UC system regents to decide on UCLA move to Big Ten later this month, per report
A University of California Board of Regents meeting later this month in San Francisco is expected to provide the final thumb up or thumb down on UCLA's impending move to the Big Ten, according to a report Wednesday from the San Jose Mercury News.
The meeting is set to take place Nov. 15-17 on the UCSF campus, but not much is known beyond that: when, exactly, the vote will take place; whether a vote will take place at all; if the results of a hypothetical vote will be made public; or how big the majority would need to be in order to halt or otherwise infringe upon the Bruins move to the Midwest.
UCLA has already accepted an invitation to the Big Ten for the 2024 football season, and the conference has signed a 7-year, $8 billion deal with Fox, NBC and CBS with the Bruins as part of the package.
Outright stopping the move is considered unlikely, but the UC Board has asserted it holds final authority over the conference home of the Bruins' sports teams, not campus leaders in Westwood.
“For this particular matter, the regents could say ‘We want to act and therefore we do not want the (UC) president or the (campus) chancellors to act in this area,’ and simply assert that,” Charlie Robinson, general counsel to UC system president Michael Drake, said in August.
The news comes after UCLA legend Bill Walton aired his displeasure over the move. His comments echoed Pac-12 commissioner George Kliavkoff, who has maintained that no one in Los Angeles really wants to join the Big Ten and are doing so purely for the money.
"I don’t believe that joining the Big Ten is in the best interest of UCLA, its students, its athletes, its alumni, its fans, the rest of the UC system, the State of California, or the world at large," Walton said on the Conzano and Wilner podcast.
"I have spoken to no one, other than the highest-level directors of athletics at UCLA, who think that this proposed move to the Big 10 is a good idea, every argument made by these senior AD’s and why they like it, is about money. These same proponents of moving to the Big Ten, are the first people I have ever encountered in my life, who have claimed economic hardship and limitations in Los Angeles, and that the solution lies in the Midwest. I have made my feelings known, privately, to the powers that be in the State of California, including the UC’s Board of Regents, my hope and dream is that this proposed move by UCLA, my alma mater, will be rescinded."
Speaking of money, the Mercury News reported UCLA could be ordered to compensate Cal for the difference in TV money that Berkeley will not receive with UCLA in the Big Ten.
For those against the move, the goal would likely be to place such restrictions on UCLA that they U-turn back into the Pac-12 without the regents having to outright prohibit the move, which would then make USC have second thoughts without its crosstown rival.
Let's say that happens, that the lift for UCLA to the Big Ten becomes too heavy to bear. What happens next? Does the Big Ten simply invite Stanford to take UCLA's place -- a move that does nothing to preserve the Pac-12 but manages to hurt both Cal and UCLA equally? Or does the B1G become the B18 and bring all UCLA, USC, Cal and Stanford aboard? And is that the UC regents' secret plan this whole time?
Political machinations have long played a role in conference realignment. Texas governor Ann Richards (a Baylor grad) and lieutenant governor Bob Bullock (Texas Tech) helped push the Bears and the Red Raiders into the Big 12 alongside Texas and Texas A&M, as the story goes. Virginia governor Mark Warner forced Virginia to get Virginia Tech into the ACC as part of the early 2000s expansion that also brought Miami and Boston College. Senators Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) went to battle over whether Louisville or West Virginia should get a spot in the Big 12.
Is that the plan here, too?
