Sources: As part of the proposed Pac-12 Apple TV deal, @TedLasso will be the head coach for 1 game per year for every school.

These games would be filmed and released on the streaming service in a Hard Knocks style show. pic.twitter.com/XNrbaY5SGa

— RedditCFB (@RedditCFB) August 1, 2023

BearSD said:

---

BearSD said:

---

ncbears said:

---

I thought media deals was what Klavikoff did do for a living. That's' why he was hired.

---

Perhaps, in the "30 For 30" episode about the demise of the Pac-12, we will learn the sad story about how the Pac-12 CEOs were duped into hiring Georgie.

---

Here's the first draft of that 30 For 30 episode.

Pac-12 miscalculated the market, got out-played by a rival & is now teetering on collapse. Its future hinges on the Arizonas.

A deep dive on latest realignment wave, where even ACC & B1G could get caught in its surge.

“It’s standing on a knife’s edge.”https://t.co/YJ9omY3J9w

— Ross Dellenger (@RossDellenger) August 2, 2023

---

I haven't been following the conference realignment stuff super closely so this may have been explained already, but if the B1G isn't interested and CU can get $31m from the B12, and the PacX deal is something less than that and on some crappy streaming platform, why is there no talk of a B12 west coast pod?

If CU was additive, I would imagine most of the remaining Pac members would be as well and maybe they would push the payout to mid-30s or even 40.

PtownBear1 said:

---

I haven't been following the conference realignment stuff super closely so this may have been explained already, but if the B1G isn't interested and CU can get $31m from the B12, and the PacX deal is something less than that and on some crappy streaming platform, why is there no talk of a B12 west coast pod?

If CU was additive, I would imagine most of the remaining Pac members would be as well and maybe they would push the payout to mid-30s or even 40.

---

The idea is the Big 12 and (more importantly) their media partners can get into the pac/mountain time zone and late night time slot at a fraction (33%) of the cost of paying the whole Pac12

calumnus said:

---

Strykur said:

---

bluehenbear said:

---

Even if he I has to lie thru his teeth, WHY HAVE WE NOT HEARD A PEEP FROM OUT THE AD???? W T F

Inexcusable.

---

We and the Trees have been radio silent for over a year, means nothing or may mean a lot more than we currently presume.

---

I would be more comforted by that if Carol Christ was not so strongly in support of staying in the PAC and against going to the B1G

---

Christ would take an invite to the B1G if one were available, in a heartbeat. Right now, there is not one.

PtownBear1 said:

---

I haven't been following the conference realignment stuff super closely so this may have been explained already, but if the B1G isn't interested and CU can get $31m from the B12, and the PacX deal is something less than that and on some crappy streaming platform, why is there no talk of a B12 west coast pod?

If CU was additive, I would imagine most of the remaining Pac members would be as well and maybe they would push the payout to mid-30s or even 40.

---

The payout won't change; contracts are signed and P5 adds generate automatic pro-rata increases from ESPN with Fox guaranteeing pro-rata up to a total of 14 and after that it's at their discretion. The networks have no incentive to "push the payout to mid-30's or even 40" just to be nice. So if we go to the Big XII, it's 31.7, period.

PtownBear1 said:

---

I haven't been following the conference realignment stuff super closely so this may have been explained already, but if the B1G isn't interested and CU can get $31m from the B12, and the PacX deal is something less than that and on some crappy streaming platform, why is there no talk of a B12 west coast pod?

If CU was additive, I would imagine most of the remaining Pac members would be as well and maybe they would push the payout to mid-30s or even 40.

---

The answer to any question like this: what is the incremental addition to the TV revenue, vs. splitting the pie into more pieces...
From a pure "west coast pod" perspective, meaning adding schools for geographical reasons, that's really more of a need for the BIG...but obviously not an urgent one, not because I know anything, but because they haven't acted to this point...

mbBear said:

---

PtownBear1 said:

---

I haven't been following the conference realignment stuff super closely so this may have been explained already, but if the B1G isn't interested and CU can get $31m from the B12, and the PacX deal is something less than that and on some crappy streaming platform, why is there no talk of a B12 west coast pod?

If CU was additive, I would imagine most of the remaining Pac members would be as well and maybe they would push the payout to mid-30s or even 40.

---

The answer to any question like this: what is the incremental addition to the TV revenue, vs. splitting the pie into more pieces...
From a pure "west coast pod" perspective, meaning adding schools for geographical reasons, that's really more of a need for the BIG...but obviously not an urgent one, not because I know anything, but because they haven't acted to this point...

---

Very logical post. Is the B1G playing this slow for negations purposes to make the Pac teams swallow a discounted share, or do they want SC and UCLA to be out on an island?

wifeisafurd said:

---

mbBear said:

---

PtownBear1 said:

---

I haven't been following the conference realignment stuff super closely so this may have been explained already, but if the B1G isn't interested and CU can get $31m from the B12, and the PacX deal is something less than that and on some crappy streaming platform, why is there no talk of a B12 west coast pod?

If CU was additive, I would imagine most of the remaining Pac members would be as well and maybe they would push the payout to mid-30s or even 40.

---

The answer to any question like this: what is the incremental addition to the TV revenue, vs. splitting the pie into more pieces...
From a pure "west coast pod" perspective, meaning adding schools for geographical reasons, that's really more of a need for the BIG...but obviously not an urgent one, not because I know anything, but because they haven't acted to this point...

---

Very logical post. Is the B1G playing this slow for negations purposes to make the Pac teams swallow a discounted share, or do they want SC and UCLA to be out on an island?

---

You gotta think that SC/UCLA on an island would not be as good as their having teams out here to play with. Is the BIG taking a chance that the rest of us will give up waiting and lock in with another set up?

The B1G is not particularly interested in other PAC teams (and if they were, Cal is, at best, #3 of the PAC and likely #4), even moreso when there's more and more talk (including by the FSU BOR Chair) of the ACC crumbling, which could liberate several schools the B1G is certainly more interested in.

MTbear22 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Strykur said:

---

bluehenbear said:

---

Even if he I has to lie thru his teeth, WHY HAVE WE NOT HEARD A PEEP FROM OUT THE AD???? W T F

Inexcusable.

---

We and the Trees have been radio silent for over a year, means nothing or may mean a lot more than we currently presume.

---

I would be more comforted by that if Carol Christ was not so strongly in support of staying in the PAC and against going to the B1G

---

Christ would take an invite to the B1G if one were available, in a heartbeat. Right now, there is not one.

---

I do not believe this to be true. The institutional recoil from schools like Texas Tech and Oklahoma State are real.

I'd also caution people against the binary thinking of "there's an invite/there isn't an invite". Conferences don't just throw out invites out there and see what happens -- they talk to schools and come up with a deal and then invite them knowing it will be accepted.

A west coast pod would be good for SC/LA's logistics, but not necessarily for the other conference teams. If they add ORWA and Cal/furd, that would increase the number of west coast trips required by others. That's not necessarily appealing to all the members if it doesn't increase the distribution for everyone.

maxer said:

---

MTbear22 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Strykur said:

---

bluehenbear said:

---

Even if he I has to lie thru his teeth, WHY HAVE WE NOT HEARD A PEEP FROM OUT THE AD???? W T F

Inexcusable.

---

We and the Trees have been radio silent for over a year, means nothing or may mean a lot more than we currently presume.

---

I would be more comforted by that if Carol Christ was not so strongly in support of staying in the PAC and against going to the B1G

---

Christ would take an invite to the B1G if one were available, in a heartbeat. Right now, there is not one.

---

I do not believe this to be true. The institutional recoil from schools like Texas Tech and Oklahoma State are real.

I'd also caution people against the binary thinking of "there's an invite/there isn't an invite". Conferences don't just throw out invites out there and see what happens -- they talk to schools and come up with a deal and then invite them knowing it will be accepted.

---

He means Big Ten, not Big 12. B1G= Big Ten.

But as for the Big 12, there's no way. Look at where they are, geographically and politically. They don't ever want to be with Cal and Stanford. They hate Cal, Stanford, and everything else they associate with the Bay Area. They have folks there who would burn our campuses to the ground, if they thought they could get away with it.

maxer said:

---

MTbear22 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Strykur said:

---

bluehenbear said:

---

Even if he I has to lie thru his teeth, WHY HAVE WE NOT HEARD A PEEP FROM OUT THE AD???? W T F

Inexcusable.

---

We and the Trees have been radio silent for over a year, means nothing or may mean a lot more than we currently presume.

---

I would be more comforted by that if Carol Christ was not so strongly in support of staying in the PAC and against going to the B1G

---

Christ would take an invite to the B1G if one were available, in a heartbeat. Right now, there is not one.

---

I do not believe this to be true. The institutional recoil from schools like Texas Tech and Oklahoma State are real.

---

Good thing Texas Tech and Okie State aren't in the B1G, huh?

maxer said:

---

MTbear22 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Strykur said:

---

bluehenbear said:

---

Even if he I has to lie thru his teeth, WHY HAVE WE NOT HEARD A PEEP FROM OUT THE AD???? W T F

Inexcusable.

---

We and the Trees have been radio silent for over a year, means nothing or may mean a lot more than we currently presume.

---

I would be more comforted by that if Carol Christ was not so strongly in support of staying in the PAC and against going to the B1G

---

Christ would take an invite to the B1G if one were available, in a heartbeat. Right now, there is not one.

---

I'd also caution people against the binary thinking of "there's an invite/there isn't an invite". Conferences don't just throw out invites out there and see what happens -- they talk to schools and come up with a deal and then invite them knowing it will be accepted.

---

When I say "invite", interpret that to mean whatever words adequately means to you "Christ would take a spot in the Big Ten in a heartbeat, but as of this moment the Big Ten is not indicating interest in such an arrangement."

BearSD said:

---

maxer said:

---

MTbear22 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Strykur said:

---

bluehenbear said:

---

Even if he I has to lie thru his teeth, WHY HAVE WE NOT HEARD A PEEP FROM OUT THE AD???? W T F

Inexcusable.

---

We and the Trees have been radio silent for over a year, means nothing or may mean a lot more than we currently presume.

---

I would be more comforted by that if Carol Christ was not so strongly in support of staying in the PAC and against going to the B1G

---

Christ would take an invite to the B1G if one were available, in a heartbeat. Right now, there is not one.

---

I do not believe this to be true. The institutional recoil from schools like Texas Tech and Oklahoma State are real.

I'd also caution people against the binary thinking of "there's an invite/there isn't an invite". Conferences don't just throw out invites out there and see what happens -- they talk to schools and come up with a deal and then invite them knowing it will be accepted.

---

He means Big Ten, not Big 12. B1G= Big Ten.

But as for the Big 12, there's no way. Look at where they are, geographically and politically. They don't ever want to be with Cal and Stanford. They hate Cal, Stanford, and everything else they associate with the Bay Area. They have folks there who would burn our campuses to the ground, if they thought they could get away with it.

---

It goes both ways...

Last July, Big 12 officials fielded a call from Kliavkoff. USC and UCLA had just announced their impending departures from the Pac-12.

In an attempt to preserve his conference, Kliavkoff wanted to know if Big 12 administrators were still interested in a proposal that then-commissioner Bob Bowlsby made to the Pac-12 a year before. After Oklahoma and Texas announced their departure from the Big 12, Bowlsby visited Kliavkoff for an in-person meeting about a partnership or merger of the two leagues.

Kliavkoff turned it down.

A year later, here he was calling to accept it. Big 12 officials, having settled into their new reality and with four new members on the way, declined. "It was a short conversation," says one Big 12 official with knowledge of the talks.

https://sports.yahoo.com/whats-next-in-college-sports-conference-realignment-heres-where-the-shaky-landscape-stands-030444592.html

MTbear22 said:

---

maxer said:

---

MTbear22 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Strykur said:

---

bluehenbear said:

---

Even if he I has to lie thru his teeth, WHY HAVE WE NOT HEARD A PEEP FROM OUT THE AD???? W T F

Inexcusable.

---

We and the Trees have been radio silent for over a year, means nothing or may mean a lot more than we currently presume.

---

I would be more comforted by that if Carol Christ was not so strongly in support of staying in the PAC and against going to the B1G

---

Christ would take an invite to the B1G if one were available, in a heartbeat. Right now, there is not one.

---

I do not believe this to be true. The institutional recoil from schools like Texas Tech and Oklahoma State are real.

---

Good thing Texas Tech and Okie State aren't in the B1G, huh?

---

I misread -- apologies.

CaliforniaEternal said:

---

A west coast pod would be good for SC/LA's logistics, but not necessarily for the other conference teams. If they add ORWA and Cal/furd, that would increase the number of west coast trips required by others. That's not necessarily appealing to all the members if it doesn't increase the distribution for everyone.

---

This is very true. And IMO could be a major reason why the B1G is split on actually expanding now. For now every school comes west once per season for the non football sports. But add more teams and that number almost certainly grows to 3 or more.

The western travel for Football is not that difficult, and not every program is impacted annually. But throw in hoops, volleyball, baseball and soccer and now it is much different. I agree that additional money to the existing members may be necessary.

I do think the western schools (UO, UW, Cal and Stanford) would need to be very open to significantly reduced shares to start. Maybe the equivalent of the Big 12. And it may require another media partner.

I still say 20 teams doesn't make sense for a conference. 24 does. They don't want to expand the west coast "pod" until they are able to get additional teams from the ACC. 4 teams from the ACC, 4 teams from the Pac gives them 24 and 4 6 team pods. If they are aiming for a number less than 24 then it is likely not good for Cal. If the ACC teams are able to break the GoR, I'd say that's likely good for Cal.

I do wonder how committed Washington is to partnering with Oregon. If the B1G's offer went to:

Washington, Utah, Cal and Stanford, does Washington blink?

Let there be hope:

A group of Big Ten presidents have begun exploratory discussions on expansion in light of Pac 12 uncertainty, industry sources tell Yahoo Sports.

Focus is on possibly adding Oregon and Washington to move to 18 members or Cal and Stanford to reach 20. https://t.co/0kJj4twFdq

— Dan Wetzel (@DanWetzel) August 2, 2023

UCLA better be making phone calls to push for Cal. If not for institutional loyalty (ha!) then at least for their selfish way out of "subsidizing" Cal.

6956bear said:

---

CaliforniaEternal said:

---

A west coast pod would be good for SC/LA's logistics, but not necessarily for the other conference teams. If they add ORWA and Cal/furd, that would increase the number of west coast trips required by others. That's not necessarily appealing to all the members if it doesn't increase the distribution for everyone.

---

This is very true. And IMO could be a major reason why the B1G is split on actually expanding now. For now every school comes west once per season for the non football sports. But add more teams and that number almost certainly grows to 3 or more.

The western travel for Football is not that difficult, and not every program is impacted annually. But throw in hoops, volleyball, baseball and soccer and now it is much different. I agree that additional money to the existing members may be necessary.

I do think the western schools (UO, UW, Cal and Stanford) would need to be very open to significantly reduced shares to start. Maybe the equivalent of the Big 12. And it may require another media partner.

---

I dont actually think that is true. If a west coast pod develops, and assuming an 8-game schedule is developed that has the west coast pod play all the other schools in their pod, then the total number of midwestern trips to the coast goes from 7 to 9 per season (for the addition of 4 teams). This is for a conference with 14 midwestern / east coast team.

If they have a 9 game conference schedule that number would jump to 12, which is still less than one trip per year.

Regardless of Cal's ultimate landing spot, does anyone see Cal playing less night games? I dont.

Fewer.

golden sloth said:

---

Regardless of Cal's ultimate landing spot, does anyone see Cal playing less night games? I dont.

---

No. That is our primary media value - playing 7 PM Pacific starts that close down the sports bars on the East Coast.

The potential West Coast additions to the Big Ten wouldn’t come into the league with full revenue shares like USC and UCLA did, per sources. So would be more on the Rutgers/Maryland plan from 2014. Certainly still stronger $$ than what Pac-12 seemingly is offering, but a factor.

— Adam Rittenberg (@ESPNRittenberg) August 2, 2023

wifeisafurd said:

---

mbBear said:

---

PtownBear1 said:

---

I haven't been following the conference realignment stuff super closely so this may have been explained already, but if the B1G isn't interested and CU can get $31m from the B12, and the PacX deal is something less than that and on some crappy streaming platform, why is there no talk of a B12 west coast pod?

If CU was additive, I would imagine most of the remaining Pac members would be as well and maybe they would push the payout to mid-30s or even 40.

---

The answer to any question like this: what is the incremental addition to the TV revenue, vs. splitting the pie into more pieces...
From a pure "west coast pod" perspective, meaning adding schools for geographical reasons, that's really more of a need for the BIG...but obviously not an urgent one, not because I know anything, but because they haven't acted to this point...

---

Very logical post. Is the B1G playing this slow for negations purposes to make the Pac teams swallow a discounted share, or do they want SC and UCLA to be out on an island?

---

Good questions. I have said all along that the "football on an Island" isn't that big of deal, I mean, what are we talking about-30 minutes to an hour more of flying vs. going to Seattle or Pullman (for the LA schools) if playing the central time zone BIG schools? So, maybe one East coast school per year per team, and then you have home games. Even for basketball, if you are flying to a spot, then doing 2 at a time road games like what we have in the Pac-12? Northwestern and Wisconsin, maybe a Rutgers and Maryland etc? I think the "island" is even more pronounced for the other sports.
Well, playing it slow now, when the schools are at a point of desperation, vs. several months ago when there was still hope yeah, that would make sense...

Some random thoughts:

1) I read the Wetzel piece and about the four PAC teams being considered now would not get full shares like USC and UCLA did. My guess is that Phil Knight will say, "You were just kidding about that with Oregon, right?" i see Oregon demanding (and getting, btw) whatever UCLA and USC got. Otherwise, they'll enjoy moving on to the Big 12. Cal, Washington, and Stanford are another subject. I suspect Nike can, in turn, make deals with the existing B1G to make that worth their while.

2) What does anyone think happens to the Beavers and Cougs? Big 12? Mountain West? Any chance they also go to the B1G?

3) I'm doing math, which is always dangerous. Let's say the scenario Wetzel lays out comes to pass, and Washington, Oregon, Cal, and Stanford join UCLA and USC in '24. That is going to leave 20 teams. Seemingly not a problem until you consider that there are theoretically going to be 6 West Coast teams in that scenario. So they have to either do two 10 team divisions (seems unwieldy - but maybe) or four 5-team divisions with one "western team" joining a "midwestern" division, or unbalanced division counts.

SoFlaBear said:

---

2) What does anyone think happens to the Beavers and Cougs? Big 12? Mountain West? Any chance they also go to the B1G?

---

They basically join the Mountain West but rebrand as the Pac (whatever). They are so screwed and it sucks.

SoFlaBear said:

---

Some random thoughts:

1) I read the Wetzel piece and about the four PAC teams being considered now would not get full shares like USC and UCLA did. My guess is that Phil Knight will say, "You were just kidding about that with Oregon, right?" i see Oregon demanding (and getting, btw) whatever UCLA and USC got. Otherwise, they'll enjoy moving on to the Big 12. Cal, Washington, and Stanford are another subject. I suspect Nike can, in turn, make deals with the existing B1G to make that worth their while.

2) What does anyone think happens to the Beavers and Cougs? Big 12? Mountain West? Any chance they also go to the B1G?

3) I'm doing math, which is always dangerous. Let's say the scenario Wetzel lays out comes to pass, and Washington, Oregon, Cal, and Stanford join UCLA and USC in '24. That is going to leave 20 teams. Seemingly not a problem until you consider that there are theoretically going to be 6 West Coast teams in that scenario. So they have to either do two 10 team divisions (seems unwieldy - but maybe) or four 5-team divisions with one "western team" joining a "midwestern" division, or unbalanced division counts.

---

There won't be divisions. A few protected rivals and rotate the others.

MTbear22 said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

Some random thoughts:

1) I read the Wetzel piece and about the four PAC teams being considered now would not get full shares like USC and UCLA did. My guess is that Phil Knight will say, "You were just kidding about that with Oregon, right?" i see Oregon demanding (and getting, btw) whatever UCLA and USC got. Otherwise, they'll enjoy moving on to the Big 12. Cal, Washington, and Stanford are another subject. I suspect Nike can, in turn, make deals with the existing B1G to make that worth their while.

2) What does anyone think happens to the Beavers and Cougs? Big 12? Mountain West? Any chance they also go to the B1G?

3) I'm doing math, which is always dangerous. Let's say the scenario Wetzel lays out comes to pass, and Washington, Oregon, Cal, and Stanford join UCLA and USC in '24. That is going to leave 20 teams. Seemingly not a problem until you consider that there are theoretically going to be 6 West Coast teams in that scenario. So they have to either do two 10 team divisions (seems unwieldy - but maybe) or four 5-team divisions with one "western team" joining a "midwestern" division, or unbalanced division counts.

---

There won't be divisions. A few protected rivals and rotate the others.

---

But inviting 6 West Coslast teams means protecting 5 rivalries. That becomes harder for the remaining 14. Not impossible, but harder.

MTbear22 said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

Some random thoughts:

1) I read the Wetzel piece and about the four PAC teams being considered now would not get full shares like USC and UCLA did. My guess is that Phil Knight will say, "You were just kidding about that with Oregon, right?" i see Oregon demanding (and getting, btw) whatever UCLA and USC got. Otherwise, they'll enjoy moving on to the Big 12. Cal, Washington, and Stanford are another subject. I suspect Nike can, in turn, make deals with the existing B1G to make that worth their while.

2) What does anyone think happens to the Beavers and Cougs? Big 12? Mountain West? Any chance they also go to the B1G?

3) I'm doing math, which is always dangerous. Let's say the scenario Wetzel lays out comes to pass, and Washington, Oregon, Cal, and Stanford join UCLA and USC in '24. That is going to leave 20 teams. Seemingly not a problem until you consider that there are theoretically going to be 6 West Coast teams in that scenario. So they have to either do two 10 team divisions (seems unwieldy - but maybe) or four 5-team divisions with one "western team" joining a "midwestern" division, or unbalanced division counts.

---

There won't be divisions. A few protected rivals and rotate the others.

---

I think the ACC is also on the verge of collapse (I think smart people are working on how to get out of the Grant of Rights), and the best schools will be divided up by the SEC and B1G.

With regards to the B1G, they will fill out to 24 teams with 4 divisions. Thus, essentially develop an Atlantic Pod to combine with Penn St, Rutgers and maryland. Then there will be some discussion for where to divide the indiana, Illinois, michigan schools between the great lakes and the great plains schools.

berserkeley said:

---

MTbear22 said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

Some random thoughts:

1) I read the Wetzel piece and about the four PAC teams being considered now would not get full shares like USC and UCLA did. My guess is that Phil Knight will say, "You were just kidding about that with Oregon, right?" i see Oregon demanding (and getting, btw) whatever UCLA and USC got. Otherwise, they'll enjoy moving on to the Big 12. Cal, Washington, and Stanford are another subject. I suspect Nike can, in turn, make deals with the existing B1G to make that worth their while.

2) What does anyone think happens to the Beavers and Cougs? Big 12? Mountain West? Any chance they also go to the B1G?

3) I'm doing math, which is always dangerous. Let's say the scenario Wetzel lays out comes to pass, and Washington, Oregon, Cal, and Stanford join UCLA and USC in '24. That is going to leave 20 teams. Seemingly not a problem until you consider that there are theoretically going to be 6 West Coast teams in that scenario. So they have to either do two 10 team divisions (seems unwieldy - but maybe) or four 5-team divisions with one "western team" joining a "midwestern" division, or unbalanced division counts.

---

There won't be divisions. A few protected rivals and rotate the others.

---

But inviting 6 West Coslast teams means protecting 5 rivalries.

---

Not necessarily. Currently the B1G is moving to a model where teams don't have to have an arbitrarily equal number of protected rivals - it's just protection for legitimate rivals. Iowa, for example, has three. UM has 2 I think, PSU 0. Out west I'd bet a large sum of money USC would want no more than 2-3 and will demand UO not be one of them.

golden sloth said:

---

MTbear22 said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

Some random thoughts:

1) I read the Wetzel piece and about the four PAC teams being considered now would not get full shares like USC and UCLA did. My guess is that Phil Knight will say, "You were just kidding about that with Oregon, right?" i see Oregon demanding (and getting, btw) whatever UCLA and USC got. Otherwise, they'll enjoy moving on to the Big 12. Cal, Washington, and Stanford are another subject. I suspect Nike can, in turn, make deals with the existing B1G to make that worth their while.

2) What does anyone think happens to the Beavers and Cougs? Big 12? Mountain West? Any chance they also go to the B1G?

3) I'm doing math, which is always dangerous. Let's say the scenario Wetzel lays out comes to pass, and Washington, Oregon, Cal, and Stanford join UCLA and USC in '24. That is going to leave 20 teams. Seemingly not a problem until you consider that there are theoretically going to be 6 West Coast teams in that scenario. So they have to either do two 10 team divisions (seems unwieldy - but maybe) or four 5-team divisions with one "western team" joining a "midwestern" division, or unbalanced division counts.

---

There won't be divisions. A few protected rivals and rotate the others.

---

I think the ACC is also on the verge of collapse (I think smart people are working on how to get out of the Grant of Rights), and the best schools will be divided up by the SEC and B1G.

With regards to the B1G, they will fill out to 24 teams with 4 divisions. Thus, essentially develop an Atlantic Pod to combine with Penn St, Rutgers and maryland. Then there will be some discussion for where to divide the indiana, Illinois, michigan schools between the great lakes and the great plains schools.

---

I almost added that to my post. But who knows. I do think USC will not want to be in a western pod. They want to play more eastern and big name brands, not make a halfway return to the PAC 8.

CaliforniaEternal said:

---

A west coast pod would be good for SC/LA's logistics, but not necessarily for the other conference teams. If they add ORWA and Cal/furd, that would increase the number of west coast trips required by others. That's not necessarily appealing to all the members if it doesn't increase the distribution for everyone.

---

I think the occasional west coast trip would be appealing, esp SF and Seattle.