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

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by BYU 14

That is huge because now Utah can play the BCS card which will likely sway a lot of kids on the fence, plus they gain more inroads into talent rich California. Definitely an advantage short term, but if they become a doormat in the Pac-10 that will change.

The sad thing is, right now I see them as the second best in that division behind SC.

There is also talk that things may change with the Big 12 and if they can coax one of the teams that left back (read Nebraska) that may open up a chance for BYU to go there. I still don't think all the dominoes have fallen here.

Nebraska didn't just light a match under the bridge when they left the Big 12. They held a news conference where they used everything but a nuclear weapon and destroyed every bridge, road, railroad and any other means of rebuilding relations with Texas or anyone else in the Big 12. They don't want to come back and nobody in the Big 12 wants them back at this point. If that's the scenario you are hoping for, you are in for a long wait.

[Swaggs]

There seems to be some buzz that the Big East will be having a meeting this week to discuss its future and that a football/basketball split could be coming by the beginning of July (which would, I believe, give the 8-football schools enough years together to have credit for an autobid for tourneys).

A lesser rumor seems to be that another conference may have approached Pitt and WVU (and that may be what is spurring this meeting). Big 12 maybe?

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

There seems to be some buzz that the Big East will be having a meeting this week to discuss its future and that a football/basketball split could be coming by the beginning of July (which would, I believe, give the 8-football schools enough years together to have credit for an autobid for tourneys).

A lesser rumor seems to be that another conference may have approached Pitt and WVU (and that may be what is spurring this meeting). Big 12 maybe?

CFT is reporting that the Big East will invite UCF and Memphis into the Big East.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

CFT is reporting that the Big East will invite UCF and Memphis into the Big East.

That would make some sense. UCF is ready and Memphis could turn out alright, if they get their shit together.

I imagine the football schools want two more schools to give them a better scheduling base (right now, each team gets 3/4 home games per year from in conference). Louisville's AD recently commented that the competition for getting decent home games (without a return visit) has gotten into the $750K-$1M range. Unfortunately, I bet the basketball schools will want to add two more teams to their side, so that they can keep voting balanced.

I have also read that Notre Dame surprisingly leans toward staying with the football schools (as a non-football member, of course) with an agreement to play a handful of BE teams each year. I guess it is impossible to have the Big East football conference without some angst against Notre Dame.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

There seems to be some buzz that the Big East will be having a meeting this week to discuss its future and that a football/basketball split could be coming by the beginning of July (which would, I believe, give the 8-football schools enough years together to have credit for an autobid for tourneys).

A lesser rumor seems to be that another conference may have approached Pitt and WVU (and that may be what is spurring this meeting). Big 12 maybe?

I'd hate to see Big East basketball split up.

Since the Miami/VT/BC defections, Big East Football has always seemed like just this group of leftover schools. No real identity or rilvaries. Big East basketball on the other hand, seems like a great brand.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by molson

I'd hate to see Big East basketball split up.

Since the Miami/VT/BC defections, Big East Football has always seemed like just this group of leftover schools. No real identity or rilvaries. Big East basketball on the other hand, seems like a great brand.

I agree and I would hate to see Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette, and Madison Square Garden go, but having Providence dictate our football moves is getting old.

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

I agree and I would hate to see Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette, and Madison Square Garden go, but having Providence dictate our football moves is getting old.

yy, I love the Big East as it currently stands (basketball-wise)

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

I agree and I would hate to see Georgetown, Villanova, Marquette, and Madison Square Garden go, but having Providence dictate our football moves is getting old.

I understand how Texas has the weight behind them to pretty much dictate what happens in the Big 12... but how does Providence have any pull in any of those discussions? Shouldn't everyone else just say, "You're lucky you aren't in the Atlantic-10"

[cuervo72]

Hmm...it's too bad the Big East and ACC can't somehow come up with a coalition agreement allowing their basketball operations to stay more-or-less separate - but maybe play a challenge like the Big 10/ACC Challenge - while pooling their football resources.

It might even be a case where a relegation system could work. Duke, Wake, NC State, Syracuse, Louisville, Maryland? You guys are relegated to the lower division. You don't like that? Get good enough to knock someone out of the upper division. FSU, Clemson, BC, GT, VT, Miami, WVU, Rutgers, Pitt, Cincy? Stay on your toes.

[Kodos]

Not being a soccer fan, I've never much liked relegation systems.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I understand how Texas has the weight behind them to pretty much dictate what happens in the Big 12... but how does Providence have any pull in any of those discussions? Shouldn't everyone else just say, "You're lucky you aren't in the Atlantic-10"

The league has had three commisioners (Dave Gavitt, Mike Tranghese, and John Marinatto) in its history and all of come out of the Providence athletic department. Gavitt was the AD at Providence and became the first commisioner and Tranghese was his right hand man throughout his tenure and was the natural successor (and rightfully so, by most accounts). When Tranghese retired last year, most folks thought it would be an opportunity to get in some fresh blood and improve the status of the conference, but we ended up with a guy that spent his entire career inside the Providence athletic department (from undergrad assistant manager manager to athletic director).

Here is a snippet from an ESPN blog entry a few weeks ago that pretty much sums up the longstanding thinking of the Big East leadership:

Big East commissioner John Marinatto was riding in a cab in New York City with Paul Tagliabue a couple of weeks ago when he mentioned the new offices the league had moved into in Providence, R.I.

There was enough space in the new building, Marinatto suggested, to erect a studio for a possible Big East Network. Tagliabue quickly corrected him.

"John," he said, "we're not building a studio in Providence. We'll build a studio next to the 'Today' show in Rockefeller Center. You'll look out and see people in downtown New York City. That will be our studio."

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by RedKingGold

yy, I love the Big East as it currently stands (basketball-wise)

I love it, too, and I think the BE tournament is one if the best sporting events around (I'd love to attend for a week, once my kid gets a little older). But, would you love it any less if it had Memphis and UCF rather than Seton Hall and Providence? That would raise the football inventory and exposure without hurting the basketball product, at all.

We have a commisioner who isn't even capable of thinking outside the box enough to realize that we could headquarter the league (and showcase it) in NYC, rather than Providence, RI.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

But, would you love it any less if it had Memphis and UCF rather than Seton Hall and Providence?

And Georgetown, and Villanova, and St. John's. I think it would lose something.

A Big East basketball conference of Cincinnati, UConn, Louisville, Rutgers, Syracuse, Memphis, and UCF (and Pitt and West Virginia if they don't leave) is very blah....I just wouldn't be excited about going to NYC to see that in March. Maybe it's just a matter of what I'm used to, but that's a pretty boring conference.

[Abe Sargent]

I would have loved to have been there for the UConn Syracuse game last year

[Galaxy]

I can picture it if the ACC decide to go to 16 and raided the BE. Getting schools like UConn, West Virginia, Pittsburgh, or Syracuse would create an awesome basketball conference.

[terpkristin]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

I can picture it if the ACC decide to go to 16 and raided the BE. Getting schools like UConn, West Virginia, Pittsburgh, or Syracuse would create an awesome basketball conference.

I know why people might want this. But dammit, I want my small ACC back.

/tk

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by molson

And Georgetown, and Villanova, and St. John's. I think it would lose something.

A Big East basketball conference of Cincinnati, UConn, Louisville, Rutgers, Syracuse, Memphis, and UCF (and Pitt and West Virginia if they don't leave) is very blah....I just wouldn't be excited about going to NYC to see that in March. Maybe it's just a matter of what I'm used to, but that's a pretty boring conference.

How about we invite 'Nova, Georgetown, St. John's and Notre Dame to a 10-team football league?

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by Kodos

Not being a soccer fan, I've never much liked relegation systems.

Personally, what I like most about a promotion relegation system is that it forces everyone to fight in every game. In a lot of sports, once your out of the playoffs or whatnot you see teams stop trying, or trade away their best players, because their is no real consequence for finishing at the bottom(in fact they get the best draft picks). In a promotion relegation system, teams are fighting to win no matter where in the table they stand, which ultimately makes the league better as a whole and a more entertaining product for fans.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

There seems to be some buzz that the Big East will be having a meeting this week to discuss its future and that a football/basketball split could be coming by the beginning of July (which would, I believe, give the 8-football schools enough years together to have credit for an autobid for tourneys).

A lesser rumor seems to be that another conference may have approached Pitt and WVU (and that may be what is spurring this meeting). Big 12 maybe?

I've heard WVU has been selling itself to the ACC and SEC. ACC is the most likely destination, but with the Big 12 saving itself there's no real hurry on the ACC or SEC's part to do anything. Right now WVU is looking for a solid/attractive partner to do a package deal with to one conference or the other.

No one seems to be looking at Big East football as a long term home at this point. It's really just waiting for the inevitable.

[Arles]

relegation isn't practical for US sports. In the English league, you have a ton of teams within a small geographic location. If the Pac-10 or MLB was just based in part of California (ie, Orange County, 3-4 LA teams, Santa Monica, Anaheim, ...), they could do a relegation system. The problem is you are risking losing a Chicago, LA, Boston, New York or other major TV market with relegation in the current city format. If the Cubs, Mets or White Sox got relegated to AAA, it would severely impact the revenue to MLB. It's just not practical.

[MJ4H]

That's why the proposed relegation system divides the country into geographic regions. It would work fine.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

I can picture it if the ACC decide to go to 16 and raided the BE. Getting schools like UConn, West Virginia, Pittsburgh, or Syracuse would create an awesome basketball conference.

never forget expansion is all about money...

FSU, VT, and Clemson all made more money off football revenue individually last year than the entire ACC did off basketball...no conference will be formed for the basis of making better basketball relations.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Oklahoma president says Sooners, A&M got invite from SEC - USATODAY.com

I have little doubt we'll see a lot of these stories in the coming months as the dealings behind closed doors are revealed, though most of them have already been exposed through the rumor mills.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Arles

relegation isn't practical for US sports. In the English league, you have a ton of teams within a small geographic location. If the Pac-10 or MLB was just based in part of California (ie, Orange County, 3-4 LA teams, Santa Monica, Anaheim, ...), they could do a relegation system. The problem is you are risking losing a Chicago, LA, Boston, New York or other major TV market with relegation in the current city format. If the Cubs, Mets or White Sox got relegated to AAA, it would severely impact the revenue to MLB. It's just not practical.

If they had a relegation system, the ownership of the other big market teams would have to spend like Boston and New York to avoid huge losses of TV revenue. Mediocre small teams who just want to bank profits without fielding a competitive team would have to build better teams to keep those profits coming. Those that get relegated are more apt to be sold to someone who wants to bring them back to higher level, getting rid of those old owners.

[Lathum]

My sources say Missouri was begging to join the Sunbelt Conference but the Sunbelt didn't want to lower their standards.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Kevin

If they had a relegation system, the ownership of the other big market teams would have to spend like Boston and New York to avoid huge losses of TV revenue. Mediocre small teams who just want to bank profits without fielding a competitive team would have to build better teams to keep those profits coming. Those that get relegated are more apt to be sold to someone who wants to bring them back to higher level, getting rid of those old owners.

OK - so in addition to screwing up history by changing the participants in a league every year or so, you'd add the instability that constant changing ownership brings.

WHERE DO WE SIGN UP?

[JonInMiddleGA]

In other news ...

ACC, ESPN reach 12-year television rights deal - ESPN

[CU Tiger]

Swofford = Moron...that is all.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

E-mails between Mizzou and Big 12 offices were released. Any e-mails concerning negotiations between Big Ten and MU were held back since they were directly related to the negotiation of a contract that was not executed.

Behind scenes, Big 12 focused on public relations - Sports | The Columbia Daily Tribune - Columbia, Missouri

[digamma]

They also appear to have held back the one where Mizzou resigned from the Big 12.

[Kodos]

Not sure this means much, but figured I would pass it along:

hxxp://www.footballoutsiders.com/college-xp/2010/big-ten-might-pick-big-apple

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Not surprising, but it took just over a month for more grumbling in the Big 12 to re-emerge. A&M wants the $20 payout that was orally guaranteed in writing or it will open up legal options and/or begin negotiations with the SEC. If this conference doesn't blow up in 2011, it will definitely separate in 2012. Most Mizzou fans after reading this are likely wishing that A&M would have just gone to the SEC so this could have been all resolved right now. Hanging on in the Big 12 for another year or two isn't going to accomplish much of anything.

A&M expects $20 million annually from Big 12 | Texas A&M college | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

[Noop]

Texas A&M is quite delusional it seems.

[Toddzilla]

Originally Posted by Noop

Texas A&M is quite delusional it seems.

Yet, if they leave, that removes the anchor keeping Texas in the league. So it seems TAMU has quite a bit of leverage.

[Noop]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

Yet, if they leave, that removes the anchor keeping Texas in the league. So it seems TAMU has quite a bit of leverage.

I consider them to be a marginally decent program and the fact they were even offered 20 million is shocking. I expect we all will be here talking about conference expansion in a year.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Not surprising, but it took just over a month for more grumbling in the Big 12 to re-emerge. A&M wants the $20 payout that was orally guaranteed in writing or it will open up legal options and/or begin negotiations with the SEC. If this conference doesn't blow up in 2011, it will definitely separate in 2012. Most Mizzou fans after reading this are likely wishing that A&M would have just gone to the SEC so this could have been all resolved right now. Hanging on in the Big 12 for another year or two isn't going to accomplish much of anything.

A&M expects $20 million annually from Big 12 | Texas A&M college | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

I agree. I wish A&M had taken the SEC route and imploded the conference. Though I think this activity we're seeing from A&M is simply posturing for the fans after the backlash of not accepting the SEC invite. I don't think A&M leaves now, but I definitely think that A&M splitting off from Texas will eventually happen.

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by CBS Sports (Dennis Dodd)

The website Orangebloods.com was breaking most of the news during that time largely through unnamed sources. It went from being the first to report that the six schools were strongly considering the Pac-10 to detailing the hectic hours as the Big 12 saved itself with the promise of a windfall increase in future television revenue. Scott, though, seemed to suggest that the reporting was driven by a Texas source or sources with an agenda.

"We weren't trying to publicize what we were doing," Scott said. "We were going about it for four months quietly behind the scenes. It's really Texas [that] leaked the plan as they were going into those Big 12 meetings in Kansas City, I think, hoping to keep Nebraska, hoping to keep the Big 12 together."

Asked what person or persons may have leaked the information Scott said, "I don't know ... It could only be a small [amount of people] who knew what was going on."

Wait ... so ... Chip Brown's source was ... WITHIN THE TEXAS ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT??????? I'd have never guessed!!!

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Wait ... so ... Chip Brown's source was ... WITHIN THE TEXAS ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT??????? I'd have never guessed!!!

That had to be one of the biggest jokes of this whole farce over the summer. Chip Brown was selling out his journalistic integrity and it was embarrassing to watch. He was a UT mouthpiece and everyone knew it.

Here's the full article.

Pac-10's Scott blames Texas for his plan's demise - NCAA Football - CBSSports.com

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

That had to be one of the biggest jokes of this whole farce over the summer. Chip Brown was selling out his journalistic integrity and it was embarrassing to watch. He was a UT mouthpiece and everyone knew it.

Here's the full article.

Pac-10's Scott blames Texas for his plan's demise - NCAA Football - CBSSports.com

I'm interested to see how you believe this is any different than Mike DeArmond's coverage of Missouri? Like DeArmond, Chip Brown has a lot of money tied to his coverage of a specific program and the sources he has there. If Texas tells Chip Brown to jump he says how high. The same can be said for DeArmond.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

That had to be one of the biggest jokes of this whole farce over the summer. Chip Brown was selling out his journalistic integrity and it was embarrassing to watch. He was a UT mouthpiece and everyone knew it.

Here's the full article.

Pac-10's Scott blames Texas for his plan's demise - NCAA Football - CBSSports.com

Well, except for those Woodward and Bernstein characters. They were a mouthpiece for Deep Throat and everyone knew it.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by the_meanstrosity

I'm interested to see how you believe this is any different than Mike DeArmond's coverage of Missouri? Like DeArmond, Chip Brown has a lot of money tied to his coverage of a specific program and the sources he has there. If Texas tells Chip Brown to jump he says how high. The same can be said for DeArmond.

I certainly appreciate your attempt, but you've displayed a great lack of understanding concerning the two situations if you think the two are in any way comparable. Alden and the Athletic Department head are at odds all the time. Dodds had a hand up Brown's ass. It's not even close to comparable.

[cartman]

Got it. So the guy whose sources were dead-on with their info is bad, but the guy who leaked that his sources said Mizzou to the Big 10 was a 'done deal and the contract is signed' is a paragon of journalism.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by cartman

Got it. So the guy whose sources were dead-on with their info is bad, but the guy who leaked that his sources said Mizzou to the Big 10 was a 'done deal and the contract is signed' is a paragon of journalism.

Damn it! You beat me to it!

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Wait ... so ... Chip Brown's source was ... WITHIN THE TEXAS ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT??????? I'd have never guessed!!!

I'm not sure where the issue is? I thought you guys said Chip Brown was right, yet now you are laughing at the fact that he is the mouthpiece of Texas? Isn't what happened exactly what Chip Brown reported? Why dismiss what he said? Most reporters would kill for a source as good as the AD, who fed him everything he needed to make this a big issue? I think he's stupid to try and take on the PAC-10 commish, but I think that's mostly an arrogance issue

[Blade6119]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

I'm not sure where the issue is? I thought you guys said Chip Brown was right, yet now you are laughing at the fact that he is the mouthpiece of Texas? Isn't what happened exactly what Chip Brown reported? Why dismiss what he said? Most reporters would kill for a source as good as the AD, who fed him everything he needed to make this a big issue? I think he's stupid to try and take on the PAC-10 commish, but I think that's mostly an arrogance issue

Oh I dont believe i ever argued he was wrong, but people like you and cartman were saying how Mizzou was this horrible athletic department leaking details left and right when the only school that has been proven to leak confidential details is Texas. If your going to point fingers at schools for being unprofessional if you will, point them at the proper places.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Oh I dont believe i ever argued he was wrong, but people like you and cartman were saying how Mizzou was this horrible athletic department leaking details left and right when the only school that has been proven to leak confidential details is Texas. If your going to point fingers at schools for being unprofessional if you will, point them at the proper places.

I never said that about Mizzou's athletic department.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by Blade6119

Oh I dont believe i ever argued he was wrong, but people like you and cartman were saying how Mizzou was this horrible athletic department leaking details left and right when the only school that has been proven to leak confidential details is Texas. If your going to point fingers at schools for being unprofessional if you will, point them at the proper places.

In hindsight, I think the Missouri athletic department handled things fairly well in the public. Some of the professors, government officials, etc did not handle things so well, but Mike Alden and his coaches kept things fairly civil.

I'm not sure why MBBF still defends Mike DeArmond though aside from DeArmond being a poster on his website.

[dawgfan]

Chip Brown didn't paint a completely accurate picture of what was going on with the Pac-10 wooing Texas and other Big-12 schools, but he put out far more accurate info than just about anyone else. Yes, it was skewed by the fact it was being fed to him by Texas officials, but it was still highly informative. I fail to see how this is a bad thing - reporters are almost always only as good as their sources, and while Brown's sources in this particular matter were from a distinct viewpoint, they were also talking. We weren't getting that level of info elsewhere.

I do find it funny how he's trying to claim he wasn't getting fed info from Dodds or Brown. Maybe that's technically true, but c'mon Brown - everyone knows you were getting your info from the Texas athletic department.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by cartman

Got it. So the guy whose sources were dead-on with their info is bad, but the guy who leaked that his sources said Mizzou to the Big 10 was a 'done deal and the contract is signed' is a paragon of journalism.

What in the world are you talking about? Link where Mike DeArmond (KC Star reporter) ever said that? And Brown was dead-on? I suppose you're correct that he was dead-on with his UT information (not surprising given the AD was feeding the info), but the rest of his information concerning any other schools was spotty at best.

I guess it's easier to make it about MBBF than to actually discuss just how badly Brown compromised his integrity in this matter.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

What in the world are you talking about? Link where Mike DeArmond (KC Star reporter) ever said that? And Brown was dead-on? I suppose you're correct that he was dead-on with his UT information (not surprising given the AD was feeding the info), but the rest of his information concerning any other schools was spotty at best.

I guess it's easier to make it about MBBF than to actually discuss just how badly Brown compromised his integrity in this matter.

I never have mentioned the name Mike DeArmond in any of my posts. I was going off of whatever sources you were using earlier in the thread to make your pronouncements that it is all but a done deal and the FOIA that was denied showed there was a contract in place.