This column and all your coverage of the PAC12 dissolution are Pulitzer-worthy. Thank you for bringing us information and analysis we can’t get anywhere else!
Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."
Will Big Ten Regret set in at UCLA?
"No."
At the end of the day, they are in the "Haves" instead of the "Have Nots." No matter what the future of the sport holds, if the P2-P4 break away from the NCAA, the NCAA develops it's own money-tier league, or otherwise UCLA will be a part of it.
The same thing is true about Oregon and Washington.
Short term financial pain is worth long term security.
That's why it is a click-baiting headline gimmick to use a question like this up top to draw readers in. When journalists and editors use questions as headlines it is not Pulitzer-worthy. It is click-bait.
Will UCLA regret going to the Big Ten? No. No. No they won't. Just because they have to pay more to travel and have to send money to Cal, they will not regret it because it buys them the long-term security of being in the strongest conference going forward.
Agreed. Turns out anyone can nominate for the Pulitzer. I looked up how but it was beyond my organizational skills. John is too modest to do what needs to be done, but if his agent, reading this, would be willing to provide some guidance to us, his avid fans, perhaps WE can provide another award beyond being the best sportswriter in America.
I’m reminded of what Fanatics just said publicly about Nike and its MLB jersey fiasco. They (Nike) ‘were innovating something that didn’t need innovating”. So too the departing Pac12 schools. I bleed purple but will shed tears of joy the next time I get a chance to see UW play a conference game against the Beavs @ Reser. Hope the pendulum swings back before I go.
Those long flights to the east coast will suck. West coast travel they were 2.5 hours tops to any destination. Now you add 3 hours to that. That's not fun.
The Pac-12 really messed things up for themselves. As a Coug, I acknowledge that UCLA should get a bigger piece of the TV pie to keep the conference together. An unequal TV split would have kept the band together, but certain schools in the middle (IE Colorado) weren't having it.
I honestly think the biggest fools were Cal and Stanford. They basically are getting nothing in the TV deal and get to travel to the east coast to play. They could have stayed with WSU/OSU and waited things out as the Pac-4. They instead, panicked and took a terrible deal.
That's silly. Cal and Stanford could not have saved WSU and OSU from their current fate. They grabbed a life raft off of the sinking Pac ship, just like Utah, Colorado, and the Arizona schools did. None of those six schools could have prevented the ship from sinking.
Timing is my point, I personally don't see how getting paid basically no where near your TV market value is "a life raft." It's a dumb business decision. To each their own.
Agree, but those 2 will regret what they did more than even UCLA or the 4 corner schools choices. When FSU, Clemson, & UNC jump ship, which they want to do and 2 of them have sued the ACC to do, all 3 voted against add Stanfprd, Cal, & SMU. They hate these schools were added. Just ask UNC coach Anson Dorrance, the ACC women's soccer coach who's won more NC championship. who spoke out against this idiocy. This will not end well for those 2 schools especially when Notre Dame jumps ship and can't protect Stanford.
The truth is those schools should try to work with the PAC2 to have a good west coast landing ground for all their sports including football. Given the issue in the ACC It can still happen and they need to be ready. That's one way to undue that terrible deal.
Yup. Cal and Stanford groveled their way into the ACC because they didn't want to be left in a conference with WSU and OSU, let alone the likes of Boise State, SD State, Fresno State, UNLV, etc. We're still in the middle of this realignment and WSU and OSU need to stay patient for when the other shoe drops.
I agree with all you said. Life decisions made based on fear are usually wrong. Witness Jonathan Smith. Patience would have handed him the Washington job.
Thanks John. I believe I actually spelled out all of this math for UCLA a couple of months ago in this column. When you take into account all the extra travel money, calimony, etc.,the numbers just don't pencil out for UCLA in the big 10. Add in the hits they're going to take in Olympic sports and this has disaster written all over it for them.. But sometimes you just have to let idiots be idiots and fail on their own..
John, both Rutgers and Maryland should go to the ACC. They cannot compete in the Big 10. BTW, I agree with the comment about Chip Kelly. He ain't stupid and he left precisely for the reason you stated. UCLA is in big trouble going to the Big 10 and will be another Rutgers.
Not so fast there fella. Last year there were only six teams in the B1G that were over .500 in conference play and there were eight teams below .500. Rutgers had the same W-L record as Minnesota, Illinois, Nebraska and Purdue. Rutgers had a better record than Michigan State and Indiana. The Scarlet Knights ain’t leaving the B1G.
I think Kelly actually liked UCLA. Can the idea that he was burned out with recruiting and NIL, since he barely did either one. More likely, he realized that being a college head coach, at any school, was no longer a good fit for him. OC position with his buddy Ryan Day looks like a better fit, but remember he was hoping for NFL OC positions first
I still think since its just about football after this year and the travel/logistics issues. The Big 10 should work with the PAC 2 to get their 4 west coast back in a Pac12 conference for all other sports and help them set up 6 other teams for their football conf like Stanford, Cal, SMU when the ACC implodes and maybe SD State. UNLV, & BSU or another Texas school to partner with SMU.
It could happen. Bring the Conference of Champions back.
Come 2031, UCLA, Oregon, Rutgers, et al will be bringing in $100M per annum in media revenue with this number likely increased by schools in the CFB and CBB men's playoffs keeping more of what they earn. Walking from a streaming-only deal and less than $30M a year was a bad move? In what universe would UCLA opt for being a beta site for Apple instead of a member of the B1G?
But the travel! Oh my gosh! In the 1930's when Minnesota was on its 3-seasons in a row championship run, Minnesota traveled to Seattle to play Washington. The round trip took 8 days.
$10M a season to Cal is another example of the great state of California refusing to recognize that B1G time college sports is, a business and not a commonwealth.
Oregon is paying $30M, along with the other Pac-10 members, to subsidize two entities not deemed worthy by the marketplace. Further evidence of meritocracy disappearing.
Does the Ohio legislature require Ohio State to share revenue with the U of Ohio, Kent State, Bowling Green, Toledo, and Miami of Ohio? How about the College of Wooster and Wesleyan of Ohio? Of course not.
UCLA athletics will be covered in the B1G and promoted professionally by the B1G Ten Network and other media. Coverage that was absent from Larry's Loser Network. The B1G Media Days in July will be three days of coverage. Dan Lanning will have the floor on day three. The coverage on Larry's Loser Network ran for half a day.
UCLA, USC, UW, and Oregon are elevating from the minors to The Show. It may not be 'kind' but it is good business.
Nothing is screwing up college sports than casual fans.
No. College sports is not a business, it is a university with an athletics department attached to it. Certainly many private entities are making it a business, but the heart is the university, which most all are funded through taxpayer monies.
Almost half of the UO’s annual budget comes from two sources—student tuition and state government support. These two sources comprise the bulk of the UO’s Education and General (E&G) budget, which pays for the majority of the institution’s academic operating costs"
Straight from UO website
You really think they can do without that funding? 🤣🤣🤣
Oregon is fortunate too. Thanks to Phil Knight and other donors, other than the basketball arena, the facilities are paid for and are worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Many schools have to use a chunk of their revenue for debt service for facilities that Mr. Knight and others have generously donated to UO.
I have a feeling that over the next couple of years that there will be a tremendous amount of buyer's remorse. Especially in the other sports that aren't football. It seems to me, and is how I have felt been reported, that a lot of very short-sighted decisions were made in this break up.
$10 million in increased travel? John hope you follow up on that in a couple years. For example, in 2024 Oregon has 3 road trips east plus 1 to UCLA for Big Ten football games. The Ducks would have had 4-5 road trips in the Pac. How much additional to go to Big Ten venues?
The Ducks basketball will play 7 road games at Big Ten schools and 3 road at former Pac12. Those 7 games will probably be 4 trips with 3 trips taking 2 opponents. Similarly, the Oregon women will have dual venue road trips back east 4 trips for 8 opponents. Both the men and women would have had 5 road trips for conference games in the Pac12.
Some sports will play tournament style contests rather than home-and-home. That will not be new for golf which has done that in the Pac12.
Likewise the Big Ten will arrange, where the can, similar approach to other sports.
So, will travel cost more? Likely. Will it be a net $10 million more than the road costs in the Pac12? I think we need to check back in a couple years.
I think the cost to “student” athlete academics is a hidden land mine. Remember that ALL programs will be faced with travel demands that won’t be on first class charter flights.
The teams UCLA played most years were under a 9 hour drive. Salt Lake is closer than San Francisco. So it is easy to get fights under $150 for most all schools. The furthest travel was UW and UO, tickets go for around $350...that is now the closest and most cheapest flight, which I over double of what I they used to pay per game. Then the other schools across the country are going for $500+.. That's over 3x what they were paying. That is per athlete, for three strings of athletes, all support personnel, etc. And these cross country flights mean they have to stay overnight... No more jump on a plane and be home, so add more hotel costs, food costs, rental car costs... Now do that for all sports. If anything, we will probably find $10 million is under costs... And don't forget that $10 million number was before inflation really hit
You are completely wrong in your assumptions on how travel will work. And, you are overestimating the number of trips and athletes who will be traveling. The B1G exec's have discussed this. Do some reading.
It's called an estimation on costs, obviously they aren't buying single tickets on regular flights. But it gives a general idea of cost increases and issues with extended travel... Lots more fuel costs more money, which is wrapped up and shown in general flight ticket prices
Don't know if the total will add up to an additional $10M, but don't forget to include: M and W Volleyball, M and W soccer, baseball / softball, M and W Waterpolo and probably more that will play home and home. They have more sports than UO.
That's the primary misunderstood point. There are not a lot of sports that will play home and home. At the time of the realignment the Big Ten spokesman discussed that. Some schools don't have the sports. I think the B1G has 2 water polo teams to match with USC and UCLA. Those 2 will replace Cal/Stanford. Some sports will be played tournament style rather than one-on-one. The travel issue definitely applies to football, men and women basketball. Some years, each of the former Pac4 football will play 3 or 4 opponents in the Midwest/East. Men and women basketball will play 2 opponents each trip. It is NOT the dire prediction many are making it out to be.
Will those trips be long? Some of them yes. But, did you ever try going to Pullman? Most of the ground travel after landing will be shorter than LAX to Westwood, or Denver to Boulder.
Spot on article, John. Chip wouldn't have left UCLA if he believed they could be successful in the B1G. He would've kept putting in the time and effort into navigating the portal and the ramifications of NIL. He saw the writing on the wall and realized that his effort wasn't worth the impending results.
I was also unaware of Rutgers' financial woes. But that further supports the point that this is all unsustainable. Big money in college sports will cause the system to collapse. Only a handful of schools can keep up with the arms race in terms of facilities, coaching salaries, NIL, and now the increased travel demands. The rest will see a pile of red ink and worse on-field performance. UCLA will be one of those schools that feels the pain with virtually zero benefit.
In the meantime, OSU and WSU are arguably better positioned than any of the former Pac institutions aside from Oregon and U$C. They haven't overleveraged themselves financially, haven't committed to anything long term, and are sitting on a massive war chest that will keep them afloat for the next few years while more things shake out.
You really don't know Chip Kelly, do you? He would've kept putting in the effort? He didn't put in the effort, and clearly didn't want to do so. UCLA has a lot to prove, it's true, but first year coach DeShaun Foster has been almost immediately better on the recruiting and NIL fronts.
John, thanks for the update and your great coverage. UCLA is going to get their butts kicked in the Big Ten, while imposing enormous travel on their student athletes (particularly the Olympic sports teams) and as a result incur even bigger athletic financial deficit. Poor leadership from the president and their AD. Chip Kelly saw the writing on the wall and bailed at the right time! Love your comparison to Rutgers!
Of all the moves in the PAC12 drama the one by UCLA always seemed to be the most ill advised to me. Felt at the time liked it smelled of desperation from financial pressures. I am willing to predict that UCLA will never be a major factor in BIG10 football and that the move will ultimately damage the brand of their sacred basketball programs. And they should have read the room better regarding the reaction of the regents.
A few schools are going to learn it's cheaper and a lot more fun to go 7-2 in the Pac-12 than it is to go 5-4 in the B1G. This is a lesson Nebraska has learned the hard way.
Since the Big Ten went to 9 games in 2016, Nebraska has been above 3-6 just once. That's 1 time in 8 seasons. That was 6-3 in Mike Riley's second year.
The realignment for football is FAR from over. No doubt we’re headed for separation out of the NCAA, salaried players under contracts, regional divisions, a few massive media contracts including ESPN, Fox, CBS, NBC, CW, & lots of Pay per view. Most smaller schools finding themselves unwanted in the big boy league, and finding it impossible to compete and dropping football altogether. That’s my story and I’m stickin to it!!😁
Cost to benefit graphs are not linear, with consistent growth over every year. They are logarithmic, there is a time of intense increase in wealth with little effort... But over time there is a limit it caps out and any increase requires much work for very little gain.
This growth is temporary and the signs of the future, rather more likely the college football scene is like Icarus getting close to the sun way too fast
Thats true for many industries and businesses, but im not so sure about Football. A good case study is the NFL. A lot will depend on fan enthuiasm and how a new college football league will be structured. Right now the whole thing is broken and not sustainable.
This column and all your coverage of the PAC12 dissolution are Pulitzer-worthy. Thank you for bringing us information and analysis we can’t get anywhere else!
Couldn’t agree more.
Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."
Will Big Ten Regret set in at UCLA?
"No."
At the end of the day, they are in the "Haves" instead of the "Have Nots." No matter what the future of the sport holds, if the P2-P4 break away from the NCAA, the NCAA develops it's own money-tier league, or otherwise UCLA will be a part of it.
The same thing is true about Oregon and Washington.
Short term financial pain is worth long term security.
That's why it is a click-baiting headline gimmick to use a question like this up top to draw readers in. When journalists and editors use questions as headlines it is not Pulitzer-worthy. It is click-bait.
Will UCLA regret going to the Big Ten? No. No. No they won't. Just because they have to pay more to travel and have to send money to Cal, they will not regret it because it buys them the long-term security of being in the strongest conference going forward.
Agreed. Turns out anyone can nominate for the Pulitzer. I looked up how but it was beyond my organizational skills. John is too modest to do what needs to be done, but if his agent, reading this, would be willing to provide some guidance to us, his avid fans, perhaps WE can provide another award beyond being the best sportswriter in America.
By the way, this is what you pay agents for. Hint, hint.
Absolutely and I’ve said it here many times.
As Warren Buffett so aptly noted, “It’s only when the tide goes out do you learn who’s been swimming naked.”
I’m reminded of what Fanatics just said publicly about Nike and its MLB jersey fiasco. They (Nike) ‘were innovating something that didn’t need innovating”. So too the departing Pac12 schools. I bleed purple but will shed tears of joy the next time I get a chance to see UW play a conference game against the Beavs @ Reser. Hope the pendulum swings back before I go.
Lol
Those long flights to the east coast will suck. West coast travel they were 2.5 hours tops to any destination. Now you add 3 hours to that. That's not fun.
The Pac-12 really messed things up for themselves. As a Coug, I acknowledge that UCLA should get a bigger piece of the TV pie to keep the conference together. An unequal TV split would have kept the band together, but certain schools in the middle (IE Colorado) weren't having it.
I honestly think the biggest fools were Cal and Stanford. They basically are getting nothing in the TV deal and get to travel to the east coast to play. They could have stayed with WSU/OSU and waited things out as the Pac-4. They instead, panicked and took a terrible deal.
That's silly. Cal and Stanford could not have saved WSU and OSU from their current fate. They grabbed a life raft off of the sinking Pac ship, just like Utah, Colorado, and the Arizona schools did. None of those six schools could have prevented the ship from sinking.
Timing is my point, I personally don't see how getting paid basically no where near your TV market value is "a life raft." It's a dumb business decision. To each their own.
Agree, but those 2 will regret what they did more than even UCLA or the 4 corner schools choices. When FSU, Clemson, & UNC jump ship, which they want to do and 2 of them have sued the ACC to do, all 3 voted against add Stanfprd, Cal, & SMU. They hate these schools were added. Just ask UNC coach Anson Dorrance, the ACC women's soccer coach who's won more NC championship. who spoke out against this idiocy. This will not end well for those 2 schools especially when Notre Dame jumps ship and can't protect Stanford.
The truth is those schools should try to work with the PAC2 to have a good west coast landing ground for all their sports including football. Given the issue in the ACC It can still happen and they need to be ready. That's one way to undue that terrible deal.
Yup. Cal and Stanford groveled their way into the ACC because they didn't want to be left in a conference with WSU and OSU, let alone the likes of Boise State, SD State, Fresno State, UNLV, etc. We're still in the middle of this realignment and WSU and OSU need to stay patient for when the other shoe drops.
The West Coast Conference for basketball (OSU/WSU) just announced the addition of Grand Canyon and Seattle Univ.
The WCC is positioning itself for the likelihood of Gonzaga, WSU and OSU leaving the WCC for the 2026 season of the rebuilt Pac-8/10/12.
The WCC just keeps getting worse. This hurts WSU big time. Go Cougs!
I agree with all you said. Life decisions made based on fear are usually wrong. Witness Jonathan Smith. Patience would have handed him the Washington job.
WHO'S GETTING THE DRIINKS.?
Thanks John. I believe I actually spelled out all of this math for UCLA a couple of months ago in this column. When you take into account all the extra travel money, calimony, etc.,the numbers just don't pencil out for UCLA in the big 10. Add in the hits they're going to take in Olympic sports and this has disaster written all over it for them.. But sometimes you just have to let idiots be idiots and fail on their own..
John, both Rutgers and Maryland should go to the ACC. They cannot compete in the Big 10. BTW, I agree with the comment about Chip Kelly. He ain't stupid and he left precisely for the reason you stated. UCLA is in big trouble going to the Big 10 and will be another Rutgers.
Not so fast there fella. Last year there were only six teams in the B1G that were over .500 in conference play and there were eight teams below .500. Rutgers had the same W-L record as Minnesota, Illinois, Nebraska and Purdue. Rutgers had a better record than Michigan State and Indiana. The Scarlet Knights ain’t leaving the B1G.
I think Kelly actually liked UCLA. Can the idea that he was burned out with recruiting and NIL, since he barely did either one. More likely, he realized that being a college head coach, at any school, was no longer a good fit for him. OC position with his buddy Ryan Day looks like a better fit, but remember he was hoping for NFL OC positions first
I still think since its just about football after this year and the travel/logistics issues. The Big 10 should work with the PAC 2 to get their 4 west coast back in a Pac12 conference for all other sports and help them set up 6 other teams for their football conf like Stanford, Cal, SMU when the ACC implodes and maybe SD State. UNLV, & BSU or another Texas school to partner with SMU.
It could happen. Bring the Conference of Champions back.
Come 2031, UCLA, Oregon, Rutgers, et al will be bringing in $100M per annum in media revenue with this number likely increased by schools in the CFB and CBB men's playoffs keeping more of what they earn. Walking from a streaming-only deal and less than $30M a year was a bad move? In what universe would UCLA opt for being a beta site for Apple instead of a member of the B1G?
But the travel! Oh my gosh! In the 1930's when Minnesota was on its 3-seasons in a row championship run, Minnesota traveled to Seattle to play Washington. The round trip took 8 days.
$10M a season to Cal is another example of the great state of California refusing to recognize that B1G time college sports is, a business and not a commonwealth.
Oregon is paying $30M, along with the other Pac-10 members, to subsidize two entities not deemed worthy by the marketplace. Further evidence of meritocracy disappearing.
Does the Ohio legislature require Ohio State to share revenue with the U of Ohio, Kent State, Bowling Green, Toledo, and Miami of Ohio? How about the College of Wooster and Wesleyan of Ohio? Of course not.
UCLA athletics will be covered in the B1G and promoted professionally by the B1G Ten Network and other media. Coverage that was absent from Larry's Loser Network. The B1G Media Days in July will be three days of coverage. Dan Lanning will have the floor on day three. The coverage on Larry's Loser Network ran for half a day.
UCLA, USC, UW, and Oregon are elevating from the minors to The Show. It may not be 'kind' but it is good business.
Nothing is screwing up college sports than casual fans.
No. College sports is not a business, it is a university with an athletics department attached to it. Certainly many private entities are making it a business, but the heart is the university, which most all are funded through taxpayer monies.
D3, I agree is not a business. D1 CFB and Men's basketball are both businesses.
The NLRB, federal, and state courts, and state legislatures are in agreement.
Taxpayer money. You are in error. Needy and poorly administrated programs need state assistance. Oregon does not need government assistance.
FWIW, I've zealously followed CFB for 7 decades.
Almost half of the UO’s annual budget comes from two sources—student tuition and state government support. These two sources comprise the bulk of the UO’s Education and General (E&G) budget, which pays for the majority of the institution’s academic operating costs"
Straight from UO website
You really think they can do without that funding? 🤣🤣🤣
Thanks for the clarification.
Oregon is fortunate too. Thanks to Phil Knight and other donors, other than the basketball arena, the facilities are paid for and are worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Many schools have to use a chunk of their revenue for debt service for facilities that Mr. Knight and others have generously donated to UO.
You ignore history quite well
I must say sir
I bemoan the history, at least the recent history, of The Pac-12.
The marketplace cares naught for history, cares naught for what you did for me yesterday.
Jon, if the LA schools hadn't bolted, there would not have been a streaming only TV offer.
I have a feeling that over the next couple of years that there will be a tremendous amount of buyer's remorse. Especially in the other sports that aren't football. It seems to me, and is how I have felt been reported, that a lot of very short-sighted decisions were made in this break up.
$10 million in increased travel? John hope you follow up on that in a couple years. For example, in 2024 Oregon has 3 road trips east plus 1 to UCLA for Big Ten football games. The Ducks would have had 4-5 road trips in the Pac. How much additional to go to Big Ten venues?
The Ducks basketball will play 7 road games at Big Ten schools and 3 road at former Pac12. Those 7 games will probably be 4 trips with 3 trips taking 2 opponents. Similarly, the Oregon women will have dual venue road trips back east 4 trips for 8 opponents. Both the men and women would have had 5 road trips for conference games in the Pac12.
Some sports will play tournament style contests rather than home-and-home. That will not be new for golf which has done that in the Pac12.
Likewise the Big Ten will arrange, where the can, similar approach to other sports.
So, will travel cost more? Likely. Will it be a net $10 million more than the road costs in the Pac12? I think we need to check back in a couple years.
I think the cost to “student” athlete academics is a hidden land mine. Remember that ALL programs will be faced with travel demands that won’t be on first class charter flights.
You are completely wrong.
The teams UCLA played most years were under a 9 hour drive. Salt Lake is closer than San Francisco. So it is easy to get fights under $150 for most all schools. The furthest travel was UW and UO, tickets go for around $350...that is now the closest and most cheapest flight, which I over double of what I they used to pay per game. Then the other schools across the country are going for $500+.. That's over 3x what they were paying. That is per athlete, for three strings of athletes, all support personnel, etc. And these cross country flights mean they have to stay overnight... No more jump on a plane and be home, so add more hotel costs, food costs, rental car costs... Now do that for all sports. If anything, we will probably find $10 million is under costs... And don't forget that $10 million number was before inflation really hit
You are completely wrong in your assumptions on how travel will work. And, you are overestimating the number of trips and athletes who will be traveling. The B1G exec's have discussed this. Do some reading.
It's called an estimation on costs, obviously they aren't buying single tickets on regular flights. But it gives a general idea of cost increases and issues with extended travel... Lots more fuel costs more money, which is wrapped up and shown in general flight ticket prices
I question that too.
UCLA, for example, only has 3 long Big 10 football trips next year, with the remaining games either West coast road trips or home games.
Don't know if the total will add up to an additional $10M, but don't forget to include: M and W Volleyball, M and W soccer, baseball / softball, M and W Waterpolo and probably more that will play home and home. They have more sports than UO.
That's the primary misunderstood point. There are not a lot of sports that will play home and home. At the time of the realignment the Big Ten spokesman discussed that. Some schools don't have the sports. I think the B1G has 2 water polo teams to match with USC and UCLA. Those 2 will replace Cal/Stanford. Some sports will be played tournament style rather than one-on-one. The travel issue definitely applies to football, men and women basketball. Some years, each of the former Pac4 football will play 3 or 4 opponents in the Midwest/East. Men and women basketball will play 2 opponents each trip. It is NOT the dire prediction many are making it out to be.
Will those trips be long? Some of them yes. But, did you ever try going to Pullman? Most of the ground travel after landing will be shorter than LAX to Westwood, or Denver to Boulder.
Spot on article, John. Chip wouldn't have left UCLA if he believed they could be successful in the B1G. He would've kept putting in the time and effort into navigating the portal and the ramifications of NIL. He saw the writing on the wall and realized that his effort wasn't worth the impending results.
I was also unaware of Rutgers' financial woes. But that further supports the point that this is all unsustainable. Big money in college sports will cause the system to collapse. Only a handful of schools can keep up with the arms race in terms of facilities, coaching salaries, NIL, and now the increased travel demands. The rest will see a pile of red ink and worse on-field performance. UCLA will be one of those schools that feels the pain with virtually zero benefit.
In the meantime, OSU and WSU are arguably better positioned than any of the former Pac institutions aside from Oregon and U$C. They haven't overleveraged themselves financially, haven't committed to anything long term, and are sitting on a massive war chest that will keep them afloat for the next few years while more things shake out.
You really don't know Chip Kelly, do you? He would've kept putting in the effort? He didn't put in the effort, and clearly didn't want to do so. UCLA has a lot to prove, it's true, but first year coach DeShaun Foster has been almost immediately better on the recruiting and NIL fronts.
John, thanks for the update and your great coverage. UCLA is going to get their butts kicked in the Big Ten, while imposing enormous travel on their student athletes (particularly the Olympic sports teams) and as a result incur even bigger athletic financial deficit. Poor leadership from the president and their AD. Chip Kelly saw the writing on the wall and bailed at the right time! Love your comparison to Rutgers!
Time and again most of the traitor-10 have shown that they are not the sharpest knives in the drawer.
They knew when to open the escape hatch....so the 10 escapees are on to other futures.
Great commentary John. Sometimes greed can end up being quite costly, in multiple ways.
Of all the moves in the PAC12 drama the one by UCLA always seemed to be the most ill advised to me. Felt at the time liked it smelled of desperation from financial pressures. I am willing to predict that UCLA will never be a major factor in BIG10 football and that the move will ultimately damage the brand of their sacred basketball programs. And they should have read the room better regarding the reaction of the regents.
A few schools are going to learn it's cheaper and a lot more fun to go 7-2 in the Pac-12 than it is to go 5-4 in the B1G. This is a lesson Nebraska has learned the hard way.
Since the Big Ten went to 9 games in 2016, Nebraska has been above 3-6 just once. That's 1 time in 8 seasons. That was 6-3 in Mike Riley's second year.
Nebraska has all the history, resources, fan support, and facilities Oregon does. Just saying.
Nebraska has a lot more than Oregon.
The realignment for football is FAR from over. No doubt we’re headed for separation out of the NCAA, salaried players under contracts, regional divisions, a few massive media contracts including ESPN, Fox, CBS, NBC, CW, & lots of Pay per view. Most smaller schools finding themselves unwanted in the big boy league, and finding it impossible to compete and dropping football altogether. That’s my story and I’m stickin to it!!😁
Yep, the top 30ish college football programs will break away from everyone else into a NFL format and UCLA will likely not make this cut.
Cost to benefit graphs are not linear, with consistent growth over every year. They are logarithmic, there is a time of intense increase in wealth with little effort... But over time there is a limit it caps out and any increase requires much work for very little gain.
This growth is temporary and the signs of the future, rather more likely the college football scene is like Icarus getting close to the sun way too fast
Thats true for many industries and businesses, but im not so sure about Football. A good case study is the NFL. A lot will depend on fan enthuiasm and how a new college football league will be structured. Right now the whole thing is broken and not sustainable.