Report: Washington, Oregon to B1G
Following a series of alternating “it’s happening” and “it’s not happening” reports over the past 24 hours, it seems likely at this point that, yes, it is capital-H Happening. The era of the Super-Conference is formally upon us.
Oregon and Washington informed Pac-12 presidents earlier that they plan to accept an invitation from the Big Ten, sources tell me and @DanWetzel. An invitation from the Big Ten is expected soon. https://t.co/KhebqNamPV
— Ross Dellenger (@RossDellenger) August 4, 2023
This move will reportedly take effect for the 2024 season. As in the season immediately after the season we’re about to play. So those ‘24-‘25 schedules? Throw ‘em out. We gotta start over.
It also goes without saying that the Pac-12, a 108-year-old stalwart of college athletics, is functionally dead. They were mostly dead 24 hours ago, as this move was the comes on the heels of Colorado departing for the Big 12, Arizona and Arizona State flirting with the Big 12, and Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff announcing an Apple TV-centric media rights deal that was underwhelming by today’s standards. But today, they are all the way dead.
The remaining question is what happens to the scraps. The Arizona schools may end up in the Big 12 after all, and may bring their Four Corners buddy Utah. There has been suggestions that the Big Ten or Eighteen or Whatever might be interested in Cal and/or Stanford. Oregon State and Washington State… uh… please come to HR, and bring your badge and keys with you.
This may not be a universal opinion, but… man, this sucks.
There is no content after the jump.
Pretty much agree.with the earthquake analogies you posted, except that I think today's shakeup is essentially a major aftershock to last year's USC/UCLA 8.5 quake.
All that's left to happen is for the final PAC remnants to fall into the Pacific Ocean unless thrown a lifeline.
August 7th, 2023 at 12:13 AM ^
Now that I think about it for some weird reason the earthquake analogy made me think of the Big Ten, etc. recent coaching changes in the past few seasons. MSU jettisoned Mark Dantonio and obtained Mel Tucker, Ohio State "retired" Urban Meyer, and Brian Kelly dumped Notre Dame for LSU (!!!). Pat Fitzgerald was fired from Northwestern just recently.
Michigan has dominated OSU the past two seasons. MSU got spanked by Mich last year and in the two years before that Mich only lost by a total of 7 points combined. Admittedly Notre Dame had bad games against Mich under Brian Kelly (after which there was a drought of games between them). I'm not trying to put Mich's success against those teams directly to coaching changes, because at least 50% of success had to do with changes but especially improvements within the Mich team itself.
I think the difference is college football was always very regional. All of these leagues were moving and shifting within regions of the country. Now it's just super conferences forming and leaving everyone else behind which is a different kind of trend.
That's true; the geographical range now is far more pronounced than before. But at the same time the ACC spans from Syracuse, NY and Boston, MA to the tip of Florida and as far west as western PA and Louisville, KY. The multiple time zones thing is obviously different but that's also somewhat the by-product of populations being mostly centered on the coasts and parts of the south.
It also goes without saying that the Pac-12, a 108-year-old stalwart of college athletics, is functionally dead. They were mostly dead 24 hours ago
Have fun storming the castle.
We just need East and West divisions and then play the championship game in the Rose Bowl. It's the only way to save this. Oregon, Washington, USC, UCLA, Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Northwestern in the West. Michigan, Ohio, Penn State, Illinois, Purdue, Indiana, Staate, Maryland and Rutgor in the East with plans to dump Maryland and Rutgars for Notre Dame and Clemson. Stanford and Cal can join the West if needed and then East will add FSU and Virginia or N. Carolina or whatever or keep Rutiger and Maryland if we can't dump them into the Mid Am or Mac where they belong.
... and then play in Norfolk, Nebraska. (Google sez that's halfway across the country.)
I’m in Raleigh and pulling hard for UNC to join. Would love to see M play down here at least semi-regularly.
By my math, that'll be once every seven or so years. Presuming we are at 24 teams by that point, probably will have 4 divisions of six. Have 9 conference games, however, I'm going to assume one of those nine will be used for a semi-final playoff before the BigTen(if 10=24) championship game. So 8 scheduled games a year, 2 protected rivalries. So six games a year to rotate through 22 teams, and home-and-home. Will take up to four years to rotate through them all, and twice as long to rotate between road games for the same team.
But yes, more often than we've played in NC in the past.
I'm also in Raleigh (Apex) and pulling for the same thing......plus it makes a lot of sense if they're trying to get to 20.
Ah, yes, Notre Dame. If they are not feverishly working on a strategy to land in the Big Ten or SEC, they are more delusional than I thought.
CFB rapidly consolidating into a NFL lite with the Big Ten and SEC as the AFC and NFC really fucking sucks.
Looks like I’m in the minority here but I think this is exciting. Much happier about adding them than RU and Maryland.
But Rutgers and Maryland are still there. This means fewer games against traditional opponents. And will actually mean fewer games versus USC & UCLA, and they aren't even in the conference yet.
Very simple: Two Divisions, Original Big Ten (ie pre-1989) and New Kids (post-1989). Play everybody in your Division once, plus three rotating crossover games in the other Division. I'm not a fan of Conf Champ Games, but if you must, play at alternating sites (Indy, Chicago, Rose, etc). The New Kids Division will eventually add more schools, until then schedule an OOC game or two.
If we ever have a Big Ten football championship game played in the Pacific Time Zone, then there should be mutiny. This is completely asinine.
August 5th, 2023 at 12:10 PM ^
But it's the same as the old Rose Bowl, which was the most exciting thing in the world for people in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s. I mean, it was essentially the champion of the Big Ten East (then called the "Big Ten") and the Big Ten West (then called the Pac-8). Winning it meant everything, and losing it was crushing.
This would be the same thing. Honestly, if there was some way of recreating that experience — have us primarily play teams in our own region, with the champion decided in an annual January 1st game in Pasadena — this expansion would go down much easier. It would, essentially, recreate the old days, which were, honestly, pretty great.
totally agree. and a Big-18 or 20 would make the Game back into "the Game" for many marbles (i.e., winner plays in the BIG 10 championship against USC or UW etc.). Not all the marbles like the old days, since a 11-1 loser of the 'the Game' would still get into the 12 team playoff probably; but better than a devalued Game followed by a OSU-Mich Big10 championship rematch.
"Oregon State and Washington State… uh… please come to HR, and bring your badge and keys with you."
You said this one million times more cleverly than I could have. Kudos.
OSU and WSU are being treated like Milton. They thought they were power-5 schools, but they really aren’t. This is college football’s way of “fixing the glitch.” I’m worried about what happens when they wake up and find their Swingline stapler is missing.
Oregon State beat Oregon last year, destroyed Florida in a bowl (yeah, not a great Florida team), and was an up and coming program with a new QB who just transferred from Clemson. Now, they are effectively cut out of the big kids table. Watch the coach leave and the transfers start. This sucks for them and the game as a whole.
August 5th, 2023 at 12:12 PM ^
True enough, but if they play in a lesser league, won't it make it easier for them to have an impressive record and compete for a place in the playoffs? Clemson-in-the-ACC, as it were?
I know no big ten but the ten teams in the north
It looks like Washington is now the northernmost team in the conference and Oregon is 3rd after Minnesota
Guess I'm alone in thinking this is AWESOME. CFB is all about exciting matchups, and most of the current schedule is filled with a bunch of boring matchups against mediocre teams; it's basically a bunch of filler in between OSU, PSU, MSU, and 1 or 2 other games, if we're being honest.
I'd much rather see M playing USC, Oregon, Wash, and UCLA instead of a slog against Indiana, Minnesota, Maryland and Rutgers -- especially given the 12-team playoff, which will reward strength of schedule and allow a team to lose a couple games. A better variety of matchups makes for a better experience. Why are people so wedding to the past? Evolve or die.
But what makes you think UM is going to play those teams all of the time? We could if we kicked Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers and Minnesota out of the conference. What happens if there is a East/West Coast split? We would see these teams once every 5-10 years.
You got downvoted for the comment, but it does go to prove that there have been a LOT of less than sexy Saturdays in B1G venues down through the years. An FSU or Clemson, Oregon (okay, maybe not Washington) will/would have a lot more cache than NW/Illinois most weeks.
This is a false choice. You can have a good schedule without killing what has been great about college football. Just schedule good non-conference programs
The best schedule in my adult life as a M fan was 1991. It was an actual ten team Big Ten and had a non- conference of: at BC, top-ten Notre Dame, No. 1 FSU and then the Big Ten. Somehow, we played all those teams without destroying 100-plus years of tradition. We can, and should, have both.
Edit - also, Rutgers aren’t going anywhere.
Teams have been moving in and out of conferences, on and off schedules, throughout the history of college football. If a second tier develops and those teams play more competitive games, develop their own traditions. . . There are various ways that this can play out. Michigan is building on a handful of great games with USC football, hoops with UCLA basketball. Oregon, Washington. . . not sure. At least for a little while, those games will be fun trips for teams already in the B1G.
Right, because there is just no way we could play a team like Washington or Ohio State would play, say, Oregon the way it’s set up now. Could never happen.
This is not being done to allow for better schedules. The last couple of years show those games are already possible
I couldn't hate this more. CFB is a unique, regional thing, so let's all get into one crab bucket and play the championship games on a Monday night in a sterile NFL stadium.
At least they'll increase the cost of my season tickets.
The quest for more money tears apart a 108 year old institution...
They've ruined college football and college basketball. I'll watch because I love sports but they have quite literally fucked everything up in the hunt for a few more dollars.
I think you'll see more one or two, maybe 3 loss teams have a chance at winning it all with expanded playoffs and higher caliber teams playing each other in 2 large conferences, maybe 3.
I come from the future, and present this eventual MGoBlog post (that would have been utterly incomphrensible as recently as 2012):
"Huge win over USC today, we're back on track! Now Michigan needs Rutgers to beat Oregon tonight in #B1GAfterDark, in order to stay in contention to play in the B1G Championship game in Las Vegas."
"Huge win over USC" works for me considering how our last two games against them went.
You left out the part where the Big Ten had to go to the 5th tiebreaker to determine who makes the conference championship game. I'm not sure you can equitably determine a conference champion in football anymore with so many teams and unbalanced schedules if everything were to remain as is (no divisions and 9 conference games). Maybe the Big Ten will move to a 10-game conference schedule or a 4-team conference playoff, but I doubt it happens until there is a major change in college football.
This sucks to be sure.
But at least - for now - this is not Rutgers and Maryland. They still feel like the bad decisions you made when you were drunk and are stuck with. They are not deserving of the conference brand or a full share.
Anti-biotics, please!
I hate all of it.
The weird and sad part of this is that Oregon and UW fans don't seem to be that excited about it.
Oh, I'm sure they aren't crazy about it because (a) they lose some fun rivalries and (b) they're now in a conference where they'll be competing against a bunch of talented teams from 2-3 timezones away. Predictability is fun and nice, and losing that sucks when the alternative basically comes down to money and exposure. But the Pac-12 wasn't long for this world when USC and UCLA left, so at least they've got options as compared to schools like WSU and OSU who really are stuck with nowhere to go.
In addition to the loss of longstanding conference and geographical identity and playing their in-state rivals in exchange for $$$ and a solid place to land, UW and UO will have a really hard time making even the expanded playoff in the future.
I heard some insider say the other day that despite the disadvantages of staying in the Pac 12 at least the automatic CFP bid was there for the taking. Now UW and UO will have to get past Michigan/Ohio St/Penn St in addition to USC and occasionally UCLA. From a fans' perspective I'm not sure it feels like the plusses outweigh the minuses.
I wouldn't expect them to be. It's better than the alternative, but that doesn't mean it's great.
If you get rescued from a sinking ship by a luxury ocean liner you're grateful to be there, but you're not going to be fist-pumping and cheering while others are still left on the vessel you left.
I know the goal of realignment is to maximize revenue by creating more high-profile matchups, but I think we are throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Will the sports world take notice if Washington upsets OSU? Probably not. It sure did when Purdue pulled those upsets. Limiting the cakewalk games takes some of the magic away from college sports. A big part of the March Madness magic is the wild upsets. The NFL lacks much of this magic - almost every Sunday a bottom-tier team beats a top-tier team and it is highlighted 30 minutes into Sportscenter. The top five college team going down to a bad in-conference team is the lead on Sportscenter.
This is a very good point, but I think it's also fair to point out that now Purdue can upset top-5 USC in West Lafayette now.
There are going to be so many more commercials during, before, after, all the time......when this all shakes out. You think its bad now, oh man.
this is no longer a conference. it stopped being one the minute rutgers and maryland joined, if we're being honest; at this point we're just setting the corpse on fire.
i'd also say - i'm really sick and fucking tired of college football being 90% of the consideration on this stuff...men's basketball gets the other 10%, and the hundreds of other athletes on every other campus can just go pound sand. i truly love college football, but sometimes it's the worst thing on the sports landscape.
Its sucks, but shouldn't football rule the roost? The last numbers I saw were that was responsible for 90-95% of college sports revenue. And the schools that are actually profitable from football, which isn't that many, that at least helps fund other sports.
August 5th, 2023 at 12:59 PM ^
i guess, if you regard college athletics as a money-making venture, separate from the actual University as an intellectual concept.
i don’t.
I concur with the OP -- this sucks.
What a stupid stupid stupid arrangement all of this is now. Just nationalize the whole thing like the NFL, and get it over with... Divide the nation into 5 regions (ACC - NE, SEC - SE, B1G - North Central, B12 - South Central, P12 - West). 10-team conferences with a regional undercard conference.
Get 2 match-ups with top tier vs top tier teams (one home/ one away) and match it to last year's finish like the NFL does. Rotate those match ups between the conferences... There's your big match up TV payoff... The first game of the season is against a regional team from the 2nd tier. Playoffs are not affected if a team loses, because that all depends on winning your conference by having the best record in that conference.
An Example, this year - Mich vs a MAC snack, then, Mich vs KState and Mich at USC, er, Utah, and a 9-game schedule vs real actual B1G teams like Ohio State, Wisconsin, and Minnesota.
And please do promotion/ relegation. Send the bad teams to the 2nd tier.
Comments