It was less than a year ago when the Atlantic Coast, Big Ten and Pac-12 conferences announced a joint alliance. In its headline, the Pac-12 used the word historic.

The move was made in response to Texas and Oklahoma’s move from the Big 12 to the SEC, which takes effect in 2025. The kicker: It was more of a gentlemen’s agreement with no formal, written contract.

Jokes immediately followed, but it was hard to imagine just how historic the punchline would be.

Big Ten presidents and chancellors voted unanimously Thursday to approve the additions of Pac-12 stalwarts UCLA and USC in 2024-25. Just like that, in one whirlwind day, the Pac-12’s top institutional brands were poached by a conference it thought it was working alongside.

Amid the still fresh rubble, here’s a look at the pros and cons of the divisive move:

Typically, the pro/con argument delivers some good news to start. However, it’s difficult to begin anywhere but here. The self-described Conference of Champions isn’t quite the Conference of Champions without UCLA (139) and USC (132), which are ranked second and third, respectively, behind Stanford’s 148 NCAA team national championships.

Just the idea of both schools in the Big Ten sounds odd. UCLA and USC were members of the old Pacific Coast Conference, with membership dating back to the 1920s.

Even in the College Football Playoff era, the Rose Bowl Game featuring the top Big Ten and Pac-12 teams still made sense and felt right. Now, it looks a little more awkward.