There is a lot of ways this could shake out, but just because their is no more PAC does not mean no more Rose bowl. It would just be B1G against someone else or something like that.
There is a lot more money at play than just the Rose Bowl.
If Kansas leaves the Big 12 for the PAC, who do you take back?
- Thread starter Allikat
- Start date
There is a lot more money at play than just the Rose Bowl.
Why? Are you saying B1G #1 vs SEC #1....is not as valuable as B1G #1 vs PAC#1? or any other conference for that matter?
Have you seen the PAC attendance and viewership numbers? Last place by far. No one out their cares about watching college football.
The City of Pasadena owns/operates the Rose Bowl and if the home conference, Pac12, is blown up by B10 expansion, the B10 runs a significant risk of being told by the City to eff off.
What you dont understand is all the Cali schools, including UCLA would now be in the B1G....so the Rose Bowl and UCLA would be part of the B1G. This is the point. It would not be that the B1G would blow up the PAC and not take the UCLA etc. They would bring those in.
These NY6 bowls will be renegotiating soon with the playoff contract ending soon anyway. So how the Rose and company is handled may change soon anyway.
USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington and Arizona St all have more long term revenue generating potential for networks than any B12 school. The last couple of years have not been good for those schools for a variety of reasons (coaching, COVID, etc.) but networks will look at the upside. Oregon had more average viewers per game last season than any projected B12 program. And no B12 program comes close to USC's upside.
LOL, one post you're saying that the P12 is last amongst P5 conferences for network value and now you're claiming that the B10 will poach half of it.
Last edited:
When CFB moves to 8 or 12 Playoff teams, the big bowl sites will become part of the playoff.
So what holds more value to the Rose Bowl?
- Hosting a quarter, semi or Championship game or
- Hosting the Big10's 4th place team against the Pac12's 3rd place team
Last edited:
I have been saying this from the beginning... read my posts. You seem to be lost. I think you jumped in to the middle of a convo and didnt understand the context.
I said its more likely the Cali schools look to move to the B1G, and the leftovers look to the Big 12. You need to look back a page or 2.
Edit: Read the first post you commented on of mine in this thread.
Having USC &;Oregon is nice, but the Pac12 also has schools like Cal, WSU, OSU, etc that have trouble putting butts in seats.
There are a bunch of G5 schools that have more TV media rights value than WSU and Oregon St.
Most of them struggle to put butts in the stands, there were a lot of pictures of empty stands coming out of the PAC last year. Made Kansas look like they filled a stadium.
Boot all the Texas teams and go back to the Big 8 and re-up Mizzou, Nebraska, and Colorado.
WHO'S WITH ME??????????
WHO'S WITH ME??????????
Kind of like CW?Just kidding, anyone from SW Iowa can't be all bad.
Excepting Senator Breadsacks. She is a piece of work.
So how do you see the expanded B10 shaking out? They aren't going to expand beyond 16 as one conference entity and I don't see them jumping two time zones to add 6 and then essentially have two conferences with one of them having the Mountain time zone between them and two existing B10 schools.
If we got back to the OG Big 8 that would be the greatest story in college sports history.
Unless the Pac12 has a TV agreement in place, not sure why KU would jump ship.
Until the Pac12 has a media rights agreement, I don't feel it's guaranteed that USC, Oregon, UW, UCLA, etc are sticking with the Pac12.
Some folks on this board feel the Pac12 is above the SEC. Maybe academically, but from a sport standpoint, the SEC adding 4-6 Pac12 schools makes a lot of sense.
Football weighs heavily in realignment decisions, but adding Pac12 schools from a softball, baseball, volleyball and track perspective makes for one heck of a super conference.
Until the Pac12 has a media rights agreement, I don't feel it's guaranteed that USC, Oregon, UW, UCLA, etc are sticking with the Pac12.
Some folks on this board feel the Pac12 is above the SEC. Maybe academically, but from a sport standpoint, the SEC adding 4-6 Pac12 schools makes a lot of sense.
Football weighs heavily in realignment decisions, but adding Pac12 schools from a softball, baseball, volleyball and track perspective makes for one heck of a super conference.
