Confirmation Of USC Being In Driver’s Seat In Big Ten Deal

The UC Regents are discussing UCLA’s move to the Big Ten today.

Here’s a nugget that confirms UCLA was USC’s wingman on the move to the Big Ten.

A UC report said USC’s estimated Pac-12 TV value was 30 percent. The report said UCLA’s value was 10 percent.

If a new Pac-12 TV deal would have been worth $500 million, each school would lose $10 million per year without USC.


21 thoughts on “Confirmation Of USC Being In Driver’s Seat In Big Ten Deal

    1. ugh,ol’peenus breth muthur wud haffta hav lotsa boy frends to ern that kined of munney,but then we wud end up with moar ol’peenus breths,smdh Btw, can I give anyone a reach around, so I can grab their peenus, then have them Cum in my mouth? And if any Cum is leftover, stick it In my Ass like Pudly76 use to do. 😃😃—>🍆


      1. And ole’ Ed continues to apply pressure to ol’peenus breth….. and it is getting to him. He obsesses about it day and night, even in his dreams. The pressure is relentless. It is sad watching a grown man break down.

        Liked by 1 person

  1. At first blush I did not trust the figures Scottie derived and thought he might be using the Houdini-formula, where all reasoning vanishes.

    But the numbers bear-out, and if accurate, this means SC is giving up about a $40-million Pac-12 yearly contract for a Big-10 $100-million.

    When money talks that big it is hard to say ‘no.’ And few do.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. PAC 12, just offer SC 100M to stay and 11 teams split 300M.

      Oregon Udub & Utes have no tv market. That’s what they’re worth. If that.

      AZ schools and O St & Wash State are worth less than 20M for TV rights.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Cal75,

        From Scooter’s figure at $500 million and SC getting 30%, that means SC would get $150 million and the rest of the 11 would get $31,818,818.00 million. Now the question is, is that per year or per contract? If it is the contract then how long is the contract? If is a 5 year contract, that means SC would only get $30 mil, while the other 11 would get around $6 mil per year.


  2. CAL – I would tend to agree with you that P 12 should just offer USC a boatload to stay in P 12. However, as a season ticketholder since the 80s, I am sick and tired of the PAC 12 after dark games with Coliseum start times of 730PM or later!! With USC going to B10, no way are we getting majority of start times 7:30pm or later for B10 homes contests with possible exception of teams in CST (Nebraska, Iowa and Northwestern).

    Therefore, no deal!!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Youngdole, if a game starts late at 7:30 in the midwest or Back East, then it is 5:30 or 4:30 L.A. time, a perfect time for football viewing.

      Of course, when at home SC will undoubtedly have a 7:30 game or two.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Young Dole,
    If SC wanted to play home/home games with Michigan, Penn St, tOSU, Wisconsin, Iowa,
    How come they were never scheduled, iirc?

    How come PAC 12 grand poobah didn’t solicit a list of grievances from schools and try to solve problems?

    Liked by 2 people

  4. It has been reported already that USC was worth 30%. Imagine, only two schools worth 40% of the total revenue out of the 12 schools. The bums at Oregon/Washington think they are hot stuff. LOL.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Well, Steve, I don’t know for sure unless you can 100% trust the news, but if sucla were required to give-away $10-million to the UC-system, and have $90-million for itself, I would say, “Where do I sign?”

        Liked by 1 person

  5. The law that creates the UC system has no redress for the politicians to screw over UCLA. AD Jarmond knew he couldn’t get UCLA into the Big10 without USC. Folks, coaches are already allocated more for their jobs than what the state law pays other employees. I repeat, there is no legal avenue to force UCLA to pay Cal, otherwise, UC Irvine, Davis, Santa Barbara will use that same tactic to get money from BOTH schools. Face it Cal alumni, your grifters have been exposed.


    1. This World,

      Why wouldn’t the UC Regents tell ugly what to do? I thought that that the US Regents were the final say or the grand pooba’s and tells the schools what to do. How does ugly get around not paying the exit fee? Thank you.


  6. USC has always been the goose that lays the PAC-12 golden eggs. The problem is that the PAC-12 didn’t stand up for fairness or reason when the NCAA went ballistic and destroyed USC with outrageous and unfounded penalties. The other schools rejoiced and the entire PAC-12 became uncompetitive on the national stage. Oregon briefly had a cameo in the spotlight but other conferences advanced and changed the entire map of college football. USC is still digging out of that debacle and it’s fallout while the PAC-12 is never going to


  7. Pasadena, even the Grand Wizard-er, General Counsel said the Chair of the Board has to tell the UCLA Chancellor that he made a mistake and get a MAJORITY VOTE to formally cancel the business decision that UCLA has made. But that would open all PAC 12 schools up to a lawsuit by the BIG10 and they don’t have those kind of cojones. Plus, Newsome wasn’t present at the UC Regents meeting at UCLA. It’s political posturing at it’s worst. The Regents gave the UC bosses authority to make 3rd party business decisions in 1991. The genie is out the bottle, Cal gets screwed for being lazy and Capitalism wins again.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.