Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Any thoughts on the bombshell that USC and UCLA are leaving for the B1G and how that figures to shake up the college athletics (primarily football) landscape?

I heard a radio sports talk show host say he heard from "reliable sources" the Big Ten and the SEC intend to expand to 20 team conferences consisting of two ten team divisions. He speculated that Notre Dame would eventually have to choose a conference. Personally, I find the college game to be a bore. Offenses have become too dominant and the realignments have become somewhat of a joke. Factor in the new NIL, the playoff dominance of just a few teams and conferences and what was once exciting to me has become a game of just passing interest. I admit I'm living with a past view that will never return but I liked the "old days" much better.

My sentiments are pretty much the same as yours. For a while I actually enjoyed college football more than the N.F.L. but that is no longer the case.

Terry Baldshaw wrote:He speculated that Notre Dame would eventually have to choose a conference.

I'm sure you know this but ND tried to join the Big Ten before (more than once) and was rejected (largely because of Michigan - the University of). All the people I see online complaining that "Notre Dame needs to join a conference" and clamoring for them to join the B1G need to read up on a few things: https://irish.nbcsports.com/2013/09/05/ ... mplicated/

The Big 10 used to be the "Western Conference" with fewer than 10 teams. It became the Big 10 after Michigan State joined. That's why the Michigan lyrics say "the champions of the West".

The Pac 12 underwent several changes as well, at one point Oregon and Oregon St were not a part of the conference when it switched from being the Pacific Coast Conference and became the AAWU. Of course it was the Pac 8 and Pac 10 before the Pac 12. For those of us who remember the Big 8, that was once the Big 6. The Southern Conference of the 1940s had something like 16 teams, many of which are now in either the ACC, SEC, or Big 10. Many of us likely remember the Big 12 beginning.

Changes in college football have happened quite a bit - additions to conferences, realignment. Not saying that I enjoy seeing what's happening, but conferences have added and changed for a long time. With greater budgets and revenue, they can afford to travel a lot further for conference games, so the regional considerations might not be a big concern for schools now.

GameBeforeTheMoney wrote:The Big 10 used to be the "Western Conference" with fewer than 10 teams. It became the Big 10 after Michigan State joined. That's why the Michigan lyrics say "the champions of the West".

Just a small correction: The conference was known as the Big Nine in between its incarnations as the Western Conference and the Big Ten.

GameBeforeTheMoney wrote:Changes in college football have happened quite a bit -

Of course. But now, more than ever, conference realignment seems to be a money grab (and an ego trip) more than anything.

USC has played in the Rose Bowl 35 times and UCLA has played in the Rose Bowl 12 times. There's a lot of history with these teams playing against Big Ten opponents, so I think it's a great move in that respect. As for chasing the money, that animal was let out of the barn a long time ago, so I kind of shrug about it. I appreciate the fact my Gophers will get the chance to play on a bigger stage.

RyanChristiansen wrote:As for chasing the money, that animal was let out of the barn a long time ago, so I kind of shrug about it.

I used to go to Washington Huskies games (back when the great Don James was head coach) with my dad all the time when I was younger. I have a good friend who is an engineer at Boeing these days. He's never cared about sports one way or the other. As far as he's concerned college sports - except intramural - should be eliminated. I've never endorsed that point-of-view and I know that's (in all likelihood) never going to happen. However - the more college sports (football, in particular) becomes "about the money" the more inclined I am to come around to my engineer friend's point-of-view on the matter.

Terry Baldshaw wrote:I heard a radio sports talk show host say he heard from "reliable sources" the Big Ten and the SEC intend to expand to 20 team conferences consisting of two ten team divisions. He speculated that Notre Dame would eventually have to choose a conference. Personally, I find the college game to be a bore. Offenses have become too dominant and the realignments have become somewhat of a joke. Factor in the new NIL, the playoff dominance of just a few teams and conferences and what was once exciting to me has become a game of just passing interest. I admit I'm living with a past view that will never return but I liked the "old days" much better.

I suspect that soon there will be a group of elite schools that simply leave the NCAA and create their own power marquee group with a great TV contract and that what remains in the NCAA will reformat to include one top tied division (D-1 ... will include the FBS schools that remain and the FCS schools that have the money to move into it) and the rest will fall to D-2, D-3 with non-scholly status.

Until recently, I though a power marquee group would be no more than ten or twelve teams breaking out of existing conferences. Now I am thinking it could be a couple of intact conferences, the Big Ten and the SEC with maybe a couple of the ACC schools.