I can't imagine why I'd be against this if I were a FAN of a B1G school. More chances to visit California and have games on TV there and adding some conference members who are unlikely to be major competitive threats (at least from their perspective)? And they add more academic prestige to the league? What's the problem?
I get why the TV networks would be less excited. But the fans? Once USC and UCLA are there, why not?
And not sure why they have the impression that UCLA is so much athletically superior than Cal and Stanford. Certainly, UCLA has a historic basketball program, but football has never consistently been at the top of the Pac. We certainly have more higher profile players in the NFL.
Don't know where you are getting your information, but the Big 10 alumni chapters in the SF area are weighing in for Cal and they aren't the only ones. The chapters count far more than some random twitter remark.
Tarnishing? We'd raise the academic standards of the Big conference in one fell swoop. Cal and Stanford are together the two greatest academic and athletic institutions in the West, all considered. I took the bait here!
I cannot stress enough how little the twitter (or X? w/e the fluff they call it now) contingent of B1G football fans replying to the expansion threads seem to care about academics.
Athletically the biggest draws are womenтАЩs sports and Olympic sports. Big10 is very behind on those vs sec (with the addition of OU UT). Revenue generating sports, not so much
Big 10 fans on Twitter are losing their minds at the thought of Cal and Furd tarnishing their conference... How myopic
I can't imagine why I'd be against this if I were a FAN of a B1G school. More chances to visit California and have games on TV there and adding some conference members who are unlikely to be major competitive threats (at least from their perspective)? And they add more academic prestige to the league? What's the problem?
I get why the TV networks would be less excited. But the fans? Once USC and UCLA are there, why not?
Some fans seem to be butthurt at the prospect of their favorite team getting less money.
But honestly, the most common POV I'm seeing is just shitting on Cal and Furd's football prowess.
I don't even think they'd be getting less money. Any arrangement to bring in new schools would have to keep the existing ones whole.
And not sure why they have the impression that UCLA is so much athletically superior than Cal and Stanford. Certainly, UCLA has a historic basketball program, but football has never consistently been at the top of the Pac. We certainly have more higher profile players in the NFL.
As you can see from that OSU dude, they only think about football and nothing else
Ignorance, probably.
They are afraid of what will happen if some athletes actually graduate. The increase in average GPA can be very frightening.
Don't know where you are getting your information, but the Big 10 alumni chapters in the SF area are weighing in for Cal and they aren't the only ones. The chapters count far more than some random twitter remark.
He's looking at Reddit. r/cfb is basically a bunch of people who think football wins are the only metric of athletic success and thus don't want Cal.
Tarnishing? We'd raise the academic standards of the Big conference in one fell swoop. Cal and Stanford are together the two greatest academic and athletic institutions in the West, all considered. I took the bait here!
I cannot stress enough how little the twitter (or X? w/e the fluff they call it now) contingent of B1G football fans replying to the expansion threads seem to care about academics.
Athletically the biggest draws are womenтАЩs sports and Olympic sports. Big10 is very behind on those vs sec (with the addition of OU UT). Revenue generating sports, not so much