[ColoCdn]

UCLA won one football national championship in 1954.
The last time USC won was in 2004.

What makes you think these schools are powerhouses?
None of us who watch the PAC-12 think so.

[God luvs America]

Exactly- Oregon has been the “class” of that conference recently and Utah’s been better than any of those two schools in recent times.

UCLA has sucked and USC is not far behind

[Round Earther]

There are a lot of eyeballs and TV set in the LA area and that value will not longer belong to the PAC 12.

[dowcaet]

They see bigger financial opportunities being in the Big Ten, but this is the beginning of the mega super conferences being formed in Division I sports with the Big Ten and SEC being the top dogs. This is why I prefer following NCAA Division II, III and NAIA college teams. For them it’s still for love of their sport and national championships really mean something to them.

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

All about $$$&

[FatherofFive]

What makes you think these schools are powerhouses?

Yeah, they should talk to Nebraska about joining the B1G. Didn’t quite work out.

[srmanuel]

It’s not about being a powerhouse, it’s about TV markets, the SEC over the years has added South Carolina, Missouri, Texas A&M, and Arkansas now Oklahoma and Texas.

The next SEC television deal is estimated to bring in 75-100 million per year per team, the Big 10 the same thing, other conferences were slow to act and will be irrelevant if they don’t change course quickly

[Nifster]

Indeed

[wardaddy]

USC AND CAL HAVE THE MOST HISTORICALLY

OREGON MOST MORE RECENT

Conference or national

[panzerkamphwageneinz]

USC played for one national championship against Texas and lost.

2004 National championship was OU versus LSU and LSU has the hardware. USC got the ap writers award, not the BCS NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.

Sorry but USC didn’t win anything but the Rose Bowl in 2004

[Rufii]

UCLA won one football national championship in 1954.

It was probably awarded the national championship by the Daily Bruin.