it’s for TV market $ reasons like rutgers
Oregon, washington, ND has always rebuffed them, UNC possible, GT possible (for atlanta market), TCU (for dallas)
then some distant candidates like Utah, Mizzou, Kansas, Colorado, Duke, longshots like Cal just to give USC/UCLA someone to play.
I’m only looking at AAU schools since that’s been a requirement to join typically for the B1G (Nebraska was when they entered but the AAU kicked them out)
UNC, Duke might be most likely next additions
Two things:
The surrounding teams guarantee the Chicago TV market. I lived there for years, it’s a big ten town through and through, but it’s not a NW town at all. They don’t need NW to guarantee that they’re on traditional cable TV.
I think you’re vastly overrating the importance of what is the old model of TV viewership. Locality doesn’t matter like it did in 2010, there’s not a pressure to be carried on every single cable market. The future is likely streaming, at which point the question isn’t what media market do you bring to the table, but what fanbase do you bring to the table.
I agree, but the b1G TV deal is up soon, those people who pay for such things still think the old way.
1 Like
Even if Stanford may have turned down the B1G now after UCLA and USC leave, I can’t see them not itching to join if UW and Oregon go B1G.
Good tweet Nate
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1542577035415101440?s=20&t=PMOD6tC3lGo4GqWchibgpQ
3 Likes
https://twitter.com/twindux/status/1542641149772410881/photo/1
More people watched Iowa State than USC last year. USC will be in the big 10 super conference, only god knows what will happen to Iowa State. Purdue that high really.
Gonna be whatever Fox wants at this point basically. Oregon will be in, probably washington after that ??? Colorado? Utah deserves it though.
How is UCLA in the top 50? (Playing LSU in primetime when they were top ten, presumably)
UCLA is a below replacement level TV draw as a big 10 opponent. USC is as well when they’re not a ten win team.
1 Like
Poor Beavs
The Big 10 is in for a rude financial awakening when they learn how many eyeballs UCLA and USC draw when they aren’t competitive.
The assumption that Lincoln Riley will make USC dominant is still just that. UCLA is going to be who they’ve always been.
None of this matters though, BTN is now in California markets.
Who in Cali is going to care about B10 matches not involving USC/UCLA who didn’t already before?
same reason they got rutgers, nobody is watching those games but TV don’t care about that, they just wanted in new york
nobody’s disagreeing with you, this is all really stupid, but this is what they’re doing cause $
sticking to geography is what made college sports great, this is definitely hurting it, not that the top programs will matter or care, though I will be amused the first time usc/ucla get a midwestern snow game in nov
guess they just wanted to make the title game the b1g vs sec champ every year and be done with all the other stuff
These are professional leagues at this point. The BIG and SEC are bringing in the other schools that want to participate in pro sports.
It’s not just about the eyeballs. It’s being able to force CA (or at least LA) cable providers to carry BTN as basic cable, which makes the B1G fees even if no one there watches. Same as the Fox News model.
So the Rose Bowl just got nuked?
it’ll still exist it just won’t honor tradition I’d presume
Meh. Was holding out hope for 4 major conferences.
4 major conferences. 4 team playoff with BCS system. That would have been ideal.
1 Like