Many of you are acting like the Pac-12 doesn't have the same long, tradition-rich history as the B1G, with the same romanticized memories of making the Rose Bowl.
The Pac-12 started back in 1915, has its own legit helmet program that's been a big-boy for 100 years and ties with ND. It has its prestigious academic institutions, it's whipping boys, and a program with a sugar daddy.
.
It's not just going to fold and spend money flying to Bloomington and Iowa City every weekend.
Does college football look today like it did in 1915? Ironically, I'd prefer it go back to that, but that's not a realistic outcome at this point. What we want to matter (history/regional rivalries) and what has proven to matter (money) over the last 20 years are different things.
The SEC is kind of forcing the hand of everyone here to either go all in on football or concede you won't be competitive at the highest levels anymore. The PAC12 schools get around $34M per school from their distribution based on the last data we have. The B10 is pushing close to $60M and will go north of that in it's next deal. The SEC's number is rumored to be $75M-$80M with UT/OU.
The bottom line is, there needs to be at least one other league that can keep up with the SEC's TV deal or every other league is going to fall behind significantly. The NIL is the first step of this pro college sports world, I don't doubt eventually schools will be paying players directly. Revenue is all that matters, and the bottom of the P12 doesn't care about football and doesn't generate the TV ratings to get paid at the same level of the B10/SEC. Plus they have a time zone problem that lessens significantly if they blend their top brands with the CST/EST time zones.
In the new world we're entering here, Oregon/USC/Washington might as well concede if they're receiving a revenue distribution that's half what the SEC receives. There really isn't a solution to that problem for the top football brands in the west if they remain in the P12, there's only so much inventory to buy and the SEC/B10 will always get a bigger cut for the reasons mentioned.
Additionally, for the B10, being relevant in the playoff is going to be more important moving forward then ever. While tOSU will always be there, and UM/PSU have the resources to consistently be in that discussion, no one else outside of Wisconsin has been, and they're not in a state that's flush with football talent. This is also about flipping the demographics to be more favorable for the B10 long term with respect to recruiting - I'd prefer Texas/Florida as my first options to bring into the footprint, but those options are gone/unlikely now. California is probably #3 on the realistic want list in regard to a state that produces a lot of football talent that could be brought into the footprint. Giving B10 schools an advantage in California over SEC schools would be a massive win long term IMO.
