UCLA to Big Ten Could Unravel as Board of Regents Discusses Move, per Report

Big Hawk D-Port

HR Heisman
Nov 29, 2004
6,562
7,618
113

HawkRCID

HR All-American
Nov 7, 2018
4,925
9,526
113
It’s funny though…some cheering for this to unravel because they’re in California….may have a different opinion if our Regents step in to try to force the BIG to take the Clowns…
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ICHerky

tarheelbybirth

HR King
Apr 17, 2003
68,017
52,126
113
It doesn't appear they can actually do anything to "unravel" the move.

The reason that UCLA and chancellor Gene Block were able to decide on the move without the board’s approval is based on a 1991 UC system policy that gives chancellors the authority to decide their own contracts. This includes athletic agreements as well.
 

ping72

HR Legend
Jan 14, 2009
33,273
47,388
113
Meanwhile USC sits back and laughs. The benefits of being a private school in California...

In today’s environment there are many more cons than pros to being a public university. It used to make sense when the state was a primary funder of the school; but now they are giving up a lot of oversight/control for like 5% of their funding. It’s crazy how many politicians and random people try to exert control of a university because “their tax dollars” are funding it. Most universities would be fine without that money… it basically just pays electricity and groundskeeping because donors don’t want to pay that stuff.

Most state universities would go private if they could. But the biggest hurdle is they don’t have the many billions of cash required to buy all the land, buildings, etc from the state.
 

bagdropper

HR Legend
Gold Member
Oct 17, 2002
28,058
11,797
113
I don't see how they can do anything about the move based on the story. Sure, they might be able to change the rules going forward...but I don't see how they could make that retroactive.

Hell, I still kinda believe Cal (and Stanford) wind up as the next P12 to B10 movers when the dust settles. That gives Northwestern a "fellow nerdy dance partner" so to speak with Stanford, and soothes the butthurt Cal (and Newson) are feeling currently from losing UCLA. And while they obviously aren't market monsters in SF, it does give the conference more exposure to effectively "take over all of California".

Those two also just (to me) seem more "Big 10" than say an Oregon or Washington...or any other schools outside of Notre Dame. IMHO, they just make the best sense assuming expansion will eventually continue to occur.
 

Tenacious E

HR Legend
Gold Member
Dec 4, 2001
33,206
37,331
113
I don't see how they can do anything about the move based on the story. Sure, they might be able to change the rules going forward...but I don't see how they could make that retroactive.

Hell, I still kinda believe Cal (and Stanford) wind up as the next P12 to B10 movers when the dust settles. That gives Northwestern a "fellow nerdy dance partner" so to speak with Stanford, and soothes the butthurt Cal (and Newson) are feeling currently from losing UCLA. And while they obviously aren't market monsters in SF, it does give the conference more exposure to effectively "take over all of California".

Those two also just (to me) seem more "Big 10" than say an Oregon or Washington...or any other schools outside of Notre Dame. IMHO, they just make the best sense assuming expansion will eventually continue to occur.
No way on cal, unless we go to 30 teams. Only took both LA schools I think as a cock block for the SEC. Stanford maybe, but I think if it comes in its dance partner will be Notre Dame.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawkeye54545

Big Hawk D-Port

HR Heisman
Nov 29, 2004
6,562
7,618
113
I don't see how they can do anything about the move based on the story. Sure, they might be able to change the rules going forward...but I don't see how they could make that retroactive.

Hell, I still kinda believe Cal (and Stanford) wind up as the next P12 to B10 movers when the dust settles. That gives Northwestern a "fellow nerdy dance partner" so to speak with Stanford, and soothes the butthurt Cal (and Newson) are feeling currently from losing UCLA. And while they obviously aren't market monsters in SF, it does give the conference more exposure to effectively "take over all of California".

Those two also just (to me) seem more "Big 10" than say an Oregon or Washington...or any other schools outside of Notre Dame. IMHO, they just make the best sense assuming expansion will eventually continue to occur.
Washington is very B1G-like. Oregon is not as strong of a school but they are OK and get a lot of TV eyeballs. Agree that those two with Stanford and Notre Dame are the final dominos to fall as far as the B1G is concerned. Cal is a no for me, dawg.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawkeye54545

Herky T Hawk

HR Heisman
Feb 5, 2003
6,305
5,046
113
Washington is very B1G-like. Oregon is not as strong of a school but they are OK and get a lot of TV eyeballs. Agree that those two with Stanford and Notre Dame are the final dominos to fall as far as the B1G is concerned. Cal is a no for me, dawg.
Oregon gets eyeballs because they've become a good team in the last few decades and have funky uniforms all of the time. Both of which are largely because of Phil Knight's money. Phil Knight is 84. How much longer will that money be coming in?

Washington is more "old money" in college football than Oregon, has a much better ranked school with massive research similar to Big Ten schools, and is likely the safer long-term bet than Oregon if I had to pick between the two. I'm talking about 20 years from now, not 5.
 

DogBoyRy

HR Legend
Jul 28, 2006
10,684
7,358
113
It doesn't appear they can actually do anything to "unravel" the move.

The reason that UCLA and chancellor Gene Block were able to decide on the move without the board’s approval is based on a 1991 UC system policy that gives chancellors the authority to decide their own contracts. This includes athletic agreements as well.

The UCLA AD is wicked smart and deserves a multi-million $ bonus. It was basically his idea to discuss them and USC with the Big 10.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tarheelbybirth

tarheelbybirth

HR King
Apr 17, 2003
68,017
52,126
113
The UCLA AD is wicked smart and deserves a multi-million $ bonus. It was basically his idea to discuss them and USC with the Big 10.
At this point, the ACC just needs to "unravel" and let every school get what it can. It has no future as a major conference.
 

DogBoyRy

HR Legend
Jul 28, 2006
10,684
7,358
113
At this point, the ACC just needs to "unravel" and let every school get what it can. It has no future as a major conference.
The grant of rights is holding everyone back.
The exit costs plus possible lawyer fees are crazy $$.
 

onlyTheObvious

HR Heisman
Jan 3, 2021
6,846
7,980
113
Who cares. They got USC so the TV carriers will add the BTN and force the fee onto the viewers.

If they want to cut their own financial throat sit back and watch them.

I think the SEC or BIG might take a couple more ACC/PAC12 teams and at that point what’s left of the ACC and PAC will join what’s left of the BIG XII to form the 3rd best conference.

actually the Big 12 is in the best position they have been in a while. Either the West Coast or the East Coast will join with them to make the best situation possible out of a mess.
 

tarheelbybirth

HR King
Apr 17, 2003
68,017
52,126
113
The grant of rights is holding everyone back.
The exit costs plus possible lawyer fees are crazy $$.
That's why I think dissolvng the conference is the only possible avenue. If they try to hold the conference together, NIL money will lure the top players in all major sports everywhere but the ACC - they won't be able to compete.
 
Last edited:

WhiteSoxClone

HR Legend
May 29, 2001
11,258
3,200
113
I don't see how they can do anything about the move based on the story. Sure, they might be able to change the rules going forward...but I don't see how they could make that retroactive.

Hell, I still kinda believe Cal (and Stanford) wind up as the next P12 to B10 movers when the dust settles. That gives Northwestern a "fellow nerdy dance partner" so to speak with Stanford, and soothes the butthurt Cal (and Newson) are feeling currently from losing UCLA. And while they obviously aren't market monsters in SF, it does give the conference more exposure to effectively "take over all of California".

Those two also just (to me) seem more "Big 10" than say an Oregon or Washington...or any other schools outside of Notre Dame. IMHO, they just make the best sense assuming expansion will eventually continue to occur.
I hate talking about this stuff because I think conference realignment is killing what is so great about college sports. But if I was the Big 10, I'm thinking longer term at this point and keeping my powder dry until the ACC grant of rights gets closer to expiration. Other than Notre Dame, UNC and UVA would probably be the Big 10's top choices if they were available. Eventually, they will be. If they only want to go to 20 teams, they should be holding spots for ND, UNC, and UVA. That leaves just one spot for a current PAC-10 member. My guess is that would go to Stanford or Washington.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tarheelbybirth

MitchLL

HR Legend
Dec 26, 2018
22,320
35,569
113
I agree the B1G contract with media probably wouldn't change if you switch UCLA for Oregon.

That's not an issue, imo.
 

tarheelbybirth

HR King
Apr 17, 2003
68,017
52,126
113
I hate talking about this stuff because I think conference realignment is killing what is so great about college sports. But if I was the Big 10, I'm thinking longer term at this point and keeping my powder dry until the ACC grant of rights gets closer to expiration. Other than Notre Dame, UNC and UVA would probably be the Big 10's top choices if they were available. Eventually, they will be. If they only want to go to 20 teams, they should be holding spots for ND, UNC, and UVA. That leaves just one spot for a current PAC-10 member. My guess is that would go to Stanford or Washington.
They should just go to 24 teams and create West Cost, Midwest, and East Coast divisions that would operate like separate "conferences". Each champion goes to an 8-team NC playoff along with three teams from an SEC superconference. That leaves a couple of spots for minor conferences, independents (Ha!) or the best of the rest from the B1G and the SEC (and, of course, Bama gets in automatically).
 

Tenacious E

HR Legend
Gold Member
Dec 4, 2001
33,206
37,331
113
Oregon gets eyeballs because they've become a good team in the last few decades and have funky uniforms all of the time. Both of which are largely because of Phil Knight's money. Phil Knight is 84. How much longer will that money be coming in?

Washington is more "old money" in college football than Oregon, has a much better ranked school with massive research similar to Big Ten schools, and is likely the safer long-term bet than Oregon if I had to pick between the two. I'm talking about 20 years from now, not 5.
I have stated here I think Washington would be a good addition, but others in the Lounge are certain there is no way we take them or Oregon, because they would dilute everyone's net share of the pie. Stanford is a more likely possibility, if they are packaged with Notre Dame. Not because Standard wouldn't dilute everyone's share, but if they are what gets ND to join, the two of them would provide a net increase.