Rushinbear said:

---

Big Dog said:

---

01Bear said:

---

Why is it assumed that UCLA's going to be prevented from joining the B1G by the Regents/Newsom? That's just ridiculous on so many counts.

Again, I still see Cal's entry into the B1G being based on litigation against the Regents for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, etc. The fact that Newsom and the Regents are looking into UCLA's deal gives me more (not less) hope that Cal will be admitted into the B1G. Of course, Newsom and the Regents have to play this as if they will refuse to permit UCLA's admission into the B1G without Cal's admission. in order to have any leverage in discussions with the B1G.

---

Love your thinking, but am really skeptical that the Regents can play hardball with the Little Sisters of the Poor, much less BiG and Fox Sports.

btw, USC has been frustrated that they have not been given a bigger piece of teh Pac pie for a long time. No way, they change their mind, unless the Pac was willing to give them perhaps 2-3x their current 1/12th share.

---

Let them go and suffer. They think that, because they have beaten up on Pac teams in the past (except recently), they'll be able to dominate 3k miles away in winter before 85k fans screaming for blood? They will become the pariah at every away game - fans will love to hate SC and will make them pay...for Hollywood, for OJ, for all the bad that CA represents to them.

All that could be avoided if they have at least 3 in conference home games a year. Plus 3 or 4 home OOC's a year and you've got a doable road sched.

---

What happens if USC wins a lot of those matchups? I have always thought the Pac-12 was underrated on the gridiron. USC has always had monster talent and now they will have even more.

P.S. I would be more than happy to see USC and UCLA never win a game again so I hope you are right.

BearSD said:

---

Maybe the solution is

-- UCLA leaves the UC system at the same time it leaves the Pac, rebrands as "University of Los Angeles", and receives no public money at all from that point forward

-- Annual funding from the state that would otherwise have been given to the former UCLA as a member of the UC system goes to pay off all CMS and Simpson Center debt, and after that debt is retired, the annual funding is re-allocated among all campuses of the UC system.

---

You forget that the buildings and the land they stand on (I.e. the campus) belong to the University of California.

ducky23 said:

---

BearSD said:

---

Maybe the solution is

-- UCLA leaves the UC system at the same time it leaves the Pac, rebrands as "University of Los Angeles", and receives no public money at all from that point forward

-- Annual funding from the state that would otherwise have been given to the former UCLA as a member of the UC system goes to pay off all CMS and Simpson Center debt, and after that debt is retired, the annual funding is re-allocated among all campuses of the UC system.

---

If you listen to newsom this is essentially what he's saying.

He specifically said he expects usc (as a private institution) to act this way, but ucla is a public institution and has a duty to all Californians. you can't take public funds and then not tell the state what the hell you are doing. Ucla basically wants the best of both worlds. They want public funds but want the autonomy of a private institution.
**** them

---

The argument is so obvious that it is incredible that the Regents didn't think of this on their own.

dimitrig said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

Big Dog said:

---

01Bear said:

---

Why is it assumed that UCLA's going to be prevented from joining the B1G by the Regents/Newsom? That's just ridiculous on so many counts.

Again, I still see Cal's entry into the B1G being based on litigation against the Regents for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, etc. The fact that Newsom and the Regents are looking into UCLA's deal gives me more (not less) hope that Cal will be admitted into the B1G. Of course, Newsom and the Regents have to play this as if they will refuse to permit UCLA's admission into the B1G without Cal's admission. in order to have any leverage in discussions with the B1G.

---

Love your thinking, but am really skeptical that the Regents can play hardball with the Little Sisters of the Poor, much less BiG and Fox Sports.

btw, USC has been frustrated that they have not been given a bigger piece of teh Pac pie for a long time. No way, they change their mind, unless the Pac was willing to give them perhaps 2-3x their current 1/12th share.

---

Let them go and suffer. They think that, because they have beaten up on Pac teams in the past (except recently), they'll be able to dominate 3k miles away in winter before 85k fans screaming for blood? They will become the pariah at every away game - fans will love to hate SC and will make them pay...for Hollywood, for OJ, for all the bad that CA represents to them.

All that could be avoided if they have at least 3 in conference home games a year. Plus 3 or 4 home OOC's a year and you've got a doable road sched.

---

What happens if USC wins a lot of those matchups? I have always thought the Pac-12 was underrated on the gridiron. USC has always had monster talent and now they will have even more.

P.S. I would be more than happy to see USC and UCLA never win a game again so I hope you are right.

---

Two losses a year should do it and I think that will happen. And, two losses will dispel any dreams of grandeur that the importation of Riley et al is meant to fulfill.

Riley's record at OU was great, but not all world. His teams tended to soften, let's say, in the 4th quarter. At least this year, he's bringing a new system, new coaches to a new school in a region unfamiliar to him. He's bringing in an admixture of players who are strangers to one another and all of them prima donnas. Will they get comfortable with the system this year? Will they play as a team vs "displaying their talents"? Will they be distracted by the Hollywood vibe and sudden NIL wealth? SC will lose 3 games this year and the boo birds will come out for Riley after the second one.