[Jamesy]

I'm not sure what the current threshhold is, but back when Penn State added hockey, it made for 6 men's hockey programs in the Big Ten, which was then the minimum for the conference to sponsor a sport. (It also destroyed rich, traditional rivalries that meant a lot more in the hockey world than the new matchups between teams that historically had been rivals on the field or the court but not on the ice.) 

So, if there are now four women's water polo programs in the Big Ten footprint, they might only need two more to cannibalize the MPSF and leave Stanford out to dry in terms of quality conference matchups.

I think it'd be fine if UCLA/USC left the MPSF. The Big 4 (Stanford, Cal, UCLA, USC) would still play against each other in the non-conference invitational tournaments (like the one this past weekend) and we'd still have Cal as an in-conference matchup.

[Jamesy]

I'm not sure what the current threshhold is, but back when Penn State added hockey, it made for 6 men's hockey programs in the Big Ten, which was then the minimum for the conference to sponsor a sport. (It also destroyed rich, traditional rivalries that meant a lot more in the hockey world than the new matchups between teams that historically had been rivals on the field or the court but not on the ice.) 

So, if there are now four women's water polo programs in the Big Ten footprint, they might only need two more to cannibalize the MPSF and leave Stanford out to dry in terms of quality conference matchups.

I think it'd be fine if UCLA/USC left the MPSF. The Big 4 (Stanford, Cal, UCLA, USC) would still play against each other in the non-conference invitational tournaments (like the one this past weekend) and we'd still have Cal as an in-conference matchup.