Stanford will do just fine "not paying its players". "So, would you like to cash the check from osu, or network with our alumni?"

BigDaddy said:

---

Notre Dame remaining independent improves Cal's chances at B1G membership as it open up a spot on the way to 20. Lot of chatter this week with the Irish remaining an indy that the B1G may add two more teams to get to 18, and then wait on Notre Dame and other ACC schools down the road.

Heard Washington and Stanford as preferred schools as it adds both Seattle and Bay Area markets. USC does not want Oregon in the B1G and is pushing back on it. Could see Cal swapped out for Washington, but Warren would like both West Coast markets.

---

A lot of chatter where? I've not seen that anywhere. The only chatter by major sports media sources is talk of 20. I haven't seen a single one talk about 18 with just Stanford and Washington.

berserkeley said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

Notre Dame remaining independent improves Cal's chances at B1G membership as it open up a spot on the way to 20. Lot of chatter this week with the Irish remaining an indy that the B1G may add two more teams to get to 18, and then wait on Notre Dame and other ACC schools down the road.

Heard Washington and Stanford as preferred schools as it adds both Seattle and Bay Area markets. USC does not want Oregon in the B1G and is pushing back on it. Could see Cal swapped out for Washington, but Warren would like both West Coast markets.

---

A lot of chatter where? I've not seen that anywhere. The only chatter by major sports media sources is talk of 20. I haven't seen a single one talk about 18 with just Stanford and Washington.

---

Wilner made a comment about USC keeping Oregon out and you must admit, if these guys are caring about market primarily above all else, take Seattle and bay area instead of just bay area.

fat_slice said:

---

berserkeley said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

Notre Dame remaining independent improves Cal's chances at B1G membership as it open up a spot on the way to 20. Lot of chatter this week with the Irish remaining an indy that the B1G may add two more teams to get to 18, and then wait on Notre Dame and other ACC schools down the road.

Heard Washington and Stanford as preferred schools as it adds both Seattle and Bay Area markets. USC does not want Oregon in the B1G and is pushing back on it. Could see Cal swapped out for Washington, but Warren would like both West Coast markets.

---

A lot of chatter where? I've not seen that anywhere. The only chatter by major sports media sources is talk of 20. I haven't seen a single one talk about 18 with just Stanford and Washington.

---

Wilner made a comment about USC keeping Oregon out and you must admit, if these guys are caring about market primarily above all else, take Seattle and bay area instead of just bay area.

---

In Wilner's mailbag published just today, he only mentions the B1G staying at 16 or going to 20 with Cal, Stanford, Oregon, and Washington. Not a single mention of 18 or just Washington and Stanford.

berserkeley said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

Notre Dame remaining independent improves Cal's chances at B1G membership as it open up a spot on the way to 20. Lot of chatter this week with the Irish remaining an indy that the B1G may add two more teams to get to 18, and then wait on Notre Dame and other ACC schools down the road.

Heard Washington and Stanford as preferred schools as it adds both Seattle and Bay Area markets. USC does not want Oregon in the B1G and is pushing back on it. Could see Cal swapped out for Washington, but Warren would like both West Coast markets.

---

A lot of chatter where? I've not seen that anywhere. The only chatter by major sports media sources is talk of 20. I haven't seen a single one talk about 18 with just Stanford and Washington.

---

I don't get the idea of, "if you take Stanfurd, you get the Bay Area market and carriage fees."

Nobody watches Furd, even when they win. In this new B1G, they are going to be middle of the pack in a good year. They will not draw a bunch of eyeballs.

Nobody is going to pay more to a cable provider so they can watch a .500 Furd play. If Bay Area cable providers try to stick an increase on their bills to pay for B1G carriage rights, they will lose even more subscribers than the flood of subscribers already bailing on them. You don't add Furd to get the BA media market. That can't be the reason to take them and leave us.

The real argument is if you were Comcast or Directv, would you pay a lot more to carry the B1G network in the bay area if they only added Furd to the league? I think that would turn out about as well as when Larry tried to get DTV to carry the pac12 network.

fat_slice said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

Notre Dame remaining independent improves Cal's chances at B1G membership as it open up a spot on the way to 20. Lot of chatter this week with the Irish remaining an indy that the B1G may add two more teams to get to 18, and then wait on Notre Dame and other ACC schools down the road.

Heard Washington and Stanford as preferred schools as it adds both Seattle and Bay Area markets. USC does not want Oregon in the B1G and is pushing back on it. Could see Cal swapped out for Washington, but Warren would like both West Coast markets.

---

This makes a ton of strategic sense. Guess we will learn:

1.) How much B1G cares about local communities that will be impacted by potentially splitting cal and Stanford

2.) If Stanford chases football money by giving into paying players (or supporting it by joining B1G even if they don't pay their players).

---

1) Zero

2) If anyone joins the BiG, they have to deal with the NIL devil. Otherwise, they evolve into a cupcake, getting crushed every week. (I'm unconvinced that Cal wants to play that game either.)

"I don't get the idea of, "if you take Stanfurd, you get the Bay Area market and carriage fees." " What's not to get? (Them's the BiG rules for cable companies.)

Big Dog said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

BigDaddy said:

---

Notre Dame remaining independent improves Cal's chances at B1G membership as it open up a spot on the way to 20. Lot of chatter this week with the Irish remaining an indy that the B1G may add two more teams to get to 18, and then wait on Notre Dame and other ACC schools down the road.

Heard Washington and Stanford as preferred schools as it adds both Seattle and Bay Area markets. USC does not want Oregon in the B1G and is pushing back on it. Could see Cal swapped out for Washington, but Warren would like both West Coast markets.

---

This makes a ton of strategic sense. Guess we will learn:

1.) How much B1G cares about local communities that will be impacted by potentially splitting cal and Stanford

2.) If Stanford chases football money by giving into paying players (or supporting it by joining B1G even if they don't pay their players).

---

"I don't get the idea of, "if you take Stanfurd, you get the Bay Area market and carriage fees." " What's not to get? (Them's the BiG rules for cable companies.)

---

They can make any rules they want. BA cable providers would be crazy to accept them.

Go!Bears said:

---

I don't get the idea of, "if you take Stanfurd, you get the Bay Area market and carriage fees."

Nobody watches Furd, even when they win. In this new B1G, they are going to be middle of the pack in a good year. They will not draw a bunch of eyeballs.

Nobody is going to pay more to a cable provider so they can watch a .500 Furd play. If Bay Area cable providers try to stick an increase on their bills to pay for B1G carriage rights, they will lose even more subscribers than the flood of subscribers already bailing on them. You don't add Furd to get the BA media market. That can't be the reason to take them and leave us.

---

The Bay Area market is more Balkanized than L.A. San Jose has their own newspapers and TV news. The region was even split into two metropolitan statistical areas. Stanford is not located in the "San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley" MSA.

I'd suggest 24 teams in 4 6-team pods.

• One 6-team pod could be former Pac-12 schools.
• One would be Rutgers, Maryland and 4 former ACC schools.
• Then two pods from Nebraska, Penn State and the actual Big Ten.

Forget about the matter of paying football players.

The real problem is when the SEC decides that school is optional. Then someone sues the Big Ten for "inconsistent academic standards."

Think about it. A chemistry major can get a summer job as a lab assistant and is not required to take summer classes. Same thing for an English major who gets a summer job in the library.

So why should a Phys Ed major be expected to go to class during his Work Term.?

Looks like the Ducks want out....

Oregon initiated preliminary discussions in Chicago w/Big Ten to determine if Ducks are compatible in B1G, source told @ActionNetworkHQ. Outgoing UO president Michael Schill, AD Rob Mullens & B1G commish Kevin Warren not involved in any discussions in Chicago, another source said

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) August 22, 2022

Cal89 said:

---

Looks like the Ducks want out....

Oregon initiated preliminary discussions in Chicago w/Big Ten to determine if Ducks are compatible in B1G, source told @ActionNetworkHQ. Outgoing UO president Michael Schill, AD Rob Mullens & B1G commish Kevin Warren not involved in any discussions in Chicago, another source said

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) August 22, 2022

---

I get the heebie -jeebies when I see new messages pop up on this thread. I thought most schools looking for their way in had already applied anyways. Perhaps this means they have jumped to the front of the line. At least we will know if USC's preference to keep them out has any weight.

fat_slice said:

---

Cal89 said:

---

Looks like the Ducks want out....

Oregon initiated preliminary discussions in Chicago w/Big Ten to determine if Ducks are compatible in B1G, source told @ActionNetworkHQ. Outgoing UO president Michael Schill, AD Rob Mullens & B1G commish Kevin Warren not involved in any discussions in Chicago, another source said

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) August 22, 2022

---

I get the heebie -jeebies when I see new messages pop up on this thread. I thought most schools looking for their way in had already applied anyways. Perhaps this means they have jumped to the front of the line. At least we will know if USC's preference to keep them out has any weight.

---

Interesting story lines developing, Surprising to me that Florida State and Miami are apparently lobbying privately for B1G membership. Also that UNC might prefer the SEC to B1G, which surprises me a bit. Figure Clemson would be on an SEC shortlist... with Va Tech, UNC and NC State? Notre Dame, UVA, Miami and Florida State to the B1G> Wild days ahead.

fat_slice said:

---

Cal89 said:

---

Looks like the Ducks want out....

Oregon initiated preliminary discussions in Chicago w/Big Ten to determine if Ducks are compatible in B1G, source told @ActionNetworkHQ. Outgoing UO president Michael Schill, AD Rob Mullens & B1G commish Kevin Warren not involved in any discussions in Chicago, another source said

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) August 22, 2022

---

I get the heebie -jeebies when I see new messages pop up on this thread. I thought most schools looking for their way in had already applied anyways. Perhaps this means they have jumped to the front of the line. At least we will know if USC's preference to keep them out has any weight.

---

Yeah I don't think this Oregon "news" is anything new. Everyone knew they were trying to get into the B1G after USC/UCLA jumped.

BigDaddy said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

Cal89 said:

---

Looks like the Ducks want out....

Oregon initiated preliminary discussions in Chicago w/Big Ten to determine if Ducks are compatible in B1G, source told @ActionNetworkHQ. Outgoing UO president Michael Schill, AD Rob Mullens & B1G commish Kevin Warren not involved in any discussions in Chicago, another source said

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) August 22, 2022

---

I get the heebie -jeebies when I see new messages pop up on this thread. I thought most schools looking for their way in had already applied anyways. Perhaps this means they have jumped to the front of the line. At least we will know if USC's preference to keep them out has any weight.

---

Interesting story lines developing, Surprising to me that Florida State and Miami are apparently lobbying privately for B1G membership. Also that UNC might prefer the SEC to B1G, which surprises me a bit. Figure Clemson would be on an SEC shortlist... with Va Tech, UNC and NC State? Notre Dame, UVA, Miami and Florida State to the B1G> Wild days ahead.

---

If we have any legit shot - I hope Knowlton and Christ act fast. I'm a bit worried they will screw this up.

Go!Bears said:

---

I don't get the idea of, "if you take Stanfurd, you get the Bay Area market and carriage fees."

Nobody watches Furd, even when they win. In this new B1G, they are going to be middle of the pack in a good year. They will not draw a bunch of eyeballs.

Nobody is going to pay more to a cable provider so they can watch a .500 Furd play. If Bay Area cable providers try to stick an increase on their bills to pay for B1G carriage rights, they will lose even more subscribers than the flood of subscribers already bailing on them. You don't add Furd to get the BA media market. That can't be the reason to take them and leave us.

---

Because if you have a team in this market you get to push the B1G Network onto all platforms. How many people in the tri-state area (NY NJ CT) watch Rutgers? Doesn't matter. And while Stanford may not "draw a bunch of eyeballs", let's not pretend that Cal delivers some massive global audience every week.

This is a TV play. That's all. If you bring in Stanford and Washington, you are taking the B1G into the #6 and #12 TV markets, Cal's B1G chances will get a boost if Notre Dame remains independent because it opens up a spot. But Cal may have to wait, and there is a very good chance they'll enter that league on half rations like Maryland and Rutgers did.

Big C said:

---

sycasey said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

Here is what I still don't get -- if B1G only needs one team to "get" the Bay Area market, how do we leap frog Stanford. Today's comment from their commissioner is a strong indicator that they will be paying athletes ... so the only possible scenario I see us getting in is if Stanford takes the high road and is willing to go independent and not pay players. The big assumption is that Cal would be willing to pay players but that is a big assumption.

So outside of the above, is there any reason to take Cal? Do we just hope and pray that ND stays independent AND Stanford takes the high ground (I doubt they do this -- too much free advertising for their brand in the B1G).

---

I think the argument is that you really need both Cal and Stanford to "get" the Bay Area market. Leaving one out leaves the door open for another conference to horn in on the territory.

Plus having two more California teams makes travel and logistics easier for USC and UCLA, and if the B1G wants to burnish their academic brand then there are no better candidates than the Bay Area schools.

---

To me, if the B1G is going to take U$C and (F)UCLA -- which they have, duh -- it makes great sense to add Cal, Furd, UW and Oregon...from so many standpoints: media markets and brands, geographic, academic. Heck, even if Cal doesn't win more, because everybody needs their Washington Generals.

---

Isn't this rather a reversion back to the way things are now? What everyone is hoping for is a Pacific Division of the Big 10 - Cal Stanford Oregon UW USC and UCLA? We play 1-2 games against a UC Davis or SDSU, and then 3 from the other divisions of the Big10.

So basically, its the same thing we have now, except for the possibility of more money? Because there's no way we are going to be full share when/if we get into the Big10. UCLA and USC will see to it that we won't.

fat_slice said:

---

Cal89 said:

---

Looks like the Ducks want out....

Oregon initiated preliminary discussions in Chicago w/Big Ten to determine if Ducks are compatible in B1G, source told @ActionNetworkHQ. Outgoing UO president Michael Schill, AD Rob Mullens & B1G commish Kevin Warren not involved in any discussions in Chicago, another source said

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) August 22, 2022

---

I get the heebie -jeebies when I see new messages pop up on this thread. I thought most schools looking for their way in had already applied anyways. Perhaps this means they have jumped to the front of the line. At least we will know if USC's preference to keep them out has any weight.

---

I know many like to believe Oregon is the cat's meow, that they are in a relatively very desirable position regarding realignment, but I wonder if that is so, at least as it pertains to the B1G... Maybe some Duck desperation on display. No doubt for 20+ years the Ducks have been the class of Pac-10/12 (west coast) football, and an exciting and glitzy brand for sure, but should that wane, whatever appeal that might exist for the B1G, would likely plummet. The academics in Eugene remain subpar, the media market too, including its B1G transplants...

Cal89 said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

Cal89 said:

---

Looks like the Ducks want out....

Oregon initiated preliminary discussions in Chicago w/Big Ten to determine if Ducks are compatible in B1G, source told @ActionNetworkHQ. Outgoing UO president Michael Schill, AD Rob Mullens & B1G commish Kevin Warren not involved in any discussions in Chicago, another source said

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) August 22, 2022

---

I get the heebie -jeebies when I see new messages pop up on this thread. I thought most schools looking for their way in had already applied anyways. Perhaps this means they have jumped to the front of the line. At least we will know if USC's preference to keep them out has any weight.

---

I know many like to believe Oregon is the cat's meow, that they are in a relatively very desirable position regarding realignment, but I wonder if that is so, at least as it pertains to the B1G... Maybe some Duck desperation on display. No doubt for 20+ years the Ducks have been the class of Pac-10/12 (west coast) football, and exciting and glitzy brand for sure, but should that wane, whatever appeal that might exist for the B1G, would likely plummet. The academics in Eugene remain subpar, the media market too, including its B1G transplants...

---

That's the thing, Oregon is desirable if you're talking about the state of the football brand RIGHT NOW, but if you look under the hood at the fundamentals of the school, then their market, location, academics, non-revenue sports, etc., probably have them below the Bay Area schools and Washington. It depends on what the B1G is looking at, but history suggests they do care about those other things too.

sycasey said:

---

Cal89 said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

Cal89 said:

---

Looks like the Ducks want out....

Oregon initiated preliminary discussions in Chicago w/Big Ten to determine if Ducks are compatible in B1G, source told @ActionNetworkHQ. Outgoing UO president Michael Schill, AD Rob Mullens & B1G commish Kevin Warren not involved in any discussions in Chicago, another source said

— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) August 22, 2022

---

I get the heebie -jeebies when I see new messages pop up on this thread. I thought most schools looking for their way in had already applied anyways. Perhaps this means they have jumped to the front of the line. At least we will know if USC's preference to keep them out has any weight.

---

I know many like to believe Oregon is the cat's meow, that they are in a relatively very desirable position regarding realignment, but I wonder if that is so, at least as it pertains to the B1G... Maybe some Duck desperation on display. No doubt for 20+ years the Ducks have been the class of Pac-10/12 (west coast) football, and exciting and glitzy brand for sure, but should that wane, whatever appeal that might exist for the B1G, would likely plummet. The academics in Eugene remain subpar, the media market too, including its B1G transplants...

---

That's the thing, Oregon is desirable if you're talking about the state of the football brand RIGHT NOW, but if you look under the hood at the fundamentals of the school, then their market, location, academics, non-revenue sports, etc., probably have them below the Bay Area schools and Washington. It depends on what the B1G is looking at, but history suggests they do care about those other things too.

---

For sure the now matters, to some extent. All the more reasons to beat those green teams this upcoming season!

I would love to see us go 6-6 with wins over ND, Oregon, UW, USC, UCLA and Stanford.

This would really be great - we can claim to be sucky but none of those fan base can enter that convo.

philly1121 said:

---

Big C said:

---

sycasey said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

Here is what I still don't get -- if B1G only needs one team to "get" the Bay Area market, how do we leap frog Stanford. Today's comment from their commissioner is a strong indicator that they will be paying athletes ... so the only possible scenario I see us getting in is if Stanford takes the high road and is willing to go independent and not pay players. The big assumption is that Cal would be willing to pay players but that is a big assumption.

So outside of the above, is there any reason to take Cal? Do we just hope and pray that ND stays independent AND Stanford takes the high ground (I doubt they do this -- too much free advertising for their brand in the B1G).

---

I think the argument is that you really need both Cal and Stanford to "get" the Bay Area market. Leaving one out leaves the door open for another conference to horn in on the territory.

Plus having two more California teams makes travel and logistics easier for USC and UCLA, and if the B1G wants to burnish their academic brand then there are no better candidates than the Bay Area schools.

---

To me, if the B1G is going to take U$C and (F)UCLA -- which they have, duh -- it makes great sense to add Cal, Furd, UW and Oregon...from so many standpoints: media markets and brands, geographic, academic. Heck, even if Cal doesn't win more, because everybody needs their Washington Generals.

---

Isn't this rather a reversion back to the way things are now? What everyone is hoping for is a Pacific Division of the Big 10 - Cal Stanford Oregon UW USC and UCLA? We play 1-2 games against a UC Davis or SDSU, and then 3 from the other divisions of the Big10.

So basically, its the same thing we have now, except for the possibility of more money? Because there's no way we are going to be full share when/if we get into the Big10. UCLA and USC will see to it that we won't.

---

This has much less to do with USC and UCLA than it is current B1G members who don't want to take less money from their massive TV deal for the privilege of adding Cal to their conference.

BigDaddy said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

Big C said:

---

sycasey said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

Here is what I still don't get -- if B1G only needs one team to "get" the Bay Area market, how do we leap frog Stanford. Today's comment from their commissioner is a strong indicator that they will be paying athletes ... so the only possible scenario I see us getting in is if Stanford takes the high road and is willing to go independent and not pay players. The big assumption is that Cal would be willing to pay players but that is a big assumption.

So outside of the above, is there any reason to take Cal? Do we just hope and pray that ND stays independent AND Stanford takes the high ground (I doubt they do this -- too much free advertising for their brand in the B1G).

---

I think the argument is that you really need both Cal and Stanford to "get" the Bay Area market. Leaving one out leaves the door open for another conference to horn in on the territory.

Plus having two more California teams makes travel and logistics easier for USC and UCLA, and if the B1G wants to burnish their academic brand then there are no better candidates than the Bay Area schools.

---

To me, if the B1G is going to take U$C and (F)UCLA -- which they have, duh -- it makes great sense to add Cal, Furd, UW and Oregon...from so many standpoints: media markets and brands, geographic, academic. Heck, even if Cal doesn't win more, because everybody needs their Washington Generals.

---

Isn't this rather a reversion back to the way things are now? What everyone is hoping for is a Pacific Division of the Big 10 - Cal Stanford Oregon UW USC and UCLA? We play 1-2 games against a UC Davis or SDSU, and then 3 from the other divisions of the Big10.

So basically, its the same thing we have now, except for the possibility of more money? Because there's no way we are going to be full share when/if we get into the Big10. UCLA and USC will see to it that we won't.

---

This has much less to do with USC and UCLA than it is current B1G members who don't want to take less money from their massive TV deal for the privilege of adding Cal to their conference.

---

My understanding is that the escalator clause in the contract allows for the same payout each year to existing teams. So they would not have to take reduced shares. The Big 10 will once again open up the TV rights in 2030 at which point they may be looking to add again.

My sense is the Big 10 will want to add 3 or 4 west coast programs by 2024 season. Notre Dame still has time to join this go round if they want. It is believed they have decided to stay independent for now.

I do not believe USC and UCLA have any qualms about UW, Stanford and Cal joining the Big 10. There has been some reporting that they are not as excited about Oregon. For various reasons.

The P12 is not in a great position to get a good contract for TV payouts. The big movers are gone (USC and UCLA) and there has been pushback from UW and UO over the GOR. They want an exit clause. That makes getting any kind of good contract very difficult. ESPN or whoever will want certainty.

JMO but the Big 10 ADs probably are all in on Oregon. But University Presidents may have some qualms. TV likely is luke warm on both Stanford and Cal, but want this market.

I see this meeting in Chicago if true to be Oregon trying to determine the Big 10's sincere interest and some sort of potential timeline.

I don't see Miami as Big Ten material. Georgia Tech has both academic standards and Atlanta market.

mirabelle said:

---

I don't see Miami as Big Ten material. Georgia Tech has both academic standards and Atlanta market.

---

B1G wants to get into Florida for the same reasons why they wanted into California. UM and FSU are more than receptive. They've been lobbying for an invite.

Add the 'Canes and Seminoles and you have markets #13 Tampa, #17 Orlando and #18 Miami.

Georgia Tech would open up market #7. Maybe Tech gpes with them, along with UVa. I would think UNC is a better fit for the B1G but apparently they want to go SEC.

BigDaddy said:

---

mirabelle said:

---

I don't see Miami as Big Ten material. Georgia Tech has both academic standards and Atlanta market.

---

B1G wants to get into Florida for the same reasons why they wanted into California. UM and FSU are more than receptive. They've been lobbying for an invite.

Add the 'Canes and Seminoles and you have markets #13 Tampa, #17 Orlando and #18 Miami.

Georgia Tech would open up market #7. Maybe Tech gpes with them, along with UVa. I would think UNC is a better fit for the B1G but apparently they want to go SEC.

---

The Noles don't have academics, nor do they have the Tampa or Orlando market. Jacksonville? Maybe.

Miami? Aca. ok, good, but limited by geog. Is it big enough, in and of itself?

BigDaddy said:

---

philly1121 said:

---

Big C said:

---

sycasey said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

Here is what I still don't get -- if B1G only needs one team to "get" the Bay Area market, how do we leap frog Stanford. Today's comment from their commissioner is a strong indicator that they will be paying athletes ... so the only possible scenario I see us getting in is if Stanford takes the high road and is willing to go independent and not pay players. The big assumption is that Cal would be willing to pay players but that is a big assumption.

So outside of the above, is there any reason to take Cal? Do we just hope and pray that ND stays independent AND Stanford takes the high ground (I doubt they do this -- too much free advertising for their brand in the B1G).

---

I think the argument is that you really need both Cal and Stanford to "get" the Bay Area market. Leaving one out leaves the door open for another conference to horn in on the territory.

Plus having two more California teams makes travel and logistics easier for USC and UCLA, and if the B1G wants to burnish their academic brand then there are no better candidates than the Bay Area schools.

---

To me, if the B1G is going to take U$C and (F)UCLA -- which they have, duh -- it makes great sense to add Cal, Furd, UW and Oregon...from so many standpoints: media markets and brands, geographic, academic. Heck, even if Cal doesn't win more, because everybody needs their Washington Generals.

---

Isn't this rather a reversion back to the way things are now? What everyone is hoping for is a Pacific Division of the Big 10 - Cal Stanford Oregon UW USC and UCLA? We play 1-2 games against a UC Davis or SDSU, and then 3 from the other divisions of the Big10.

So basically, its the same thing we have now, except for the possibility of more money? Because there's no way we are going to be full share when/if we get into the Big10. UCLA and USC will see to it that we won't.

---

This has much less to do with USC and UCLA than it is current B1G members who don't want to take less money from their massive TV deal for the privilege of adding Cal to their conference.

---

No they probably do. They left the Pac12 for more money. Money that they would not have gotten had they stayed. They would absolutely have a say, as I am certain its been discussed with them and the B10 as to whether other teams from the P12 will join and what their share may be. I'm not going to make a jump unless I know for certain that the payout will be more. And I'm certainly not sharing equally with other P12 schools that my moved paved the way for. No way.

Chabbear said:

---

This is probably a silly question but will an metro area population really matter once streaming is the way to access tv? I know it did with cable by the evidence of getting Rutgers for its NY cable audience. But in the future, will it still be a overriding criteria?

---

This. My understanding is that carriage fees are MUCH less important in the contract valuation than eyeballs (and population).

socaltownie said:

---

Chabbear said:

---

This is probably a silly question but will an metro area population really matter once streaming is the way to access tv? I know it did with cable by the evidence of getting Rutgers for its NY cable audience. But in the future, will it still be a overriding criteria?

---

This. My understanding is that carriage fees are MUCH less important in the contract valuation than eyeballs (and population).

---

You take both - both are important. It is not a one or the other. It will be decades before cord cutting is all that is left. These contracts are for the next 6 years.

socaltownie said:

---

Chabbear said:

---

This is probably a silly question but will an metro area population really matter once streaming is the way to access tv? I know it did with cable by the evidence of getting Rutgers for its NY cable audience. But in the future, will it still be a overriding criteria?

---

This. My understanding is that carriage fees are MUCH less important in the contract valuation than eyeballs (and population).

---

Which only makes sense. Rutgers and Maryland were added 10 years ago, when cable dominated. It is a different landscape now.

Oski87 said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

Chabbear said:

---

This is probably a silly question but will an metro area population really matter once streaming is the way to access tv? I know it did with cable by the evidence of getting Rutgers for its NY cable audience. But in the future, will it still be a overriding criteria?

---

This. My understanding is that carriage fees are MUCH less important in the contract valuation than eyeballs (and population).

---

You take both - both are important. It is not a one or the other. It will be decades before cord cutting is all that is left. These contracts are for the next 6 years.

---

And even people who "cut the cord" and want to keep watching live sports are going to get a package through YouTubeTV, Sling, or something. If a sports network is considered "local" then it's more likely to be included with your base package.