July 26, 2007
Big 10 expansion coming soon?
The Big 10 has put the topic of expansion back on the table.
Commissioner Jim Delany told the Des Moines Register that the creation of the Big 10 Network means that the conference will look at expanding it's distribution by adding one team in a new market.
"I think we need to look at it in the next year," he said during a wide-ranging interview with Register reporters.Adding a 12th team likely will be revisited because of the network, which is scheduled to launch Aug. 30, Delany said. An additional big-name university in a large television market means more exposure for the network and its sponsors.
"It changes to some extent how you think about it," Delany said of expansion. "The broader (the network) is distributed, the more value (expansion) has.
"We have eight states. With expansion, you could have nine."
In other words, the Big 10 is now in the content business and future membership may be based on your television popularity rather than traditional membership and/or geography. Which means the usual suspects for Big 10 expansion talk (Notre Dame) may not be the targets that Delany has in mind.
Let's just dispense with the 10,000 lb elephant in the room: The Big 10 and Notre Dame are not likely to hook up. The Big 10 needs the Irish a lot more than the Irish need the conference. Everybody clear? Notre Dame is not interested in sharing the wealth. They Irish have a national broadcast television contract and can likely get any deal the Big 10 could wrangle without saddling themselves with the conference membership and revenue sharing.
So who's next on the list? Here's my guess, based on bigger tv market programs with a reasonable geographic proximity.
RUTGERS - The current darling of the Big East, Rutgers boasts one of the biggest television markets in the world - NJ/NY/NYC. The Scarlet Knights lack some of the cache that other schools offer, but you can't beat Rutgers when it comes to TV market.
BOSTON COLLEGE - Despite recently fronting a lot of cash to join the ACC, it's not unreasonable to think that the Big 10 could offer Boston College a better deal to join up. Besides the obvious geographic advantages which would give BC better options for team travel, the Eagles would also benefit from developing conference rivalries that would be within a more reasonable weekend travel distance from Boston. BC would be the second smallest school in the conference, and the Big 10's second private institution. Boston is the 7th largest television market, so you have to think that BC will be on the target list, ACC affiliation be damned.
NAVY - The Midshipmen would be an outstanding football only member, because they have both the #8 (Washington) and #24 (Baltimore) TV markets, but also have a respectable nationwide following. The problem with Navy is that it would require the Big 10 to agree to waive membership in many of the conference's sports.
UCONN - Just down the list at #28 television market is Hartford/New Haven, which brings us to the UConn Huskies. The Huskies lack the football tradition, but certainly bring some serious pop & street cred on the mens & womens basketball front. At 16,300 undergrads, UConn would be the second smallest school in the conference, roughly twice the size of Northwestern. Still... UConn would open up a new TV market.
SYRACUSE - The Orange have a reputation that would hold up nicely to some of the other Big 10 schools, which could put them near the top of the field, but play in the 79th biggest television market. There are a lot of other options above SU.
PITT - The Pitt Panthers play in one of the larger television markets currently within the current Big 10 conference... but Pittsburgh is already within the Big 10's reach. Long story short, Pitt would be at the bottom of the list for expansion under Delany's new tv-centric strategy.
Other new wrinkles to a 12-team conference? The prospect of a Big 10 championship game and a two-division conference alignment.
"I'm agnostic," Delany said. "I could live with two divisions and a championship game, but I think that has a tendency to devalue the season-ending game and have a negative impact on your losing team in season-ending games."I don't want us to tear ourselves apart over the structure of football for the sake of expansion."
I don't honestly believe Delany on this one. The guy is saying without hesitation that expansion could come as a result of television money, so why should I think that Delany would turn down a few extra million dollars from a championship game? That just doesn't wash.
Comments:
TrojanHorse said:
posted on July 26, 2007 3:33 PM — 132.228.195.207 — link — abuse?
RU > wow, NYC maybe but doormat.. that would be all but guaranteed.. true they could be like NW and have that cinderella season like last year but what would RU do without the five ooc patsies like buffalo, Norfolk State, Howard, etc???
UConn, that is quite interesting. The hoops part they are fantastic at on both sides; football though this would be worse than NW, these guys are perenial doormats with little hope for the future.. even in their bowl season they stunk as they played MAC bottom feeders and made RU's schedule look good.. this is NOT a good fit for FB.. kind of reminds of PSU joining the B10.. great football team, lousy hoops and PSU has done nothing in hoops since joining the B10 but get used on a weekly basis
Navy, don't even go there, their FB program stinks too.. hey I love our military academies as much as the next guy but I know that they stink.. they play such a watered down schedule, the other academies, a couple of 1AA's a year, temple and some bottom feeders in the MAC, win 8-10 a year and think they are good (ask ND fans) but they stink if they have to play a B10 schedule
I'd have to say BC would be the best bet, but does anyone know what the escape clause is to get out of the ACC.. I'd lmao as this would be justice served to the ACC; so we'd start the raids all over again.. would the ACC then go for Louisville? Syracuse??? then the BE would go raid more CUSA teams who in turn would raid the WAC and they would raid the sun belt
gaffbag said:
posted on July 26, 2007 4:27 PM — 130.132.120.79 — link — abuse?
True, Rutgers is large, public, and in a great television market - but the market doesn't matter unless people are watching, and until this past season nobody has watched Rutgers football games.
The NFL dramatically overshadows college football in the NY/NJ area. Unless this season truly represents the emergence of a Rutgers program that is competitive year-in and year-out, I can't imagine the Big 10 would actually capture additional market share by having Rutgers in the conference.
The Big Ten would likely be better off airing Penn State games or the best Big Ten matchup in each time slot in NY/NJ than they would running Scarlet Knight games. And I say that as someone from Jersey who would really like to see Rutgers emerge as a solid football program.
Maurice said:
posted on July 26, 2007 4:38 PM — 204.117.78.97 — link — abuse?
Mike The Big East Commish watch out! Once the TBE becomes an national powerhouse football conference here comes the Big 10 with another raid. I heard rumors please correct me if I am wrong that the Big 10 wanted Syracuse some years ago. I betcha the Big 10 goes after Uconn why b/c Uconn will not mess up football tradition and Uconn brings a huge BBall presence. Rutgers would be nice, Syracuse would be better, but the steal would be UCONN. UCONN can expand their stadium. Mike please do not allow another raid
posted on July 26, 2007 5:03 PM — link — abuse?Kevin Donahue said:
The question isn't do people watch Rutgers (or any of these teams). The question is... would people watch Big 10 football, or more specifically, would they watch the Big 10 Network.
I have to think there are enough Michigan/tOSU/PSU/etc fans in NYC to make it worth the while.
posted on July 26, 2007 6:32 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse?
Here's the $64k question: What the hell are they going to call the conference once they add the 12th team? Here's my suggestion: "The Big 10--Now featuring 20% more-FREE!!!!"
I'm copyrighting that name, so don't any of you get any ideas...
Welcome to the 21st century, Big Ten, if you get it done. I'll believe it when I see it.
Does anyone in the NYC metro area even watch college football?
Whoops! My paragraphs are about as long as gatorhippy's...
shiguy said:
posted on July 26, 2007 6:38 PM — 68.81.91.178 — link — abuse?
wells yes kevin there are probably alot of people in the ny, nj area that would probably like to have the big ten. the problem though as gaffbag said is pro sports. a large portion of the country isn't going to buy into this big-10 network. which means that much of the coverage will be from the normal cable. the ny/nj area has so many pro sports that rutgers would be competing for air time from an area that is hardcore about their professional sports but not so much about college. i agree boston college would be the best bet as the only real TV competition would be from the patriots and basketball but there is a much larger college fanbase in that area ss well. plus i'm sure that BC is reconcidering their choice in the ACC as their travels fees are horrendous with the closest school being maryland almost 500 miles away. after that almost all their games might as well be in the midwest. plus i'm sure their fan travel is low.
Zac said:
posted on July 26, 2007 6:58 PM — 76.85.143.185 — link — abuse?
AHEM!!! "…the usual suspects for Big 10 expansion talk (Notre Dame) may not be the targets…" In how many languages can you say BULL SHIT?!? This Jim Delany character is presumed to be focusing on a 12th school in a big TV market, and he's not considering ND? Without a doubt, he's no Mike Tranghese, not that Mr. Tranghese is all that spectacular. In ND, no only do you have a perfect geographic fit, you have a team which attracts attention week after week, season after season, in baseball, basketball (among others), not to mention football. As for the others…
BC, Rutgers, & UConn: good TV markets all, but geographically way out of range; besides, anyone would be nuts to the ACC would give up BC (not to mention the B.E. giving up Rutgers & UConn) without a fight.
Navy: available/independent, solid market, good academics, but like the 1st 3, geographically out of range (high travel costs).
Syracuse: though closer, it still doesn't make any geographic sense, not to mention the B.E. would still gripe.
Pitt: This is not a new idea; they've been approached by the Big-10 in the past. However, loose that rivalry with WVU??? ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGEOUS!!! It was bad enough loosing VA Tech; loosing Pitt would be intolerable.
I've offered this before. So, Mr. Delany, if you're listening, try this one on for size. Give up PA St; pick up ND & IA St. In doing so, you'll have brought in more than enough marketing (let alone TV) to make up for the meager market IA St would offer. You won't be hurting the Big-12; they can pick up Air Force, AR, or both. Failing in that, grab from among the best MAC schools, TV wise; say Toledo or Akron. But leave the Big East alone!!! (Ya thilly…)
Tomcat said:
posted on July 26, 2007 7:00 PM — 70.243.66.148 — link — abuse?
They would cause a raiding opportunity for other conferences if a Big East team is included as the twelfth team.They probably should go with a MAC team, since the MAC already has 13 teams. Guess that would make too much sense, for a league with 11 to take a team from a conference with 13.It would make sense geographicaly but, the Illinois-Ohio market is already covered by The 10 network.
If they took Iowa St or Missouri from the XII that would be geographacally correct and free up the XII to snatch up TCU, LSU or Ark.That probably wouldnt happen because the 10 network probably already covers the Iowa area, dont know about the Mizzu coverage.If T.V. coverage is really what their after as opposed to League expansion based upon the need for the league to expand.Making the 10 a 12 team conference would put an end to all the BS we had to listen too last year from the leagues two one loss teams.
Good Topic Kev
Hookem-Horns
Sicem-Bears whup the H outa NDMizzou said:
posted on July 26, 2007 7:17 PM — 75.66.27.236 — link — abuse?
Heres the scenario-
Missouri moves on over to the Big 10.
Arkansas returns home to the Big 12.
Clemson,FSU or Georgia Tech joins the SEC.
Syracuse joins the ACC.
The Pac picks up 2 more.
Big East cries about it all and takes the scraps.
Everyone has and or keeps rivalries and all the alignments make sense.
Post #7-Memphis is a terrible market for the Big 12 and the University loses out to Tennessee and other area colleges in terms of fan support.
Post #11-LSU leaving the SEC would be like Michigan leaving the Big 10 or USC leaving the Pac.
posted on July 26, 2007 7:26 PM — link — abuse?
I think the Big 10 can continue to pursue Notre Dame until the oceans dry up. Notre Dame doesn't want to be in the Big 10 and that's that. I think ND -> B10 is a moot issue. (Just as ND->BE is a moot issue). Ain't gonna happen.
I think BC/Rutgers options are pretty realistic, if Delany is serious about TV markets (as he seems to be).
The B10 has the Iowa market, so Iowa State would seem odd.
Missouri is an interesting prospect. Would they give up their Big 8 roots? I don't know. I don't THINK so, but I don't know.
JDS said:
posted on July 26, 2007 7:46 PM — 70.128.254.193 — link — abuse?
I think Missouri is the best option. Beyond just football, it is a fit academically and historically. It is an AAU Research I school with lots of history and a large alumni base. There would be some catching up to do both athletically and funding to bring it into the middle of the Big 10 pack. That would be easier for Missouri than most of the other schools mentioned.
Regan said:
posted on July 26, 2007 8:45 PM — 205.188.116.136 — link — abuse?
Kevin Donahue:
>>I don't honestly believe Delany on this one. The guy is saying without hesitation that expansion could come as a result of television money, so why should I think that Delany would turn down a few extra million dollars from a championship game? That just doesn't wash.I'm not certain, although I am really not an authority.
Four out of the last five years, the Big Ten has had two teams in BCS Bowls:
2006 - Michigan (Rose), Ohio State (Title)
2005 - Ohio State (Fiesta), Penn State(Orange)
2004 - Michigan (Rose)
2003 - Michigan (Rose), Ohio State (Fiesta)
2002 - Ohio State (Fiesta), Iowa (Orange)Often, a Conference Title game proves to eliminate the second strongest conference team from participating in a BCS Bowl.
Conference Title games haven't really helped the ACC much (I don't think), and there is little reason to think it is worth it for the Big Ten.
IMHO, of course.
shiguy said:
posted on July 26, 2007 9:28 PM — 68.81.91.178 — link — abuse?
i don't think rutgers would go for one reason. greg schiano. he wants to get the rutgers program as far as possible even winning a big east title and maybe then some. however, (and this is no offense to rutgers) they wouldn't be able to progress nearly as fast as they would in the big east. i don't want to belittle the big east at all because my team is in it but i'm not bling. i mean rutgers in the big east is facing 3 major teams that it has to hurtle to attempt a run at the conf champ. in the big ten they would be facing 4,5 even 6 teams possibly that would be major obstacles to overcome. i'm not saying they couldn't do it. but think about it from a team that is determined to make a name for itself that has been the doormat since it started the game over a hundred years ago. would you really give up a conference where you have a shot to go to one that you may wind up back where you started? just a thought.
College Pigskin Fan said:
posted on July 26, 2007 9:32 PM — 63.19.38.207 — link — abuse?
Here we go again, talk of possible expansion, but this time you guys are missing out on one main point.
Due to a requirement of the Big Ten bylaws, any expansion must be within, or next to, current Big Ten territory. Here's the link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_10_Conference
Now that you have it narrowed down, you have a better idea of who and who will not be a possible 12th team for the Big 10.
goodolnuma5 said:
posted on July 26, 2007 9:52 PM — 65.24.221.145 — link — abuse?
Thanks Regan, point taken. post#20
Mizzou is nice, but Rutgers is better.............for college football. That coveted NY market could change some things. Can you imagine the NY posts here?!!
BTW, Delany sucks.
Tom Blogical said:
posted on July 26, 2007 9:58 PM — 24.95.77.153 — link — abuse?
K-Hue:
Agreed, ND-Big 10 won't happen, and nobody in the Big 10, or in South Bend, will lose any sleep over that one. I honestly can't see any of the teams on your list being attractive to the Big 10, however, except for maybe Rutgers. Without having looked at the TV market numbers, my first thoughts were West Virginia and Louisville being approached. I would be surprised if BC was approached simply because of their location.
College Pigskin Fan said:
posted on July 26, 2007 10:01 PM — 63.19.38.207 — link — abuse?
Mizzou, that's some pretty wild speculation. So the SEC is going to expand to 14 teams when it's all said and done huh? Chances are, none of that will happen.
If the Big 10 would go to a top to bottom conference without a championship game, then look for them to sweet talk Syracuse to join. A very populated state and it brings the New York City viewing market.
Otherwise, Regan you're right, a conference championship looks good, but can knock out a second team that would play in a BCS game. Nice post Regan.
Zac said:
posted on July 26, 2007 11:11 PM — 76.85.143.185 — link — abuse?
Don Nehlan, "the" Don Nehlan, as in one of the greatest coaches to bless college football, let alone WVU, who is directly responsible for the next great coach to do the same at WVU? Or did you just steal the man's name to show your reverence of him? Sorry, had to ask.
In answer to your question, it would seem to me to be hypocritical. I agree; the Mountaineers have a decent market and fan base, not to mention a great stadium. And, that's just football. However, my biggest issue with BC, Miami, and VA Tech's defection to the ACC, was it occurred on the wings of rhetoric to the tune of "...commitment to a strong Big East..." I don't want WVU to be a part of that. If the Big-10 came a callin, I like it to be known up front and above board. And while WVU should certainly consider it, when all is said and done, I'd like to think WVU would still be committed to a strong Big East, and stay. Otherwise, in the wake of WVU booking to the Big 10, gone may be AR to the Big 12, gone may be Louisville to the SEC, and God knows what happens to the rest. I don't like it. Somebody has to maintain some sense of honor and integrity and show it can be done while still making a buck. Why can't that be the Big East & its existing members, including WVU? Just a thought.
BlueGold95 said:
posted on July 27, 2007 8:25 AM — 24.7.238.54 — link — abuse?
If a school is added, I'll be shocked if it's anyone but Missouri. Either way, it would be nice if the Big Ten found a way to have all of its teams either play each other or play a championship game. I'd favor the former.
gatorstud said:
posted on July 27, 2007 8:36 AM — 69.95.111.248 — link — abuse?
m go blue......then they need to re-name the conf..THE BIG ELEVEN...and get it over with....my son asked me about that last week...my response to him was....don't worry about it son, cause your going to florida anyways...lol....i think it makes college football look really stupid to have a conference that doesn't know how to count the teams it has in it.........i have nothing aginst michigan (except for the fact that when they lost to osu last year.....they didn't drop in the polls) or the big ten...it is a damn good conf...with a ton of tradition.....but something needs to happen....
drop a team (which isn't going to happen)
call it the big eleven (which would kill all the "big ten" merchandise that is out there)jmho
go gators...and hokies
posted on July 27, 2007 8:50 AM — link — abuse?
@College Pigskin Fan #22 - The Big 10 bylaws are what makes Rutgers so appealing. (Not that the Big 10 couldn't vote to do modify the bylaws, but I digress).
@M GO BLUE #29 - Your genius commish may not agree
M GO BLUE said:
posted on July 27, 2007 10:46 AM — 216.46.213.195 — link — abuse?
Well, I suppose it might happen.........and there is really nothing I could do to stop it........so if I had to pick from the above list........I guess I would hope for Pitt, and then Boston College......and Temple...........Worst thing that could possibly happen.
d1 said:
posted on July 27, 2007 12:28 PM — 211.121.3.80 — link — abuse?
If Navy, why not Army? Closer to NYC and NE markets, potentially larger following nationwide.
I don't think any of the other Big Ten schools would have a problem with taking on a potential doormat- the other schools would appreciate the possibility of the extra win.
Not sure about how any of these schools mentioned would fit with the Big Ten's vision of itself as a premier academic as well as athletic conference.
Vincent said:
posted on July 27, 2007 1:19 PM — 64.12.116.136 — link — abuse?
Rutgers simply hasn't been sufficiently established as a big-time school to make sense for the Big Ten. Syracuse has a better tradition, many alumni in the metro NY area and could probably bounce out of its football doldrums in a real conference, not a hybrid like the Big East. If it's strictly Scarlet vs. Orange, give me SU every time.
If you want a longshot, consider Maryland. It has a solid athletic program -- since 2001, it's played in a major bowl game and won national titles in men's and women's basketball and men's soccer -- and would bring the Washington/Baltimore area fully into the Big Ten (where it has plenty of alums). And Maryland is contiguous to Pennsylvania. Academically, it would boost College Park's reputation; the question is whether it would benefit Maryland financially. In football, it definitely would, but losing the ACC basketball cachet might be too much.
UConn said:
posted on July 27, 2007 2:29 PM — 69.182.58.55 — link — abuse?
I live in Connecticut and went to UConn. There is not a chance in hell UConn would ever leave the Big East. Calhoun first off was furious with how BC was taken from the Big East and has now refused to ever schedule a game with them. In addition the Big East tournament is played at MSG and UConn is always represented with fans there. If UConn were to move to the Big Ten they would lose more than they would gain. The Big East is arguably the best Basketball conference in the country and that is what UConn bases its athletics on. They are not a football school although whoever said they will always be a doormat is pure stupid. They just built a state of an art football training facility along with a great stadium that has the ability to be expanded for when UConn does become a competitive football program. Give the football team 5 years and they will be competitive within conference as they have shown they can and even possibly get a bowl bid year in and out.
gaffbag said:
posted on July 27, 2007 3:16 PM — 12.111.50.7 — link — abuse?
The more I think about it, the more I like Pitt as a fit here (even if it might have tragic implications for the backyard brawl). Pitt is big, public, and solid from an academic standpoint. They are home to solid football and basketball programs, both historically and in recent memory. They have what could become a natural rivalry with Penn State - and geographically they would effectively tie Penn State in to the rest of the conference.
Perhaps as importantly, The Big Ten Network desperately wants to be carried on Comcast basic cable. Three of Comcast's core markets are Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, and Philadelphia. Between all of the Penn State and Pitt alumni in these markets it would be difficult for Comcast to confine the Big Ten Network to just the Sports Package.
If the Big Ten Network does end up on Comcast basic then that opens up access to viewers who would not otherwise pay extra for the sports package - including viewers in New York, New Jersey and New England.
I like this one from a lot of angles. I'd like it even more if they dropped Northwestern and picked up Dub-V in the process.
badgerballer said:
posted on July 27, 2007 4:49 PM — 70.59.213.124 — link — abuse?
M GO BLUE, not sure where you get the "we don't need or want a #12" from. As a die-hard Big10 fan, basically from birth - I can see a lot of advantages to having 12. I, personally, would LOVE to see an annual championship game. Yes, its whoring things up, blah, blah, blah. But tell you what, when and if a Big10 Championship game gets introduced, I'll be parked in front my wide screen, along with my boys, every single year, roster and stats in hand, yelling at the refs and coaches, eating beer brats, tivo'ing, burning, recording (or whatever technology is the flavor of the era), and loving every minute of it - no matter who is playing.
This current set up of the Big10 finishing its season 2 or 3 weeks before the rest of college football's regular season ends absolutely blows!
BlueGold95 said:
posted on July 27, 2007 6:21 PM — 24.7.238.54 — link — abuse?
badger #45, you make a great point about how the Big Ten finishes earlier than everyone else. I don't like conference title games, but that's a good reason to add one.
gaffbag #43, I doubt the Big Ten would/could drop Northwestern (its team in the Chicago market), but adding both Pitt and WVU is a cool idea.
Maxb said:
posted on July 27, 2007 6:28 PM — 67.93.163.35 — link — abuse?
Where was the conversation of conference expansion before the network? I read in the Des Moines register that coaches don't even necessarily want this, "I've not met anybody in coaching that really enjoys it," [Iowa Hawkeyes Coach Kirk] Ferentz said of the divisional playoff format. "There's a lot of downside to it, in my opinion."
This just seems like another money grab. If the coaches want it, that's one thing but when it's done right at the launch of a new network and major figures in college sports disagree, is it really a good idea?
WVfan said:
posted on July 27, 2007 6:41 PM — 69.47.167.199 — link — abuse?
Wow. Rutgers is the cinderalla team of the hour. They haven't had a consistent football program for years. They had one good season and have a ton of potential but I don't think they're ready for the big ten. WVU would be a better pick but I don't think they would abandon the Big East. But hey, Tech did it. All for the right price. Seems sad to see the Big East get worse if either of these teams go. I vote for Missori too.
CFBLUv said:
posted on July 27, 2007 6:42 PM — 71.182.138.209 — link — abuse?
gaffbag #43
I think you have the best point I've read. Pitt, WVU, and drop NW. NW has done nothing for the Big 10 BB or FB and the tv market is still covered by the Illini.
Pitt would immediately improve in fb, tradition is there, and Wandstadt is already a hell of a recruiter. I checked Pitt has had 2 top 20 recruiting classes in spite of 2 losing seasons under wandstadt. It's all there. Pitt v Penn State would become a huge rivalry and Pitt would link the conference. WVU and Pitt have very competitive fb & BB so no drop offs.
But it's all moot...Missouri to Big 10
Colorado St. to Big 12.gaffbag said:
posted on July 27, 2007 6:44 PM — 12.111.50.7 — link — abuse?
And in case you were all waiting with baited breath for my division alignment in the above scenario, it would look like this:
Midwest Division
*Iowa
*Minnesota
*Wisconsin
*Illinois
*Indiana
*PurdueMiddle East Division
*Michigan
*Michigan State
*Ohio State
*Penn State
*Pitt
*West VirginiaAnd actually, Northwestern does indeed have to leave for the divisions to work out nicely like this so... sorry 'Cats time to find a new home.
Yander said:
posted on July 27, 2007 6:45 PM — 72.28.40.224 — link — abuse?
I'm a Pitt alum and would love to see the Panthers move to the Big Ten. Despite its dominance over the last several years in men's basketball, Pitt would be better served -- in an overall sense -- by the Big Ten. Academically, Pitt is on par with the current membership. It just makes too much sense. Let's hope Pitt is it!
cardman steve said:
posted on July 27, 2007 6:59 PM — 74.131.212.190 — link — abuse?
the hell with anyone else. louisville,with great basketball history. a very solid football program. most of all,is their location. close to purdue,iu,ill and ohio st they travel quite well as in fan support. yes pitt and rutgers are bigger markets,but louisville still has a good market and brings more to the table sports wise. same goes with comparison with iowa st and mizzo as well. louisville fits better and the big 10 should pick the hottest school in collage sports. when you add their baseball ,womens basketball , womens volleyball,men basketball in the mix,they add up better than anyone talk of on this blog because the irish are not joining the big east.
Eddie Debartalo said:
posted on July 27, 2007 8:27 PM — 67.186.140.113 — link — abuse?
#42 you must not forget it is all about $$$$ and if the Big 10 comes to UCONN and offer them more money what they are making in the TBE. I do not care what Calhoun says. Money talks. I believe The Big 10 will Target BC, or Rutgers, or Syracuse, or Uconn or even Maryland. You can bank on this. The Big 10 is looking for a EAST COAST Market
Zac said:
posted on July 27, 2007 11:07 PM — 76.85.143.185 — link — abuse?
Cardman Steve, it's likely Louisville to the SEC, not the Big 10. If MO goes to the Big 10, AR will book to the Big 12. That opens the door for somebody to join the SEC. The SEC isn't anywhere near as full of TV market mania as with the Big East, or as the Big 10 has apparently become. No, they'd want the slot filled with a quality team. Face it; Louisville would be that team. Not to mention, that would give the SEC the added advantage of owning the KY/Louisville rivalry. Sadly, the great rivalry Louisville was building with WVU would fall, and of course, the B.E. would have to pick up another team. But, to those pulling the strings, it's not personal; it's business.
Having given this more thought, MO is the logical choice. It's the MO state flagship university, and that will bring with it the St Louis Market, which is far bigger and richer than Pittsburgh. I can't imagine the Big 10 commissioners dishonoring themselves by kicking out NW. They're a founding member, for crying out loud. Not to mention, NW solidly brings to bare the Chicago market. However, IL is that state's flagship university. They too, by association, are tied to the Chicago market. So, arguably, the Big 10 could come to an accord with NW. NW could join the MAC, Conf. USA; they could even opt to go Div-2, not that I would expect that to happen. That, then, opens the door to Pitt & WVU joining (salvaging that rivalry), as gaffbag illustrates in post 50. The Big East could then, logically pick up Marshall to reestablish the WV market, and ECU to jump into the NC market. I still don't like it. All this proves to me is that entire institutions & their admin staffs can still be bought. So much for honor and integrity. But, as I've already said, "It's not personal; it's business."
Taking a moment to step off my soap box, consider how badly unbalanced the Big 10 (Will somebody please come up with a new name?) would be in the scenario illustrated by gaffbag. All the major power is in the "Middle East". Consider the following instead.
NW Div
IA
IL
MI
MI St
MN
WISE Div
IN
OSU
Pitt
Purdue
PA St
WVUThere now, that's much better. One Div gets all the "M's"; one gets all the "P's", and they split the "W's". Who could ask for anything more???
Tomcat said:
posted on July 28, 2007 7:50 AM — 70.243.66.148 — link — abuse?
Zac # 56 I enjoy reading your ideas, and now I know that I'm going to be repeating myself on different threads with the same arguments.
1. All conferences should have the same number of teams
2. All conferences should have a Champ game or Champ games should be eliminated all together
3. All conferences should be considered Div-IA and there should be no distinction of {BCS-Conf} and non BCS conf.You will see this same argument on the Big East Expainsion thread, the Plus one Thread etc, etc.
Check this outSEC 12 teams _ Champ game
ACC 12 teams _ Champ Game
XII 12 teams _ Champ GameC-USA 12 teams _ Champ Game- non BCS
MAC 13 teams non BCS
B-10 11 teams _ no Champ game resulting in two one loss teams griping about whose #2 when they have not all faced each other, and had a champ game been played somebody would have one more Loss
Pac- 10 10 teams no Champ game BCS
Big East 8 teams no Champ game BCS
Sunbelt 8 teams non BCS
WAC 9 teams non BCS
Mt West 9 teams non BCS ?
with BYU, TCU and Utah Mt West is probably as tough as Big East, however no automatic bid
Check this out
Independent 3 teams
Total 119 Div IA schools
Bring up 1 more 120 teams
10 conferences with 12 teams each
everybody has same amount of teams
everybody has a fair shot
Leagues like Big East, Pac-10 & Big Ten would no longer have an unfair advantage over the other leaguesleagues like
C-USA, WAC, Mt West, MAC have equal shot
Big 10 pick up one MAC
Big East pick up 4 Sunbelts
The remaining 4 and the three ind's join up with WAC, Mt West and Pac 10Results teams like Bois St, Utah,Hawaii, TCU, BYU and Troy would have the same shot as Rutgers ,Louisville, Duke, Baylor and Vanderbilt.
Hookem-Hornscardman steve said:
posted on July 28, 2007 8:29 AM — 74.131.212.190 — link — abuse?
zac,i agree with you to a point. i don,t think n. western will get kicked out. i smell iowa st despite the market. perhaps pitt. being a louisville fan,the big east should have taken s miss and memphis instead of depaul and that basketball team from miller low life city. nearly all of the big east football schools could fit into the big 10. i wouldn,t be shocked if they went after s fl. iowa st seems odd being in the big 12. mizzo is a good fit as well. the hogs seem out of place in the sec. u of k would not want my cards in the sec.3/4,s of their fan base hate louisville. louisvill had to fund their own football stadium with private money because most of the state senators are u of k fans. to be honest, u of k would fit as well. the football program would advance in the big 10 and create a monster baketball conf. when comes to fan support,they rival the irish,ohio st. being the most northern sec school,hurts them in football. 85% of the fans i know don,t care about football. i lived in lex but listen to sports talk shows from lou because it,s 70% basketball. think,the big 10 is tough in football,but it is not the sec. u of k will catch up football wise and pass purdue,minn,iu and n,western.perhaps mich st as well and even ill. their program could advanced that far in football being in the big 10. i can,t stand u of k,but i give them tons of props. i bet my lousy pay check at 11 o 5 an hr. they are looking at them. the location,fan base,sports grounds are tops. market wise,you have nearly the whole state with the cincy and louisville market to back them. they smell better than anyone being talk of that means the irish,wva,mizzo,rutgers,uconn,bc,lou,iowa st,pitt and the orangemen. most of all,their football program would go forward in the big 10 as well.
BlueGold95 said:
posted on July 28, 2007 11:31 AM — 24.7.238.54 — link — abuse?
I'm not sure if we are discouraged from posting article links here, but I happened upon an interesting read by a Michigan State columnist. He addresses well my initial reaction -- that the Big Ten is serving notice to Notre Dame. His main alternative is Syracuse...
Tomcat, I've been saying something similar for the past few years. I think that such a realignment would make it easy to implement a playoff, which could help bridge the regionality of college football. I'd rather see 12 conferences with 10 teams each, with the hope that conference teams could play each other and still have 2 or 3 slots for non-conference games. You are right on about leveling the field for the so-called non-BCS teams. Unfortunately, I think it's all a pipe dream.
posted on July 28, 2007 12:21 PM — 152.163.100.136 — link — abuse?
BlueGold95 #46: What's wrong with conference title games? It determines a clear-cut winner, it enables a team to play themselves back into it if they lose a game or two, plus, it brings additional $$$$ and exposure to the conference. Having multiple conference champions is soooo 1980s. Even the Pac-10, which has 10 members, seemingly has gone now to a 9-game conference schedule, so each school gets to play everyone else. Yet, last year, they had co-champions with USC and Cal, even though Cal lost to USC. How much sense does that make? Get a title game, Pac-10.
UConn said:
posted on July 28, 2007 12:31 PM — 69.37.132.219 — link — abuse?
#54... I am sorry but you just proved my point. UConn would not benefit whatsoever from going to the Big 10. They already have great tv contracts with ESPN and CBS and since they are one of the top 5 basketball teams in the country over the past decade or so there is no reason they would leave the conference they established themselves in to go to a lower level basketball conference. Big 10 is a football conference first not basketball and that is what UConn is a school; BASKETBALL FIRST. You don't realize this since you do not live here but UConn basketball is basically the pro team here. They have more support than any other sports team in the state and thats including every type of semi-pro sports team in the state. This situation would be like if I were to say that the Big East was going to take Indiana, OSU or Michigan St. from the Big 10 to make the Big East a better basketball conference. Neither of those teams are going to move to the Big East regardless of money because there is something called honor and respect. You can keep dreaming about UConn even thinking about going to the Big 10 but it will NEVER happen. Syracuse most likely will not move either. None of the top 5 teams from the Big East would benefit from a move and the Big East will match any $$$ offer to keep those teams in the conference because they already lost BC, Va tech, and Miami. I dont care about losing any of those teams except for BC but it will not happen to the Big East again.
M GO BLUE said:
posted on July 28, 2007 2:58 PM — 216.46.209.108 — link — abuse?
gaffbag, WHAT ?????? Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan State, Pitt, And West Virginia IN THE SAME DIVISION........
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA....
................Your "Midwest Division" would get their teeth scattered all over the field 9 out of 10 years by the "Middle east division"
No offense to Wisconsin and Iowa.
Are you people ready for this???
WE ALREADY HAVE A CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIP!!!
(it's called Michigan vs Ohio State)GO BLUE (42 CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIPS AND COUNTING)
jma019 said:
posted on July 28, 2007 4:30 PM — 76.241.159.85 — link — abuse?
Sorry to rain on some of your parades, but the Big Ten schools - plus former athletics member U of Chicago - all comprise the Committee on Institutional Cooperation or "Academic Big Ten" which is possibly the most respected academic consortium in the US this side of the Ivy League. Under no circumstances then is Northwestern going anywhere, nor will the Big Ten ever accept a run-of-the-mill commuter school like Louisville, Memphis, Cincinnati, or S. Florida. This academic/athletic balance also rules out any of the MAC schools except possibly Miami U. West Virginia, while better, still does not offer the proper mix of academics or TV viewership to bolster its athletic prowess, so it too is out. Navy and/or Army just can't compete athletically and Temple got the boot from the Big East.
If Notre Dame, the best possible solution, is truly not an option this leaves the list of realistic possibilities at Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers, Mizzou, Iowa State, UConn, and BC with Nebraska, Kansas, or maybe even Texas as longshots on the outside. Not a single additional school except Maryland makes any sense at all. I happen to favor Mizzou or Pitt but the Big Ten seems to have its eyes on the larger markets of the East Coast.
cardman steve said:
posted on July 28, 2007 6:04 PM — 74.131.212.190 — link — abuse?
bluegold95,i haved been watching those espn channels all day. the coaches or the 1,s i have seen on tv don,t like the ideal of playng a champ game for the big 10 if they get an extra team. i don,t blame those guys. that 1 extra game can have draw backs. not having that extra team has helped the big 10,pac 10 and big east as well. is the extra money worth it when the big 10 is getting paid well anyway? this past season for example and the big 10 had an extra team. ohio st had to play wis. and wis pulled the upset? you answer that. you know the answer,no bcs camp game for the big 10. money is the only upside to this issue,but the big 10 is not lacking the money. that,s the bottom line.
cardman steve said:
posted on July 28, 2007 6:08 PM — 74.131.212.190 — link — abuse?
sorry bluegold95,my post was meant for war eagle atlanta. sir,that extra game has cost the sec a chance to have a team in the bcs title game and last year was luck thanks to ucla and that,s a fact jack.
BlueGold95 said:
posted on July 28, 2007 6:24 PM — 24.7.238.54 — link — abuse?
War Eagle Atlanta #61, I think that the Pac-10 has it right. Every team plays every other team. They can call it a "co-championship", but at the same time they have a clear winner because USC beat Cal head to head. I know the Pac- and Big-10 have some special rules about who gets to go to the Rose Bowl based on who's gone more recently, but that's just seeing bowls for what they are -- festivals and tourism.
Title games, on the other hand, give conference teams the excuse not to play every other team in the conference each year. To me, the basis for claiming that it's tough to play in a conference depends on that very thing. If you have a "great" season like Wisconsin last year, but didn't play Ohio State, where do you really stand?
Further, title games open the door to re-matches, and I think that there are too few college games to have re-matches. A team should not have to beat another twice, nor does a "season split" yield a clear champ in my eyes.
Lastly, as a fan of the sport, I'd much rather watch the Iron Bowl than the SEC title game. Or watch UM-OSU instead of a Big-Two-Little-Nine title game. Sure, I could have seen the Badgers and Buckeyes that way, but I could also have been subjected to a Hawkeyes/Buckeyes rematch that just diluted the significance of the traditional season-ending conference match-ups.
BlueGold95 said:
posted on July 28, 2007 6:52 PM — 24.7.238.54 — link — abuse?
cardman steve #67, I'm with you and the coaches regarding title games. However, you can make a good argument that the SEC title game last year was the reason that Florida got a berth in the NC game.
jma019 #65, thanks for mentioning the CIC and U-Chicago. There were a lot of academic folks in South Bend pushing to join the Big Ten the last time around (late 90s) for that reason. ND's a great undergraduate school, but the graduate/research resources of the Big Ten schools are impressive. It will be interesting to see where this talk leads.
Matt said:
posted on July 28, 2007 11:42 PM — 70.59.161.173 — link — abuse?
As a big fan of the conference, I am excited for the possibility of new rivalries. How come no one has mentioned Nebraska?
I'm not a fan of the Huskers, but they definitely have nation-wide TV appeal. They are also very disgusted with future CCGs being held in Texas four of the next five years. They are competitive in all sports and are not that far geographically out of the way.
Missouri might seem a more appealling (Stl and KC) market, but one must realize Stl is already a Big 10 market with Champaign so close. Iowa St. makes no sense as Iowa is clearly a Big 10 state.
My reasons are personal. I would love to see the Big Red have to compete year-in year-out with Michigan, Ohio St., Wisconsin and my favorite, the Iowa Hawkeyes.OU Fan said:
posted on July 29, 2007 7:32 AM — 84.146.30.5 — link — abuse?
Once and if the Big 10(11) add another team , that idiot Big 10 commissioner Delany will start whining again because there will be 2 Big 12 conferences. He'll then want the original Big 12 conference to either lose a team or give up its name, logo, or whatever. BOOMER SOONER!
cardman steve said:
posted on July 29, 2007 10:33 AM — 74.131.212.190 — link — abuse?
in my opinion,the big 10 has to be looking at u of k. they are crazy not too. i don,t kentucky would leave the sec,but they smell better than anyone consider. 1.fan support 2.market value,they have the whole state of kentucky with strong fan support in s west ohio along with the cincy market and add the louisville market as well. 3.location 4.they would make the big 10 the no.1 baketball conf. 5.football wise,their program will surpass northwestern,ill,iu and the gophers and will come to par with m st.,purdue and maybe iowa.in the sec,they have no chance football wise in catching up. they could,in the big 10. 6.sport complexes are better than most teams being consider. rupp arena 24,000,commonwealth 70,000 and they support the football team madly and add more fans to games playing ugly football than the gophers winning,n western and iu.7. maybe they are to far north for the sec as well. easy travel time to purdue,iu,ohio st,ill,n western, m st. and mich. 8. the fans,they travel like an army. they come out like army ants,fire ants and driver ants. the big 10 has the team to pick right here in kentucky. this is my opinion only. it will never happen with u of k southern ties. their basketball will,which is their passion will suffer in the big 10. a much tougher dog fight basketball wise despite the gators winnig 2 stright title games in basketball and having lsu in the final 4. anyway,i think kentucky will a better fit than any team that spoken of on the various post about this subject and i think louisville is a good fit as well for the big 10.
Tomcat said:
posted on July 29, 2007 11:05 AM — 70.243.66.148 — link — abuse?
#61 War Eagle Atl valid points regarding Conf Champ games.
#68 BlueGold95 I'm in agreement with your third paragraph, Yet as a Horns fan that is exactaly what we have every time.Since the XII started the Horns have played in three Conf Champ games all three to teams they already played during regular season.Had the Ten had a Conf Champ game there would not have been one undefeated and two one loss teams, There would have been possibly three one loss teams or one two loss team.
It is not to the Pac-10 or Big 10/11 advantage to have a conf champ game.There would be financial advantages to an additional game however that would hurt their conference overall record, because there would be an additional loss for one of their teams resulting in a loss in the polls etc. Had the 10 played it out, then perhaps an OSU vs Mich rematch could have resulted in three one loss teams for that conference. Same goes for the PAc USC vs Cal would have given the bears a shot at defeating the mighty two loss Trojans.Hookem-Horns
clemson said:
posted on July 29, 2007 1:04 PM — 71.12.216.205 — link — abuse?
Diggs #71 - how would 16 teams in the SEC be manageable? would there be two 8-team divisions? with only 12 games would you be playing every team in your division (7 games), a cross-over opponent from the other division (8th game) and two teams from the other division, round-robin (9th, 10th games) and only have 2 OOC games? or would you play ALL conference games all season? that wouldnt be very respected by pollsters.
You couldn't do away with divisions becuase there are certain teams you have to play every year, eg. rivalries, but 16 teams seams almost unmanagable.
who would you consider as the 4 new teams in the SEC? as a Clemson fan, i love the ACC, but would love to see us in the SEC (i know it will never happen), but reviving rivalries with Auburn, Georgia, playing Tennesee, Florida, and LSU (no matter where you are, you're always playing in Death Valley), and of course the in-state rivalry wtih So Car. Florida State, Louisville, and Georgia Tech would also make great additions. And if Arkansas was to move to the Bid XII for some reason, i think Tulane or another colorful Louisiana team would be great. Then there would be 2 teams from every state of SC, GA, FL, AL, LA, KY, TN, MS - ensuring great rivalries year in and year out. Making the SEC the Super Conference - rich with hostile rivalries, the grandest and richest tradition, and the best football imaginable.Cape Cod Tom '84 Rutgers said:
posted on July 29, 2007 4:29 PM — 24.218.208.81 — link — abuse?
Cardman;
It's very difficult reading your blogs. No offense to you my Big East brother, but can you try to use capital letters amd the correct spacing once in a while? We are interested in what you have to say, but you are making it hard on us. Take your time. No short cuts.
Thanks in advance, Bro.
Eddie Debartalo said:
posted on July 30, 2007 11:47 AM — 204.117.78.97 — link — abuse?
Money talks!!! Football brings big money to colleges. If BBall brought in more money than Football, BC, V-Tech, and The U would never considered leaving the big east. If the Big Ten courts some east coast teams Maryland, Rutgers, Syracuse, Conn, or BC, you can holla basketball tradition all you want, but if the moneys right and schools will make more revenue than it is making now, there will be some fusing BBall coaches coaching their school in the Big 10 conference. I hate to say it their is no more loyalty anymore. Money talks!! The Big 10 is coming east in a few years
UConn said:
posted on July 30, 2007 1:16 PM — 69.37.166.143 — link — abuse?
Money might talk but losing a Hall of Fame coach means more to the University of Connecticut. Calhoun was outraged with the ACC taking those teams and has vowed never to play BC again. If UConn did the same thing you could also expect an early retirement from one of the greatest college coaches in history. UConn will not go. They do not gain from going; they are not going t be winning football bowl games when part of the Big Ten and thats where the football money comes into play. It is disgusting that higher learning institutions are falling into the money money money aspect and spend more time and effort on sports than the actual learning atmospheres. College it to further your education and advancement it is not suppose to be a business based around how can I make the most money.
Frank the Tank said:
posted on July 30, 2007 4:19 PM — 208.252.154.162 — link — abuse?
Other than the obvious "perfect fit" of Notre Dame, I've always believed that Syracuse would be the best expansion choice. If the Big Ten is going to expand, it needs to go East as opposed to adding on the fringes of the Midwest. Here are the reasons that I put forth last year:
http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2006/03/05/big-ten-from-eleven-to-twelve/
John Doody said:
posted on July 31, 2007 2:12 AM — 68.193.149.158 — link — abuse?
Rutgers in the Big 10 last year or this year is competitive with every team besides Michigan and Ohio State. Wisconsin, Penn State, and Rutgers are pretty evenly matched. Purdue lost every game they played against a good team. The rest of the conference stinks. I can't believe people would think that Rutgers would be a doormat in a conference with 4 good teams.
Dan Doody said:
posted on July 31, 2007 3:03 PM — 206.21.11.203 — link — abuse?
Rutgers would be no match for teams like Iowa or even (should i say it) Northwestern. Rutgers was a big fish in a small pond last year. They would get laughed off the field in a good 6-7 games, year in and year out.
And as far as the Big Ten network is concerned I think it's bullshit. All the good games are televised on the major stations. I could care less to watch Indiana and Purdue battle it out.cardman steve said:
posted on July 31, 2007 4:01 PM — 74.131.212.190 — link — abuse?
Hi, I still think U of K will a better fit in the Big 10 conf. Better than anyone spoken of on this blog. Kentucky, locatin wise, market wise and their complexs are tops. The football program will pass up, MIN, IU, ILL, NORTHWESTERN and catch up with PURDUE AND MICH ST and add alot of fire power to the BIG 10 basketball wise. Fan support is beyound great and the only school i know of that plays lousy football and still gets 55,000 in a 70,000 seat stadium. Is that better CAPE COD TOM.
Cape Cod Tom '84 Rutgers said:
posted on July 31, 2007 8:40 PM — 24.218.208.81 — link — abuse?
John Doody;
One decent year doesn't mean much to the likes of Ohio State and Michigan. We need to be more humble and eat more crow.
Personally, I think RU is overrated. Why? The teams we compete against are weak, save Louieville and WVU. Let's get real for one moment. Look at our schedule this year. Some of these schools are at best junior colleges. Others are "has beens." Schools like Michigan would destroy us.
Before we crow too loud, we need to beat Penn State, WVU, Michigan State and others; often, not just once in a blue moon.
Don't get me wrong, I love Rutgers, but we as fans need to stay grounded.
-CCT
goodolnuma5 said:
posted on July 31, 2007 10:23 PM — 65.24.221.145 — link — abuse?
Refresh my memory, wasnt there talk about Neb? The B10 has been holding out for ND.(not gonna happen, they already play a B10 sched)
Rutgers could hang in the B10 because their recruiting would improve. Pitt would suffer tho.
Zac said:
posted on July 31, 2007 11:19 PM — 76.85.143.185 — link — abuse?
I'm of the opinion; expansion is over-rated, especially in this day and age with fuel prices and the cost of travel being as high as they are. Imagine the Miami/Washington home & home series a few years back played today. Even the FSU or Miami Vs. ND series of years past would be expensive for the visitor today. By spreading the conference over a wide area, those teams on the fringes suffer the heaviest costs. This never ending search for the school in the perfect situation (academics, commitment to sports, fan-base, TV market) is all well and good until travel costs results in diminishing returns. It's time the NCAA grew with the times. What is the basis for a 12 team conference requirement before they can have a conference championship game? Why can't it be 10 teams? What would the NCAA do, if an entire conference decided, "Screw You! We're having a championship game with or without your permission."? Would the NCAA put the entire Big 10 on notice, or the other way around? Face it; if the Big 10, and the ACC for that matter, didn't have to worry over the number of schools in their league, they could have their lucrative game, and give back a couple of schools in the process. That way, leagues like the Big East, which spent the time & money building to the point of presenting desirable teams wouldn't have to worry about defections or hostile take-overs. We could concentrate on the game, not the business aspects or politics. Just a thought.
Big Ten land said:
posted on August 1, 2007 10:41 AM — 128.255.88.71 — link — abuse?
Why not truely make it a super conference and take several teams at once. Grab Rutgers and Syracuse in the East and Missouri in the West. This would expand coverage into the NY/NJ/east coast markets and into S.L. Now you would have a 14 team conference with 7 teams in a division. Then you could devide the conferences as Follows and keep many of the border rivalries.
West: Missouri, Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, Purdue, Northwestern
East: Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State, Syracuse, Rutgers, Michigan State, Michigan
This would also make a pretty good BB conference.Big ten land said:
posted on August 1, 2007 11:04 AM — 128.255.88.71 — link — abuse?
If the big ten is going to expand I think they need to do it by more than one team and keep its national relevance by becoming the first super conference. I see them expanding by 3 teams like the ACC did. This would allow the big ten to take on east coast/NJ/NY markets by adding Syracuse and Rutgers, then expanding into Stl/KC market with Missouri. You would then devide the conference into east west divisions.
West: Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue.
East: Syracuse, Rutgers, Penn State, Ohio state, Michigan, Indiana, and Michigan state.This would decrease travel for the majority of teams and would keep many of the rivalries. Not to mention it would vastly increase the strength of BB in the conference.
james higgs said:
posted on August 2, 2007 12:50 AM — 12.213.80.54 — link — abuse?
I think that the big ten should try to take kentucky. they would be average in football, but one of the best if not the best in basketball, and that would open up for the Mighty SEC to try and get Texas, Texas Tech, and Texas AM. hell ya'll can have Mizzou, Rutgers or any other crappy football teams.
"THE" BUCKEYE MARK said:
posted on August 3, 2007 9:25 AM — 70.62.161.114 — link — abuse?
just a couple thoughts
RU to far awayothers to steal from the Big East
Pitt bring back the Penn St-Pitt rivalry the schools wont do it
Cincinati they would need a bigger stadium but there is one down the river Tosu-cincy would become a lot like UM-MSU
WV I want to see them play Big Ten teams great Gameday match ups plus Morgantown is a nice town haven't seen a football game there but it is a nice place to visit
Loisville needs bigger stadium but would provide good games
other teams to add
Kentucky "Basketball" in football they could hang with Northwestern,Illinios,Indiana,purdue
Missouri exluding the basketball about the same
Notre Dame would fit geographically but they don't need B10 and they are to good "and greedy"
My favorites in order
WVU
Cincinati
PittNew Name for Conference
Great Lakescardman steve said:
posted on August 3, 2007 9:47 AM — 74.131.212.190 — link — abuse?
Someone with some logic. MR. HIGGS! Texas would come into play along with other big 12 teams. Rutgers in the big 10. Market wise is the only reason, but for location and even market, KENTUCKY. I Am not a little blue fan. Their football would improve and their basketball would make the BIG 10 the best conf. With logic, U of K has better fan support than any teams on this blog to join the BIG 10 basketball wise and give ND a run for the money football wise in fan support. 24,000 for b-ball and 70,000 for basketball and the whole state of KENTUCKY along with LOUISVILLE and CINCY areas market wise.
UConn said:
posted on August 3, 2007 1:56 PM — 76.243.114.23 — link — abuse?
Some of these make sense. Such as Cinci or Missouri. How can everyone say that Kentucky would benefit from joining the Big 10?? SEC football is the best in the country and the revenues that the SEC pulls in almost doubles any other conference. Not to mention SEC basketball is much better. For people to say if Kentucky went to the Big 10 it would make them the best basketball conference must be on some great drugs cause it wouldn't. The Big East has UConn, Cuse, Pitt, Louisville, Notre Dame, West Virginia, Nova, Marquette, Gtown that are for the most part perennial top 25 and tournament teams. The Big 10 has OSU, MSU, Wisconsin and Indiana with Illinois good every once in a while. With the increasing costs for travel the Big 10 would be better suited to stay the way it is or add a team that is in the Great Lakes region.
cardman steve said:
posted on August 3, 2007 7:02 PM — 74.131.212.190 — link — abuse?
Those days are over, drug wise UConn. They can,t win in the sec football wise. Great money football wise from the sec, but the checks would be fat from the BIG 10 as well. Look! They fit location wise, a good market for havy a crazy fan base and most of all they will win and go to bowl games every other year. That won,t happen in the SEC for bowl games. They can rival ND in fan support. The MUSIC CITY BOWL is a very good example and they come out of the wood works for basketball as well. SYR, WVA, RU, MIZZO, IOWA ST, PITT, LOU and UCONN can not match KENTUCKY.
Stephen said:
posted on August 3, 2007 9:08 PM — 76.1.72.182 — link — abuse?
Missouri makes the most sense. Especially being bookended by both KC and St L. Iowa to the north, Illinois and Ohio State very close by as well. Overall, a much neater fit. That would cause a reaction from the Big 12, most likely bringing Houston back for the exact same reason...big market money.
John said:
posted on August 6, 2007 1:45 PM — 75.109.243.154 — link — abuse?
Remember Arkansas' coach Houston Nutt, the "him and his dad did such and such",
Obviously he did no major in English, well at least I HOPE NOT??
Read the papers about the # of text messages and emails he had during a 4 to 6 weeks period.
DMZ said:
posted on August 6, 2007 4:31 PM — 72.12.13.98 — link — abuse?
The only possible change to the SEC would be a swap of South Carolina and the ACC's Georgia Tech.
This would put both schools back in their original conferences - USC was a founder member of the ACC and GT is an original member of the SEC. It also creates even bigger in-state and border-state rivalries.
Georgia Tech's new AD came from LSU, so this guy knows the drawing power of the SEC. The only time Tech sells out its football stadium is when they play SEC teams and Clemson. Tech would love to finally be able to sell out its football stadium and create its own passionate football following. Tech is tired of playing second-fiddle to Georgia, even in Atlanta, and a move to the SEC would begin to even the playing field. Football = $$$.
(Tech basketball might not want to leave the ACC, put the SEC is longer a pushover conference.)
Cock'n'Fire South Carolina 101 said:
posted on August 6, 2007 10:40 PM — 96.10.98.113 — link — abuse?
dang that is the stupidest thing ive ever heard...nowhere in that statement did i hear a single thing that had to do with any benefits that south carolina would have...the only thing that would help south carolina is giving them a very easy schedule which i certainly wouldnt like...south carolina left the acc because they though they were better...however it was a mistake but once south carolina joined the sec it was the greatest mistake they ever made...besides i dont think that tickets would sell out after an 0-11 season in the acc...i would not waste money on season tickets if i had to watch an acc schedule
Midwesterner said:
posted on August 7, 2007 10:20 AM — 24.148.69.36 — link — abuse?
I hope the BigTen(11) doesnt really think expanding out east is a good idea. Sure, it might be a big TV market, but a school like Rutgers would bring their east coast attitude with them into my beloved midwest. We dont need that here. Nothing east of the Appalachians, thank you very much...
Notre Dame is the obvious choice, but that likely wont happen. Mizzou and Pitt would be the best choices. I like the idea of the super conference. Then we would need one more to the two mentioned above; WVU, Nebraska, or Louisville. I dont think Iowa State can happen due a rumor I heard that there is an Iowa law which prohibts IA St and Iowa from being in the same conference.
Finally, any talk of dropping Northwestern is insane. They are a founding member, give the conference great academics, and have been able to make a run at the football championship not too long ago. Also, for all the Chicagoans that went to a BigTen(11) school, it gives them a local venue to see their school play Northwestern. Ryan Field is always half Purple and half some other BigTen(11) team's colors.
Besides, every confernce has to have a Northwestern...Vandy in the SEC, Baylor in the Big 12, Stanford in the Pac10, Duke in the ACC.
DMZ said:
posted on August 7, 2007 11:35 AM — 72.12.13.98 — link — abuse?
Mizzou is by far the best fit, geographically and TV wise (St. Louis and Kansas City)...
Big 10 East
Penn State
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Purdue
IndianaBig 10 West
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Iowa
Illinois
Northwestern
Missouri(Then expect Colorado State to jump to the Big 12.)
After that, I would think Syracuse is next. Compared to Rutgers, the Orange bring much more to the all-around table, they're geographically closer and they still provide access into the NYC TV market by being a NY state school. After that, Pitt or Louisville...
Big 10 East
Penn State
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Indiana
Syracuse / Pitt / LouisvilleBig 10 West
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Iowa
Illinois
Northwestern
Purdue(If one of these three is taken by the Big 10, I would then bet on Marshall to expand its football stadium and join the Big East.)
Barry in MO said:
posted on August 7, 2007 3:10 PM — 216.41.135.108 — link — abuse?
Big Ten swiping a Big 12 away....that would
explain Kevin Weiberg's move from Big 12
Commissioner to Big 10 Network.@ 30...Mizzou won't get @$$ kicked every week.
Coach Pinkel has roots in northern Ohio and
is getting recruits from TX now. Get real.@ 65...Mizzou has a good journalism school and
is near the KC market. This is intriguing.@ 70...Huskers to Big 10 would put too many
traditional football heavyweights together.
I wouldn't rule out Missouri St jumping to the
big stage. Branson's a good sell for visitors
LOL.@ 98...Good question. But after losing by 36
to USC, kicking starters off the team to
avoid an NCAA spanking, being owned by Texas the
last few years, and whining all season long
about a bad call in Oregon.....I wouldn't sound
off too loudly LMAO.cardman steve said:
posted on August 7, 2007 10:11 PM — 74.131.212.190 — link — abuse?
Look dude,the BIG 10 is will not drop a team. I still say KENTUCKY brings more to the table than anyone on this blog.
Zac said:
posted on August 7, 2007 11:14 PM — 76.85.152.62 — link — abuse?
GatorH/108: That's called cornering the market, my friend. Imagine FL/FSU or Miami/FL on a Thursday night game. How big an audience do you think that may attract??? The truth be known, however, fans are really beginning to enjoy Cardinal, Knights, and Mountaineer football. No brag, all fact.
gatorhippy said:
posted on August 8, 2007 12:03 PM — 209.16.115.5 — link
shiguy said:
posted on July 26, 2007 2:41 PM — 64.9.12.234 — link — abuse?hmmm well rutgers is located in one of the largest markets but i don't think they're taking into account that rutgers has to compete for television time in the aera other than local broadcasts. etc. while they may be playing abc, nbc and all the other stations many times are playing other games in the country. therefore even though rutgers is only a few miles from all those televisions getting on them is sometimes a problem for them. although with that new big-10 network deal comming that might work out. i hope not though. rutgers is one of the older teams that has been in the conference almost since it was started.