All the more PROOF that I was RIGHT all along in saying that the Big 12 was a better landing spot for UH than the PAC would have been.
Had we taken the advice of some on this board and gone to the PAC, we’d be in the same ABSURD travel situation that Califord, Washington, USC, and UCLA are now in….and just like it is now with those schools, it would be have been to our detriment.
A good example of “be careful what you ask for”.
Part of the reason that I have Michigan, Ohio State, Penn St going to the SEC in the 2030s or 2040s
SEC is and always will be the strongest conference due to regionality alone
Big Ten adding UCLA/USC was a response to UT/OU. Big Ten knew knew it was happening, and they didn’t want any conference having access to the LA market. Adding Washington/Oregon was just to give them easier travel partners, Big Ten didn’t really want them or else they would’ve received full shares immediately
Big Ten is screwing themselves in the long run, and it’s probably why they’re begging for a scheduling partnership with the SEC
The problem with that thinking is that if you add those three schools, then the SEC no longer has its “regionality” advantage, and those three schools then have increased travel budgets similar to what Califord and the West Coast B1G schools have, albeit at not quite the same extreme level.
I’m not sure if the B1G or ACC’s coast to coast models will ultimately work, but even if they don’t, I really don’t see those three schools going to the SEC. Remember, that would be both an academic step down, AND be contrary to history (historically, no school has ever left the B1G, except to drop big-time sports altogether; Chicago is the exception that proves the rule in that regard).
If anything, a more regional version of the B1G might be re-created…and perhaps the PAC could be reformed in some way. Please note that if it is…neither UH, nor anyone involved with UH, should want to have ANYTHING to do with it, otherwise, it’ll be as I said: UH being in the same boat that those West Coast schools are, having to be “road warriors” to their detriment.
Michigan, Ohio State and Penn St are within the same time zone as the SEC, and are essentially sitting right on top of Kentucky
It would be easier travel for Michigan to play UT or Georgia than it would be to fly all the way to the west coast, especially for non-football sports
If the Big Ten and Big 12 merge minus Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State, it would make much more sense because they would have the Midwest and West Coast covered.
They may be in the same time zones, but they are HARDLY “southeastern” in any sense of the word.
They are NORTHERN schools in every sense of the word, and would have higher travel costs than the rest of the conference.
They’d be as misfit as the West Coast schools are in the B1G, albeit to not quite as great an extreme.
I have Virginia and UNC also eventually going to the SEC.
Are UT, Virginia and UNC “southern” schools?
Florida Gators aren’t even truly southern in my opinion, given how competitive it is to go there. They get plenty of northern folk
Both UNC and UVA are ABSOLUTELY SOUTHEASTERN schools, based on geography, and those two plus UT are also SOUTHERN schools, based on History.
All three would be considered to be in states which are a part of historical “Dixieland.” All three schools are also located in former Confederate States, a distinction which in the past often defined the South, rightly or wrongly.
As is Florida.
That’s VERY different from Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. COMPLETELY different.
Look, I’m not saying that that history is good by any means, but historically, all four of those states would have been considered a part of the South, ESPECIALLY Virginia, where the Confederate capital was located, which makes those four schools at least Southern (and three of the four, SOUTHEASTERN) as a result.
I’m not saying they aren’t physically located in the south. Obviously they’re in the south.
I’m saying that culturally, UT, UF, UNC and UVA all could fit in the Big Ten culturally/academically - which is why I don’t think Michigan, Ohio State would have an issue.
In fact, Penn State probably has more in common with Alabama than they do with Ohio State, culturally-speaking
Academically, UNC and UVA would be excellent fits for the B1G, which is why I’ve often thought of them as potential B1G targets.
OTOH…
Both would be excellent GEOGRAPHICAL fits for the SEC, and help that conference to expand and further monopolize their own “southeastern” footprint.
Those two schools could go either way.
But there’s NO WAY those other three schools leave the B1G to be misfits in the SEC.
hence, why they need to form TWO 12 school divisions so they can maintain a sense of regionalism and cut down on costs.
The B1G has 6 spots to get to 24
B1G TEN- EAST
- Rutgers
- Maryland
- Michigan
- Michigan State
- Ohio State
- Penn State
- Notre Dame
- Northwestern
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Purdue
- Florida State
B1G TEN- WEST
- Washington
- Oregon
- UCLA
- USC
- Colorado
- Utah
- Arizona or Arizona State
- Houston
- Wisconsin
- Minnesota
- Iowa
- Nebraska
Oh no.
Here you go again.
Back on your whole “East West” division thing.
When will you learn?
Has it ever occurred to you that the B1G has ZERO interest in adding a bunch of value dilutive brands?
Hell, they were only willing to add Oregon and Washington at reduced shares. What makes you think that they want to add even smaller brands?
are you not reading the articles?
The B1G, in the current form, will not work.
Too fragmented…they won;t view them as dilutive brands…they will think of them of 1) filling in their map to form regional divisions and 2) taking away the best remaining brands from the Big 12 and ACC thus crippling those Conferences and takign their market share.
Same reason why the NFL is about to expand into London, and Europe. Not because the “brands” are equal to the Dallas Cowboys because they can grow their market share and increase the pot.
Why do you think Big Ten and SEC are proposing a scheduling agreement
It essentially solves this problem
Of course, which means that they may end up losing some of the West Coast brands…NOT adding more.
Maybe some West Coast schools could get sick of the travel and reform a new PAC-ish conference, or perhaps they will stay…but the B1G will NOT add more brands that will dilute value.
ESPECIALLY NOT UH…which would arguably be the smallest and most dilutive brand on the list you presented.
If the Big Ten ever expanded with UH, it wouldn’t be for its brand
It would be to get more Big Ten brands (non-Michigan/OSU schools) into the most profitable region of football, the south.
And before you say it, I’m telling you… Texas A&M benefits more from the SEC than they would in the Big Ten.
UT could join any conference they want. They wait on no one, and obviously, they saw the SEC more valuable than the Big Ten likely because of geographic fit.
That said I agree it’s unlikely
In a word, the PAC schools prostituted themselves !!
aTm certainly benefitted from joining the SEC, ESPECIALLY as long as UT wasn’t also a member. They now made more money, played better teams, and no longer had to play second fiddle to UT.
That has ALL changed.
Now that UT is in the SEC, aTm is once again playing second fiddle to UT, and I doubt they’ll like it.
I realize that many alums from both schools are delighted about having their Thanksgiving Week traditional rivalry renewed…but the administration may have other feelings.
As I’ve said before, I don’t see the B1G taking ANY TX school at this point. They’ve never needed such a school in order to become the biggest money conference, and if they ever wanted one for the reasons you described, there are LARGER brands (even Tech would be larger) to choose from.
Their most likely target (which is still HIGHLY UNlikely) would be aTm, which is AAU, a land grant (like 10 of 18 B1G schools), adds value (100K+ attendance and huge TV viewership) and would have an incentive to make the move (more money, and out from under UT’s yoke).
It would NOT be UH, which is non-AAU AND very value dilutive.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/sports/college/article/aggies-sec-not-big-ten-19576581.php
With that said…
I don’t understand how you can say UH is non-AAU and dilutive when Texas Tech is non-AAU and dilutive as well.
Again, UH wouldn’t be added for its brand. It would be added for its location.
- There are alums from every conference in Houston, a city that is the 3rd most populated in the entire country. There is nothing in Lubbock that justifies being in the Big Ten.
- UH joining the Big Ten is already under the presumption that they are AAU by that point. Yes, without AAU… UH would never land in the Big Ten.
- UH joining the Big Ten would naturally elevate its already growing brand similar to Rutgers or Maryland
- Continuing to talk about TAMU is pointless because they won’t ever leave the SEC. Even if they hate UT, it doesn’t net them any benefit. (Transitioning from Big 12 to SEC is much more sustainable than transitioning from SEC to Big Ten.)