I’ve been reading about this elsewhere and holy shit are people pissed off, even the UCLA and USC fans. Is there anyone who likes this?
The people in charge of the cable TV contract.
Honestly, I say let’s keep it going. The NCAA is a horrible, corrupt monstrosity that benefits no one (I don’t even see how it benefits itself). The push towards mega-conferences is a step in the direction of getting rid of the NCAA, which would be a good thing. The Big 12 just hired a new director who comes from the land of sports marketing, which I think is ideal for a conference that’s lost its biggest schools in a sports atmosphere trending towards focusing solely on the individual players via NIL deals. Let the NCAA starve.
The traditions of the old school conferences are over (unfortunately - they made for a great Keith Jackson voiceover during pre-game). The era of the individual is here, and the conferences need to consolidate to get what’s theirs (TVdeals).
I’m sure once there are just 2 mega conferences, they’ll realize that the best way to organize their divisions will be regionally, and the circle will be complete.
As a USC fan I have to say this is a big surprise. Right now I don’t know what to think of it. I will say this. Many of us USC fans have been very frustrated with the soft PAC 12 in football, but this kind of opens up a big can of worms.
Should the Big 10 still be called the Big 10? After 2024 there will be 16 teams in that conference.
Yeah. I wonder if this means we get to schedule garbage teams and go Undefeated like in the good old days? Rack up a few more trophies and championships. Hell, let’s get Pete Carrol back! Tear down the Colosseum and build a big glass thing. Name it after some Crypto Fraud shit.
I’m shocked. And stunned.
I’ve rooted for all Big Ten teams in bowl play except OSU pretty much since I started following college ball in the 90s, though I still can’t quite muster up excitement about Rutgers or Maryland. With USC and UCLA in the mix, I’ll probably still keep Midwestern Big 10 school conference loyalty, but East and West Coasts I couldn’t give a hoot about.
There haven’t been just 10 teams in the Big Ten since 1989. It’s a brand, not a descriptor.
Well I very well understand that. However is it too late to start putting the name of a conference into accuracy? Better late then never.
Why is it better? I’m sure the conference has every intention of expanding as much as it can, just as it did 30 years ago. Why is having to rebrand and re-educate the audience every time it expands “better”?
Now supposedly the Big10 is looking to go to 20. Oregon and Washington have expressed interest, but been told that the conference is waiting to see what Notre Dame does.
At this point, why not look South? FSU, Miami, + ND give the Big10 even MORE clout and retiree-alums would get some easy-to-travel-to games. And the Florida TV market has to be bigger than the Northwest market.
I’m on a lot of FSU sports discussion boards, supposedly the ACC has them locked down tightly until 2036 making it almost impossible. With money, anything is possible but neither FSU nor Miami has that kind of money. ESPN could get involved but they have the ACC network also.
Heck - more teams for Illinois to lose the big game to! 
Well, the Big Ten has solved its football-division imbalance problem. USC and UCLA will go in the West, and Purdue will be reunited with Indiana in the East.
And that’s why I fucking hate this. I have friends who went to Purdue and we tailgate at the Illinois-Purdue game every year. That game will now be played two years out of every eight. In return we’ll get games played 2,000 miles away against schools with alumni bases with whom we have zero interaction.
At this point I’d rather watch the NFL.
I wonder when games will be randomly scheduled at whatever neutral site can line the most pockets (I admit I know nothing of the economics of college football).
For example, USC v UCLA… in New Orleans. Michigan v Ohio State… in Florida. 
I assume the big USC and UCLA games against Ohio State or Michigan will move to the Rams/Chargers stadium for maximum dollars when being played in California. I could maybe see neutral sites for the games in the Midwest at a pro stadium.
SoFi Capacity is 70,000
Rose Bowl Capacity is 90,888
Colliseum Capacity is 78,467
Sure, but what about luxury boxes and bottle service? You can’t expect monied alumni and LA scenesters to just mingle with the cheese-curd-covered hoi polloi at a UCLA-Ohio State game.
I did forget that LA does have the 2028 Olympics. I assume they’ll use all three stadiums for various events. How much they’ll upgrade the Coliseum and Rose Bowl beforehand could be a factor.
I still think opting for the new pro stadium is what they’ll do for the marque prime time games. It’s got all the bells and whistles, the college kids want to play there and it’s designed to separate fans from their money, quickly and efficiently.
Does kinda blur the difference…
And USC fans will be happier that the team will face lots stiffer competition in the Big Ten, and the odds of a league championship (never mind a spot in the playoffs) will decline markedly?
You’d think that perennially weak teams in conferences adding big-time outside schools would break away to other conferences where they have a better chance of winning.
Oops, what I am thinking? Money rules. The fans will show up, watch the games and buy the gear regardless.