Barry Alvarez's Big Ten Expansion Talk Has A Logistical Problem
by Adam Jacobi on Dec 12, 2009 9:00 AM CST
in Football
228 comments
For years, the Big Ten has been struggling with just what the hell to do about the whole "11 team in the conference" thing. It's made the BXI a bit of an anomaly, being that it's the only I-A conference without either a conference championship game (SEC, Big XII, MAC, C-USA, ACC) or a round-robin schedule (Big East, Pac-10, MWC, WAC, Sun Belt). After all, when it comes to automatic bowl bids, you'd want the conference to, y'know, pick the right team, right?
Well... maybe not. As Jim Delaney will be more than happy to remind you, the Big Ten has this funny habit of sending two teams to the BCS nearly every single season--and grabbing more of that filthy BCS lucre. So until a championship game nets as much money as a second BCS bid (a little under $5 million for the conference for the second team) or the conference slips enough to stop consistently sending the second team, the impetus isn't exactly strong to expand.
Barry Alvarez didn't get that memo, though; according to ESPN, he's priming Wisconsin for the prospect of having another baby in the family:
Speaking to Wisconsin's athletic board on Friday, Alvarez, the former longtime Badgers football coach, said the conference already has investigated possibilities for expansion "from all over the country." And though he places no timetable on the search, Alvarez thinks conference commissioner Jim Delany will respond to a group of athletic directors and coaches who want expansion.
"I have a sense he is going to take this year to really be more aggressive about it," Alvarez told the board. "I just think everybody feels [expansion] is the direction to go, coaches and administrators."
All of this makes lots of sense; when teams miss two fellow conference members a year on a weird rotating schedule. A 12-team, two-division setup would simplify matters dramatically and eliminate any prospect of a 2002 scenario (and yes, we know OSU won the title; Iowa would have smoked that Buckeye team).
But if it were that cut-and-dried, it would have happened already. And there's one screaming bulletproof bitchgoblin of a problem in front of the prospect of expansion: logistics.
Here's a map of the Big Ten members:
There's a pretty obvious geographic division inherent in this setup; we've used the modern power of "Computer Internet" to make it more conspicuous:
Yeah. That's five to the west, six to the east. Moreover, there's really no moving that line east without disrupting the Michigan or Indiana rivalries. That's straight out of the question; Jim Delany may be ambitious, but he's far from an idiot.
Thus a problem: the most natural candidates for expansion are teams like Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Rutgers. Cincinnati or Kentucky if we're drunk enough to tell ourselves they'll work on academics. And they're all on the east side of that divide. That line might as well be a Berlin Wall. Go ahead, try to add any of those teams and show us where the new line is.
On the west, though, there aren't nearly as many possible candidates; moreover, they're basically all in the Big 12. So unless we want to bump Marquette or Wisconsin-Green Bay to I-A (err, FBS or whatever)--and what fun that'd be--it's time to start thinking about a little old-fashioned thievin'.
Iowa State is probably right out; they're a decent academic school, but they don't do much in terms of adding media attention. Further, their only real potential rival would be Iowa, and that gets its own special treatment already.
There's probably no way Nebraska leaves, and the two Kansas schools are likely too far away.
But what about Missouri? They've already got some bad blood with Illinois, and I kind of think the Iowa-Missouri thing could get real entertaining, real quick. Something about states that border Iowa that make them hate us. Feels fun. It brings the St. Louis media market into play, and a little less so Kansas City. St. Louis is probably more than enough. They're ranked as the #102 university in the country; not great, and it'd be the worst in the Big 10 Which Is Actually 12. But it's hardly an embarrassment, and merely aligning with the BXI could prop that ranking up to the standards of the rest of the conference.
Of course, that all depends on whether Missouri actually, y'know, wants to leave the Big XII. The Big 10 would have to make the case that it's in the school's best interest to join our conference instead and make it convincing enough that Delany doesn't have to go through the embarrassment of Missouri triumphantly announcing that they're staying in "the best conference in the land" or whatever they'd declare the Big XII to be in that scenario. Frankly, none of us have the stomach for that.
Philosophically, the case has already been made for expansion, and emphatically so. I don't think anyone's going to argue against a 12th team because 11 would be better than 12 for a conference. That's all settled. I just can't figure out who, aside from Missouri, would make any sense from a purely practical standpoint.
Or we could just say "screw it" and add Cornell.
[UPDATE: I'm fanposting it above this, but just to have it in the article: there's some good, interesting reaction from the Missouri POV over at Rock M Nation. Varied responses, as you might expect. Go check it out.--OPS]
0 recs |
228 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Why expand?
Obviously, the only idea/rationale behind expanding the Big 10 to 12 teams is to add a conference championship game. As has been discussed on this site before, a conference championship is nothing more than a cash grab, and is at best a dubious way to pick a conference champion.
The way I see it, the best route for the Big 10 would be to drop a team, drop a non-conference game, and have everyone play a round robin. That way everyone plays everyone else, and there isn’t any doubt as to who the best team is.
I agree it would end up being about money
but adding the bye week and then a championship game would keep the conference relevant through longer in the season. Also you would have to drop two conference games for a round robin. BigTeleven style.
"I'm colonel cool! And I'm the captain on this rocket to the stars!"
by psuphiman80 on Dec 12, 2009 10:08 AM CST up reply actions
If the primary incentive is to keep playing into December
for exposure and sharpness purposes, why not just schedule regular games later in the season? The Pac 10 and Big East were playing regular season games last week. Obviously the Pac 10 has a weather advantage, but I’m not convinced the weather in Big East territory would be much better than the weather in Big XI territory.
Last week in Pittsburgh (and all of PA, for that matter), it was cold (high 30s), windy (15-20), and snowing
That’s worse than the 2008 Iowa-PSU game.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 12, 2009 1:58 PM CST up reply actions
And that's warm weather in Green Bay
So your point is… ?
"Wow. You know you have problems when even the cheerleaders know you suck." ~ Pain in the Sash
by Leftcoast Hawk on Dec 15, 2009 4:48 PM CST up reply actions
Not quite
The Pac-10 plays a round robin schedule, with each team playing the other 9, and only 3 non-conference games each season. The schedule alternates yearly for each team to have 4 or 5 conference home games.
"Oh no, don't do that, don't do that. If you shoot him, you'll just make him mad." - The Waco Kid
I think
that the powers that be at Penn St, Michigan, and Ohio State would pitch a serious bitch about being aligned together in the same division. I agree with Ferentz on this one, just drop two non-conference games and play a 10 game Big Ten schedule. Wait, that would jeopardize our chance at paying UNI to totally dominate them….hmmm, this is quite a quandry.
"I'm not doing any good back here."
Expansion is interesting but.....
It seems the biggest hurdle for the BXI from being competitive was stopping our games 2 weeks before the rest of the country was done playing. With the recent lengthening of the schedule (i for one support playing mini-haha the first week o’ December in the FREEZING cold) the largest obstacle to even-ing the playing field has been over come. Other than this the addition of another team would hurt us more than help. How many times has the best team from a 12 team conference blown it in the championship game? And this brings in sending only one school to the BCS. We’ve got it pretty good right now and even without a true round robin mostly the conference works itself out. Beside the fact that there is really no good fit except for ND but let’s face it they can just go fuck themselves and their partial membership in the big east.
I am being quite prolific for a Saturday morning so I had better go Irish up my coffee now.
Can't we just kick out jNWU
And go back to 10. Then we get our round robin back and they can’t intentionally hurt our QB anymore…
Fuck tOSU
I’m in favor of North/South with one reserved inter-division rival. You get Minnesota/Wisconsin/MichiganState/Michigan/PennState and potentially Northwestern or the expansion team in the North, and depending on the team that is added, that would affect the protected inter-division rival layout.
Michigan would get Ohio State, Minnesota would get Iowa, Michigan State would get Purdue, Northwestern would get Illinois, Wisconsin would get Indiana, and Penn State would get the new southern division school. Wisconsin or Penn State could change depending on where the new school is.
If the school is aligned in the North, such as Rutgers or Syracuse, it changes only slightly. Move Northwestern to the south, Michigan/OSU, Minn/Iowa, MSU/Purdue all stay the same. Wisconsin would play Northwestern, Illinois would play Penn State, and Indiana would play the expansion team.
I really prefer the lower model as I think those games make a lot of sense outside of Indiana vs an expansion team, but we’ve got to lure the team in with an auto-win every year, right?
by formerlyanonymous on Dec 12, 2009 9:48 AM CST reply actions
Just to clarify
You’d have your 5 division games, 1 reserved inter division game, and a rotating 2 of the 4 other teams every year. So Iowa, in the lower scenario, would play Illinois, Purdue, Indiana, Ohio State, Northwestern, and Minnesota every season. Every other season they’d play Wisconsin/Michigan State or Michigan/PennState
by formerlyanonymous on Dec 12, 2009 9:50 AM CST up reply actions
Except I'm also an idiot and only counted current teams
there would also be an expansion team that floats on the schedule. I guess they are kind of the point of this discussion
by formerlyanonymous on Dec 12, 2009 9:53 AM CST up reply actions
If we add Missouri...
I see only one way to divide up the conference…
"I'm not doing any good back here."
by Hawkaloogie on Dec 12, 2009 9:48 AM CST reply actions 7 recs
That is exactly what i'm talkin' 'bout....
by HawkeyePapyrus on Dec 12, 2009 9:50 AM CST up reply actions
Can't separate Ohio State
and Michigan…they will not go for it. Ever.
"I think it's safe to say our concerns are many." -- Kirk Ferentz
They could be separated but still play every year as cross division rivals
by HawkeyeRecon on Dec 12, 2009 9:56 AM CST up reply actions
that undermines the whole point
"I think it's safe to say our concerns are many." -- Kirk Ferentz
by StoopsMyAss on Dec 12, 2009 10:09 AM CST up reply actions
Does it? Only in that it creates the possibility of them replaying then in the conference championship.
I don’t see how it undermines anything though.
by HawkeyeRecon on Dec 12, 2009 10:15 AM CST up reply actions
It may not undermine the entire conference,
but I don’t think many people want 2 UM-OSU games in the same year. They could maintain their late season rivalry, and the idea that it could be for the division title every year would only accentuate the importance of victory.
by The Mexican't on Dec 12, 2009 11:24 AM CST up reply actions
Michigan fans
Michigan fans don’t really mind. They just would rather play OSU to close the regular season, which, if they are in separate divisions, could lead to a rematch the following week. They aren’t a fan of a rematch on back to back weekends, and I’m not sure they want to move the game up either. Might be a bit of a stumbling block, unless you don’t give two flips about Michigan, which then, yeah, have at it.
by formerlyanonymous on Dec 12, 2009 12:04 PM CST up reply actions
If they play in the same division, they can have their end of the year game
And avoid an immediate rematch. Which, really, was the point I meant to make. If they were in the same division, they’d have to play early in the conference season schedule to allow the potential conference championship rematch to have some time to re-build interest.
If it has to be geographical, then the north-south allows for more teams than the east-west. Otherwise, as others have said, they can simply find a way to separate the teams fairly. I like the idea of preserving the most common rivalries within the division and pairing a cross division rival, as well, but I have no idea who the 12th team could/should be.
I’d love for it to be Pitt, but, as some have pointed out in the past, the BigTen already has a presence in Pennsylvania, so Pitt’s largest contribution would be on the hardcourt, which isn’t really the reason the BigTen wants to expand. I also like the idea of Mizzou, as they could allow the BigTen to enter another recruiting area, but, really, how much trouble is the BigTen having recruiting St Louis, anyway?
Expansion sounds great, but I’ve yet to see a team that was an obvious choice.
by The Mexican't on Dec 12, 2009 1:02 PM CST up reply actions
Rutgers and Syracuse would both be great if they didn't suck.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 12, 2009 2:00 PM CST up reply actions
Wait a cotton pickin' minute there
Suck is not necessarily a bad thing for either one of us. ;)
"Wow. You know you have problems when even the cheerleaders know you suck." ~ Pain in the Sash
by Leftcoast Hawk on Dec 15, 2009 4:49 PM CST up reply actions
They do it in the SEC and works out just fine
Alabama and Tenn are in separate divisions and still play their rivalry game every year. There’s no reason OSU and Michigan couldn’t do the same.
And anyway, you are taking what was essentially a penis joke way too seriously
Not really
it just wasn’t that hilariously funny or original so I moved past it to something that I decided would be more interesting. Is that okay? Even if it isn’t we’ve moved on from your joke.
"I think it's safe to say our concerns are many." -- Kirk Ferentz
by StoopsMyAss on Dec 12, 2009 12:04 PM CST up reply actions
Wow.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Not original?
So you see penises drawn on maps of the Big Ten often?
"I'm not doing any good back here."
Now that I think of it, I've never seen a penis joke
ever.
"I think it's safe to say our concerns are many." -- Kirk Ferentz
Yeah, they're usually pretty serious. And they can't talk, so it'd mostly be you know, pratfalls & stuff.
Drew Carey jokes though, and he sorta looks like a penis.
by Bucketochicken on Dec 12, 2009 4:14 PM CST up reply actions
You should try looking in the mirror sometime when you're naked
You’ll see a penis joke then! AMIRIGHT???
I keed, I keed.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
Have you ever been in a Turkish prison?
"Wow. You know you have problems when even the cheerleaders know you suck." ~ Pain in the Sash
by Leftcoast Hawk on Dec 15, 2009 4:50 PM CST up reply actions
I thought it was original
And I also thought it was fucking hilarious. Thumbs up to you loogie for the good laugh.
"My momma always said, 'It's better to eat shit than to not eat at all.'" --Rube Baker
by McNutt Butter on Dec 12, 2009 4:19 PM CST up reply actions
It was very original.
Kudos to you!
"I think it's safe to say our concerns are many." -- Kirk Ferentz
Wasn't that the idea the ACC had with Miami-FSU
Put them in separate divisons and assume they’d meet for the title more often than not? How’s that working out?
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
FOR GODS SAKE
Watch where you aim your conference division please.
A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones that need the advice.
Bill Cosby
Dividing the 2 divisions geographically is unnecessary
A geographic division only adds a difficult constraint. The ACC is the Atlantic and Coastal divisions, and they are all interspersed amongst each other. All we need is another good team and then split the 12 into 2 groups that would be roughly equal, trying to preserve as many traditions as possible. Plus you can make it so each team plays a non division rival every year and then rotates playing the other teams in the other division, the way Florida plays LSU every year even though they are in different divisions.
For instance, if Penn St was in the other division
I think they should be the cross division team Iowa plays every year.
by HawkeyeRecon on Dec 12, 2009 9:54 AM CST up reply actions
WHY WON'T YOU LEAVE US ALONE?
Twitter: @scrappled
"When it’s third-and-10, you can take the milk drinkers and I’ll take the whiskey drinkers every time" - Max McGee
by Run Up The Score on Dec 12, 2009 10:46 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
The divsions could be the Heartland and Midwest divisions
Or Great Lakes and Heartland divisions
Or the Red and Blue divisions
by HawkeyeRecon on Dec 12, 2009 9:58 AM CST up reply actions
or cool and uncool
or agricluture/engineering and humanities/social sciences!
"I think it's safe to say our concerns are many." -- Kirk Ferentz
by StoopsMyAss on Dec 12, 2009 10:10 AM CST up reply actions
Combines and Steel Mills and Coal Miners division:
Iowa
Penn State
Wisconsin
Purdue
Michigan State
Indiana, I guess
Hot Chicks with Douchebag fans division:
Michigan
Ohio State
Northwestern
Minnesota, I guess
Notre Dame
Illinois
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 12, 2009 2:04 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
As a Michigan Man
I resent and strongly disagree with you putting us in the Hot Chicks With Douchebag Fans division. Our women are quite homely. Make it the Combines, Steel Mills, Coal Miners, and Urban Blight division and let us in.
"You're excited? Feel these nipples!"
-Bob Costas
by karatefistsandbeans on Dec 12, 2009 2:14 PM CST up reply actions
We don't want you in our division
And you hang out with Ohio State too much. We don’t want their stink in our divison.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 12, 2009 2:33 PM CST up reply actions
Although
We’ll probably have to add “Urban Blight” if we’re gonna allow MSU to join.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 13, 2009 1:06 PM CST up reply actions
I don't want to be in the Douchebag Fans division,
but we don’t have an agriculture program and there’s nary a steel mill or coal mine to be found.
by Third Generation Hawk on Dec 13, 2009 12:41 PM CST up reply actions
You're in
The media THINKS you’re all about combines and stuff, and that’s all that matters.
THE YOUNG MAN FROM DAKOTA DUNES, SOUTH DAKOTA.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 13, 2009 1:03 PM CST up reply actions
One of the great town names in America, folks
/Musburgered
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
The solution seems so obvious
Make conferences obsolete and everyone becomes an independent. Mano y mano. Each school makes thief own schedule, tv deal, and pre-arrainged bowl deal. Just think, the Hawks could be fee to schedule all of November (and heck, why not December), in some wonderful warm weather paradise instead of held down by the man and forced to play in East Lansing or Evanston.
by Pubes in Pink Urinals on Dec 12, 2009 9:53 AM CST via mobile reply actions
I think expansion is inevitable
and I don’t think it has to strictly be based on geography. I don’t see Missouri or Nebraska coming along. I would add any of the following:
ND – they would be smart to join but they won’t (also, private school)
Pittsburgh – Solid academically (although not much btter than Mizzou), would be a solid addition in football and basketball and it is a publicly controlled Universty.
Syracuse – They lack any special rivalry in football and their football will be much better ONCE they leave the dog conference of college football. Their basketball of course is great and would be a great addition. Drawback…private school.
"I think it's safe to say our concerns are many." -- Kirk Ferentz
I don't know who the Big Ten would prefer...
…but in the end, I think Mizzou would accept if offered. Between academics, TV, and the growing urge to not reside in a conference owned by Texas, A&M, Texas, OU, Texas, and Nebraska, I would say Mizzou would be a lot more willing to jump than they would have been in the past.
Rock M Nation
Thrust nunchuk upward!
Especially after the bowl snubs this year and in 2007...
…I can see Missouri telling the Big 12 to get bent. They’d be in an equal-revenue sharing conference with a better TV deal and wouldn’t have to fight the uphill battle against the teams that get bigger payouts from the conference every year.
On the other hand, could they walk away from the Border War?
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
Border War = Mizzou/Kansas, right?
Iowa plays Iowa State every year in the non-conference slate, as do other bitter rivals separated by conference boundaries (Clemson/South Carolina, Florida/Florida State)… it’s not an insurmountable problem.
Don't MU and ISU play for some telephone trophy, too?
by Pubes in Pink Urinals on Dec 12, 2009 10:18 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
Not really, no.
I mean, we have history, and it would be a shame to lose that I guess … but not really, no.
Really, the rivalry I’d miss the most is the increasingly bitter Mizzou-Nebraska one, as I’d obviously see us making MU-KU an annual non-conference game and really losing ties with everybody else, at least as far as football goes.
Rock M Nation
Thrust nunchuk upward!
Iowa would be a much better rivalry than Iowa St.
I think it’d help with recruiting, too.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
The "Border War"...
is big in both football recently and basketball (a few years ago when both teams were nationally competitive.) The Missouri-Nebraska rivalry has a nice history in football, and if Nebraska ever didn’t suck in basketball, who knows?
Somehow, if the Big 10 offered enough perks (cash, favorable position in a division, extra bowl tie-ins) then maybe Mizzou thinks about it, but I still doubt they actually do it. All the Big Ten fans will be making fun of Missouri because they are poor, or toothless, or can’t read, or live in wooden shacks, or whatever.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 2:52 PM CST up reply actions
Also...
once the Big 12 starts its own TV network (and if they don’t, they are retarded), then that money will get doled out and provide less incentive for the Mizzous and ISUs to bolt for another conference.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 2:57 PM CST up reply actions
once the Big 12 starts its own TV network (and if they don’t, they are retarded),
I dunno. Their appeal seems more regional than the Big 10, so they may have even more difficulty getting the channel on cable systems than BTN has had.
Yeah...
but usually, the cable systems don’t have a problem adding it to their special sports package. That is what the Big Ten was angry about.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 5:36 PM CST up reply actions
I doubt Missouri is thinking to itself:
“We’re the butt of jokes from Iowa fans. We shouldn’t join the conference because that will increase.”
I will assume you were being sarcastic when you said that…
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
I wouldn't put it in those words...
but would you want to join a conference where you will always be made fun of, or looked down on, just because you are the southern-most member?
No, this wouldn’t be a serious point in the negotiation, but it might be something fans and athletes might consider. It seems like every year, the stupid shit that fans pull gets worse and worse (didn’t somebody from BYU try to beat up the Utah coach and/or his family a couple of weeks ago? Or just watch the SEC for examples of that crap)
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 4:00 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah, this seems like the most trivial of aspects of the discussion.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
Trivial, yes.
But I needed an excuse to make jokes about Missouri people and their illiteracy.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 5:37 PM CST up reply actions
Well, that works for me, actually.
;-)
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
I honestly think...
…that the vast majority of people don’t have an inferiority complex but as sports fans, actually have a superiority complex. I doubt they think they get made fun of for anything other than jealousy and/or rivalry and/or normal sports shit-talking.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
I think Border War would be something similar to what MU/UofI is now
Just change the site of the games from St Louis to KC.
Personally…I’m a pretty damn big Mizzou supporter, and I’d love to see MU in the Big Ten. It just all works out: a very heated rivalry (especially between the fans, as there’s the whole Cards/Cubs element added to it) with UofI, interesting games with Iowa and Minnesota, fair TV money/bowl distribution and the belief among a lot of our fans that we’d acquit ourselves well due to our spread. Throw in a money-spinning football championship game every year at Soldier Field/Lucas Oil/hell, maybe Lambeau and voila.
It's a funny name.
by Turd Ferguson on Dec 12, 2009 10:25 AM CST up reply actions
I agree that Missouri is ripe for moving.
Although there is a strong contingent of the fan base that loves tradition, which means playing NE in football every year (as well as KU) and having the home/home with KU in basketball.
That said, Mike Alden (Mizzou AD) is a forward thinking guy, and I think could be talked in to moving. He’s talked about the Big Ten Network as a model the Big XII should emulate, and his hometown is Chicago, so he certainly knows all about the history of the Big Ten. Alden has proven that he will do what he believes is right for Mizzou…fans be damned. If you can convince him, he’ll make the jump.
Black and Gold Blood: Cubbie Blue Heart
Follow me on Twitter: @MattLaCasse
by MissouriHawk on Dec 12, 2009 3:33 PM CST up reply actions
jNWU is also private
Actually, I think its a lot more likely that we could snatch Kansas or Kansas State out of the Big 12. Geography aside, though, there are more (and better) choices to the East. Logical would be Pittsburgh and then we move Illinois to the Western Conference.
"Wow. You know you have problems when even the cheerleaders know you suck." ~ Pain in the Sash
by Leftcoast Hawk on Dec 12, 2009 10:22 AM CST up reply actions
Ooops.
Illinois already would be. My bad.
"Wow. You know you have problems when even the cheerleaders know you suck." ~ Pain in the Sash
by Leftcoast Hawk on Dec 12, 2009 10:22 AM CST up reply actions
Why would it be smart for Notre Dame to join?
They have a massive TV contract all to themselves and an easier path to the BCS as it is. I think they’d be retarded to give that up for the sake of joining a conference.
Notre Dame's non-revenue sports are a major drain on their budget and a bit lost competitively
when a playoff comes to college football ND will be a tough situation and if the Big Ten has already added a Syracuse (who opens door for entre into NY market and that recruting base that is under appreciated) we might not be able to find a place for them then…so where do they go?
The NBC contract is increasingly over-valued by most people as compared to conference revenue sharing benefits…NBC is paying about $15 million a year in the current deal. The value of being in the Big Ten is estimated at equal to that right now. If ND joined it would increase the media rights value. Plus, NBC was just bought by Comcast, who will likely drop the contract in the next five years. It isn’t really paying off for them unless ND is highly ranked EVERY YEAR. A NYT’s article hinted at this just this week. ND is not going to be a year-in and year-out Top 5 team any longer in their current configuration.
Just to put it into perspective, the SEC brings in $206 million per year in media rights just for football, so that is roughly $20 mil per school. The Big Ten numbers are $105 mil annually (or about $8 mil per school, not including the Big Ten network and other sports).
Also, the Chronicle of Higher Education wrote a while ago that the faculty of ND would like to join the Big Ten for academic purposes to further enhance its academic profile and cooperations.
The Faculty Senate had voted 25-4 in support of joining the Committee on Institutional Cooperation, an academic consortium composed of the 11 Big Ten schools and the University of Chicago. In the view of the Faculty Senate, the affiliation with major research facilities would have enhanced academic status.
"I think it's safe to say our concerns are many." -- Kirk Ferentz
by StoopsMyAss on Dec 12, 2009 12:35 PM CST up reply actions
As a Penn State fan, I am naturally biased towards expanding eastward
I say we let Marrone fix up the ‘Cuse, and then invite them. I just don’t know if they’d leave Big East basketball behind. Same for Pitt, who (contrary to whatever some of their fans may believe) is becoming a basketball school.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 12, 2009 2:07 PM CST up reply actions
I'm not convinced Syracuse would leave the Big East
Granted, football is the big engine that drives the ship, but I’m not sure ‘Cuse would want to give up the traditional rivalries it has with the other Big East schools in basketball. Plus, Syracuse is a founding member of the league. This doesn’t necessarily mean much, but the Big East is only 30 years old, I think the internal pressure at Syracuse to stick with something they created would be too strong for them to overcome in the short term. In 10-20 years? Sure, no problem but by then I assume the Big Ten would already have found a partner for expansion.
The benefits, for me at least, of Syracuse joining is that I wouldn’t have to look at Jim Fucking Boeheim’s scowling face twice a year when they play Georgetown. Oh how I hate that man.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
Better check
the Big East’s out of conference record and their bowl record before you call them a “dog” of a conference. Syracuse is down big time and they beat Northwestern, lost in overtime to Minnesota and played PSU very tough. Penn State and Syracuse, for your edification, have one of the most storied rivalries in football, albeit of an historical nature of late.
Syracuse and PSU had a storied rivalry in the 50s
They beat Paterno like three times and lost 20+ straight games. It hasn’t been “storied” in a long, long time.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 12, 2009 8:25 PM CST up reply actions
Ok, not 20 straight, but still
1966 Home 10 12 Loss
1967 Away 29 20 Win
1968 Home 30 12 Win
1969 Away 15 14 Win
1970 Home 7 24 Loss
1971 Away 31 0 Win
1972 Home 17 0 Win
1973 Away 49 6 Win
1974 Home 30 14 Win
1975 Away 19 7 Win
1976 Home 27 3 Win
1977 Away 31 24 Win
1978 Home 45 15 Win
1979 E. Rutherford 35 7 Win
1980 Home 24 7 Win
1981 Away 41 16 Win
1982 Home 28 7 Win
1983 Away 17 6 Win
1984 Home 21 3 Win
1985 Away 24 20 Win
1986 Home 42 3 Win
1987 Away 21 48 Loss
1988 Home 10 24 Loss
1989 Away 34 12 Win
1990 Home 27 21 Win
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 12, 2009 8:27 PM CST up reply actions
This is starting to look like a global warming map.
"Wow. You know you have problems when even the cheerleaders know you suck." ~ Pain in the Sash
by Leftcoast Hawk on Dec 15, 2009 4:52 PM CST up reply actions
Based on AAU
Teams in states that neighbor a BigTen state and are currently members of the AAU:
Expansion to the North/East
Expansion to the South/West
Again, one cross divisional rivalry would be protected to play every year in either scenario.
by formerlyanonymous on Dec 12, 2009 10:30 AM CST reply actions
If we were to take Maryland
I will leave the Big Ten. No way Kentucky leaves the SEC, bball tradition for them is too strong.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
Would love to see ISU join
As an ISU fan, it’s great. We’d be in the same conference as our rival (making the game mean even more), we’d get the chance to play other teams that fans want to see us play more: MN, Wisconsin, Illinois, etc, and we’d be on TV more. In the Big 12, there isn’t any kind of a conference rival at all for ISU. To be honest, I’ve found us playing the Big 12 kind of boring. I’m sure the losing is part of it, but the other part of it is how there’s not a lot of interesting storylines in the game. The Big 12 would love it if ISU left, because they could add a TCU, or something to the conference.
But as you are saying, it wouldn’t give the PR the Big 10 would want. If the Big 10 was going to do this, they’d want to add a team that gets people excited about it…
RE: a conference title game would jeopardize getting two teams into BCS games...
Really? The SEC has appeared in only two fewer BCS games than the BXI. The Big XI’s biggest appeal to BCS bowls — massive fanbases that travel well — isn’t going to be lost with the addition of a championship game. How often do you see a season end without at least two BXI teams in the top 14 of the BCS rankings? So long as there are BXI teams there, they’ll be desirable to BCS bowls, BXI title game loss or not.
That's still two fewer...
…and nobody would seriously argue that the highest echelon in the BXI has outperformed the highest echelon of the SEC.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
But why do they need to outperform them? They just need to finish in the top 14, under the current rules.
Years in which the SEC failed to send two teams to the BCS:
2000 — They just had a 2009 BXII-esque year, with one really good team (10-2 Florida) and no one else. The highest ranked team after Florida was Tennessee at #21 (9-3). Just a strange year.
2002 — Another year with 1-2 really good teams, followed by a mishmash of teams. Georgia went 11-1. Alabama went 10-3, but was on probation and couldn’t play in a bowl game (although it would have been very interesting to see who would have gotten the four at-larges that year since you had Iowa at 11-1, USC at 10-2 [Wash St got the auto-bid], Texas/Kansas State at 10-2, and Notre Dame a 10-2 AND Bama at 10-3… someone was gonna be butt-hurt that year).
2003 — Tennessee was viable (10-2, finished #7) and would have almost certainly gotten a bid in the modern 4-bid era.
2004 — Georgia (9-2, #7) and LSU (9-2, #12) were viable, but got muscled out by Texas (10-1, #6) and Utah (auto-bid for non-BCS). In the modern 4-bid era, you have Cal (10-1, #4), Louisville (10-1, #8), Boise St (11-0, #10), Iowa (9-2, #11), and the aforementioned SEC schools.
2005 — Again, Auburn and LSU were viable candidates, but got muscled out by OSU and ND. One of them likely makes it in the modern 4-bid era.
I just think the very thing that has allowed the BXI to get so many BCS bids in the first place is still going to be there: big fanbases that travel well. If OSU, PSU, Michigan, Iowa, or Wisco are sitting there at 10-2 and aren’t conference champions, they’re still going to be very, very desirable. IMO, this was a much bigger concern in the era before 4 BCS bids, when it was much easier to get muscled out of a spot.
Conference Title Games Are A Sham
Personally, I’d rather have the December layoff than have the conference divide itself. The Big 12 doesn’t even feel like a conference, just a loose conglomeration of teams divided into “divisions.” Conference title games are a joke and just seek to perpetuate the whole “losing late is worse than losing early” bull in college football. It’s ridiculous that last year there were three 10-1 teams in Big 12 and a mediocre Missouri team (or Nebraska this year) had a chance to go to a BCS game. Do we really want to do what the Big 12 does? That’s the exact opposite of what I want from college football.
And it’s true that the championship games are just cash grabs. To combat it, the NCAA should say that a conference can have a choice between a championship game or an extra game for the entire conference. That way the Big Ten can drop a NCA game and play a round robin (and the PAC10 can add a NCG). See how the SEC and Big12 would love their title games then.
by DisplacedHawkeye82 on Dec 12, 2009 11:06 AM CST reply actions
Living in Omaha and going to Nebraska in the early part of this decade....
…, the transition from Big 8 to Big XII was seamless. NU kept the rival with Oklahoma (even though they don’t play each other two years out of every decade or whatever it is) and created a new one with Texas, even before the recent game.
Nebraska’s offense was horrible, but there team as a whole was hardly “mediocre”. Their loss to ISU was inexcusable and they got waxed by Texas Tech, but they didn’t really get lucky in any of their wins.
And the point to this “exercise” is to figure out how we can keep good teams in each conference year after year (which is, of course, impossible to do indefinitely because if we had done it 5 years ago, no one would have predicted Michigan’s collapse)
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Maybe mediocre was too strong a word....
Nebraska’s not that bad a team. And our offense wasn’t exactly stellar either.
But I still think it’s silly that a three loss team can possibly beat out a 1 loss team (or two other one loss teams) for a conference championship due to the way the divisions fall out. I prefer our system as is. And I have have a hard time thinking of the Big 12 as one conference. It’s pretty much two conferences with a little cross-over. As annoying as it is to have to drop two teams every year, I feel connected with every team in the Big Ten and would hate to jeopardize that for what I consider a cash grab.
by DisplacedHawkeye82 on Dec 12, 2009 6:06 PM CST up reply actions
meh, bad argument this year, my friend
Nebraska beat Oklahoma and Baylor, Tech had a worse record and Nebraska came a lot closer to Texas and Oklahoma (beating them) than Oklahoma State did. (Okie State got smoked by Texas.)
After Dez Bryant left, and they’re the only team that would have even had an argument to being better than Nebraska in the Big XII South, the conference was Texas… and everybody else. It wasn’t a down year for the Big XII, but it certainly was for the “top”.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
ACTUALLY, why does the division have to have any logical basis at all?
It’s not like we’re spread out over 4,000 miles or anything. Just call one the North and the other the South and put whomever works best in either one—NFL fans might recall that Atlanta was in the same division as San Fran for years and no one cared.
But you CANNOT have the possibility of TWO games between OSU and Michigan each year. They will be in the same division, or this thing will not go forward. That rivalry is the sacred cow in the B10 barn.
My preference is to have PSU in the same FB division as Iowa and Wisky, with ND or PITT or whomever along for the ride. Then put OSU, Michigan, Purdue, MSU, Indiana, and NW in the other division.
No one would care if PSU and Minny were in the “South” division together. But if you’re a stickler, trade Minny for NW or Indiana.
In the end, it’s all about $$$ and prestige, anyway.
If it's not too much trouble, search your soul--and then ask yourself if maybe I might have a point.
Eastern Team
If they are going to expand I think the Big Ten (11) needs an eastern team. The reason being this would further enhance the Big Ten’s television ratings and making the teams more desirable for the bowls. I also think it would generate more press for the Big Ten.
Another fun scenario would be to put Bosie State in here and watch them die in December as the injuries pile up and shut them up!
On a fun note I am watching the division 2 NCAA championship and my daughter sees Pam Ward and says " Thats a women?" Scared her with how hard I was laughing.
Missouri makes the most sense for expansion
In my humble opinion. It balances the West-East divisions. There is potential for some great rivalries. Mizzou is a highly regarded state university in the Big 10 academic mold. Adding Mizzou would allow the Big 12 to take a member out of the Mountain West (Colorado State, Utah, New Mexico) and then the MWC could add Boise St. Then you could make the MWC a BCS conference and you could then prolong the awful BCS without the controversies. The downside is the Big 12 would fight like heck to keep Mizzou and they are a member of the original Big 8 with lots of tradition. Therefore, I don’t think Mizzou is very likely to join.
The Big XI is going East. Pitt, Syracuse or Rutgers. None of those schools make much sense from a geographical or academic standpoint. But its all about money and TV screens and the Big XI wants East Coast viewers.
So Mr. Delany, TEAR DOWN THIS WALL. Indiana and Purdue will have to get split up. Indiana goes West Purdue East.
If the MWC adds Boise and becomes an AQ conference,
who does the BCS drop? If the BCS has 7 AQ, and just 4 BCS bowls, the at-large opportunities drop. I can’t imagine many conferences being willing to add a 7th AQ conference and run the risk of losing their 2nd BCS team.
For what it’s worth, I think the MWC absolutely needs to add Boise and make a run at AQ status. Now that Kelly is at ND, I think the BigEast is going to revert back to the garbage football conference that it’s been in the recent past. Just imagine how angry schools like West Virginia and Syracuse would be if they’re considered mid-majors.
by The Mexican't on Dec 12, 2009 1:07 PM CST up reply actions
The Cotton Bowl
It becomes a BCS bowl in the new Cowboy’s stadium with a Big 12 tie-in. The Fiesta is the MWC tie-in with an at large.
Exactly
Hard to remember now, but the Cotton Bowl used to be a BIG DEAL. Then SMU had to go and pay their players, get the death peanlty and kill the SWC, which effectively ended the Cotton Bowl’s run. That, and the decrepit stadium that it used to be played in. With the move to Jerry World, the Cotton Bowl could be primed to reclaim its spot in the top-tier of bowl games. Plus, adding the Cotton Bowl would make it easier for the BCS to move to a plus-one playoff scenario without throwing a wrench in the whole works (in my opinion, a plus-one is as close to a playoff as the BCS will ever allow there to be – and I am still opposed to a playoff).
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
There are effectively 5 BCS games with the stand-alone national title game.
If you add Boise to the MWC and give that league its own auto-bid, they would effectively take the non-AQ guaranteed spot that exists now. All but one of those spots (Hawaii in 07) has gone to teams from the MWC/Boise. You could keep the rule on the books but the likelihood of it being utilized by another league is small. No one in the MAC, CUSA, or Sun Belt has ever been able to make it through a regular season undefeated (and I doubt one could finish high enough to get the automatic spot if they lost during the regular season). Could Fresno State or Hawaii or someone emerge as the new power in the WAC? I suppose, but they’ve rarely shown that ability.
What about this?
OSU and PSU would get thrown together in what I’ll call the Bigger 12 Southeast, and you’d have Michigan as a counterbalance in the Bigger 12 Northwest. You’d be breaking up a couple of rivalries (OSU-UM and jNU-Illinois), but you could make those protected fairly easily.
The real beauty of this plan, too: you’d have six to the northwest and five to the southeast, aligned in such a way that whichever realistic candidate (let’s be honest, Nebby and ISU probably aren’t looking to jump conferences) joined would be in the Bigger 12 Southeast (i.e. Mizzou, Rutgers, Pitt, ND).
So, it’d end up looking something like this:
Bigger 12 Northwest
Iowa
Minny
UM (protected rivalry with OSU)
MSU (protected rivalry with PSU
jNU (protected rivalry with Illinois)
UW
Bigger 12 Southeast
(insert team here)
Illinois (protected rivalry with jNU)
IU
PU
OSU (protected rivalry with UM)
PSU (protected rivalry with MSU)
You'd have to ask Michigan and OSU if they want to be in separate divisions
But to me, that seems like an automatic dealbreaker straight away.
Perhaps those more skilled in scheduling, probability, etc. can explain if that system of a few protected inter-division rivalries is mathematically feasible. I truly do not know.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
I think you'd almost have to split UM and OSU up
because otherwise you’d have both traditional powers in the same division, and think of the fit they’d pitch if their annual rivalry game were for just the right to play somebody else in the CG rather than the championship itself.
As far as the protected rivalries bit, assuming an eight-game conference slate you’d have five interdivision games and three out-of-division games. Just make one of those cross-division games permanent for each team and rotate the other two around, and voila.
Counter argument is OU and UT in the Big XII South.
I don’t think that’s an issue at all.
Black and Gold Blood: Cubbie Blue Heart
Follow me on Twitter: @MattLaCasse
by MissouriHawk on Dec 12, 2009 3:44 PM CST up reply actions
But Nebraska's still in the BXII North.
If you had NU, OU and UT in the same division, you’d have major issues with the balance of power in that conference.
Protected inter-division rivalries is exactly how the SEC does it.
Which is why Bama gets to play Tennessee every year and Florida gets to play LSU every year and so forth.
The downside is that it does limit the number of times you play the other teams from that other division. For instance, Florida plays its 5 SEC East divisional rivals, LSU, and then two other SEC West teams. Which leaves 3 other SEC West teams that it isn’t playing and they don’t see them that often.
The other negative is that it works great for the UM/OSU, MSU/PSU, and jNWU/ILL rivalries, but the other rivalries would have to be completely fabricated. Although if Mizzou was the team added, Iowa/Mizzou would make sense and then you just give Minny/UW the two Indiana schools.
The problem figuring all this out
Is that, assuming that the Big Ten keeps the idea of 2 permanent rivals, at least one current rivalry would have to be broken up to provide a “rival” to the new school. Most obvious answer is the PSU-MSU rivalry, since (1) it was created by the league when PSU joined and (2) the trophy is god-awful ugly (only item in the world that makes the Cy-Hawk Trophy look dignified). Plus, you would probably have to find a way to divide the teams so that one of each team’s protected rival was in the other division (similiar to how the SEC does it) or just drop the idea of protected rivalries altogether.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
I think Iowa-PSU makes more sense for being "protected" cross division rivals
by HawkeyeRecon on Dec 12, 2009 6:05 PM CST up reply actions
Oh, come on
You only say that because you enjoy beating a team perceived by the media to be better.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 12, 2009 8:29 PM CST up reply actions
Sure, winning helps
But the games always feel like a big deal and tend to be exciting, which is also nice.
We’ve played a stupid amount of close, exciting games with MSU over the last twenty years, but I still get far more excited about playing PSU, ranking be damned.
I would like to stipulate...
that the Iowa-Ohio St. game NOT be protected. If we ever beat them, I want it to be for the Big Ten title.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 9:43 PM CST up reply actions
If the BigTen does expand to twelve
Where is the conference championship game played? Soldier Field? Does it rotate between professional stadiums within the footprint, similar to the ACC CG?
Lucas Oil.
That place is un-fucking-real. Not to mention a pretty good central meeting point.
/O'keefe'd
by Smokin Herb Grigsby on Dec 12, 2009 1:13 PM CST up reply actions
I'd rotate it through the pro stadiums
There’s some great facilities within the footprint of the Big 10 already (excluding the Metrodump):
-Soldier Field
-Lucas Oil Stadium
-Lambeau Field (how cool would this be?)
-Ford Field
-Heinz Field (though not if you add Pitt)
-Paul Brown Stadium
-Cleveland Browns Stadium
-RCA Dome/Arrowhead (if you add Mizzou)
-Lincoln Financial Field
I think holding it indoors would be an absolute necessity, though.
If the conference expanded and held a championship game, the game would be early in December, and in case anyone needed reminding, it’s fucking cold in the mid-west. To get teams and their fans from possibly far away to travel and likely spend more money than regular season games, I would think it would be nice a nice gesture to keep them warm.
/O'keefe'd
by Smokin Herb Grigsby on Dec 12, 2009 1:22 PM CST up reply actions
Possibly
but, then again, there’s a little part of me that thinks it’s not really football unless it’s played in subzero temperatures and blizzard conditions, and to hell with inclement weather because there’s always another layer you can throw on.
Plus, think of how cool the trophy ceremony would look under the lights and the snow.
That would be pretty awesome, actually.
Ala…
/O'keefe'd
by Smokin Herb Grigsby on Dec 12, 2009 1:36 PM CST up reply actions
I don't think weather would be much of a stopping point for most BXI fanbases.
Assuming the outdoor stadium was in an easily accessible locale — i.e., Chicago. I think if you start putting it in Cincy or Cleveland or Green Bay, that would complicate things. But Chicago is relatively centrally located for a lot of schools in the BXI (not to mention being home to a ton of alums anyway).
The fanbases it would have the most impact on are the ones that would be the big concerns to travel to it even if it was in a dome — Minny, Indiana, jNWU… they’re just not terribly big or passionate in the first place.
They're Football Players
not panty waist nancy boys. They can play in the cold. As for the fans, if you haven’t noticed, the NFL doesn’t have a problem selling tickets in the cold. So that’s a non-issue.
The conference is based in Chicago. Chicago is about as central a location as you can get, and they can probably get some kind of tax incentive from the city if they guarantee the game will be there very year. For most schools it’s a 3 or 4 hour drive tops. Also, Chicagoland is home to a LOT of Big 10 alumni. Plus, I think it’s adds something to have the game in the same place every year.
In 100 years, we'll all be dead.
by Flakbait on Dec 12, 2009 8:56 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I agree about the weather.
Let’s say that one year in the future, the SECCG is once again boring, and the Big 12 game is once again between OK/TX and some overmatched Northern team. If the Big Ten played a close defensive game in the snow, the media would be all over it.
The only issue I have is my dislike of Soldier Field’s design. Lambeau Field is much cooler.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 12, 2009 10:52 PM CST up reply actions
THE BIG TWELVE PAC
Why don’t we just combine the BIG TEN with the PAC TEN and the BIG TWELVE and call it THE BIG TWELVE PAC? Play a whole bunch of cross country football games right up until Spring? The SEC can play with themselves.
Interestingly...
For decades, the BXI and Pac-10 did something not too dissimilar. If you look back at the historical scores, there were a metric fuckton of games between teams in the two conferences. For example, Iowa’s 38-12 Rose Bowl win over Oregon State in 1956 was actually a rematch of an earlier game, one Iowa won 14-13.
Before the BXI’s dalliance with a true round robin in the early ‘80s (at which point Iowa was playing ISU and only one other non-con, often PSU), the Hawkeyes were playing at least one and often two Pac-10 teams as part of their non-conference schedule for years and years. In 1969 and 1970, in fact, Iowa’s three non-conference games were all Pac-10 opponents.
All in all, from the inception of the Big Ten in 1953 (prior to that, it was the “Western Conference”) to 1982, Iowa played at least one scheduled Pac-10 opponent in all but three seasons: 1954, 1958 (where we’d end up facing California in a Rose Bowl anyway), and 1979, where we tripled up on the Big 8 with Nebraska, OU, and ISU.
This is all inconsequential trivia, I assure you, but hearing the talk of Big Ten and Pac-10 rivalry got my inner history nerd working.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
Who did these maps?
We’re not in freaking Scranton.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
That was my problem.
I was trying to fit in Rutgers on the corner and had Penn State way out of place.
by formerlyanonymous on Dec 12, 2009 3:40 PM CST up reply actions
Why stop at 12?
How about 16 teams split into 8-team upper and lower divisions. Each division plays round-robin and at the end of the year two or three teams are promoted/demoted. TV and bowl money would be weighted towards the upper division teams. It gives the bottom feeders something to play for, at least.
Ah, kind of like football....
….er, soccer.
by Eyeheartfreedumb on Dec 14, 2009 11:14 PM CST up reply actions
Why have divisions?
Personally, if the Big Ten was to add a 12th team, then I think that there should be no divisions and just have it be a straight 12 team table with the top two teams playing in the championship game. There is not a good way to divide up the conference while making each side equal and keeping all the rivalries. Is there any rule that says to have a conference championship you need to have divisions? Without divisions, we would never run into the problems that the Big 12 has nearly every year, where the best 2 (or 3 or 4) teams are all in the same division and can’t play in the championship.
Without divisions, each team would still play 8 teams each year, with 2 games protected, just like it is now (i.e. MSU plays UofM and PSU every year). That leaves 9 teams, and you would play 6 of them each year. So the 3 teams you don’t play would rotate around every other year in a 6 year schedule (as opposed to 4 rotating groups of 2 teams right now). Then at the end of the season, whichever two teams have the best Big Ten records would face off in a championship game (probably in either Chicago or Indy).
This system makes the most sense to me, because it preserves all the great rivalries in the Big Ten, and it creates the fairest, most deserved match-up for the championship. The only risk I see is that there is a greater chance of a rematch in the championship. But if they are really the best two teams in the conference, I don’t think people would mind that.
What happens if 3 teams end up with the same conference record?
Assuming it’s mathematically feasible, that is. Then we’ve got a mini BCS scandal on our hands for the conference championship. Divisions allows the conferences to avoid this controversy by establishing a select few opponents that any team must best.
by The Mexican't on Dec 12, 2009 3:15 PM CST up reply actions
No different than Big 12 South last year
The same thing happened last year with Big 12, except only within one division. Texas, Oklahoma, and Texas Tech all had the same records, and OU got to play in the championship because of some bogus tiebreakers. Obviously, this problem could arise whether there are divisions or not, I would just hope that the Big Ten would come up with some better tiebreakers than the Big 12 had last year.
What was bad about the XII's tiebreaker?
They had more obvious tiebreakers in place, but they were all negated by Texas Tech also being right there at 7-1 and splitting with UT and OU.
So, if H2H, conference records, division records, and overall records are all the same (all of which were tiebreakers before the deciding factor), why not go with the team with the highest BCS ranking? What else would you suggest?
Further, with each team missing three! opponents in the conference, the schedules would likely be even more unbalanced and subject to the whims and vagaries of chance. No thanks. Count me out of that idea.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
Clearly, the tiebreaker in that case should be
rock-paper-scissors.
You know you’d watch Dread Pirate Cap’n Leach, (Not-So) Big Game Bob, and Sweet-Talkin’ Mack in a RPS contest.
I'd like to see...
RoChamBot amongst those three. And I’d hope all lost at the same time.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 5:39 PM CST up reply actions
Actually...
RoChamBeau might be the same as Rock Paper Scissors.
What I want to see is the crotch-kicking game, whatever its name is.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 5:40 PM CST up reply actions
Alright...
Well, maybe that was all that was left for the Big 12 to use (I would have prefered something that only took the Big 12 schedule into account), but the point is that these “mini BCS scandals” will happen regardless of whether there are divisions or not. Obviously, it would be awesome to have a conference tournament like basketball and then a playoff, but that is completely unfeasible. So I think that the best way of determining the two best teams in the Big Ten would be to have a straight table of 12 teams.
Everyone probably knew this already....
…but Iowa is the only school in the conference that is in a state not bordering a Great Lake.
I think Missouri makes the most sense because the Big XII North would have plenty of schools to choose from to replace them… not that the Big XI’ers would have to care about that, but if a school leaving a conference had to pay a get-out sum, taking that into consideration might help. Schools from Iowa (Northern Iowa, of course), Missouri, NoDak, SoDak, Colorado, Wyoming.. they’d all be in play. The biggest problem I see with that, though, is recruiting for Iowa. Getting Northern Iowa into FBS helps them in-state, and getting Missouri into Big XI would help them in Iowa… although I guess the reverse is true. But maybe they get a bump in Illinois, too.
I’d split the conference as above, adding Missouri, and call them the Lake 12 Conference. Corny… but doable.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
I should say... Missouri or Notre Dame ake the most sense.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Missouri is already making inroads into Illinois.
They’ve got the STL market as locked down as one can have it, and are making noise in Chicago as well.
Black and Gold Blood: Cubbie Blue Heart
Follow me on Twitter: @MattLaCasse
by MissouriHawk on Dec 12, 2009 3:50 PM CST up reply actions
yeah, the Big Televen would accelerate that, I believe.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
Notre Dame is honestly the perfect addition.
The impact of adding Notre Dame as a twelfth team cannot be understated. It would do wonders for the conference, be far less complicated than adding another team with little to no history involving the Big 10, and would bring in an absurd amount of revenue. Unfortunately, this will likely never happen, due to how lucrative their NBC contract and independent status is to the university and their funds. The only way I could see this ever changing is if Notre Dame and NBC were some how convinced to both come on board… making NBC the Big 10+2 network, similar to how CBS has a contract with the SEC.
All other scenarios pale in comparison to Notre Dame joining. But there are just so many hurdles to jump in order to add them.
/O'keefe'd
by Smokin Herb Grigsby on Dec 12, 2009 2:57 PM CST reply actions
Notre Dame will never join a conference.
When it comes to BigTen expansion, Notre Dame has to be considered a non-entity.
by The Mexican't on Dec 12, 2009 3:17 PM CST up reply actions
Notre Dame joining?
Yeah, I’m pretty sure Evy would come back from the dead and kill Jim Delaney for allowing the possibility of Iowa to play Notre Dame during the regular season. I wasn’t even alive for that game, but I hate Notre Dame with an undying passion as a result (that’s how I was raised, as a good Hawkeye fan).
Funny thing is, I rib my Notre Dame co-workers (and their ex-football buddies) about the Fainting Irish every chance I get. I also blamed their recent self-destruction on that, especially after Evy passed away. I believe he’s got the big man upstairs in a headlock telling him not to allow Notre Dame to ever be a perrenial powerhouse.
They took the bar, the whole fucking bar!
by recoveringfratguy on Dec 12, 2009 3:43 PM CST up reply actions
Big Ten expansion
Whether you know it or not, your best bet is to add the University at Buffalo. Why? Large state school, decent academics, member American Association of Universities, geographically closer fit than Syracuse or Rutgers, up and coming program with solid fan base of western NY., willing to spend money on athletics.
Fits your large state school profile better than most.
I think if Buffalo really does find a way to maintain their surge
That they could be a legitimate consideration. Especially considering the BigTen’s fascination with the American Association of Universities.
by The Mexican't on Dec 12, 2009 3:19 PM CST up reply actions
Maybe...
But I do wonder what immediate good that does. Does Western NY care more about Buffalo or PSU? Serious question.
(Obviously, the answer is C: Syracuse, but I’m wondering who’s better between Buffalo and PSU)
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
I'd guess PSU
What was Buffalo before Gill showd up? I honestly have no idea.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 12, 2009 8:34 PM CST up reply actions
Not even.
They weren’t even I-A between ’71 and ’98. Then they were the laughingstock of the FBS.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
by Adam Jacobi on Dec 12, 2009 10:59 PM CST up reply actions
Would this put us in the NYC media market?
I still think beating up the Fainting Irish year after year would get us more exposure.
by Eyeheartfreedumb on Dec 14, 2009 11:28 PM CST up reply actions
To get Notre Dame...
We will probably need one of these things to happen:
a) Notre Dame keeps getting worse and worse in football, but wants roughly the same amount of money from NBC. NBC does not renew the TV contract.
b) NBC gets its head out of its butt, and starts investing in more sports programming. Then, they realize Notre Dame football doesn’t have to be the biggest (or one of the two or three biggest) pieces of its sports programming, and they low-ball Notre Dame or just don’t renew with Notre Dame.
I’m not optimistic on either of these happening real soon (I think Notre Dame just re-upped with NBC until roughly 2013).
So, unless the Big Ten wants to wait for another 3 to 5 years to try to add Notre Dame, they need to look at the other schools mentioned (Mizzou, ISU, Pitt, ’Cuse, Rutgers.)
Or, they could ask one of the lesser-conference schools to man up and join a real conference. Maybe do it for a 5-year trial run in football: Boise, TCU, Cincy? Those schools wouldn’t agree to the trial run idea, but I’m just spit-balling.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
You're missing one very consequential word from that NBC talk...
COMCAST.
It’s just as easily possible that Notre Dame ends up on the Comcast-owned Versus Channel than A or B on your list.
(This is where we start laughing uncontrollably)
Depending on what that move would mean to ND’s coffers, a move may or may not be forthcoming. Their on-field play will likely force Comcast’s hand either way.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
For the B10, there's actually TWO heads to this conference monster....
…..and each will demand a sacrifice.
The most obvious head is the Athletic head. This is the one that likes the BTN and the possibility of a B10 Champ Game. This head would want ND, Mizzou, Pitt, or even WVA.
But the hidden, more carnivorous head is the Academic Consortium head. THIS head is the one that truly calls the shots. The head that would demand much of any university entering the B10, academically (and not about athletics—I’m talking research and science).
Contrary to pop belief, PSU did NOT join the B10 primarily so JoePa’s boys could win the Rose Bowl. They joined, absolutely over the moon to do so, so they could enhance PSU’s academic reputation nationally and internationally. THEY had more to gain than the B10 did.
In other words, the B10 could entice ND to join simply by dangling that carrot above them, though they would demand more from ND academically than perhaps ND can give (it’s a great undergrad school, but is not a research school quite yet).
Pitt is already there, academically—that potato is done and ready for eating. That’s why I always put them first in these sorts of discussions. But ND certainly COULD get there, and believe me, as a university they would KILL to be in the B10 Academic consortium. Or maybe, perhaps, even join the athletic part first and THEN try and get their academics/research arm going.
If it's not too much trouble, search your soul--and then ask yourself if maybe I might have a point.
by The Director on Dec 12, 2009 3:43 PM CST up reply actions
Don't count Missouri out of that.
Mizzou is a great research school. Has the nation’s largest research nuclear reactor on campus, has a medical and veterinary school and is helping build a bio-science research park on the south edge of Columbia with the city. Mizzou would meet the academic head’s wants.
Black and Gold Blood: Cubbie Blue Heart
Follow me on Twitter: @MattLaCasse
by MissouriHawk on Dec 12, 2009 3:54 PM CST up reply actions
Actually, Mizzou would be a decent fit....
…..though I think it’s a notch below Pitt academically, since Pitt has a world-class medical college/hospital system. But Mizzou would be a nice geographical fit.
What’s stopping that is the Big 8/Big 12 tradition down there, whereas Pitt and the Big East are newbies to the college athletics world in comparison.
If it's not too much trouble, search your soul--and then ask yourself if maybe I might have a point.
by The Director on Dec 12, 2009 5:12 PM CST up reply actions
Missouri also
has an excellent journalism school, right? Pitt, btw is no newbie to big time football, just so ya know.
The J-School is the oldest in the world, and thusly, one of the best.
And you can make that argument, though the J-School at jNWU gives it a run for its money.
I think there will be a small portion of the Mizzou fan base, that would be very vocal, lamenting leaving the Big XII due to history, tradition, blah blah blah. If the leaders of the school are smart, and I believe they are, they won’t listen to that and they’ll put Mizzou in a better position for the future.
Black and Gold Blood: Cubbie Blue Heart
Follow me on Twitter: @MattLaCasse
by MissouriHawk on Dec 12, 2009 9:25 PM CST up reply actions
Didn't anyone tell ya?
Journalism died years ago… that’s why all of us smarties are on this site.
by Eyeheartfreedumb on Dec 14, 2009 11:35 PM CST up reply actions
Missouri
Is by far the most logical choice in terms of academics, athletics, and geography. They aren’t a ‘perfect’ fit, but they’re close.
Everyone has been saying “what does Missouri gain?” In short – money, and academic standing. That’s the two biggest deals to a school, with sports coming in a DISTANT third to those first two. Offered a spot in the B10, Missouri would hop on board as fast as humanly possible, and anyone saying they wouldn’t isn’t looking beyond the sports aspect of it.
I don’t exactly see what the B10 gains, beyond a conference championship game in football that we may or may not want.
St. Louis media market.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
by Adam Jacobi on Dec 12, 2009 11:00 PM CST up reply actions
They'd lock up STL...
…between Mizzou and Illinois, and they’d gain a foothold in Kansas City, Missouri. Lots of Mizzou fans in KCMO.
We'll carry the banner high!
Bring On The Cats
Lots more KU fans.
KC is a KU town. STL is a Mizzou town.
Black and Gold Blood: Cubbie Blue Heart
Follow me on Twitter: @MattLaCasse
by MissouriHawk on Dec 13, 2009 5:16 PM CST up reply actions
The Comcast/NBC merger
is not approved yet. It probably will be but that’s not a 100% certainty. And as long as Dick Ebersol is a big shot, Notre Dame is going to be on NBC. Even if Comcast fired him, they would not pull the ND games because they wouldn’t want to deal with the lawsuit that resulted. Heck, I can see Ebersol ramming through a big extension as his parting gift to ND.
Now, when the contract expires in 2015, if Ebersol isn’t around to protect it and Brian Kelly can’t revive the brand, there could be a very good chance ND gets dropped. Then ND would be desperate to join a conference. If the Big 10 had a slot open, they might join. Otherwise they’ll go Big East like the rest of their sports.
I think ND would be an excellent addition. Pitt & Missouri also make sense but would be #2 & #3 in that order
In 100 years, we'll all be dead.
You really think ND would join Versus?
Because we can’t even get Versus on DirecTV right now.
Also, I thought Iowa State was the big dog on Versus? LOL
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
I don't think it's ND's call anymore, thanks to Comcast.
Oh, and best believe VS gets right back on DTV as soon as the ND games get moved there. DTV isn’t stupid.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
TV exposure and contracts are about as fluid as thinned soup...
…..just ask the NHL, or MLB, or any one of a number ofr sports that USED to command major network coverage, and now are relegated to who-knows-where on cable.
ND can’t call any shots—they’re just along for the ride, wherever it takes them. And without a conference, they’re at a disadvantage in many ways.
If it's not too much trouble, search your soul--and then ask yourself if maybe I might have a point.
by The Director on Dec 12, 2009 3:45 PM CST up reply actions
Forgive me for being dense...
but how does ND end up on Versus without it being their call? I’m sorry, but I am confused.
Here is an article from last year about ND’s contract with NBC.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3452161
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 3:49 PM CST up reply actions
I think it's a matter of an erosion of ND's influence
I think ND has a relatively new NBC contract, but who knows what happens with those contracts if NBC and Comcast get all mixed-uppy?
My point is this: as time goes on, ND has less and less power to call their shots when it comes to TV coverage. Sooner or later, I see them relegated onto a minor cable channel, one way or another. Maybe it comes about because of the Comcast thing, or maybe after their current deal expires. But this NBC, thing, I think, can’t go on forever.
If it's not too much trouble, search your soul--and then ask yourself if maybe I might have a point.
by The Director on Dec 12, 2009 5:15 PM CST up reply actions
If they get good again...
which is a possibility under Kelly, then NBC will do what they can to keep them.
If they stay just OK, maybe they start their own channel, like the Yankees did? They would have all home and some neutral-site football games. They could probably talk the Big East into letting them run any non-conference basketball games that the Big East “network” doesn’t run. They could put lacrosse, baseball, and maybe some women’s sports on. Who knows?
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 5:50 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah...
on the other hand, if you made your entire schedule, you’d throw in a few gimme games also. I am Catholic, and so I can’t really hate ND. But I must argue that ND never really plays a ridiculously easy schedule. Look at 2010:
Purdue, Michigan, At Mich St, Stanford, at BC, Pitt, Western Michigan, at Navy at NY Giants Stadium, Tulsa, Utah, at Army at Yankee Stadium, at USC.
I’d say the only real cupcakes are: maybe Western Michigan, Tulsa, and Army. So, one-fourth of their schedule might be “cupcakes”, and a lot of other teams are doing that now (Cough, Penn State, cough.)
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 9:53 PM CST up reply actions
He's just making that up
Any idiot can figure out the the ND lawyers reviewed that contract up, down and sideways. All ND home games will be on NBC, nationwide for the duration.
In 100 years, we'll all be dead.
I doubt Syracuse would
leave the Big East as they helped create it. Excellent fit anywhere academically and they graduate their athletes so that’s a big plus, along with the added prestige of the Maxwell and Newhouse Schools. Still don’t see it though, they’re private and more like Northwestern than they are any of the other ten schools. You never know though, they played three Big Ten teams this season alone.
There is also the lacrosse problem – does the Big Ten have anyone playing other than Ohio State?
I doubt Lacrosse would be an obstacle.
You would think the Big East would let them keep playing in there for Lacrosse.
I was thinking something similar earlier about the Big Ten not wanting to add a school that did not have wrestling. And then I realized, it’s wrestling, and nobody would base a decision this big on a sport that costs them money. Then again, we are talking about university administrators, so I probably shouldn’t rule out the “retardation” factor.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 3:52 PM CST up reply actions
Well, a Lax program probably
wouldn’t break the deal but it would be considered a factor, In CNY lacrosse is really BIG.
Plus it pays for itself at Syracuse. That said, Syracuse has been called the Notre Dame of lacrosse – difference is they win!
ZING!!!
Black and Gold Blood: Cubbie Blue Heart
Follow me on Twitter: @MattLaCasse
by MissouriHawk on Dec 12, 2009 4:21 PM CST up reply actions
without bothering too much to look, lacrosse is Youge at Syr, but I don’t think the conference affiliation is terribly meaningful. You’re looking at MD, Duke, Carolina, Hopkins (for gods sake), Princeton …. It would not a factor for them for moving. Their relative importance to the Big East would mean more since it wouldn’t translate to the televen.
Why not W. Virginia?
They have great football and good bball most years. Gives Big Ten another eastern team and a intro to the south.
Doesn't meet the academic standards, which is why it won't be considered.
Black and Gold Blood: Cubbie Blue Heart
Follow me on Twitter: @MattLaCasse
by MissouriHawk on Dec 12, 2009 4:29 PM CST up reply actions
AAU and neighboring requirements.
If the requirements that you must be AAU and either in or next to a state containing a BigTen institution are true, you’ve only got 8 FBS options:
* Rutgers
* Maryland
* Syracuse
* Buffalo
* Pittsburgh
* Missouri
* Iowa State
* Nebraska
Just sayin’
by formerlyanonymous on Dec 12, 2009 4:31 PM CST reply actions
They are DIII now...
and mediocre.
So I will hope you were joking.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 5:47 PM CST up reply actions
Yep, I knew it.
Now I am joking.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 9:54 PM CST up reply actions
OK, then Case Western
Still DIII, but at least they made the playoffs.
by Brock Sampson on Dec 12, 2009 8:41 PM CST up reply actions
If we have to do it....and I hope we don't.
Let it be a team from Ohio. Cut into that recruiting base a little.
by DisplacedHawkeye82 on Dec 12, 2009 6:08 PM CST reply actions
I don't think adding another Ohio team will make recruiting in the state any simpler.
Unless we start beating on OSU, the Buckeyes will always own the recruiting there.
by The Mexican't on Dec 12, 2009 6:11 PM CST up reply actions
And...
Michigan and Penn State will clean up the sloppy seconds.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Dec 12, 2009 9:55 PM CST up reply actions
Will never happen
Ohio State would sooner lose the sanctity of THE GAME before they let another Ohio school in.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 12, 2009 10:54 PM CST up reply actions
University of Toledo.
They are in the process of building an athletic facility comparable to (some say better than) Michigan’s new one and they are pumping millions of new dollars into the football program, facilities, and stadium upgrades. Not too sure about the academic requirements of the B-11 but Toledo has really good engineering, medical, and law schools. But the City of Toledo itself is horrible. I was born and raised here. It is like a third world country to people who come here from nicer parts of the country it’s a shit hole. I would like to see it but i highly doubt the B-11 would allow a school like Toledo to join.
So if Mizzou gets the nod from the Big XI,
who will Iowa play when they opt out of the game to play at Arrowhead? So Notre Dame it is…bring on the Fainting Irish!!!
Academics
Why do people at the Midwest state schools all think they’re on par with the Ivy league? Got bad news for you but Syracuse, Georgetown and Villanova are among the top 40 schools academicly. Rutgers and Pittsburgh are both in the top 50 or 60. Not sure saying that any of these schools are a poor fit “academicly” for the Big Ten is really a realistic evaluation of the situation. The Big East is not the SEC.
I think there are pluses to adding Pittsburgh, WVA, Rutgers and Syracuse to the Big Ten. Purely from a fit geographicly and institutionally I would rank the schools in that order of preference. If they wanted to get a program to add to the Q rating of the conference, Syracuse would probably be the first choice. Basketball is obvious. Football has tradition and looks like it might be on the upturn. ‘Cuse would be tough because they are very connected to the East Coast, and leaving to the Big Ten would pull them away from NYC which is their bread and butter. I think you’d see them join the ACC before the Big Ten (get BC back).
That said, Pitt or WVU might be the next most realistic option.
by JB Reafsnyder Fan on Dec 13, 2009 9:29 AM CST reply actions
Why? Because, in a sense, they ARE like the Ivy League
The B10 Academic Consortium is not just a measure of how “good” a school is, particularly not how good a school is regarding undergraduate studies. It’s all about research and post-graduate studies and academics.
No, the B10’s Academic consortium is NOT on par with the Ivy League—but then again, last time I looked Pitt, ‘Cuse, WVA, and Rutgers were NOT in the Ivy League, either. As an aggregate of the twelve B10 academic schools, you’d be hard pressed to find another major conference as good in academics, undergrad through post-grad and research. The Big East has a lot of fine schools, but as an aggregate, they can’t compete on a research basis or post-graduate studies basis with the B10’s lineup.
If it's not too much trouble, search your soul--and then ask yourself if maybe I might have a point.
by The Director on Dec 13, 2009 4:19 PM CST up reply actions
Expansion
Why expand at all? A true round robin(10 games) plus 2 non conference games, maybe even three would make expansioin a moot point.
If the BXI was to expand 3 teams come to mind, Missouri, Notre Dame or Louisville. Louisville would never do this because of they joined the Big East for basketball. Missouri would be a great fit based on natural rivalries with Illinois and Iowa.Additionally Mizzou can be added to the West div. It also makes sense because of the STL TV market.
ND makes the most sense anyways. ND plays enough BXI teams. They could be added to the West division no problem. Also the TV money could be worked out for the first few years until the NBC deal is up.
I’m sure the divisions can be split up enough for competitive balence. Even North/South with a rivaly week that keeps the traditional .
North – South (rivalry week)
Minnesota – Iowa
Northwestern – Illinois
Michigan – Ohio State
Michigan State – Penn State
Purdue – Indiana
Wisconsin – Missouri/Notre Dame
by Barry McCokiner on Dec 13, 2009 12:47 PM CST reply actions
Ignore Geography
that is the dumbest possible way to split the teams.
Notre Dame is the best possible addition, but I say fuck ’em. They had their chance. Right now their future is in the hands of Brian Kelly and Dick Ebersol. One needs to revive the program and the other needs to hold off his new corporate masters to keep NBC a Notre Dame only zone. Neither is guaranteed.
If a 12th team joins, the Big 10 will be closed. That would force force ND into the Big East where they would probably do quite well and could continue to pretend they are a national powerhouse.
In 100 years, we'll all be dead.
I like the "Heartland" and "Great Lakes" divisions myself.
You LOOSELY put the Great Lakes schools in that division (NW, OSU, UM, MSU, IU, Purdue) and put the rest in the Heartland division (Iowa, PSU, Minny, Wisky, Illinois, Pitt/Other newbie school). You’ll keep the traditional rivalries alive within divisions (only one you don’t is NW-Illinois, and few people care about that one!), yet provide some balance among the “traditional” FB powers, too.
If it's not too much trouble, search your soul--and then ask yourself if maybe I might have a point.
by The Director on Dec 13, 2009 4:23 PM CST up reply actions
I think this would be a good breakout.
Keeps “The game” in place. Splits the " upper echelon" evenly.
"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. "
George S Patton
by psu in the w-b on Dec 13, 2009 4:43 PM CST up reply actions
I Like That One
Depending on who the new school is, that balances pretty well. UM & OSU fans will whine about how “the game” usually decides the Big 10 champ and a CCG ruins that but they can just grow up. Plus, as long as you make the last 3 or 4 weeks all in-division games you don’t end up seeing a repeat match up in too short a period of time.
The other big part is the cross-division rotation. I hate how the skips currently work. Two years skipping the same two teams is too long. There needs to be a better method to ensure a sort of variety.
In 100 years, we'll all be dead.
So far, I think this is the best split we've seen.
It also preserves the growing Iowa-PSU “rivalry.” However, if this were the split, and a cross-division rival were to remain protected, which school plays Iowa each year? jNW?
by The Mexican't on Dec 13, 2009 5:04 PM CST up reply actions
I think this would definitely reinforce the growing rivalry.
"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. "
George S Patton
by psu in the w-b on Dec 13, 2009 5:11 PM CST up reply actions
Under that split
Maybe something like this to preserve the most rivalries;
Iowa —> Indiana/Purdue
PSU —> Michigan St (how could we lose playing for the Land-Grant Trophy every year?)
Minny —> Michigan (likewise, how could we lose playing for Michigan keeping the Little Brown Jug every year?)
Wisco —> OSU (I guess)
Illinois —> jNWU (gotta keep playing for the hat)
New School X —> Indiana/Purdue
Not really ideal, but no combination would do that. One alternative would be to preserve Illinois’ protected rivalry with OSU (they do play for the IlliBuck trophy).
Penn State -> Ohio State
The Big Ten would be stupid to split that series up.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 13, 2009 6:27 PM CST up reply actions
If that were the case
Then I’d like to see Iowa-MSU turn into a more consistent series.
OR
Put Wisconsin in the Great Lakes division, and move Indiana into the Heartland division. That solves the IU/Purdue problem and the Iowa issue.
Iowa —> Wisconsin
PSU —> OSU
Minn —> UM
IU —> Purdue
Illinois —> jNW
n00b —> MSU
Since the MSU-Penn State rivalry is forced, they wouldn’t be new to the idea of a less than traditional rival. I can understand the idea of preserving the Land Grant rivalry, but, as Rambler stated, I think PSU-OSU would be a much better fit. Sparty can have the new guy and most of the other rivalries remain intact.
by The Mexican't on Dec 13, 2009 6:52 PM CST up reply actions
I suppose.
But if the BXI felt that strongly about OSU and PSU playing every year, they could have made that a protected rivalry when PSU joined the league; instead, they decided to preserve OSU’s oh-so-important IlliBuck rivalry with Illinois.
It *is* a protected rivalry
We’ve played them every year since we joined. Ohio State’s “rivalry” with Illinois isn’t protected.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 13, 2009 9:52 PM CST up reply actions
Oh screw the cross division rivalry
most of them would be forced anyway. and nobody would really care about them. Then they’d create another trophy, which there are too many of as it is.
In 100 years, we'll all be dead.
Mizzou in Big 10
Seems like a win-win. I think Mizzou immediately contends for titles in both football and basketball. OSU-Michigan-Penn State are about equal to Wisconsin-Iowa-Mizzou, especially with michigan being down the last 2 years……
You're joking
You’re deranged if you think Mizzou is on par with Michigan State, Purdue or Wisconsin in basketball right now. Give it a couple years, maybe, but there’s no way they “immediately” contend in basketball.
One more thought
A championship game offers real potential for the winner to go to the BCS championship game. The Rose Bowl will always take #2. So the conference will still get 2 BCS teams on a regular basis.
there is a blog on the kansas city star about Mizzu going to the Big 11
i assume you’ve all seen it.
If Big Ten Called, Missouri Would Listen By Mike DeArmond – Posted on 14 December 2009.
it’s a pretty good read. some of the Mizzu fans around the office today caught wind of the ESPN story, and basically said good for Mizzu, screw the Texas schools & Nebraska.
this place smells like feet. i’ll bring a can of lysol next week.
What is the Big XII's deal?
I don’t know the particulars but from the Mizzou blog linked here it seems there is some definite anger on the Mizzou side about the second-class citizen treatment they get from the league. Anyone have any details/backstory on this? From the tone of the comments, and this is all I have to go on, it seems like the Big XII is pretty heavily tilted in favor of Texas. In what ways I don’t know. I just find this shocking because I can’t imagine any of the Big Ten teams fans (even jNWU’s) having a similiar complaint about our league.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
i'm no Mizzu fan, but as I understand it the Tigers bowl games slide down
a notch in the pecking order the last 2 years, especially this year (apparently). also the big 12 does not have equal revenue sharing. i just read over at http://big10mizzou.blogspot.com/ that Purdue, Indiana, and jNW made more $ money off TV than Mizzu did last year (i can’t validate that).
also complaints about games on the VS network, Fox Sports Network, crap tv coverage. i know my neighbor has had Mizzu on pay per view at least twice this fall.
apparently this has been brewing for a while, enough to make it to a blog on the Kansas City Star webpage.
check out that Mizzu to the big 10 website, he even put together a 2013 football schedule.
this place smells like feet. i’ll bring a can of lysol next week.
The Big 12 TV deals are awful, awful, awful.
For all the hand-wringing about the BTN, it is INFINITELY better than dealing with all of the bullshit of trying to watch Big 12 games on TV (well, unless you’re Oklahoma or Texas).
And I think Mizzou has been jumped three years in a row. In 07, they got bumped by Kansas for the Orange Bowl — despite beating them head-to-head and winning the B12 North. In 08, they got bumped by Nebraska and Okie State, despite beating Nebraska head-to-head (crushing them, actually) and winning the B12 North. And this year, they got bumped by Iowa State of all teams, despite (yet again) beating them decisively head-to-head. Obviously, we know as well as anyone how much (or rather, how little) head-to-head can matter in bowl game decisions and how they’re all about the benjamins… but when it happens three years in a row, I can see why they’d get annoyed by it.
ACC has no regional divisions
And we seem to be doing it “pretty ok” though the Coastal does seem to be the better division right now but those things fluctuate. Currently we have 12 teams, 2 6-team divisions (duh, called Atlantic and Coastal divisions) with 1 cross-divisional “rival” that we always play every year and another cross-division team that jumps on and off the schedule every two years for a home-and-home series.
The inter-division rival could be Ohio State/Michigan and Northwestern/Illinois that would keep those in-state rivalries intact. Michigan/MSU would stay together in the same division.
The college football season is so fragile. It's like a glass ball being pushed around from stadium to stadium by a rhinoceros.
by Winfield Featherston on Dec 14, 2009 4:12 PM CST reply actions
Come on people
Anyone that suggests UM and OSU would be separated clearly doesn’t follow football at all. It will NOT happen.
Additionally, I’m hoping to add Mizzou or Nebraska.
MIZZOU Academics
Although Mizzou may be lower in a overall national ranking of(public and private) universities, it’s among the top in the nation for Scholar Athletes of public universities.
Per the University Website ( http://www.missouri.edu/about/pridepoints.php)
MU is the No. 1 public Bowl Championship Series institution in the nation in academic performance of student athletes and ranks 25th among all schools, public and private. Mizzou also leads the Big 12 in eligibility, retention and graduation rates of student athletes. These rankings are based on the NCAA’s 2008 Academic Progress Rate, which measures the academic progress and performance of athletic programs.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Black Heart Gold Pants
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
