Jon Joseph

Man, I feel like an expectant father as was once the case awaiting delivery of his first child.

As to my POV as to whether Oregon should stay or go if offered by the B1G I have said (sigh of relief from all Forum members) enough and likely, more than enough. But, if the B1G adds Oregon and UW and goes to 18 teams, I think this would make sense; if, I know what makes sense, competition and travel-wise. First, a B1G 10 (18) would have 5 teams that played for a BCS championship including newbie Oregon: Nebraska (boo! should have been the Ducks in 2001 and not Nebraska), Ohio State, OREGON, Penn State, and USC. Champs, Ohio State, Penn State, and USC (hose job vacated.) Playoff - Also five teams - including newbies Oregon and UW - Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, OREGON, and UW. Combined record - 4-8, 1 championship. B1G-10 (18) Divisions West - Iowa, Nebraska, OREGON, UCLA, USC, UW Central - Illinois, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Wisconsin East - Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers 5 intra-division football games with 4 or 5 division cross-over games. I'm thinking 10 conference games could be required by media partners. This would allow USC to play Notre Dame every year and hopefully, if schedules could be figured out, Oregon to play Oregon State every year and Washington to play Washington State.

Oregon first fielded a football team in 1894. In 1894 the fans at Oregon games all knew and were friends with the young men who took the field. No doubt fans sat on the side of the field and ate a picnic lunch while watching the games in the daylight. No one in the all-mighty Ivy League knew the results of Oregon football games. No one was being paid to play. College football coaches were student managers of a club activity and were not making $1,000 a year let alone $10M dollars a year. Eventually, one of the conferences Oregon became a member of after numerous other conference affiliations was the Pacific-8 Conference. That conference grew into the Pac-12 Conference. Football was still a regional sport before the NCAA lost an antitrust case in the 1980s. After this occurred, media companies and money generated from television broadcasts became a major factor in how college athletic teams are funded. The "need" for one true champion in college football led to the monetization of football and all college sports, especially football and basketball morphed from being regional-focused activities into national sports activities. Certain conferences benefited from the change, especially the SEC and other conferences focused more on matters other than mere athletic success fell behind. The B1G 10 Conference grew in the golden age of college football in the 1930s, along with Notre Dame, Army, and Navy to the point where these teams eclipsed the Ivy League which was more focused on academics than on success on the football field. Scholarships for athletes regardless of a student's academic bona fides became the norm. The Ivy League dropped from being a national power to being a regional sport. The majority of schools playing college football today, like the Ivy League, do not award athletic scholarships, and as many stray dogs as fans attend the games. But these teams do not compete for national titles. Today, Oregon is a major player in the capitalized world of college football and basketball. It's football and basketball coaches are paid millions of dollars a year. Oregon's athletic director's base salary is close to a million dollars a year and Oregon athletes play in multi-million dollar facilities. To me, the choice in this day and age is a simple one. If offered an opportunity to participate in one of two conferences that have the money to be sustainable in athletics in the future or attempt to piece together a lesser collection of lesser schools, at least lesser from an athletic revenue point-of-view is not a difficult decision. To attempt to hold onto a tradition that has already been blown away with UCLA and USC joining the B1G is frankly senseless. To be a member of a diminished conference so you can more easily compete for football and basketball titles IMO makes no sense. Especially, when Oregon will be competitive in every sport in the B1G. Oregon will likely play UCLA and USC every season in football but will not play Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State every season. The playoff format will change in 2026 and as a member of the B1G and recruiting as a member of the B1G and the media coverage attendant to the B1G will help and not hurt Oregon's attempt to win football and men's basketball titles and in every other sport in which Oregon competes. The entry money will be less than that received by Northwestern and Rutgers which is far from ideal. But it will be more than the money Oregon will make in a diminished Pac-9 or whatever. IMO, if Oregon receives a B1G invite, failing to accept the invite will be ruinous down the road for Oregon's finances and for Oregon's opportunity to win championships. But that's just me and I more than respect and appreciate all other POVs.

It would likely be the same money as Oregon would receive as a B1G entry fee so IMO going B1G beats any alternative available at this point in time. The B1G is not the SEC when it comes to a path to the expanded playoff. Oregon can and has defeated Ohio State and Michigan at their places and has owned USC since Pete Carroll left and also UCLA since Terry Donahue left UCLA. Both in football and basketball Oregon will be more than competitive in the B1G and will not take a back seat in any other sport. The B1G is big due to location and the huge number of alumni/alumnae and the Midwest folks being more zealous when it comes to college sports than West Coast folks. In the future, there is roughly the same travel in the B1G as in the B12, especially with at least 4 teams on the West Coast than aligning in any less than a Power 2 conference.

And get Foxy with it?

Why does anyone or any company need more money? Because they and us and I, most often spend to the ceiling and not the floor. It's not just the money. It's about survival in a world of collapsing conferences. It's about being a survivor as a member of the Power 2 and not an also-ran. Yes, introductory money with a chance to score a full share come 2031 is far better than being a member of a glorified G5 conference. Especially when the introductory money and today's linear broadcast exposure exceed what Oregon can otherwise bank. Oregon moves to the B1G now or later. Move now and do not run the risk that the opportunity will indeed be there later.

The B1G did what it should have done. Wait for a Pac media number to surface instead of bidding against itself. Bad spot? Rather than look at this potential offer as taking a discount, I look at it as paying a premium for a future commodity bet. Being behind Rutgers money-wise stinks. But come 2031, Oregon will have a very good chance as a P2, B1G member of cashing in. The alternative assuming a discounted offer to join the B1G comes to fruition is what? Play in a patchwork conference through 2030 and then take a discounted offer from the B1G? Oregon's future is long-term IMO taking a discount now and betting on itself for where it will be financially and where the B1G will be financially come 2031.

Power 2 offer comes and Puddles is gone. The Playoff format in 2026 will look far different from what is coming in 2024/25. Joining the B1G even at an initial discount is a Duck in the hand.

A B1G offer comes even at a discount and it will be at a discount and Uncle Phil is not going to allow Oregon to pass on being a Power 2 member.

Not official. But the B1G presidents' meeting and subsequently authorizing the commissioner to explore further expansion seems to indicate that B1G expansion is coming. Why else have the meeting and the consequent message to the commissioner? Notre Dame due to contractual obligations is not, unless 8 or more members decide to bolt the ACC, in the mix. The B1G's concern about 'destroying' the Pac after poaching SC and UCLA is disingenuous but I very much doubt that the B1G wants to break up the ACC and risk interference with contract litigation from the ACC and ESPN. Far different for Pac teams to be poached and to leave when the end of the current grant of rights deal expires at the end of the 2023 season. BTW, Jon Wilner suggests that Oregon's 1st-year payout will likely be in the range of $30M with modest escalation before the B1G's new media deal expires in 2031/32. Better than the $20M or so payout under the current agreement. This kind of step-up deal should if USC's whining matters to the B1G presidents, assuage the Trojans. If an offer is coming it will be accepted, probably before the middle of next week. 4 teams on the West Coast will elevate travel concerns and 6 teams even more so. UCLA has to be pushing for Cal to be invited in order to escape the Cal alimony payments. The college expansion Game of Thrones continues at Star Trek-like Warp Speed.

Sounds like we could be headed into an Uncivil War. Buy out FSC games and an annual game would be doable sooner rather than later.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiight? Stinks for OR ST but what is the premise for the lawsuit? The media grant of rights ends in 2023. It's unfortunate that OR ST will be shuttled off to the Mountain West but Oregon does not owe one iota of a fiduciary duty to Oregon State. Being upset at your situation in life compared to others better situated does not ipso facto allow for a remedy at law. I very much doubt that reasonable parties at OR ST will pour money into a useless lawsuit. To my knowledge, the two schools do not have a single board of overseers as is the case with CA public universities and state universities. I tried to research this and the search agent did not lead to a result.

This is just one of many preseason projections. The one that kind of counts, the AP Poll will be released on 8/15 at Noon Eastern time. But FWIW, this ranking has Oregon playing the preseason ranked #8, USC, #9, UW, #11, Utah, #15, Oregon State, and #19, Texas Tech. A tough row to hoe in any conference.

So very sad. Ducks will be fine but Oregon State and Washington State, if Oregon and UW can't or do not want to hold the Pac together in one form or another are headed for the Mountain West. Cal and Stanford are on the B1G cusp; or, on the cut line? It kind of ticks me off that ESPN and Fox have the money to add CU, Arizona, ASU, and Utah at a full share of $31.7M a year but not the money to invest in Pac-12 inventory. It's a bit of a strained analogy but in anti-trust law, this is bordering on predatory pricing. The next domino to fall will be the ACC. I think Clemson, FSU, UNC, and Georgia Tech are candidates for the SEC, and with Yormark's emphasis on basketball, Syracuse, Pitt, Louisville, and NC State would be, along with UConn, likely candidates to join the B12. 8 ACC teams give exit notices and the conference is done without huge exit fees being in the way. Regardless of cost, Clemson and FSU will find a way out of the ACC. This could leave Notre Dame stuck in a bad spot which would be heart-breaking, right? I do hope the B1G $ in not the B1G amount will be there and sufficient for Oregon to move into a Power 2 conference instead of creating a conference out of patchwork G5 teams. The idea of an easier road into the field in a 12-team playoff is enticing but with the conference shuffle continuing I doubt that the playoff format for 2024/25, 6 top conference champs with the top 4 conference champs receiving a 1st round bye will survive. And barring anti-trust restraints, would a 20-member B1G with UW, Oregon, Cal, and Stanford and 20-member SEC with Clemson, FSU, UNC, and Georgia Tech need more than the 2 Power Conferences to conduct a playoff? In this day and age will the 2 conferences want to share playoff revenue with teams with no chance to advance? Of course, with its unearned gravitas, Notre Dame will be in the mix one way or the other. I can easily envision a scenario where the B1G adds OREGON, UW, UNC, and Notre Dame. UNC brings in viewership right there with Cal and Stanford and UNC is an AAU member school. Among Oregon, UW, Clemson, and FSU, Notre Dame is the brand award winner. I just do not see the B1G adding non-AAU member Clemson or FSU. But this is just realignment ceiling walking by an old guy who finds it difficult enough these days to walk on Terra Firma.

Football is back on the field. YES! Oregon Football: Quotes from Dan Lanning following first fall practice DUCKSWIRE.USATODAY.COM Oregon Ducks head coach met with media members following the first fall camp practice of the 2023 season.

I'd add, UNC, FSU, Clemson, and Georgia Tech to the SEC. To the ACC - Notre Dame (as a most-favored-nation full-time football member - more $ for the Irish), UConn, USF, Memphis and Providence, Saint John's, Xavier, and Marquette as members other than for football. It's anyone's guess, no?

Ducks Wire Author - "I'm not saying the Pac-12 is dead but ..." Pac-12 Football: Predicting where all remaining teams could end up DUCKSWIRE.USATODAY.COM The future looks bleak for the Pac-12. Here is where we predict all remaining teams would go if the conference crumbles.

Here's a spot-on reality check for the B1G. Worried about destroying the Pac-12, you already destroyed the Pac-12. Also, a take on the FSU being desperately wanting to get out of Tobacco Road. It ain't over until Fat Media Companies sing. The Big Ten is at the epicenter of college football's shifting landscape WWW.YARDBARKER.COM The Big Ten left the Pac-12 for dead but doesn’t want to be the one to pull the plug on the conference.

Key 2023 storyline for every top 25 college football team WWW.YARDBARKER.COM The 2023 season should be a fascinating one both on and off the field, filled with questions that will be answered and stories ready...

Keep those seat belts buckled up and hang in there. Third-party influence may soon shake foundation of college football impacting conferences, programs - CBSSports.com WWW.CBSSPORTS.COM How does a new conference financed with a $1 billion investment sound to you, college football fan?

'We don't want to be responsible for taking down the Pac.' Really, after poaching the LA schools and a few refs? How about, our media partners now have a number to negotiate against?

A reasonable B1G invite? Yes, that is what I would like to see happen. And if it is 4 schools and not just Oregon and UW in the mix, this would do much to abate travel; especially, for non-revenue sports. The B12? IMO a non-starter. BTW, when the SEC goes to 20 teams, TCU and OK State are viable candidates for expansion. The B12 deal at $31.7M a year is not, IMO, a long-term viable deal. If you have the faith that I have in the Oregon brand, why the concern about being able to market the brand to a far greater audience without being restricted by limited cable broadcast agreements? We see the same facts but simply happen to be 180 degrees apart on what the impact of the facts will be. And these are simply the 'facts' known to date in a game of musical chairs that is far from over. As to what would be acceptable in a revenue share from the B1G? I defer to the people instrumental in the operation of the Athletic Department but in my FWIW opinion, $40M a year with 6 teams on the west coast would warrant a move to a conference that will be one of two standing at the end of the day.

The Media Mafia at Work. Go back to June of 1984 when the Supreme Court affirmed Oklahoma's District court win against the NCAA. The NCAA's limit on the number of games that could be televised on a given Saturday, usually one game, was found to violate anti-trust law. From this date forward it was every man and conference for itself and the media became far more instrumental in funding college athletics. Jump to the conclusion of the 1999/2000 season when FSU defeated now fellow ACC member VA Tech, 46 to 29 in the first BCS Championship game. The flood gates were of the date of this game now wide open. And the beat goes on with a 4-team playoff that will become a 12-team playoff in 2024 and likely, IMO, to go to 16 teams in 2026. You monetize anything and the monied people will take over.

Charles, great comment but equating Puddles business acumen to that of college presidents could warrant a liable action on behalf of Puddles?