put it past the B1G to eventually adjust the revenue allocations towards the more successful schools, putting us in an even bigger competitive disadvantage.
At least with the Pac-12(10) we could dream of the occasional run at the conference championship. All we need right now is to field a respectable team, catch the conference in a down year, and catch a few lucky breaks. If we can string a few seasons like that together, that could be enough to get fan engagement back up again and start filling the stadium. I suspect a move to the B1G means we are going to be eternally doomed to watching our team struggle year in and year out, memorial stadium filled with opposing teams fans, and the slow asphyxiation of what is left of our fanbase. But hey, at least we will have paid off the stadium.
CBS article just posted on the matter: https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/big-ten-evaluating-cal-oregon-stanford-and-washington-from-pac-12-as-further-expansion-considered/
A major point made is that while all four schools are being considered, they're viewed more as necessary measures that won't carry as much value. There's the possibility (likelihood?) that any deal would result in us four taking lower revenue shares than other members of the B1G. You have to think Cal is a major source of that consideration, but at least we're being included.
What I don't understand is the incentive for B1G to wait on making offers. If they want the Pac, why give the conference time to shore things up and possibly lock schools in with a new media contract?
UCLA and USC are immediately Full members.
https://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/2022/07/usc-ucla-will-receive-full-big-ten-revenue-share-before-rutgers-heres-why.html
Avi, could a quiet "settlement" between Cal and UCLA be UCLA pushing for Cal's inclusion into the B!G?
Cal aint going to the big ten! Washington, Oregon, and even Stanford will beat them out. Cal is far from a football school, and they should be talking to the big 12, or the wac!
The Big Ten universities are presently managing almost $10 billion in research funds. That’s about ten times whatever the next media contract will earn. Plus the media rights are primarily used in the athletic departments and have little direct benefit for the academic interests of the universities. Florida is an AAU school, but in my wildest dreams I can’t imagine the Big Ten wanting FSU or Miami. As I previously wrote, the Big Ten is run by people who put academics first. They aren’t going to lower their standards just so the athletic departments have more money to spend. The SEC is a far different animal, so they may be interested in FSU and Miami, but not the Big Ten. The Big Ten Commissioner never mentioned these schools. It was a reporter who proposed them as possible candidates.
SOON
https://twitter.com/Dalmcm/status/1544382634913976320?
So SEC does not have any school in the top 6 media markets (I believe aTm is in Houston market not Dallas-FW), and only 2 in the top 10 (Atlanta and Houston). They can generate that much money on football alone. I'm just impressed. Those in the SEC region can be so passionate about college football teams that they didn't even attend. That will never happen in California (or any other parts of the country).
I'm a cynic on these public pronouncements. Yeah, they have a 'short list', but I'd be big cyber-dollars that that list is really long. If the BiG (aka Fox Sports) could lock up other major markets to keep espn out, they'd do it. IMO this pronouncement is unserious. And note, teh Commish did not say Cal was on a short list, it was unknown, anonymous "Sources".....
Moreover, such a pronouncement (hopefully, for them) reduces the pressure on the Regents to twist UCLA's arm to funnel some $$ to Cal. If the Bruins have to cough up some sort of cash, that will hurt their competitiveness for a time, and that hurts the BiG brand.
Interesting that UVA and UNC are not on the short list, as they have been rumored targets for both the B1G and SEC for awhile now. FSU and Miami are new to me and a little more far flung alternatives. They feel like natural fits for the SEC. I could see UVA and UNC in either-at least culturally.