Agree, but it’s one caveat w/ The UCLA/USC move to the B1G. U can say the stars aligned, in a way.
There’s a reason y the Big 10 started pushing into other conference’s territories, & changed their logo from BIG 10 to B1G in 2011. They started doing it very subtly, dipping their toe in the Big XII, & then expanding farther East. It was always their plan to become a national brand v. a regional brand.
In comes the PAC-12; the PAC-12 have had rocky leadership since the hiring of former Women’s Tennis CEO, Larry Scott, to become its Commissioner. Larry Scott & John Swafford must’ve had a competition of worst commissioners among P5 conferences. Scott made financial blunder after financial blunder within the conference, I’m talking unnecessary financial blunders. U couple that w/ the PAC-12 having egregiously late games which was of no interest to the rest of America, along w/ every last one of their “top teams” sans 2010 & 2014 (Oregon) chitting the bed, not vying for a BCS/CFP Championship spot, & voila, no interest from big companies.
With The B1G thirsting to become a Nat’l brand, & the soon to be implosion awaiting the PAC-12, USC/UCLA (both in need of financial assistance to keep up &/or get out the red from their AD) were ripe for the picking. Their administration was proactive, b/c it was clear the lack of leadership unveiled itself around 2016-17 via an audit. Holy chit was that a f’ing mess; it was an unexplainable mess, one that was years in the making behind PAC-12 Presidents’ backs. Scott….man, let me not go down that rabbit hole. Anyways, cracks started to form, confidence started to erode, and SC/UCLA as poster children of the conference said F this, & it was perfect timing.