Why should any current Big Ten school take a pay cut to bring on new members
West Coast View on Expansion
- Thread starter rucoe89
- Start date
Not likely that would be the solution but it was a suggested solution. The other was an extended buy in period.
The premise though isn't necessarily a wrong one depending on what you think the future potential is. You take the short term pain with outlook for greater value down the line. The value they bring today isn't necessarily the value they bring tomorrow. VCs and investors put money into companies that currently aren't profitable with the expectation they will be profitable and successful in the future. There has been a little madness on that in recent times but the general idea isn't always a bad one.
Clemson is thought to be a good get and shoe in for the SEC but what were they 10-15 years ago. It's because of their recent performance their value has gone up. We don't even know how Dabo will do with the loss of his 2 long time coordinators. Is he closer to Saban or Orgeron? We don't know, yet people assign high value to them because of recent performance. They don't bring a new territory to the SEC either.
IMO, you have to see if the institutional commitment to improve and elevate oneself is there. Oregon is dependent on Knight money so I'd want to know what happens after Knight passes. Washington did get Peterson out of Boise and had the willingness to fire an unsuccessful coach after 2 years. Do they have potential to be ranked teams and make playoffs in the future with the added exposure and resources of the B10? Can they create more than just late night west coast inventory but also rivalries and ranked must see matchups that draw those 3-4M viewerships the networks crave? I think quite possibly the answer is yes. It's also good just structurally for the conference to have more than just the lone outpost of USC/UCLA in the west.
So I don't just write them off because of their current value but you have to figure out what their potential future value to the conference may be. Structurally, I still think 1-3 schools from the west will be added in the future. I'd guess those candidates would be Stanford (with ND), Washington and Oregon. I don't know when but I just don't think the long term plan for the B10 is to leave USC/UCLA out there alone indefinitely.
Last edited:
Did i ever say they bring in 100 million?
what you quoted from me was an answer to the question - what would Oregon and Washington bring?
It’s very easy to see what they would bring.
Now is it worth bringing that in if it’s not gonna substantially increase revenue? Im sure the big ten has an answer
Not compelling I'd think but:
Seattle Tacoma 14th media market of 1.8 million
Portland OR 25th 1.1
Both growing and affluent regions
Here's the full Matt Brown article. Sounds like he could cause problems but the odds tilt against him. Lots of politics.
https://www.extrapointsmb.com/california-governor-gavin-newsom-ucla-usc-big-ten/
Interesting. As usual, politicians posturing without anything to back them up.
"Because of a historical quirk, the legislature and governor have a lot of control over the community colleges and CSU, but the UCs are actually a constitutional entity, and so they have a lot more autonomy than the other two systems," she told me.
Seven UC system regents are ex officio members, which include not just folks like the president and vice-president of the UC Alumni Associations, but also the California Governor, Lt. Governor, and Speaker of the Assembly.
"In reality," Dr. Smith told me, "normally the governor doesn’t even attend their meetings."
Yea read the article and basically not really much he can do to stop it and it’s just grandstanding as mentioned above.
Will there be cameras at the next meeting? If so, I think there is an analogy to the old Chuck Schumer joke.
"What's the most dangerous part of DC? The part between Chuck Schumer and a television camera."
What will it take to get Gavin Newsom to a Regents meeting? Television cameras."
Regardless of anyone's opinion on a particular politician, a "good" (whatever that means) politician never misses an opportunity to grandstand and pander to their constituency. When I first read Gov. Newsome's comments on the thread that got locked/disappeared, it sounds like he had something to back himself up. Even if he doesn't, that is a pretty big move by UCLA, one of the two most prominent UCal system Universities--a courtesy call by UCLA would have been wise on their part. As RU has learned, it is good to have the Gov. in your corner.
I can understand why UCLA kept it under wraps. Someone in the UC Regents would have leaked. The UC Regents HQ is in Oakland - just a few miles from UC Berkeley. The UCB folks would have completely flipped out on the news.
Leaks is exactly why it’s kept to a close knit circle.
Or maybe not. Many UCB faculty (and probably some admins) would be happy to see Cal exit big time athletics.
A thought on Clemson - IMO, that school is more coach than institution. The Big 12 didn’t add for Boise State for a similar reason. What does Clemson offer that South Carolina doesn’t already provide to the SEC?
Even with the coach, we’re not even sure how the coach will do without his two long time assistants. It’s unknown. Is he like Saban where things just chug along without a hitch, is it like Orgeron where it falls apart or something in between? If it’s not scenario one then do they still offer the same value tv wise?
Channeling my inner Sun Tsu or Machiavelli here - The Big 10 might do so for strategic reasons that provide a longer-term benefit or preclude an opponent from taking an advantage.
No more than few loud mouthed Rutgers faculty. Big-time athletics is ingrained into the UC Berkeley identity.
Yes, reviewing their W-L records under different coaches, they had small spurts of success, but Danny Ford had sustained success in the 1970s-80s, but after that, it was hit or miss until Dabo got it rolling in 2011.
Clemson Tigers College Football History, Stats, Records | College Football at Sports-Reference.com
Check out the Clemson Tigers College Football History, Stats, Records, Polls, Bowls and More College Football Stats at Sports-Reference.com
www.sports-reference.com
I'm not attempting to digress, but I couldn't resist. Whenever "good" Gov. Murphy decides to next run for whatever he decides to run for, it might be interesting if he comments on how much of a help (if any) he was with the Trenton commitment of $$$ for RU that seemed to coincide almost exactly with the latest B1G expansion. I'm sure if it's politically prudent, he'll use it to his advantage. If not, he'll never mention it! I guess I'm not that much different than him...if he had a big hand in getting RU the $$$, then I love the Guv! If he didn't...he's just another politician 🙂. GO RU!
Either way is fine with me as long as Rutgers got the money.
The San Francisco Bay Area is the sixth largest media market in the nation. Sacramento, an hour's drive away, is the 20th largest media market. So Cal and Stanford have a lot to offer.
If it's all about the $$$ for Notre Dame, Notre Dame would have joined a conference a long time ago. I don't deny that money is a factor, but it were the only factor, ND would be in the BigTen.
As for attracting ND with other schools, the BigTen is better off looking to the Southeast and bringing in UVa, UNC or even GT. ND recruits a lot of talent from those areas.
When Ronald Reagan was governor (1967-1975), he attended virtually every Board of Regents meeting. I know because I would go to the small press conferences he would hold after each meeting. The University was an issue in state-wide politics, so it made sense for him to go. I'm sure Newsom would attend if he saw a political point in doing that.
Maintaining its brand; playing a diverse schedule across the country; keeping the alumni happy. ND could join the BigTen today and make 3x what it's making off the NBC contract. As an ND alum, I think bringing in USC makes the BigTen more attractive, but not enough to give up on ND's independence.
ND endowment fund 13 billion. Rutgers less then 2. Maximizing $$ from sports less important for ND and allows them to prioritize other goals you mention.
At the latest, I think whenever the ACC breaks up (ACC GOR expiration time) is when ND finally joins.
Thanks! That shows a focus on the long-term brand rather than short-term profit ,and it's hard for me to criticize anyone willing to think about the long term.
I think the Big 10 will eventually need to add more western teams. I can't see how USC/UCLA are forced to play on an "island" for every sport forever.
Adding on to the comment that NorCal includes the #6 and #20 media markets in the country, this is also the wealthiest. At an MSA level, the San Jose and San Francisco areas have the highest GDP per capita - by far - in the country.
One caveat: MSA definitions are a bit weird. Northern California is broken into >6 MSAs, while the entire NYC region is one MSA. Take the data will a grain of salt, but the wealth point still holds about NorCal. #3 is Seattle. Sacramento and Portland are middle of the pack of the top 50 in the USA.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._metropolitan_areas_by_GDP,
You're probably right. At that point, I think ND may be shut out of whatever playoff structure the BigTen and SEC may concoct. As someone else pointed out in this thread, that's the only way ND joins a conference. And, if the ACC breaks up, there's a good chance some former ACC schools join the BigTen. With USC, Michigan, MSU, and some among UVa, UNC, GT, etc., that's an attractive conference for ND.
Thats what I mentioned last summer when I thought it was a good idea for the B10 to go national in response to the SEC. You may just snag ND in the process. Make it a “cozy inviting” home…as in a national conference with a bunch of long time rivals.
I would agree with a lot of those points.. Interesting youtuber video where he has a consultant talking about schools valuation and what the B1G is looking for. Made the point that in the end the B1G schools are massive institutions that operate and make decisions based on institutional sized cost benefit analysis. Lots of good graphics and info here.
B1G school evaluations
Not all his thoughts are diamonds but made some interesting points
I've been meaning to ask this:
Why exactly does the Big Ten need UCLA then?
Wouldn't having USC in market get the higher rate per sub? Similar to when Rutgers/Maryland joined?
I would assume the BTN wouldn't need all Div-1A football programs in market to justify the increased rate.
Just one team?
Is UCLA going to move the needle that much on the national media contract?
Why not make the #16 school in a different market to get increased rates somewhere else?
I suppose it could be seen in the same way Texas was even though SEC already had A&M. Texas adds value regardless of A&M but also I suppose it’s just deeper penetration into Texas. UCLA isn’t Texas but in the same fashion maybe adds deeper penetration and negotiating leverage for in market rates in LA.
Make take is the Big Ten's total dominance of the #2 market in the country. Why share the stage when you can kill all of the inhabitants and salt the Earth?
Preventing competitors from entering the market is another reason. Just like Texas as well.
Pac 12 Network is 18 million. BTW, I didn't previously realize this. The Big 10 Network is joint venture between Fox and the Big 10. The Pac 12 owns all of their network.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
***WAR ROOM: Latest Recruit Scoop and Team News on Rutgers Athletics***- Latest: RU-Choppin-Ohio
-
Football Things Rutgers submitted to EA Sports for the NCAA Video Game?
- Latest: Scarlet Shack
-
-
-
