forums

OT: Are USC and UCLA cooked?

FrostyVFL

FrostyVFL

Believe the HEUP
Joined
Jun 25, 2023
Messages
376
With the recent exodus of players from USC and UCLA, I’m curious if this hurts them far more in the B1G than it would’ve if they would’ve just stayed in the PAC12 (Which IIRC was more money anyways).

My reasoning for saying it does is now they have depleted rosters, already with no Defense, and heading into one of of the most stout defensive conferences in football. They also both just lost their futures as Malachi Nelson and Dante Moore have both entered the transfer portal. So currently they are moving to a tougher conference with a worse roster.

So what now?

I would argue that with geopolitical factors such as taxation and the already low sports climate in California, this may be the nail in the coffin for these programs.

Curious to see if you think the dissolvement of the of PAC12 basically destroyed these programs as well.
 
Advertisement
FrostyVFL said:
With the recent exodus of players from USC and UCLA, I’m curious if this hurts them far more in the B1G than it would’ve if they would’ve just stayed in the PAC12 (Which IIRC was more money anyways).

My reasoning for saying it does is now they have depleted rosters, already with no Defense, and heading into one of of the most stout defensive conferences in football. They also both just lost their futures as Malachi Nelson and Dante Moore have both entered the transfer portal. So currently they are moving to a tougher conference with a worse roster.

So what now?

I would argue that with geopolitical factors such as taxation and the already low sports climate in California, this may be the nail in the coffin for these programs.

Curious to see if you think the dissolvement of the of PAC12 basically destroyed these programs as well.
Click to expand...
The PAC-12s best offer without them was $30M per school per year I think. With them staying in the best case they were probably getting under $40M per year.

Program was in worse trouble staying in the PAC12 unless they got uneven revenue sharing.
 
FrostyVFL said:
With the recent exodus of players from USC and UCLA, I’m curious if this hurts them far more in the B1G than it would’ve if they would’ve just stayed in the PAC12 (Which IIRC was more money anyways).

My reasoning for saying it does is now they have depleted rosters, already with no Defense, and heading into one of of the most stout defensive conferences in football. They also both just lost their futures as Malachi Nelson and Dante Moore have both entered the transfer portal. So currently they are moving to a tougher conference with a worse roster.

So what now?

I would argue that with geopolitical factors such as taxation and the already low sports climate in California, this may be the nail in the coffin for these programs.

Curious to see if you think the dissolvement of the of PAC12 basically destroyed these programs as well.
Click to expand...
I haven't mulled it over enough to really be definitive.

That said, I think you're onto something about the unintended consequences here. There's more money promised, but it's a **** of an expense. Chip Kelly *might* have figured this out before his recent remarks.

There's a famous saying in Florida (and maybe in Tennessee, too):

Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered.
 
FrostyVFL said:
With the recent exodus of players from USC and UCLA, I’m curious if this hurts them far more in the B1G than it would’ve if they would’ve just stayed in the PAC12 (Which IIRC was more money anyways).

My reasoning for saying it does is now they have depleted rosters, already with no Defense, and heading into one of of the most stout defensive conferences in football. They also both just lost their futures as Malachi Nelson and Dante Moore have both entered the transfer portal. So currently they are moving to a tougher conference with a worse roster.

So what now?

I would argue that with geopolitical factors such as taxation and the already low sports climate in California, this may be the nail in the coffin for these programs.

Curious to see if you think the dissolvement of the of PAC12 basically destroyed these programs as well.
Click to expand...
Add the logistics of cross country travel and both have their work cut out for them. They’ll be middle of the pack at best.
 
I think Kelly articulating a super football conference and other sports remaining geographically oriented makes alot of sense. It could be an end point but was probably too difficult for the Brain?Trust to figure out.
 
SPAMM said:
I think Kelly articulating a super football conference and other sports remaining geographically oriented makes alot of sense. It could be an end point but was probably too difficult for the Brain?Trust to figure out.
Click to expand...
I’ve always been in favor of an 8 team playoff. All 5 P5 champions + highest ranked G5 champion and 2 at large bids. Regular season still holds all meaning and conference championships were the only guarantee to playoffs
 
SPAMM said:
I think Kelly articulating a super football conference and other sports remaining geographically oriented makes alot of sense. It could be an end point but was probably too difficult for the Brain?Trust to figure out.
Click to expand...
Totally agree and heard him talk about while driving yesterday. Makes total sense.
 
USC has a ton of money. It’s all a matter of whether they want to spend it. UCLA is in a much different situation. They too have money but they can’t spend it as freely. The UC Board of Regents will make sure that they take care of the other sports and women’s teams.
 
You guys are giving the B1G way more credit than they actually deserve.

It's a sh*t conference with really only 2 maybe 3 good teams, the rest barely have functioning Offenses that can move the ball on a consistent basis.

USC, UCLA & the rest of the Pac teams headed to the B1G will be just fine. The real question that should be asked is what will happen now that MiCheatagain will have to actually play multiple teams with a pulse & won't be able to gerrymander their schedule for 11 easy wins every year?
 
Advertisement
Memnon said:
You guys are giving the B1G way more credit than they actually deserve.

It's a sh*t conference with really only 2 maybe 3 good teams, the rest barely have functioning Offenses that can move the ball on a consistent basis.

USC, UCLA & the rest of the Pac teams headed to the B1G will be just fine. The real question that should be asked is what will happen now that MiCheatagain will have to actually play multiple teams with a pulse & won't be able to gerrymander their schedule for 11 easy wins every year?
Click to expand...
Well....Michigan has built their team the right way (other than repeatedly cheating), are tough and physical and we are lucky to be able to watch them run the ball.

Other than that, I completely agree with you and the WestB1G will be fine...
 
They'll be fine... Everyone hits a rut at some point but long term they set themselves up nice..
 
Brains said:
I haven't mulled it over enough to really be definitive.

That said, I think you're onto something about the unintended consequences here. There's more money promised, but it's a **** of an expense. Chip Kelly *might* have figured this out before his recent remarks.

There's a famous saying in Florida (and maybe in Tennessee, too):

Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered.
Click to expand...
george bush GIF
 
FrostyVFL said:
With the recent exodus of players from USC and UCLA, I’m curious if this hurts them far more in the B1G than it would’ve if they would’ve just stayed in the PAC12 (Which IIRC was more money anyways).

My reasoning for saying it does is now they have depleted rosters, already with no Defense, and heading into one of of the most stout defensive conferences in football. They also both just lost their futures as Malachi Nelson and Dante Moore have both entered the transfer portal. So currently they are moving to a tougher conference with a worse roster.

So what now?

I would argue that with geopolitical factors such as taxation and the already low sports climate in California, this may be the nail in the coffin for these programs.

Curious to see if you think the dissolvement of the of PAC12 basically destroyed these programs as well.
Click to expand...

No.
 
FrostyVFL said:
With the recent exodus of players from USC and UCLA, I’m curious if this hurts them far more in the B1G than it would’ve if they would’ve just stayed in the PAC12 (Which IIRC was more money anyways).

My reasoning for saying it does is now they have depleted rosters, already with no Defense, and heading into one of of the most stout defensive conferences in football. They also both just lost their futures as Malachi Nelson and Dante Moore have both entered the transfer portal. So currently they are moving to a tougher conference with a worse roster.

So what now?

I would argue that with geopolitical factors such as taxation and the already low sports climate in California, this may be the nail in the coffin for these programs.

Curious to see if you think the dissolvement of the of PAC12 basically destroyed these programs as well.
Click to expand...

I certainly hope so. They deserve it
 
Teams like Iowa and Wisconsin that ate the whole year playing maybe one opponent that recruits in the top 25 and has a real offense, on the way to an inflated record and being run over by * or Michigan in the B1G title game, are the teams that are cooked.
 
Advertisement
UCLA been playing big 10 football this past year. There probably more ready for the big 10. Curious to see how USC air raid does in those cold nov games in the big 10.
 
Memnon said:
You guys are giving the B1G way more credit than they actually deserve.

It's a sh*t conference with really only 2 maybe 3 good teams, the rest barely have functioning Offenses that can move the ball on a consistent basis.

USC, UCLA & the rest of the Pac teams headed to the B1G will be just fine. The real question that should be asked is what will happen now that MiCheatagain will have to actually play multiple teams with a pulse & won't be able to gerrymander their schedule for 11 easy wins every year?
Click to expand...
👆This x100.

BIG10 is basura caliente except Pedo St, Taint, and Meesheegahn. It's a 3-program conference not unlike the "mighty SEC".

With that said, USC will be more middle of the road and UCLA will be more runt of the litter.
 
UCLA will not succeed in the Big Ten they are just there for the check. USC will do well in a year or 2 once they adapt to the big ten personnel
 
Logistically it doesn’t make sense-

I don’t see either one being successful-

It’s a shame USC has a storied history that can rival any program in the nation -
 
Back
Top