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

[Logan]

But I thought the Big Ten had no interest in a conference championship game??????

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Logan

But I thought the Big Ten had no interest in a conference championship game??????

Who knows?

A championship game is probably the only guaranteed rise in revenues that they can come up with.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Pumpy Tudors

So has this shit happened yet or what?

They're waiting for the USC sanctions to come down before they make a move. They got stuck behind the NCAA sanctions committee at kinkos, I think.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Who knows?

A championship game is probably the only guaranteed rise in revenues that they can come up with.

Joking of course, as the last "big rumor" centered around the Big 10 not needing the championship game because they were going to have all the teams play an extra game instead (you know, if not for that pesky NCAA rule that prohibits it).

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

The latest (take it with a grain of salt):

Folks reporting from the Big East conference meetings seem to be getting the feeling that the Big Ten may only expand with Nebraska this time around or that they will petition the NCAA to allow conference championships to be played with less than 12-teams (which would presumably get more support this time around than it did with the ACC).

There is also a rumor floating around that the Big East may add UCF and Temple (as all sports members) and give a Big East Network a try. Kind of a surprise to see Temple over Memphis (big, new market, one of the best basketball draws around), since Villanova seemed to block them out from being a full member last time around. I'm not sure what type of money a BEN would bring, but it would be cool to see some of the old basketball games.

Ummm...didn't see Missouri mentioned. They have research capabilities that would blow your effing mind.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by molson

They're waiting for the USC sanctions to come down before they make a move. They got stuck behind the NCAA sanctions committee at kinkos, I think.

SI

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Think the Big 12 commish has irritated Coach Osborne with his comments?

Steven M. Sipple: Big 12 meetings could yield big drama

Nebraska athletic director Tom Osborne says he doesn’t really know what to expect at this week’s Big 12 meetings in Kansas City, Mo.

He’ll listen intently to league commissioner Dan Beebe.

“I’m sure he’ll have some things to say,” Osborne said. “We’ll probably get an officiating report on football and basketball. I imagine we may have some discussion as to how you start or stop the clock on an incomplete pass.”

Awesome.

[tarcone]

Dollars and Sense of Big Ten Expansion | Hawkeye Nation

Here is a good article on the financial aspects of expansion.

Lots of good info and links to other articles.

[tarcone]

Big 12 is shooting itself in the foot. I can see the North division teams getting more upset if the game is permanently located in Dallas.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Big 12 is shooting itself in the foot. I can see the North division teams getting more upset if the game is permanently located in Dallas.

No one in the North minded that a whole lot as long as they put the basketball tourney in a North city on a permanent basis. But with Missouri and Nebraska apparently on the way out, they've lost the two best venues in their footprint (Omaha and KC), leaving them in a really bad position. It's quickly going from bad to worse.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

No one in the North minded that a whole lot as long as they put the basketball tourney in a North city on a permanent basis. But with Missouri and Nebraska apparently on the way out, they've lost the two best venues in their footprint (Omaha and KC), leaving them in a really bad position. It's quickly going from bad to worse.

Well, except that Kansas and K-State are closer to Kansas City than Mizzou. However, yeah, with 2 less teams in the area, there's less regional pull.

SI

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Well, except that Kansas and K-State are closer to Kansas City than Mizzou. However, yeah, with 2 less teams in the area, there's less regional pull.

SI

Yes, but Beebe has already said that holding the Big 12 tourney in a state not represented in the conference is a non-starter. I suppose they could throw up an arena near the NASCAR track, but outside of that, if Mizzou leaves, the B12 tourney won't be in KC anymore.

[Ryno]

Frank the Tank added to the rumor mill last week. The latest sounds like a Big Ten wish list: Texas, A & M, Maryland, Virginia and Vandy.
http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/20...r-the-big-ten/

This collection doesn't seem likely, but it looks a lot better to me than most of the other scenarios that have been thrown around. It also sounds like Texas isn't completely out of the picture yet.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Ryno

Frank the Tank added to the rumor mill last week. The latest sounds like a Big Ten wish list: Texas, A & M, Maryland, Virginia and Vandy.
http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/20...r-the-big-ten/

This collection doesn't seem likely, but it looks a lot better to me than most of the other scenarios that have been thrown around. It also sounds like Texas isn't completely out of the picture yet.

Frank has consistently been an outlier when it comes to this conversation. It just doesn't fit at all. Vandy is really the only one out of that whole group that makes any sense. Good academic school that would fit in well.

[cuervo72]

Curious...what about Maryland wouldn't fit?

[tarcone]

We have Northwestern. Vandy wont get invited.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Ryno

Texas, A & M, Maryland, Virginia and Vandy.

If they pulled it off, that would be an amazing move for the Big 10. Short of getting Notre Dame, I am not sure what better it could do.

All top-notch academic institutions (not sure about A&M actually, but they are probably the cost of getting Texas). One of the top two or three programs in the country. Weaken three other conferences (leaving, ironically, the Big East intact) and expand the Big Ten's geographic reach substantially.

That would probably hurt the ACC the most because the SEC would replace Vandy with an ACC member, I'd expect. Although the teams remaining in whatever would be left of the Big 12 after that would also be in somewhat of a heap of trouble.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Curious...what about Maryland wouldn't fit?

They're fine on the academic end (as is Virginia). I'm just not sure they'd be willing to part ways with the ACC, especially after the big TV contract they landed. The ACC would appear to be one of the conferences that will emerge as a mega-conference, so no real reason to leave unlike the Big 12 options where a conference break-up seems increasingly likely.

[Swaggs]

I don't see Vandy being interested in leaving the SEC for the Big Ten. They are a founding member of the SEC, they are outside of the of the Big Ten's footprint (whereas they fit nicely within the SEC's), and get a ton of players out of Georgia, Florida, and Alabama (and the other gulf states). If I were a Vandy supporter, I cannot imgaine being excited about that move -- trading relatively local games against Tennessee, Alabama, LSU, etc. for trips up North in the Fall or Winter.

Maryland makes a lot of sense as a partner for Penn State, although they fit in the ACC, geographically and with rivalries, much better. They are more of a Big Ten type of school (large land-grant, good academics) with better revenue sports than most of the other realistic candidates.

[sterlingice]

Vandy doesn't make any sense to me. Again, they're basically the SEC's Northwestern. Why would the Big Ten want them? Virginia, in particular, makes a ton of sense, tho.

SI

[miked]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

If they pulled it off, that would be an amazing move for the Big 10. Short of getting Notre Dame, I am not sure what better it could do.

All top-notch academic institutions (not sure about A&M actually, but they are probably the cost of getting Texas). One of the top two or three programs in the country. Weaken three other conferences (leaving, ironically, the Big East intact) and expand the Big Ten's geographic reach substantially.

That would probably hurt the ACC the most because the SEC would replace Vandy with an ACC member, I'd expect. Although the teams remaining in whatever would be left of the Big 12 after that would also be in somewhat of a heap of trouble.

Not sure how losing UVA and UMD weakens the ACC, or losing Vandy weakens the SEC. It weakens the B12 but I thought everyone was sour on Texas leaving.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by miked

Not sure how losing UVA and UMD weakens the ACC, or losing Vandy weakens the SEC. It weakens the B12 but I thought everyone was sour on Texas leaving.

Well, it takes the D.C. market away from the ACC. And, if the ACC wants to replace those schools, what options does it have? Nothing as good as a MD or UVA. It also starts to weaken the ACC's academics which matters to the conference.

Vandy could probably leave and be replaced by, say, Ga. Tech, which would not really hurt the SEC.

But I think that anytime a conference gets raided, it hurts the perceptions of that conference.

[cuervo72]

ACC is better suited to being a basketball conference anyway. The whole conference revolves around the Carolinas, so losing Maryland wouldn't kill them.

[albionmoonlight]

FWIW, the Missouri, Rutgers, Nebraska, ?, plan still seems the most likely in terms of schools that the Big 10 would want and that would want to leave their conference.

But Texas plus the D.C. market, plus a finger in the eye of the SEC isn't bad for a dream scenario that does not involve Notre Dame.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

ACC is better suited to being a basketball conference anyway. The whole conference revolves around the Carolinas, so losing Maryland wouldn't kill them.

There are a fair number of people here who just figure that UNC, Duke, NC State, and Wake Forest playing round-robin basketball all year long would be the dream conference.

They are, I think, wrong. You can't lose flagships schools like UVA and Maryland without really suffering. And, of course, other parts of the country tend to consider football just a tad more seriously than they do down here.

Just to give a sense of how different the culture is here, several of the Duke fans in my office have a general sense about Duke football. They want Duke to be good enough in football so that the games are fun to watch and competitive. But they don't want the team to get so good that the games start to get crowded. As one person noted, it's nice when you have small children b/c they can run around in all the empty seats.

I can't imagine any fan of an SEC school having that opinion about their football team.

[Noop]

Losing Maryland would be a big blow to the ACC as that would be thing that forces Miami, Clemson and Florida State to join the SEC. What happen to Nebraska, Missouri and Rutgers or whoever MBBF was claiming got invites?

Was that one of those things he says it with a credible tone only to be proven wrong again? MBBF why are Maryland and Virgina being mentioned? What happened? What are your sources telling you? Should I prepare myself for the eventual arrival of the SEC?

I wait on your response.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Noop

Losing Maryland would be a big blow to the ACC as that would be thing that forces Miami, Clemson and Florida State to join the SEC. What happen to Nebraska, Missouri and Rutgers or whoever MBBF was claiming got invites?

Was that one of those things he says it with a credible tone only to be proven wrong again? MBBF why are Maryland and Virgina being mentioned? What happened? What are your sources telling you? Should I prepare myself for the eventual arrival of the SEC?

I wait on your response.

They're being mentioned because someone posted a link to a blog that a guy writes noting other options. That's about it.

Mizzou and Nebraska are both considered gone for all intensive purposes. We might get a bit more information this week from the B12 meetings, but I doubt it. Nothing has changed other than a guy decided to write a blog with something other than the general concensus.

[Ksyrup]

For all intents and purposes, please.

[stevew]

Insensitive porpoises.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Well, it takes the D.C. market away from the ACC.

Where the audience typically doesn't amount to much locally for football, and really doesn't amount to a whole lot nationally either. It has the potential to be meaningful due to market size but in reality it doesn't carry that much weight on their package.

Outside of the core college football areas, if you put a good game on & it'll draw some, regardless of conference. And outside of those core areas, if you put a mediocre game on then it doesn't draw much audience, regardless of conference.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

ACC is better suited to being a basketball conference anyway. The whole conference revolves around the Carolinas, so losing Maryland wouldn't kill them.

I would largely agree with this.

Virginia would be a loss IMO, but Maryland? Meh. I don't know how many people in the conference footprint would actually care or even notice beyond the initial news items.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

For all intents and purposes, please.

These purposes are intensive, man.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

For all intents and purposes, please.

Thanks. That's what I get for shooting off a post in a rush.

[Solecismic]

I'm surprised Maryland doesn't get more discussion. It's a good fit academically, it brings a solid presence in the DC and Baltimore media markets, it has a long athletic tradition.

I'm sure the ACC would be unhappy to lose Maryland.

At first, people figured if the Big Ten expanded, its candidates would have to be Big East schools. So talk was mostly limited to Rutgers and Pittsburgh - the best candidates from that conference.

Then, people realized that the Big Ten is making a lot more money, per school, than anyone other than the SEC. So now it's a matter of how large a footprint the Big Ten wants, and how many schools it wants.

I'm not sure Vanderbilt is a reasonable addition. I could understand why Vanderbilt might be interested in a move - solely because of academics. Florida is the only other AAU school in the SEC. But financially, it's not a positive move. Vandy identifies with the south - the SEC schools are its rivals. And it doesn't bring in enough alumni to mean that the Big Ten Network would be able to claim Nashville.

I think this guy with the blog is just seeking attention by putting out a vastly different rumor from anything else we've heard.

Since it seems clear that no one knows what Delany and the conference presidents are doing, we can create our own list.

First, we decide how far a commute Big Ten teams are willing to make in minor sports. Minnesota-Penn State is about 1,000 miles. Is 1,500 a reasonable limit? That opens up just about anything in the eastern and central time zones.

Then, we can limit the search to AAU schools with major college athletics. And, of course, no list would be complete without Notre Dame.

Finally, we subtract schools that would never leave their current conferences. I doubt any SEC school would leave, and ACC's southern component seems safe. It's not like North Carolina would go anywhere without N.C. State and Duke.

So, here's our big list:

Big East - Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse.
Big XII - Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Texas, Texas A&M.
ACC - Maryland, Virginia.
Independent - Notre Dame.

Now, we can create a computer program that takes 1, 3 or 5 of these 12 schools randomly, and produces a blog post saying the invitations are out and it's a done deal.

[Ksyrup]

I don't think some of these blog sites have put that much thought into it, Jim.

[Kodos]

C'mon, UConn!

[Radii]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

They are, I think, wrong. You can't lose flagships schools like UVA and Maryland without really suffering.

As a lifelong fan of the ACC I would find that devastating. The expansion to 12 teams was bad enough, all of this talk of superconferences and a vast changing landscape of college sports has me wondering if I'm even going to care anymore by the time its done.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Kodos

C'mon, UConn!

They were a highly unlikely candidate from the start, but I think the recent basketball issues hurt their chances even more.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by stevew

Insensitive porpoises.

Those bastards!

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

So, here's our big list:

Big East - Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse.
Big XII - Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Texas, Texas A&M.
ACC - Maryland, Virginia.
Independent - Notre Dame.

Now, we can create a computer program that takes 1, 3 or 5 of these 12 schools randomly, and produces a blog post saying the invitations are out and it's a done deal.

Awesome

I like it

SI

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by Logan

They were a highly unlikely candidate from the start, but I think the recent basketball issues hurt their chances even more.

Yeah, I know it won't happen. It'd just be convenient for me as a fan because I could see Indiana play in person more frequently.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I don't think some of these blog sites have put that much thought into it, Jim.

His analysis would probably make for a pretty good blog post.

[tarcone]

The Big Ten Network gets approximately $.70 cents per every cable subscriber withing the Big Ten footprint, because the network is on the basic tier package. Outside the footprint, the network is on a sports tier that is an additional cost, so the network averages around $.10 cents per cable subscriber in those areas.

This and the academics will decide what schools are invited.

looking at Jims list, lets eliminate Iowa State. No chance there. Des Moines/Council Bluffs/Souix City arent a big enough draw. Also, you have to get rid of Kansas. They wont go anywhere without K-State.

I dont think it matters too much how many Big10 fans or alumni there is in NYC or DC. Just the fact that they would fall into the Big10 footprint.

NYC metro population is 17,799,861. multiply by .70 cents= $12,459,902.70. HELLO RUTGERS

D.C. Metro population has 8,448,238 multiply by 70 cents= $5,913,766.60.
HELLO MARYLAND AND VIRGINIA.

Throw in Texas and Texas A&M.


Wow.

[Butter]

I wish they would just make a flippin' announcement already.

[Marmel]

As a Syracuse fan, and a basketball fan primarily, I'm in a tough spot. I don't want to be a part of the Big10, at all. But if there was an invite, I know the school would accept it.

But then, I wonder what kind of conference Syracuse would be joining, if they really believe Rutgers would be a good team to invite. No offense to the Rutgers fans here, but that school has contributed exactly NOTHING to the Big East since it joined. It continues to provide nothing, and in fact, they have done nothing but suck at the tit of the Big East since joining. It doesn't make a dent in the NYC market (no Big East team does). It has a smoke and mirror football team with 5 years of "success" built on one win against Louisville and about 30 wins against the worst teams in 1A and 1AA. If the Big10 thinks this is a good choice, then they are no smarter than the ACC leaders who completely blew it with their expansion plans a few years ago.

Bottom line and best case scenario, take Rutgers off our hands and let the rest of the Big East stay intact. Please. We'll even waive their departure fee.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Marmel

As a Syracuse fan, and a basketball fan primarily, I'm in a tough spot. I don't want to be a part of the Big10, at all. But if there was an invite, I know the school would accept it.

But then, I wonder what kind of conference Syracuse would be joining, if they really believe Rutgers would be a good team to invite. No offense to the Rutgers fans here, but that school has contributed exactly NOTHING to the Big East since it joined. It continues to provide nothing, and in fact, they have done nothing but suck at the tit of the Big East since joining. It doesn't make a dent in the NYC market (no Big East team does). It has a smoke and mirror football team with 5 years of "success" built on one win against Louisville and about 30 wins against the worst teams in 1A and 1AA. If the Big10 thinks this is a good choice, then they are no smarter than the ACC leaders who completely blew it with their expansion plans a few years ago.

Bottom line and best case scenario, take Rutgers off our hands and let the rest of the Big East stay intact. Please. We'll even waive their departure fee.

You don't want to be a part of the Big 10? Don't you know we are the pinnacle of exciting basketball?

[JonInMiddleGA]

I love the way everyone assumes that the .70 per in the footprint amount is etched in stone for any & every market in the country.

Could someone please point me to copies of the agreements with all the cable systems that says not only do we agree to that rate for existing markets but also for every market in the future in perpetuity? It may exist but I have a hard time believing even the cable companies are that stupid, since there are many markets that won't give a flying fuck about the network whether there's a team in the Big 10 or not.

[Swaggs]

I think the most interesting portion of that blog entry is the concept that the Big Ten, more than any other conference, acts really well as a cohesive conference and may not want to bring in a bloc of schools that could make a dent in their voting. For example, adding Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt, and Maryland to Penn State would give those Eastern schools enough sway to change the overall direction and decision making of the conference.

Pulling in one or two teams, each, from the Big 12, Big East, ACC or Notre Dame makes a lot of sense in that regard.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I love the way everyone assumes that the .70 per in the footprint amount is etched in stone for any & every market in the country.

Could someone please point me to copies of the agreements with all the cable systems that says not only do we agree to that rate for existing markets but also for every market in the future in perpetuity? It may exist but I have a hard time believing even the cable companies are that stupid, since there are many markets that won't give a flying fuck about the network whether there's a team in the Big 10 or not.

Agreed. There are some markets that wouldn't flinch at that .70 rate (Missouri and Nebraska). But I find it really hard to believe that the DC and NYC market would accept that rate. Likely would be somewhere in the middle of .10 and .70 and probably looking at .30-.40. That's not necessarily a bad thing as they do have more subscribers, but using the .70 rate for those locations is fool's gold and would never actually happen.

[tarcone]

Even if it is "only" .30-.40. Its still 18 million people paying .30-.40.