Paul Finebaum thinks Pac-12 is finished - Big Ten may be eyeing up to 4 teams

Paul FInebaum has written that the end of the Pac-12 is coming soon, the Apple + media deal might be the final blow.

Separately, multiple reports are saying that several Big Ten presidents are talking about adding Washington and Oregon, with Stanford and Cal also mentioned.

If that happens and if the Big Twelve picks up Arizona, Arizona State and Utah, then Washington State and Oregon State will be the last two teams without a new home.

Mike Nolan

The Big Ten Commissioner has been told he can start exploring adding Washington and Oregon.

Tick tick tick goes the clock on the Pac-12.

Mike Nolan

ESPN is reporting that Arizona is ‘deep discussions’ to join the Big Twelve, with a deal expected to be finalized soon.

Looks like the Big Ten is willing to make the first formal move by inviting Washington and Oregon to join.

It’s looking like, in my lifetime, the second major college conference will cease to exist (SWC and PAC-12).

Greg Zimmerman, UNL '75
Overland Park, Kansas

You don’t think the Pac-5 will survive? :slight_smile:

I was watching Sports Center about an hour ago. There was a guy on there, can’t remember his name, that was pretty convinced Washington and Oregon to the Big 10 is a lock. There was a vote to be taken today I believe and it is generally believe the vote would be unanimous to add the two schools. Maybe it has already happened.

As an aside I would think at some point soon the Big 10 will be renamed. It seems silly to call the conference the Big 10 when in reality there are 16-18 teams.

John Papenhagen

Paul Sullivan’s column in the Chicago Tribune about the future of the Big Ten is interesting, I hope this link isn’t behind their paywall.

Are you also predicting the United States of America to change its name, because it hasn’t been united in much of anything for a long time?

I guess if you don’t see the difference between the country being named the USA and and a 16 or 18 team conference calling itself the Big 10 then there is nothing I can say.

John Papenhagen

The BIG 10 has not been 10 teams for several years. It’s a brand name and has value.


I bet there will be more yet in your lifetime, Greg.


I realize that. If I recall correctly the year they added Penn State it was no longer ten teams.

If the amount of teams is around ten like 11-12 it is one thing but if the number is pushing 20 that is another. I really believe if they were to change the name people would figure out that this is the old Big 10 Conference renamed and not a new conference.

Personally, I would stay away from picking a name for a conference that reflects the number of teams in the conference. The number of teams in a conference can change at any time.

John Papenhagen

I can remember when we only had 48 states. We have 50 now but the name didn’t change.

ESPN is reporting that ASU and Utah have applied for admission to the Big Twelve.

The difference is the name of the country is the United States of America. It wasn’t called the United 48 States of America, then they added two more states and left it as the United 48 States of America. Calling the country the USA allows for any number of states and it can remain the USA.

The Big 10 is named that because in the beginning they had 10 teams. It no longer has 10 ten, and hasn’t for some time, and is on the precipice of having nearly twice that number.

I am not saying they should change the name of the conference just because they added teams. If they wouldn’t have had a team number in the name they wouldn’t have to do anything like the SEC, ACC, AAC, etc wouldn’t have to. Those conferences can change the amount of teams they have every ten minutes if they want to and the name of the conference can remain the same and is still descriptively accurate.

The bottom line is I really couldn’t care less what they call the conference. I was just remarking that the name doesn’t reflect what it is.

John Papenhagen

Hey, at least we made the cut and are in the Big Ten according to the Trib column. Interesting that the article proposes promotion and relegation, a concept foreign to mostUS sports fans.

Greg Zimmerman, UNL '75
Overland Park, Kansas

Promotion and relegation makes sense to me, but I’m a soccer fan, so I more or less understand it.

I think I’d consider the possibility of zero, one or two teams moving up/down at each rebalance, probably on a multi-year basis as scheduling would be a total mess if they had to redraw the schedule for the next season in December every year. Drawing it every two years, 2027-8 after 2025-6 results are in would be a bit less frenetic, plus it puts teams on notice that have a bad year in the upper division that they’re in danger of being relegated after next year.

But with 10 teams in each division and a nine-game conference schedule, there are no cross-division games, which could kill off several rivalry games. It’d suck if teams that aren’t good enough to be promoted never saw the teams in the other division. At least if they were in another conference completely they could schedule those teams in the non-conference season.

ESPN is saying it is a done deal, Washington and Oregon are joining the Big Ten in 2024.

ASU and Utah have fled to the Big Twelve now.