I understand the desire for more $$ – it is critical and a top priority. But this move seems shortsighted. It will bring more money, but there are many intangibles that will have real costs, but may not show up in a spreadsheet. IMO, the main intangibles are travel for students and families of students and the loss of traditional rivalries (which impacts fan interest).
Although the dollar amount to travel will be easily offset, the burden of constant travel will wear on the students and the families of those students. Further, fans will care a lot less about a weekend matchup with, for example, Iowa and Illinois, as compared to Oregon State and Washington State. Sure, the novelty of matchups with Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State will be fun for a while, those matchups will be the exception, not the rule (especially if UCLA and USC are in a west division). If Utah were playing the Big 10 west, I would still support the team, but I would absolutely be less interested and less likely to travel to those away games as compared to the Pac12 slate of teams.
That said, I am not of the opinion that USC and UCLA will lack success in the Big 10 (as many claim). I think they will do fine – especially if they are in the weaker west division. I just don’t think it will be nearly as fun for their fans, and that will impact the bottomline over time.