The PAC 10 expansion groundswell

[Uncle Ted]

Well, the Tribune article says that Utah is in the NCAA records as the 2008 national champion.

Look, this is a tiresome, sophomoric debate. I'll just say this, and I say it with total goodwill and without rancor. I think objectively, rationally, anyone would rather have Utah's season that BYU's "NC,", considering the number of highly ranked teams Utah beat, including no. 2 "Bama in the Sugar Bowl, the number of sports writers who argued Utah deserved the NC, what all the computers said, that it was in the modern epoch, etc.

It doesn't matter... The B1G doesn't want Utah. The have already stated who is on their shopping list. Utah and Colorado were really never part of the PAC but a mistake that drove U$C and UCLA away. They just added more deadweight to the conference. And the Big 12 doesn't want Utah either... They have BYU and the Utah market already:

They don't need Utah. I suggest y'all call the American (I heard there will be a few openings there next year) or the MWC. Good luck.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Well, the Tribune article says that Utah is in the NCAA records as the 2008 national champion.

Look, this is a tiresome, sophomoric debate. I'll just say this, and I say it with total goodwill and without rancor. I think objectively, rationally, anyone would rather have Utah's season that BYU's "NC,", considering the number of highly ranked teams Utah beat, including no. 2 "Bama in the Sugar Bowl, the number of sports writers who argued Utah deserved the NC, what all the computers said, that it was in the modern epoch, etc.

“Objective” and “Rational” doing a lot of heavy lifting in this take.

[Uncle Ted]

Wow... I didn't even think of New Mexico:

Embedded Tweet

That market is completely untapped. The PAC needs to jump on this before the Big 12 gets any ideas.

[beefytee]

Well, the Tribune article says that Utah is in the NCAA records as the 2008 national champion.

Look, this is a tiresome, sophomoric debate. I'll just say this, and I say it with total goodwill and without rancor. I think objectively, rationally, anyone would rather have Utah's season that BYU's "NC,", considering the number of highly ranked teams Utah beat, including no. 2 "Bama in the Sugar Bowl, the number of sports writers who argued Utah deserved the NC, what all the computers said, that it was in the modern epoch, etc.

I think it is safe to say that neither "national championship" is going to lend one iota of credibility to BYU nor Utah's potential candidacy in the B1G.

[Uncle Ted]

This could back fire on the Pac 12...

Pac-12 jockeying to try and retain UCLA, John Canzano says on KJR Radio

PAC-12 COMMISSIONER George Kliavkoff is seeking 2024 media rights bids in two forms: with and without UCLA as a member of the conference, John Canzano told KJR Radio hosts Jason Puckett and Jim Moore on Tuesday. “I believe that the Pac-12 in their negotiations with ESPN have asked for a valuation that includes UCLA as part of the conference,” said Canzano.

With the UC Board of Regents set to review UCLA's decision to exit for the Big Ten, and separate from the University of California, is there a possible way back for UCLA to rejoin the Pac-12?

“I think he’s playing a little propaganda game and I don’t blame him for it,” Canzano said of Kliavkoff. “… I think the Pac-12 is trying to leave the door open for UCLA on the chance the Chancellor and the Regents in the UC system are able to give them enough grief (for splitting from Cal).
[...]

https://247sports.com/college/washin...dio-190892214/

This may just force the B1G to take Cal (along with Stanford, UW, and Oregon) now instead of later. And then the Big 12 could pick up the Arizonas, and Colorado on the cheap (e.g., not full membership and conference money for 5 years).

[Moliere]

This could back fire on the Pac 12...


https://247sports.com/college/washin...dio-190892214/

This may just force the B1G to take Cal (along with Stanford, UW, and Oregon) now instead of later. And then the Big 12 could pick up the Arizonas, and Colorado on the cheap (e.g., not full membership and conference money for 5 years).

UCLA is going to make $100 million per year just on media rights. Why would they turn that down to make much, much less in the PAC12? It’s the economy, stupid.

[Uncle Ted]

UCLA is going to make $100 million per year just on media rights. Why would they turn that down to make much, much less in the PAC12? It’s the economy, stupid.

Did you forget that UCLA is a public school and the governor of California is Gavin Newsom? (Remember that Democrats are not rational.) In other words, it may not matter what UCLA thinks if Newsom thinks Cal is getting screwed in the process. Bringing Cal along may become part of the deal. This may force the B1G to accelerate their plans to blow up the PAC by inviting the other schools on their shopping list now rather than later. Right now the B1G is just trying to soften the blow for the teams in the PAC that don’t have a place to land (ie, WSU, OSU, Utah) to process their grief and come to realization of their bleak future.

[originalsocal]

Did you forget that UCLA is a public school and the governor of California is Gavin Newsom? (Remember that Democrats are not rational.) In other words, it may not matter what UCLA thinks if Newsom thinks Cal is getting screwed in the process. Bringing Cal along may become part of the deal. This may force the B1G to accelerate their plans to blow up the PAC by inviting the other schools on their shopping list now rather than later. Right now the B1G is just trying to soften the blow for the teams in the PAC that don’t have a place to land (ie, WSU, OSU, Utah) to process their grief and come to realization of their bleak future.

Huh? I understand you hate democrats, but the scenario you lay out would bring double the revenue to the UC system. I'm trying to understand how that is "not rational".

[Jeff Lebowski]

Did you forget that UCLA is a public school and the governor of California is Gavin Newsom? (Remember that Democrats are not rational.) In other words, it may not matter what UCLA thinks if Newsom thinks Cal is getting screwed in the process. Bringing Cal along may become part of the deal. This may force the B1G to accelerate their plans to blow up the PAC by inviting the other schools on their shopping list now rather than later. Right now the B1G is just trying to soften the blow for the teams in the PAC that don’t have a place to land (ie, WSU, OSU, Utah) to process their grief and come to realization of their bleak future.

If Gavin Newsom is involved, expect something really stupid to happen.

[Omaha 680]

Huh? I understand you hate democrats, but the scenario you lay out would bring double the revenue to the UC system. I'm trying to understand how that is "not rational".

Well, not double. If it really meant double Cal would already be invited. The reason they (and Utah and Stanford) aren't is because they dilute and the result would be less money per school. But yeah Newsom forcing Cal into the the Big Ten would definitely bring move overall money into the UC system. It would also be the first time since the start of realignment that political threats actually changed an outcome.

[Art Vandelay]

If Gavin Newsom is involved, expect something really stupid to happen.

Well, not double. If it really meant double Cal would already be invited. The reason they (and Utah and Stanford) aren't is because they dilute and the result would be less money per school. But yeah Newsom forcing Cal into the the Big Ten would definitely bring move overall money into the UC system. It would also be the first time since the start of realignment that political threats actually changed an outcome.

These Newsome killing the deal theory all seem to presuppose that CAL has all the political capital and fUCLA has none. I would assume more than 1 state senator or rep has Bruin ties, or at least backed by ucla money. It also wouldn't surprise me if some of the more conservative state congress persons (Does CA have any of those?) detest Berkeley enough that they are willing to cut off their nose to spite their state's face.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Well, not double. If it really meant double Cal would already be invited. The reason they (and Utah and Stanford) aren't is because they dilute and the result would be less money per school. But yeah Newsom forcing Cal into the the Big Ten would definitely bring move overall money into the UC system. It would also be the first time since the start of realignment that political threats actually changed an outcome.

Spoiler alert: not going to happen

[Omaha 680]

Spoiler alert: not going to happen

Whatever. After Newsom forces Cal into the Big Ten, the Texas Legislature will force Texas Tech into the SEC.

[falafel]

Did you forget that UCLA is a public school and the governor of California is Gavin Newsom? (Remember that Democrats are not rational.) In other words, it may not matter what UCLA thinks if Newsom thinks Cal is getting screwed in the process. Bringing Cal along may become part of the deal. This may force the B1G to accelerate their plans to blow up the PAC by inviting the other schools on their shopping list now rather than later. Right now the B1G is just trying to soften the blow for the teams in the PAC that don’t have a place to land (ie, WSU, OSU, Utah) to process their grief and come to realization of their bleak future.

Did you forget that UCLA has the right to negotiate and decide conference affiliation decisions independent of the Board of Regents?

[Pelado]

These Newsome killing the deal theory all seem to presuppose that CAL has all the political capital and fUCLA has none. I would assume more than 1 state senator or rep has Bruin ties, or at least backed by ucla money. It also wouldn't surprise me if some of the more conservative state congress persons (Does CA have any of those?) detest Berkeley enough that they are willing to cut off their nose to spite their state's face.

If I'm the B1G, if UCLA can't come without Cal, I would probably just say goodbye to UCLA. That way, neither school gets more cash.