USC & UCLA to BIG10 spells doom for Pitt

The name says it all!
ERAChamp
Junior
Junior
Posts: 136
Joined: July 26th, 2017, 12:51 pm

USC & UCLA to BIG10 spells doom for Pitt

Post by ERAChamp » July 1st, 2022, 10:45 am

With the bombshell news yesterday of USC & UCLA moving to the BIG10, Pitt likely will be outside the SUPER 2 of the BIG10 & SEC looking in. Even with future expanison for the SUPER 2, I just don't see an invite for Pitt or WV coming from either. The only way Pitt will remain relevant in the changing landscape of college sports is if the ACC can somehow get Notre Dame to join as a full member. I really don't see this happening and this would mean Pitt athletics becomes very irrelevant in some leftover conference. College sports have now fully jumped the shark and are really just mini-pro leagues.

Bedrock
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 549
Joined: September 30th, 2003, 1:49 pm

Re: USC & UCLA to BIG10 spells doom for Pitt

Post by Bedrock » July 1st, 2022, 4:59 pm

I think it may be a bit too early to spell the doom of Pitt and WVU, but it will be interesting to see how this all shakes out.

Colonel Mustard
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 454
Joined: October 25th, 2011, 9:51 pm

Re: USC & UCLA to BIG10 spells doom for Pitt

Post by Colonel Mustard » July 5th, 2022, 10:44 am

Yes this will hurt Pitt on a national level ( and $ level), but they weren't really competing with the Alabama's, Georgia's, Oklahoma's, Ohio State's, and obviously USC's (see Jordan Addison) anyway. Best case scenario, they end up in some kind of conference where they play WVU annually, and maybe schools like VT, Louisville, NC, Cincy, NC State, etc.. with some out of conference against some Pac 10(?) and Big 12(?) refugees. I would be ok with that.

Colonel Mustard
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 454
Joined: October 25th, 2011, 9:51 pm

Re: USC & UCLA to BIG10 spells doom for Pitt

Post by Colonel Mustard » July 5th, 2022, 10:55 am

Colonel Mustard wrote:
July 5th, 2022, 10:44 am
Yes this will hurt Pitt on a national level ( and $ level), but they weren't really competing with the Alabama's, Georgia's, Oklahoma's, Ohio State's, and obviously USC's (see Jordan Addison) anyway. Best case scenario, they end up in some kind of conference where they play WVU annually, and maybe schools like VT, Louisville, NC, Cincy, NC State, etc.. with some out of conference against some Pac 10(?) and Big 12(?) refugees. I would be ok with that.
And if they can add the Catholic schools for basketball season and call this new league the Big East, I'm all in.

Crimson's Ghost
Moderator Team
Moderator Team
Posts: 10991
Joined: June 24th, 2011, 10:43 am

Re: USC & UCLA to BIG10 spells doom for Pitt

Post by Crimson's Ghost » July 5th, 2022, 3:40 pm

There are a bit too many variables in play and a lot of uncertainty around everything at the moment. The key to everything is Notre Dame. If they feel like they can remain as an independent then I think for at least the next 5-10 years the ACC is safe, there’s also a grant of rights deal in place that makes it a real pain for any school that were to leave the ACC until 2036. So it might level off a bit.

The PAC 12 is on the verge of crumbling it seems. I’m thinking Arizona, ASU, Colorado, and Utah and apparently 2 others are going to join the Big 12, which will effectively make the ‘power 5’ a ‘power four’ and the PAC 12 is going to die (Someone please check on Bill Walton).

The Big 12 went from shaky to steady all of the sudden because I don’t think the Big Ten and SEC don’t seem interested in any of the remaining 8 programs there. If the SEC wanted Oklahoma State or Baylor, they’d already have been invited by now. So they sort of strengthened themselves by going with a solidarity approach. They’re adding Cincinnati BYU Houston and UCF already and will add some PAC 12 teams and remain a viable league.

The ACC’s TV deal is all of the sudden very far behind the others. So in order to keep Clemson and FSU happy is that they are going to need to do a redistributed money allocation based on performance. Unequal shares, if you will. Clemson is going to get a bigger chunk of the TV deals than Boston College basically. It’s going to take some concessions from some schools, but if you want to remain a viable league that might be the best approach.

The ACC TV deal can also be redone at any time if they were to add a new member. So they could explore adding a school or two and go to ESPN looking for a new contract. I’m not sure what schools make sense. I’m guessing if they could get the money right, WVU would rather play the teams in the ACC instead of the Big 12. Their fan base already hates being on an island and expanding further west only isolated them further (but does geography even matter anymore?)


I mentioned Notre Dame and if they join the Big Ten, all bets are off and it would change everything. The SEC would try to match that move almost immediately and Clemson, FSU would be called. It would be inconvenient for them to get out of the grant of rights but they’d bite the bullet I think if it ever becomes clear the ACC is getting totally left behind. I don’t think this is all that likely, but if Notre Dame joined the ACC the league would be stabilized rather quickly. They have that kind of power, but again if they wanted to be in the ACC they’d already be in there.

Another potential domino is Washington and Oregon. If the Big Ten adds them, then again the SEC will try to match it in some way and that would hurt the ACC as well. However, Oregon and Washington would probably have been invited to the Big Ten last week with USC and UCLA if the league and the California schools wanted that to happen. They kind of got left on read because the Big Ten is waiting on Notre Dame and they don’t necessarily need UW or Oregon just this very second.

I mean in 20 years will there just be 50 of the best schools breaking away from the NCAA and become a faux professional league? Probably. We’re not there yet, but it’s not a far fetched idea it’s heading in that direction. In the immediate future, it feels like the PAC 12 is going to get squeezed out of the power five. The SEC and Big Ten are 1A and 1B. And the ACC and Big 12 schools are going to be sitting on shaky ground for the next 10 years.

Crimson's Ghost
Moderator Team
Moderator Team
Posts: 10991
Joined: June 24th, 2011, 10:43 am

Re: USC & UCLA to BIG10 spells doom for Pitt

Post by Crimson's Ghost » July 5th, 2022, 3:44 pm

Colonel Mustard wrote:
July 5th, 2022, 10:55 am
Colonel Mustard wrote:
July 5th, 2022, 10:44 am
Yes this will hurt Pitt on a national level ( and $ level), but they weren't really competing with the Alabama's, Georgia's, Oklahoma's, Ohio State's, and obviously USC's (see Jordan Addison) anyway. Best case scenario, they end up in some kind of conference where they play WVU annually, and maybe schools like VT, Louisville, NC, Cincy, NC State, etc.. with some out of conference against some Pac 10(?) and Big 12(?) refugees. I would be ok with that.
And if they can add the Catholic schools for basketball season and call this new league the Big East, I'm all in.
The current members of the Big East basketball conference don’t want anything to do with dabbling in football again (RIP Big East football 1991-2012). They know what they are and they’re OK with it.

abpk2903
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 3640
Joined: December 7th, 2004, 2:36 pm
Contact:

Re: USC & UCLA to BIG10 spells doom for Pitt

Post by abpk2903 » July 7th, 2022, 2:03 pm

I have a lot of thoughts here that are nothing more than just my thoughts, ideas, and opinions. But here they are.

- Let's not pretend that what is happening hasn't already been the case for a long time in college football. The Big 10 and SEC have been the wealthiest, most supported, and highest quality of football (top to bottom) in the country for quite a while. You can't tell me you couldn't visibly tell the difference between the SEC and the ACC or the Big 10 and PAC 12 and so forth for the last several years. ACC has been propped up by Clemson but outside of them, ACC football has looked no difference than AAC football for quite a while now. Let's be honest (this will be very unpopular on here) but Pitt won the ACC last year with a team that probably goes 7-5 at best in the B1G or SEC. How do I know that you ask? Simple, my eyeballs.

- There is nobody to blame for this except the conferences, themselves. Why should USC's brand fund and legitimatize an entire conference? Same can be said with Texas/Oklahoma in the Big 12 and Clemson/Florida State in the ACC. What really separates the Big 10 and SEC from the pack is the number of major brands in the conference. B1G has Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, and Michigan State. SEC has Alabama, Auburn, A&M, Tennessee, Florida, LSU, and Georgia. It's strength in numbers. It's many programs bringing some good a$$ food to the pot luck. Not showing up to the pig roast with a 2 liter of Thunder Mountain soda and bag of chips expecting to eat from the pig all night. You could take 2 major programs from the B1G or the SEC and still have a very legitimate conference. Same couldn't be said for the other 3. Yes, some of those above mentioned programs might not have had the recent success but you don't think major media partners wouldn't want TV rights to show a conference with Nebraska or Tennessee football games in it? Success on the field is a very small factor in this. REVENUE CREATED is all that matters. Texas and Oklahoma got tired of bringing 80% of the revenue to the Big 12 and then only getting the same pulled pork sandwich as Kansas State for dinner.

- This will go one of two ways. It is either going to expand as much as possible (I am guessing 24 per conference max) and that alone will be Major College football. Basically there will only be 48 seats at the table. There will be 2 major conferences and then a bunch of regional conferences (example Pitt, WVU, VT, Syracuse, Temple, etc. will form a local conference). Or it will level out into 2 major conferences (B1G and SEC) and 2 sub-major conferences (leftovers from other 3 conference go into 2 slightly better conference)

- I am wondering if/when B1G and SEC starts booting members. That is when it will get crazy. Let's say in 5 years ND decides they want in after B1G already expanded to 24 members. What value does Northwestern and Illinois bring outside of amazing academics? Same can be said about schools like Kentucky and Vanderbilt in the SEC.

- There are some schools that could be tied at the hip to another school that could complicate things. Duke/UNC come to mind. BC/ND, as well. Would ND throw a bone to their catholic counterparts in Boston by demanding the B1G take BC along with ND? Would UNC really want to move to conference that would jeopardize future UNC/Duke basketball games? VT and UVA, Miami and Florida State, Arizona and Arizona State...

- Does basketball at all matter? Louisville, UNC, Duke, UVA, Arizona, Kansas are all major college hoops brands that really seem to not have any influence on this right now.

- I think long term there will be expansion of the B1G and SEC to 20-24 in each conference. So there is room for 8-16 more teams at the big boy table. Below I will rank my top 20 programs and reason why for each...outside of these 20 I think they are really, really in trouble.







1) Notre Dame - Doesn't need explanation

2) Florida State - Once again, lets forget the last few years on the football field. I think SEC and B1G want Florida for recruiting and this major brand.

3) Clemson - Just below FSU because they are not in FL

4) Miami - I think they are just super easy to bring along with FSU and Clemson for whoever takes them.

5) UNC - Football is formidable, basketball is amazing. Large brand.

6) Oregon - Nike, enough said. Nike dumps enough money into college football to have some pull here. Sort of weird they didn't come with UCLA and USC already though.

7) UCF - I don't think most people understand the size of UCF. They are a top 5 alumni association in the county, out of Orlando which is a decent market size, and their football brand is growing. Once again, I really think the B1G finds a way to get a team from FL in their conference. The recruiting grounds down there are just too important. If they SEC gathers FSU and Miami, I think UCF finds a way into the B1G.

8) Louisville - Largest market in the country that does not have one of the 4 major professional sports. Louisville sports are always supported. They have a legit brand in both basketball and football.

9) Baylor - Sort of the same reasons here as the 2 above combined. SEC and B1G are going to want TX footprint. Baylor is about halfway between Houston and Dallas.

10) Oklahoma State - Probably the best football program left in Big 12. They also have money and a brand. I just don't know how desirable they are in terms of geography.

11) Boston College - They have 2 MAJOR things working for them. One is they are the Boston TV market and two is I really think ND would help them get into a conference with them.

12) Stanford - Their Olympic sport programs are incredible, their academics are incredible, and they are the SF market. I just don't know if they really have that much of a needle moving brand. Olympic sports and academics don't pay the bills.

13) Cal - Once again, incredible Olympic sport programs, good academics, and another SF market. But a little worse at each than Stanford

14) Arizona State - Phoenix market. Decent brand

15) Kansas - Basketball, thats it

16) Houston - See Baylor except a smaller brand

17) TCU - Once again, I just don't see them being a better add than Baylor but they are in Texas and a decent sized football brand. That is worth something.

18) Pitt - Good academics, good facilities, and Pittsburgh market. I don't know if that is enough to get them in but they are on the list.

19) Cincinnati - Pretty much the same boat as Pitt. These 2 are interchangeable.

20) Duke - I just don't think basketball is all that important to the SEC and B1G and I don't know how many schools in the Carolina's are going to be in the big 2 conferences. Small school and historically horrible in football. South Carolina is already in the SEC and Clemson and UNC are both way more attractive IMO than Duke.

Colonel Mustard
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 454
Joined: October 25th, 2011, 9:51 pm

Re: USC & UCLA to BIG10 spells doom for Pitt

Post by Colonel Mustard » July 8th, 2022, 8:15 am

The Big 10 is in the conversation because of numbers only. They have huge alumni bases that generate big $. Let's face it, outside of Ohio State for a few years, the Big 10 really hasn't challenged the SEC in 25 years. Adding Texas and Oklahoma only strengthens the SEC further. If they were to add Clemson and FSU, they should break off on their own. Why share the spotlight with the Big 10? Sure there will always be TV money for the Big 10, and getting USC and possibly ND would help. But I don't see the SEC wanting to run the gauntlet of their conference, only to share the spotlight with some Big 10 teams. But $$ talks, and if some network wants throw huge $ to have the SEC champ smoke the Big 10 champ, then it will happen.

Manfred
Official BleacherCoach
Official BleacherCoach
Posts: 5747
Joined: August 2nd, 2009, 7:23 pm

Re: USC & UCLA to BIG10 spells doom for Pitt

Post by Manfred » July 8th, 2022, 12:13 pm

Maybe Elon Musk, after he backs out of the Twitter deal.
It ain't over until it's over.

Crimson's Ghost
Moderator Team
Moderator Team
Posts: 10991
Joined: June 24th, 2011, 10:43 am

Re: USC & UCLA to BIG10 spells doom for Pitt

Post by Crimson's Ghost » July 11th, 2022, 10:46 am

There are only like 5 teams that can currently win a national title and maybe like 10 more that could pull it off if everything goes right and they have a dream season. It’s going to be interesting if/when they go to two giant super leagues how the food chain will change. There are absolutely teams in the Big Ten and SEC that are at the table but their whole role in the new landscape is just to lose to Alabama and Ohio State and they might not realize that yet. Rutgers fans probably have a sore hand for patting themselves on the back for getting into the Big Ten but their whole existence is to go 3-9 every year.

So at a different point made in a post above, if we remove Ohio State from the Big Ten and Clemson from the ACC, the quality of football isn’t too far off from everyone else remaining, so maybe the ACC isn’t too far off from the AAC, but most of the Big Ten isn’t far off from the ACC either. It’s just so top heavy in the sport right now and the gap between the 5 or so elite programs and everyone else is pretty jarring.

If Pitt’s ACC Championship team is 7-5 in other leagues, let’s not forget Penn State’s only Big Ten Championship team lost to an 8-win Pitt team. Not to diminish things for 2021 Pitt or 2016 Penn State, but it just paints a better picture that this sport is really only there for the taking for like 5 schools right now. Having 5 good leagues or 2 really good leagues won’t change that.

Post Reply