Mailbag: Washington or USC for the Big Ten title(?), Pac-12 vs. Mountain West in media rights, future of the bowl system and more
The Hotline mailbag publishes weekly. Send questions to wilnerhotline@bayareanewsgroup.com and include “mailbag” in the subject line. Or hit me on the social media platform X: @WilnerHotline Some questions have been edited for clarity and brevity.
And if you missed it, last week’s mailbag examined whether Washington State or Oregon State was better positioned for success in the new Pac-12.
Who wins the Big Ten football championship first: Washington or USC? Both seem to be improving. But next year, aren’t they fighting for fourth place? And once Michigan and Penn State get fixed, aren’t they fighting for sixth place? — @MikeRice32
Honestly, the Hotline would prefer Door No. 3 if available: Neither school will win the Big Ten in the foreseeable future, albeit for different reasons.
We don’t believe Lincoln Riley’s coaching style, with the massive emphasis on offense — and on the aerial game specifically — is built to win the Big Ten.
It worked in the Big 12, and it could have worked in the Pac-12. But from the observable evidence, the Trojans simply don’t play defense with the level of discipline and physicality necessary to win the conference. (And if Riley proves us wrong, good for him.)
Washington’s challenges are on the resource and personnel front more than the philosophical and tactical fronts. With the half-share of Big Ten media revenue, the solid-but-not-superb NIL support, and the lack of elite linemen regionally, the Huskies are playing from behind in the talent-acquisition game relative to the teams they must overtake to win the conference.
Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Indiana, Oregon and USC are all more likely to compile championship rosters than UW in a given season, especially with Kyle Whittingham leading the Wolverines and Matt Campbell coaching the Nittany Lions.
Those two hires made the climb exponentially steeper for everyone else.
Meanwhile, Indiana has emerged as an unexpected obstacle to the summit while creating a sense of urgency for everyone save the Buckeyes and Wolverines.
If the long-lowly Hoosiers can win a national championship, why can’t the proud programs in Seattle, Eugene, L.A. and State College?
The ascent is daunting for USC, as well. But the Trojans have more money and a deeper well of local talent — not to mention their ultra-rich football tradition — than the Huskies.
That said, the 2026 season will be immensely telling for both Riley and Jedd Fisch.
It’s Year 3 in the Big Ten, which means both coaches have had ample opportunity to fortify their rosters.
Both have returning quarterbacks, UW’s Demond Williams and USC’s Jayden Maiava, and sharp defensive coordinators, Ryan Walters and Gary Patterson, respectively.
Also, both coaches have veteran offensive lines. (Cohesion up front has always been essential to success but is significantly more advantageous in the transfer portal era.)
And both have favorable trajectories thanks to year-over-year improvement: USC was 4-5 in conference play in 2024 and 7-2 last season, while Washington was 4-5 two years ago but 5-4 last season.
(One notable difference between Washington and USC as we look to the fall: the schedules. The Huskies and Trojans play each other, and both play Oregon, Penn State, and Indiana. But the Trojans face Ohio State; the Huskies do not.)
Put another way, Fisch and Riley are at serious risk of losing momentum and sliding into ruts of mediocrity if they don’t take the next step competitively. Time and again, we have seen instances in which early-tenure energy and optimism disappear — granted, it’s not early for Riley — and are never recaptured.
And yes, the climb figures to get more difficult by an order-of-magnitude in 2027 and beyond, once Whittingham and Campbell have restructured their rosters and instilled their cultures.
All that said, the question addressed which of the two schools would be the first to win the Big Ten.
Had you asked which would be the first to qualify for the College Football Playoff, our answer would have been relatively easy.
Both possess an excellent chance to make that leap next season.
Have some of the former Pac-12 teams like Washington, USC, Stanford, Cal, etc., come to terms with the fact they’ll forever be middle- to-lower tier in football and basketball in their new conferences? — @CelestialMosh
I don’t get that sense at all, and why should they presume middle-tier status when the worst football program in major college history just completed a perfect season?
Indiana has given hope to the masses. And that’s especially true for schools that won at a high level recently. Cal was a force nationally 20 years ago; Stanford occupied that same position one decade ago. With the right leadership and a steadfast commitment to success, either could reach the CFP.
It won’t be easy, or cheap. And for many of the former Pac-12 members in the two major sports, the Hotline is deeply skeptical. (As we noted above with the Huskies and Trojans.)
But that doesn’t mean the schools themselves view mediocrity as inevitable. They didn’t want the Pac-12 to implode but have accepted the reality and are attempting to make the most of it thanks, in part, to the expanded playoff.
Many Washington State and Oregon State fans are understandably hoping for the worst for the departed schools and want to believe regret will win the day in Seattle and Tucson and Salt Lake City and Los Angeles … especially Los Angeles.
The reality could prove quite different.
How did you come up with the $6 million figure for the Pac-12’s annual media rights revenue (per school)? It’s my understanding that Pac-12 Enterprises is a revenue source, not an expense as you stated. Also, should we assume the Mountain West’s deal was for less than $3.5 million per school because they have to use reserves to hit that distribution amount? — @Pac12Aztec
The $6 million figure for the Pac-12 schools in the Hotline’s analysis of the two media deals was based on information pieced together from multiple sources and a hefty dose of common sense.
The conference was acutely aware of the estimates published in the media ($7 million to $12 million per school annually, depending on the outlet). Had the deal approached the high end of that range, the Pac-12 would have leaked the number as a way of generating positive publicity and energizing fans. The silence makes it clear the deal was on the low end. And our industry sources have repeatedly supported that conclusion in recent months.
As for Pac-12 Enterprises: It’s a revenue source, not necessarily a profit center. It could get there, eventually. But the cost to produce dozens of football and basketball games for USA Network and The CW will be significant (e.g., millions of dollars per year).
The gross revenue from the media deals might pencil out to $9 million or $10 million per school per year — we are guessing — but the net amount is what matters because that’s the pool from which the campus distributions flow.
And to be clear: Our $6 million estimate could be high once all the costs are included.
At the same time, Pac-12 Enterprises produces events for outside entities, so that revenue should be considered when calculating the bottom line. (And we did that before publishing our estimate.)
With regard to the Mountain West, it’s clear to us — again, the Hotline has relied on industry sources — that the media deal went backwards relative to the agreement the conference signed with Fox and CBS back in 2020.
That should not come as any surprise given the attrition.
How long before all the non-College Football Playoff bowls also fold up shop like the LA Bowl? — @dukestainer
The LA Bowl made official this week what has long been known: The 2025 edition was the last.
Others will follow, for sure, but the degree of damage depends largely on the CFP.
A 24-team playoff would devastate the bowl system, which is why game operators across the land are pushing back on doubling the size of the field.
If the playoff merely increases to 16 — that would not happen until the 2027 season, at the earliest — we could see a handful of bowls go dark. But it would not constitute an extinction event.
The bowl games have deep ties to both conferences and schools. They are part of the sport’s fabric. And the games are viewed as a reward for players, along with a source of extra cash (via performance bonuses) for coaches and athletic directors.
More importantly, the bowl games do well on television. Certainly, they draw larger audiences than anything else ESPN would air at 9 p.m. Eastern on a Tuesday in late December.
Only the removal of high-profile schools from the bowl pool (via a 24-team playoff) will change that dynamic.
How much say do the media partners have in the creation of the football schedules? — @draywilson29
We are not aware of media partners dictating details of the conference schedules and requesting a certain matchup for a specific Saturday.
But make no mistake, they have input. It could be unspoken input, but it exists.
Generally, conference officials overseeing the schedule are so aligned with their media partners, based on multi-year relationships, that the preferences are accounted for within the process.
The leagues know what Saturdays are most important for their partners and which Saturdays feature conflicts, either because of other programming commitments (e.g., the World Series) or because of marquee matchups elsewhere. The Big Ten knows, for example, that Alabama-LSU is always in early November.
That said, there is only so much any conference can do because the matchups are set years in advance. Only the sequencing of games for each team is crafted annually.
Every time I see the word “portal”, it fries my butt. Two, three, and sometimes more years for multiple teams! Why doesn’t the NCAA restrict the number of times a player can use the portal to … once? — Phil P
Because that would be illegal, according to the courts. Specifically, it would be a restraint of trade and therefore a violation of antitrust law.
On a practical level, that makes sense: Coaches can switch jobs as often as they like, and regular students can transfer multiple times. You can’t prevent a political science major from transferring from School X to School Y to School Z during a four-year span, so why should a college athlete be limited to one move?
Previously, the NCAA’s residency rule limited multi-time transfers. They were allowed to play immediately after the first transfer but not after the second: They had to sit out one competition season, which was problematic with the five-years-to-play-four eligibility clock.
But in December 2023, a judge in the Northern District of West Virginia issued an order that prevented the NCAA from enforcing the residency rule for the second transfer.
That led to sweeping changes in the eligibility rules in the spring of 2024, paving the way for multi-time transfers to play immediately.
And here we are.
NCAA basketball is increasing to a 32-game regular-season in 2026-27. Could the Pac-12’s 16-game conference slate offer a scheduling edge, particularly for preseason tournaments and home-and-home agreements with mid-majors and regional opponents? — @CurtisBlack
Absolutely, it could. Pac-12 teams will control 50 percent of their 32-game schedule, whereas many of their peers will be locked into 18- or 20-game conference lineups.
The added flexibility could prove beneficial in the resume-building process.
That said, scheduling is both an art and a science. And a good chunk of the science is having the cash to buy home games against lower-level opponents. So we can’t state definitively that Pac-12 schools will maximize the opportunity. Some might execute better than others.
Another factor: When the non-conference games will be played.
As the Hotline noted earlier in the week, the 16-game schedule will offer Pac-12 schools the chance to play non-conference matchups in January and February, after transfer-heavy rosters have had time to coalesce.
That, too, could be an advantage.
Lastly, be aware: Teams aren’t required to play 32 games — that is the maximum allowed under the revised NCAA rules.
To what do you attribute Washington State’s recent success in attracting portal transfers? Where did the money for this come from? — @Twamsgans
Are the Cougars having more success than in the past? The data doesn’t support that conclusion.
Granted, the Hotline hasn’t scouted WSU’s incoming class well enough to know whether it includes another John Mateer or Wayshawn Parker. But based on the 247Sports database, the 2026 transfer class is comparable to the 2025 edition:
— Last year, WSU signed 35 transfers. Of those, 28 carried three-star ratings, per 247.
— This year, WSU has signed 28 transfers, of which 24 have three-star ratings.
That doesn’t seem like much of an upturn to us. (There were no four- or five-star prospects in either class.)
But again, it’s extremely difficult to project the quality of any transfer class. We simply haven’t seen them play enough to form conclusions.
Frankly, WSU’s continued success, despite all the tumult, is a minor miracle.
What are the factors that make a Super Bowl exciting? — @cool_brezze
One of the best aspects of the Super Bowl is the opportunity it provides to do other things.
Full disclosure: I don’t watch the Super Bowl in full every year. It depends on the matchup and the options.
Years ago, we took the kids skiing for the day.
Another time, we went to the California Academy of Sciences.
Once, we went to IKEA.
It’s an ideal window to do things you wouldn’t otherwise attempt because of crowds.
That might sound odd to some readers, but keep in mind that the Hotline typically works every weekend from late August through April. Super Bowl Sunday features a light college basketball schedule, and I attempt to squeeze in some family time.
*** Send suggestions, comments and tips (confidentiality guaranteed) to wilnerhotline@bayareanewsgroup.com or call 408-920-5716
*** Follow me on the social media platform X: @WilnerHotline