Big 10 Expansion Thread -Big Ten ready for a playoff .. finally?

[tarcone]

BC brings Boston and Virginia solidifies DC. The BTN footprint would be huge. Each school would make about $35 million a year just off that 16 team conference.

[Marmel]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

Another thing that I probably ought to save for a blog post...is a lot of folks are quibbling about the bleeding over of geographic alliances, but we're talking about organizations with long histories that were formed due to shared interest, geography and perhaps collaborative goals the old dudes in smoke filled rooms had at the time.

The other elephant in the room is the fact that it was a lot more expensive to travel in the old days than it is now and so, of course no one would've started a large geographic conference in the days of bus trips. But now? All of our professional leagues are bicoastal behemoths, so I think if anything, college sports were just slow to the game in some ways to catch on to national trends.

Even shitty, third tier pro leagues extend nationally in many cases. So while I can understand the consternation, it just seems like a lot of these moves while strange make sense in the context of a globalized world where Greece and France share the same currency.

I feel like people will get used to it. Or the whole thing will dissolve over time and go back to how it was. But the former seems far more likely to me than the latter.

I disagree with this 100%. The NCAA spans the whole country and while it is great fun for an East Coast time to play an Ohio State, or a California team once a year, it is much more fun when you play your local rivals. NCAA = NFL, Conferences=Divisions - try to keep them somewhat geographically relevant.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Marmel

I disagree with this 100%. The NCAA spans the whole country and while it is great fun for an East Coast time to play an Ohio State, or a California team once a year, it is much more fun when you play your local rivals. NCAA = NFL, Conferences=Divisions - try to keep them somewhat geographically relevant.

This is why the B1G stays East. 4 divisions of 4 teams:

Iowa
Wisky
Neb
Minn

Illinois
Purdue
Ind
NW

MSU
Mich
OSU
PSU

MD
Rutgers
VA
BC

Or something along those lines

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by tarcone

BC brings Boston and Virginia solidifies DC. The BTN footprint would be huge. Each school would make about $35 million a year just off that 16 team conference.

Also, BC plays hockey.

In case you can't tell, I really hate the Big Ten for hockey.

[HerRealName]

Originally Posted by Marmel

Long term, if this plays out into the 4x16 super conferences, then this was a bad move for the Big10, probably in response to the ACC getting a foothold with Notre Dame. The Big10 figures if the ACC is going to invade our territory then we'll take a shot back at them and steal Maryland. Now, this move did shake up the ACC confidence a bit in the very short term, but looking big picture, nobody in the ACC cares that Maryland is leaving. The Big10 ends up with 2 crap sports programs but some good markets. The ACC still has the advantage with Notre Dame.

In a 4x16 scenario, the 3 obvious locks are Pac10, Big10 and SEC. But where is the PAC10 going to pull its teams from? The only obvious answer is the Big 12. The ACC will be the 4th Super Conference in this scenario. In a 4x16, Notre Dame cannot stay independant, so they end up in the ACC. The big score will be if the ACC can get Texas or OK in the future. The other going to the Pac10. The Big 10 would have been better served to wait and get some better pickings from the Big12 instead of taking Rutgers, who they can have anytime they want in the future. They jumped too quick here as a reactionary move to Notre Dame's move.

Personally, I think this is all horseshit. I am for an all-inclusive system where conferences are based on geography and long standing rivalries. The more conference movement that occurs, the less and less interest I have in college football. In my world, basketball is king, and I despise these super conferences. What fun is it seeing the same teams over and over and over again in the title games? How does it make any sense that Alabama gets the bid last year for the title game because they have the 'best' loss, but this year they get the nod because they have the hardest schedule (and Oregon has the 'best' lost at least by the BCS standings)? Yes, I know the SEC always has some great teams, give me the NFL's parody anyday.

I am really not looking forward to playing Duke, Virginia, GTech, etc. (no offense to those fine schools) when I love playing Uconn, Rutgers, Georgetown, Villanova, etc. I can't imagine Maryland or Rutgers fans are really excited to play Illinois, Minnesota, Wisconsin, etc... Again, all great schools with good teams, but really of no interest to (former) big East teams. I am sure the Clemsons of the world could give two shits about Syracuse as well as OSU and Michigan playing Maryland or Rutgers. It is just stupid.

I can't see Notre Dame minus the football program as a valuable conference partner. Quite the opposite, actually.

I hope the Big Ten completely ignores Notre Dame and Texas, they just don't fit the communist paradise of the Big Ten. The Big Ten even shares bowl revenues equally across the conference.

Conference rivalries do develop quite naturally. Who would've thought Illinois would see Penn State as a hated conference basketball opponent. A couple upsets and a lot of close games and it happened. Maybe not to the level of Indiana or Iowa but that game gets Illinois fans on edge.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by tarcone

BC brings Boston

Ask the ACC how that's working out for them.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Ask the ACC how that's working out for them.

The ACC doesnt have a television netwrok of their own. So I cant compare.
The Big Ten Network would love to access Boston and the advertising dollars.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

Another thing that I probably ought to save for a blog post...is a lot of folks are quibbling about the bleeding over of geographic alliances, but we're talking about organizations with long histories that were formed due to shared interest, geography and perhaps collaborative goals the old dudes in smoke filled rooms had at the time.

The other elephant in the room is the fact that it was a lot more expensive to travel in the old days than it is now and so, of course no one would've started a large geographic conference in the days of bus trips. But now? All of our professional leagues are bicoastal behemoths, so I think if anything, college sports were just slow to the game in some ways to catch on to national trends.

Even shitty, third tier pro leagues extend nationally in many cases. So while I can understand the consternation, it just seems like a lot of these moves while strange make sense in the context of a globalized world where Greece and France share the same currency.

I feel like people will get used to it. Or the whole thing will dissolve over time and go back to how it was. But the former seems far more likely to me than the latter.

I'm sure people will get used to it but something is definitely lost. If you go to school in the Northeast you had friends at all the big east schools and could tie weekend road trips around games. As you graduated and started careers, you still had those fun regional rivalries, the guy down the hall remembers the game where your guy hit a bunch of three pointers and won the game. It's not the end of the world with less of that stuff, but its a different world and its one I'm glad I didn't go to school in. The biggest game in Idaho every year, the only game everybody talked about and had an opinion about was of course, BSU/Idaho, and that's gone. Somehow it makes more sense for BSU to make road trips to Louisville and Central Florida and have zero cheering section. I don't doubt that that makes sense financially, but it is a loss to the college experience.

[cuervo72]

It's too bad PA is already covered, else I'd say Pitt.

[molson]

Originally Posted by tarcone

The Big Ten Network would love to access Boston and the advertising dollars.

Why haven't they asked them to come in then? Why don't they just bring in one school from each of the top 25 markets? I don't understand why the Big 10 Network is so much more valuable to DirecTV just because a BC team nobody cares about and hardly anybody watches on TV is in the big ten, but apparently it is, so they might as well milk this.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by molson

Why haven't they asked them to come in then? Why don't they just bring in one school from each of the top 25 markets? I don't understand why the Big 10 Network is so much more valuable to DirecTV just because a BC team nobody cares about and hardly anybody watches on TV is in the big ten, but apparently it is, so they might as well milk this.

Baby steps. The B1G isnt a rash, shoot from the hip conference. SEC went 14 1st. Then we followed. When SEC goes 16 or the PAC12 goes 16. Then the B1G jumps.
The B1G doesnt want to be the bell cow. Just in case something goes wrong.

[General Mike]

Originally Posted by Marmel

Long term, if this plays out into the 4x16 super conferences, then this was a bad move for the Big10, probably in response to the ACC getting a foothold with Notre Dame. The Big10 figures if the ACC is going to invade our territory then we'll take a shot back at them and steal Maryland. Now, this move did shake up the ACC confidence a bit in the very short term, but looking big picture, nobody in the ACC cares that Maryland is leaving. The Big10 ends up with 2 crap sports programs but some good markets. The ACC still has the advantage with Notre Dame.

The ACC has the advantage in what? Money? No. Football programs? No. Basketball programs? Probably, but not because of ND.

And as far as being excited about the idea of playing Illinois or Minnesota or Wisconsin? It's a lot better then playing Louisville, Cincinnati, Memphis, Houston, etc going forward.

[cuervo72]

Yeah, I don't at all see how the ACC is operating from a position of power here.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by HerRealName

I hope the Big Ten completely ignores Notre Dame and Texas, they just don't fit the communist paradise of the Big Ten. The Big Ten even shares bowl revenues equally across the conference.

You mean other conferences don't share bowl revenue equally?

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

Another thing that I probably ought to save for a blog post...is a lot of folks are quibbling about the bleeding over of geographic alliances, but we're talking about organizations with long histories that were formed due to shared interest, geography and perhaps collaborative goals the old dudes in smoke filled rooms had at the time.

The other elephant in the room is the fact that it was a lot more expensive to travel in the old days than it is now and so, of course no one would've started a large geographic conference in the days of bus trips. But now? All of our professional leagues are bicoastal behemoths, so I think if anything, college sports were just slow to the game in some ways to catch on to national trends.

Even shitty, third tier pro leagues extend nationally in many cases. So while I can understand the consternation, it just seems like a lot of these moves while strange make sense in the context of a globalized world where Greece and France share the same currency.

I feel like people will get used to it. Or the whole thing will dissolve over time and go back to how it was. But the former seems far more likely to me than the latter.

I get what you're saying about travel and globalization, but the tradition and rivalries are stronger in college football, so it's different. Take molson's example -- and he's talking about Idaho, which doesn't even have any pro teams. The fact that college football has so many teams and extends down to more rural places makes geography more important. I think you're right, that people will get used to it (people always do, especially as a new generation of fans grows up, and it's not going away since there's more money this way), but the point is just that something is getting lost here.

[Marmel]

Originally Posted by General Mike

The ACC has the advantage in what? Money? No. Football programs? No. Basketball programs? Probably, but not because of ND.

And as far as being excited about the idea of playing Illinois or Minnesota or Wisconsin? It's a lot better then playing Louisville, Cincinnati, Memphis, Houston, etc going forward.

The ACC has the advantage over the Big12 based simply on geography. Where is the Pac 12 going to look when it expands to 16?

Rutgers biggest, greatest game ever was against Louisville. I'll give you Memphis and Houston obviously, but Rutgers will never have a game like that again. Better get that BCS bowl this year or it may never happen now.

edited to add: Obviously it was the right move for Rutgers and they had to go. They are actually the only big winner in this latest move.

[General Mike]

Originally Posted by Marmel

The ACC has the advantage over the Big12 based simply on geography. Where is the Pac 12 going to look when it expands to 16?

Rutgers biggest, greatest game ever was against Louisville. I'll give you Memphis and Houston obviously, but Rutgers will never have a game like that again. Better get that BCS bowl this year or it may never happen now.

edited to add: Obviously it was the right move for Rutgers and they had to go. They are actually the only big winner in this latest move.

Oh so now its the Big 12 that the ACC has the advantage over and not the Big Ten? I see what you are trying to do there.

[cuervo72]

An advantage over both, apparently. The Big 12 because it is going to fall prey to the Pac-12, and the Big 10 because the ACC is going to be better able to geographically vulture what's left. I don't know if I buy either theory.

(I say - ACC should let the football schools go, concentrate on basketball.)

[Marmel]

Originally Posted by General Mike

Oh so now its the Big 12 that the ACC has the advantage over and not the Big Ten? I see what you are trying to do there.

Perhaps I wasn't clear. The ACC has the advantage over the Big12 when it comes to the 4x16 scenario.

[panerd]

All I have to add is how dumb it is when fans of the Big Ten schools try to use the term "B1G" like it is catching on with anyone in the country besides them. (Much like their stupid division names)

[General Mike]

Originally Posted by Marmel

Perhaps I wasn't clear. The ACC has the advantage over the Big12 when it comes to the 4x16 scenario.

Probably, but if we get to that place, the end game is probably more of a hodge-podge conference between the ACC and Big 12.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by panerd

All I have to add is how dumb it is when fans of the Big Ten schools try to use the term "B1G" like it is catching on with anyone in the country besides them. (Much like their stupid division names)

Well, I never use the term "B1G" and despite being a big Michigan fan and two time alumn I could not tell you whether Michigan is in the "Leaders" or "Legends" division.

So, I guess I'm not dumb! My employer will be thrilled.

[Butter]

Not as gay as guys who use the term "gay" as a derogatory term, though.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

Not as gay as guys who use the term "gay" as a derogatory term, though.

Word.

[Passacaglia]

But think how awesome B16 will be when we go to 16 teams!

[Butter]

That actually would work pretty nicely.

[HerRealName]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

You mean other conferences don't share bowl revenue equally?

They share but not all conferences share equally. I'm sure there are other conferences that do share equally, Im obviously not sure about all the details. My main point is that Texas would have no desire to share TV revenues equally and ND losing out on the big bowl payout would be difficult for them to accept as well. I just don't think they fit in well in the Big Ten for that reason, they just have a different mindset.

I read somewhere that SEC bowl participants get an additional $1 to $2 million over their expenses depending on the bowl payout but I'm not in a good enough reception area to search for the article now.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

But think how awesome B16 will be when we go to 16 teams!

B16 would be allright (even making the 6 look like a G). B1G just seems like they are trying too hard to be catchy. I guess I should have been clearer when I said fans of Big Ten schools since it seems like it is mostly Tarcone who uses the term on this board.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Marmel

The ACC has the advantage over the Big12 based simply on geography. Where is the Pac 12 going to look when it expands to 16?

Well, if DISH and DirecTV pay tons of money to your network just based exclusively on the population of the market your teams are in, they just need to get Northeastern (maybe Umass if they count), Long Island University, Detroit Mercy, South Florida, for starters. (OK, NOW I'm being obtuse.)

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

Not as gay as guys who use the term "gay" as a derogatory term, though.

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Word.

Word +2

[panerd]

My apologies for offending the board members with such horrible language. Offending post changed so you can sleep better at night.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by tarcone

MSU
Mich
OSU
PSU

I can't imagine that division being created.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Marmel

Rutgers biggest, greatest game ever was against Louisville. I'll give you Memphis and Houston obviously, but Rutgers will never have a game like that again.

Until November 29th!

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by panerd

My apologies for offending the board members with such horrible language. Offending post changed so you can sleep better at night.

I wouldn't expect much better from someone who is into bestiality.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by tarcone

BC brings Boston and Virginia solidifies DC. The BTN footprint would be huge. Each school would make about $35 million a year just off that 16 team conference.

BC may bring Boston, but Virginia brings Virginia Tech. You got room for a 17th?

[molson]

BC doesn't bring Boston, it brings some of the common areas in Chestnut Hill undergraduate dormitories. And I don't think those TVs are metered.

[RainMaker]

I have a friend who is a Maryland grad who was irate about the move to the Big 10. She says everyone she knows from the school was mad too. Guess football isn't a big deal and they didn't want to move out of the ACC for basketball.

[Logan]

No offense but your friend is an idiot.

[Izulde]

Originally Posted by Logan

No offense but your friend is an idiot.

Calling tk an idiot?

[panerd]

Originally Posted by Logan

No offense but your friend is an idiot.

I appreciate his friends sentiment. When Mizzou moved to the SEC we left for money/football reasons to a football conference we have no chance in competing in. Leaving behind century old rivalries with KU, KState, Iowa State, OU... We also joined a basketball conference that does have some solid tradition at the top (UK, FLA, Ark, Tenn) but given the choice I would have much rather stayed in the Big 12 for basketball purposes.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Izulde

Calling tk an idiot?

Well I already called my best friend an idiot when he was pissed cause of the basketball angle, but then Saint Gary came out blessing the move and he changed his tune.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by panerd

I appreciate his friends sentiment. When Mizzou moved to the SEC we left for money/football reasons to a football conference we have no chance in competing in. Leaving behind century old rivalries with KU, KState, Iowa State, OU... We also joined a basketball conference that does have some solid tradition at the top (UK, FLA, Ark, Tenn) but given the choice I would have much rather stayed in the Big 12 for basketball purposes.

They're entirely different situations. The Maryland AD is hemorrhaging cash. Survival was a legitimate question.

[panerd]

Fair enough but from a fan's perspective I can see where ACC basketball >>> B1G ( ) football.

[RainMaker]

I don't know TK personally, it's someone else. But her reasoning is that Maryland will never field a competitive football team so being in the Big 10 means shit.

[britrock88]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I don't know TK personally, it's someone else. But her reasoning is that Maryland will never field a competitive football team so being in the Big 10 means shit.

I think you mean "$hit."

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I don't know TK personally, it's someone else. But her reasoning is that Maryland will never field a competitive football team so being in the Big 10 means shit.

Never say never. There have been a lot of programs who are doing well these days who were crap 10, 20, 30 years ago. I mean was anyone talking about Oregon football in the 1980s?

[I. J. Reilly]

And thus ends the Tedford era, I thought he would get one more year just because of the $8mil buyout. If Cal is willing at all to spend money on the next guy they should be able to get someone pretty good. It sure hasn’t taken long for the Pac12 network money to change the quality of coaches around the league.

Cal fires Jeff Tedford - San Jose Mercury News

Edit: oops, wrong thread. Still canned though

[Daimyo]

As a Big Ten school alum, I'm happy about the move. We added two good academic schools and AAU members in nice markets. Both are big state schools in big adjacent states that I think fit the Big Ten profile nicely. Rutgers seems full of potential that will now get proper investment.

Maryland brings a nice pedigree and could have a huge indirect effect if it destabilizes the ACC enough to open up UNC or UVA as potential targets (which I would have considered unthinkable just a week ago!). I think either one would be an amazing addition fit-wise.

Other than that I guess Texas and Notre Dame are still the biggest prizes, but I wonder if the Big Ten even cares about either any more. They've got such a good situation, why risk it by adding a prima donna? Pitt, Georgia Tech, or Kansas would probably fit better at this point (if you can't get UNC/UVA).

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

The confusing part about the whole B10 move is why they didn't pull the trigger when they had better options. They could have easily landed Mizzou and Syracuse and been in a much better position than the two programs they added today. It certainly would have made much more sense.

I don't mind how it ended up for Mizzou, but it's certainly a head-scratcher if you're looking for best alternatives from a B10 standpoint.

[Toddzilla]

To me this just seems like a desperate stab to grab television markets - and had Maryland and Rutgers said no the B1G would then have turned to whomever they could dig up - Georgetown and St. Johns - just for the tv dollars. I strain to understand how adding these two schools is going to make the conference more money now that the TV cash is split 14 ways and not 12. Do advetisers give a shit about Maryland and Rutgers? Fuck no. They don't have any fans, much less televison viewers. If anything, the Big 10 has dilluted their product to the point where they ought to refund the carriers that have already paid for the Big 10 network now that 14.28% of their games now include 2 jokes.