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

[Passacaglia]

Them Guys and Those Guys

[Chief Rum]

If they really wanted to have the division names represent the conference, they should name one division "Three Yards" and the other "Cloud of Dust".

[RomaGoth]

How about the Haves and the Have Nots. Oh, my bad. The SEC already uses that one.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

How about the Haves and the Have Nots. Oh, my bad. The SEC already uses that one.

huh?

[Abe Sargent]

How about Maize Division and Scarlet Division

[RomaGoth]

Ok...how about this:

The "job is safe" division and the "soon to be fired" division. Guess which one Michigan is in.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

Ok...how about this:

The "job is safe" division and the "soon to be fired" division. Guess which one Michigan is in.

I like that. And then they could do a relegation style re-ordering of the divisions each year based on beat writers' votes for who is most and least likely to be fired.

[tarcone]

I like "3 yards" and "a cloud of dust". It is football exclusive. It taps in to the tradition of the league. This is the way to go.
I liike Lakes and Plains, also.

Or "Corn" and "Steel"
Or "Snow" and "Ice"

Something besides Leaders and legends.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I think it's a legit issue. The division names represent the entire conference, not just the most successful football teams. Would be like calling the ACC divisions the Tomahawks and the Ibises.

I don't remember say, the NHL teams having butt-hurt over the Adams division (named after the founder of the Boston Bruins), but we do live in a different time now.

[Ksyrup]

We definitely live in a different time - one in which the NHL ditched those names for geographic ones.

[molson]

I also wish the NCAA didn't require the division setup for conference championship games. Artificially splitting teams up when there's no actual distinction between the teams is pretty pointless. Just take the top 2 and put them in a championship game, and then rotate the schedule however makes sense.

[Ksyrup]

The more I follow sports, the more I wish divisions never existed. I'd love to see baseball just have 2 leagues and the top 4 teams in each league make the playoffs.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

The more I follow sports, the more I wish divisions never existed. I'd love to see baseball just have 2 leagues and the top 4 teams in each league make the playoffs.

Agreed, it's a pain in the ass to glance at the NHL/NBA standings and try to figure out what's going on. The leader of one division might be the 7th best team in the conference. And in the NBA, that guarantees you, I think, a top 4 seed, but not home court (I've lost track, they change it all the time). Why not just have two conferences and take the top 8 to the playoffs? Makes no sense to me. It makes things so much cleaner, so much easier to follow.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

Leaders & Legends is horse & shit.

I think the new logo looks stupid.

I get the feeling that they overdid things with the naming of the awards to give modern players name recognition. Pat Fitzgerald was a nice LB, but does anybody really think his name belongs with Butkus? Is he truly the second best LB to ever play in the Big Ten? I never saw Bubba Smith play, but it is my understanding he was one tough and nasty SOB. Courtney Brown should drop to his knees and thank God he can even be mentioned in the same sentence (and he was pretty darn good.) Are they now going to reexamine the names on the trophies every year, or in 50 years is the Freshman of the Year going to get the Thompson/Randel El Trophy?

[ISiddiqui]

It's ok. In 50 years, the Big 10 teams will be part of the Big 64.

[bhlloy]

I think leaders & legends is horse shit, but a million times better than the award names. Are they actually expecting people to pronounce and use some of those?

It's tough to see how they could have done a worse job with this. I thought Delaney was a pretty sharp guy and a pretty good commish but geez...

[hoosierdude]

My wife mentioned when I told her about it and showed her the new logo, that the divisions could be called Blue and White. I told her that was just as good as what the Big Ten came up with, and thought it couldnt be worse than some others that come to mind.

All I know is they have to change it, and make it something that makes sense. Naming it after legends might not work, as then only two people get the honor... and does the Big Ten really need to double up on the awards? I mean really... Dallas Clark as an award? Seriously?

Big Ten really needs a reality check.

[General Mike]

Should have done an Animals division and non-Animals division, and split the division based on team mascots

[TCY Junkie]

Originally Posted by General Mike

Should have done an Animals division and non-Animals division, and split the division based on team mascots

Brilliant. Well, I am comparing it to what they went with.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Here comes the Big 12 rumors again. May just be a whole lot of bluster, but sounds like OU and A&M can go to the SEC whenever they're ready. Just have to make the call and they're in.

A&M-to-SEC rumors surface yet again | CollegeFootballTalk

[Passacaglia]

So does the SEC kick Auburn to the East if that happens? And if so, will there be provisions to keep the Auburn-Alabama rivalry game? Finally, another conference can get (almost) as messy as ours!

[Ksyrup]

The idea that Texas' network is the impetus for this just doesn't make sense. That was openly talked about when Texas agreed to stay in the Big 12. There's no way A&M was blindsided by the creation of the network, unless they seriously undervalued the money Texas would get from it.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

There's no way A&M was blindsided by the creation of the network, unless they seriously undervalued the money Texas would get from it.

This. It was all speculation at that point, but the reality that it's happening, and more importantly the amount that Texas is apparently going to reap from it is hitting Aggie faithful hard.

[Ksyrup]

Read an interesting article on SI, I think it was, about all of the potential violations teh Texas network could have, especially if they are serious about televising high school football games.

It really feels like something is going to bust loose in college football in the next 5-10 years and compeltely alter the landscape.

[Matthean]

I looked at the Texas network as a big middle finger to the rest of the conference and it being a way for Texas to say they could go independent if need be.

[Ksyrup]

But everyone knew that was what Texas was going to do when they made the last-minute decision to turn down the PAC10.

[Swaggs]

Anyone else think the Pac Ten really dropped the ball by adding Colorado and Utah rather than just sucking it up and taking the 4 Texas schools and 2 Oklahoma schools (and letting Texas have their network)?

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Anyone else think the Pac Ten really dropped the ball by adding Colorado and Utah rather than just sucking it up and taking the 4 Texas schools and 2 Oklahoma schools (and letting Texas have their network)?

I dunno, bringing in Texas might cause as many headaches as it brings revenues. And there was never a chance that the Pac-10 was going to budge on the private religious university thing and accept Baylor.

[tarcone]

Oklahoma wouldnt go without Oklahoma State, right? So who is the 16th team? Missouri? Texas Tech? Florida State?

[Swaggs]

Eight is great: No expansion for Mountain West Conference - ESPN

Semi-surprising news here, as the MWC will not be inviting Utah State and/or San Jose State and Hawaii will be football only.

Not sure what the headline means about "Eight is Great." Looks like 9 team all sports and 10 team for football.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Eight is great: No expansion for Mountain West Conference - ESPN

Semi-surprising news here, as the MWC will not be inviting Utah State and/or San Jose State and Hawaii will be football only.

Not sure what the headline means about "Eight is Great." Looks like 9 team all sports and 10 team for football.

But it'll only be 8 for next season.

[BishopMVP]

Speaking of 8-team conferences and odd conference movement rumors, while I still think the MAC is our likely (football-only) destination with Temple staying there, and an outside chance of C-USA in all sports, there have been very faint UMass/WAC rumors. The thinking going that if something happens with Villanova going up and Temple leaving the MAC (leading to no MAC offer for UMass), we could enter a marriage of convenience with the WAC (football-only) since travel costs wouldn't be much more than the Temple-less MAC, the MAC doesn't want an odd number of teams, and the WAC would welcome a 9th member because of the scheduling and conference membership benefits.

Needless to say, I'd much rather we get a C-USA all-sports invite (again) or go football-only to the MAC.

[Swaggs]

After playing (getting whipped) by Villanova in hoops today, some of the folks involved with the AD seem to feel that 'Nova is really leaning towards making the move up in football. I'm not too crazy about the move (I think I'd rather have UCF in a 10-team conference so that we could have a game in Florida every season for recruiting purposes), but I can live with it.

Hopefully, the Big East does not move past 10 teams and will play a 9 game conference schedule. If my math is correct, that would increase the number of available games from the current lineup from 28 (8 teams that each play 7 games) conference games all the way up to 45 (10 teams that each play 9 games) conference games. That would give the conference a ton more inventory for television and keep its teams from having to pay for/schedule crappy guarantee games.

I know that I'd rather see WVU playing 9 Big East games + 3 OOC games like Maryland H/H in a regular series, another H/H BCS series, and then a team like East Carolina/Marshall or other MAC/CUSA-type team, rather than the current slate of Maryland, other BCS series, Marshall, random guarantee game against MAC/CUSA-type, and then guarantee game against a subdivision team.

[Passacaglia]

45 conference games? Am I missing something?

[RedKingGold]

I just don't see Nova making the move up. The necessary support and stadium are just not there and thats unlikely to change for awhile.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

45 conference games? Am I missing something?

The total for the entire conference per season.

10 teams with 9 conference games each should equal 45 conference gamers per season.

The current set up is 8 teams with 7 games each (which equals 28 conference games).

There were a lot of weeks where there were only a couple of conference games (due to off weeks and OOC games) which made it difficult to find reasonably decent games to televise. With the extra games, the inventory should be a little more attractive, week-to-week, from a television standpoint.

And, I will admit that my math may be way off.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by RedKingGold

I just don't see Nova making the move up. The necessary support and stadium are just not there and thats unlikely to change for awhile.

I think it is going to be tough for them from the stadium standpoint, as well.

It is my understanding that football is already a significant financial loser for them, but they think they will be able to make do by picking and choosing a few different locations to play games in the city to play higher profile games and be able to guarantee much higher revenue between the Big East's BCS/bowl money + television deals.

If Notre Dame, as a fellow Catholic Big East team, or possibly Penn State are willing to play them at Lincoln and then they play some of their other higher profile games at Citizens, they could probably survive playing their lower profile games at PPL Park.

They'll also have to find a way to even up scholarships (I think they'll need to go from 65 to 85), so they'll need to either come up with some new womens' teams or cut some existing mens' teams (or some combination of the two).

I think it will be tough for them, but there were similar concerns with Cincinnati when they moved up, as well. Like I said, they aren't my first choice, but I do like the thought of having Villanova (and Philadelphia) on the football side of things if the conference does split.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

The total for the entire conference per season.

10 teams with 9 conference games each should equal 45 conference gamers per season.

The current set up is 8 teams with 7 games each (which equals 28 conference games).

There were a lot of weeks where there were only a couple of conference games (due to off weeks and OOC games) which made it difficult to find reasonably decent games to televise. With the extra games, the inventory should be a little more attractive, week-to-week, from a television standpoint.

And, I will admit that my math may be way off.

I guess that sounds right -- I thought you were talking about how many conference games each team would play. Also, I thought you were talking about basketball. I guess I've just never seen anyone concerned with the total number of conference football games played.

[Logan]

I understand Golden is out now so who knows, but I can never figure out what makes Villanova more appealing than Temple.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by Logan

I understand Golden is out now so who knows, but I can never figure out what makes Villanova more appealing than Temple.

I would imagine that it is simply that Villanova is already in the Big East and they probably do not want any other Philly schools in the conference.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

It is my understanding that football is already a significant financial loser for them, but they think they will be able to make do by picking and choosing a few different locations to play games in the city to play higher profile games and be able to guarantee much higher revenue between the Big East's BCS/bowl money + television deals.

If Notre Dame, as a fellow Catholic Big East team, or possibly Penn State are willing to play them at Lincoln and then they play some of their other higher profile games at Citizens, they could probably survive playing their lower profile games at PPL Park.

They'll also have to find a way to even up scholarships (I think they'll need to go from 65 to 85), so they'll need to either come up with some new womens' teams or cut some existing mens' teams (or some combination of the two).

Based off my understanding of UMass's desire to move up and talk of playing at Foxboro, the NCAA requires teams to play 80% of their home games at one facility. There may be ways around that by scheduling a Penn State at Lincoln Financial and designating them the "home" team, but you can't just barnstorm around.

They may cut things anyways because Presidents love cutting sports to save money and blaming Title IX, but I also doubt they would have to change the number of varsity sports. There are some sports like crew/track that have room for upwards of 15 female scholarships and are almost never fully funded, so equaling the 20 scholarships can be achieved by increasing funding into existing women's teams instead of founding new ones/cutting mens ones.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Based off my understanding of UMass's desire to move up and talk of playing at Foxboro, the NCAA requires teams to play 80% of their home games at one facility. There may be ways around that by scheduling a Penn State at Lincoln Financial and designating them the "home" team, but you can't just barnstorm around.

They may cut things anyways because Presidents love cutting sports to save money and blaming Title IX, but I also doubt they would have to change the number of varsity sports. There are some sports like crew/track that have room for upwards of 15 female scholarships and are almost never fully funded, so equaling the 20 scholarships can be achieved by increasing funding into existing women's teams instead of founding new ones/cutting mens ones.

Awhile back, I read that they would likely look into forming a women's golf team (which is apparently one of the cheapest around) and then cutting the remaining 8-10 from a men's sport somewhere.

[BishopMVP]

UMass Chancellor Holub says decision on upgrading football program to FBS to be made in early March | masslive.com

[Abe Sargent]

Interesting - thanks!

[Swaggs]

Bump...

Villanova's Board of Trustees is set to meet on Tuesday (April 12th) to vote on whether or not to move up and join the BCS. Word is that they have the votes to do so if the leadership makes the recommendation.

Here is an article with some of the details: Expansion Apocalypse: What to expect when you are expecting (a decision) | VUhoops.com

Villanova would not be able to begin play in the Big East until 2014 (with two transitional seasons in '12 and '13), so there is a school of thought out there that the conference may add Houston, as a full member, for the 2012 season (to begin at the same time as TCU) and then add East Carolina, as a football only member, to make a 12-team football conference when Nova joins in 2014.

UCF and Memphis appear to be on the outside. UCF because USF doesn't want the competition, because they appear unwilling to join as a football-only member, and/or because their athletic department has a tenuous history with some of the Big East's athletic departments (largely because they have pulled out of return visits, at the last minute, on H/H series with a few current BE schools). Memphis once looked to be in the driver seat for full invitation (based on their location, strength of their basketball program, affiliation with the Liberty Bowl, and deep pocketed donors) but they have dropped out of the conversation for some reason (presumably beyond the horrendous state of their football program).

[DeToxRox]

Not sure how legit this is but:

[DeToxRox]

Source: ’Nova’s Big East vote delayed | Philadelphia Inquirer | 04/10/2011

Source: ’Nova’s Big East vote delayed
POSTED: April 10, 2011

By Mike Jensen

INQUIRER STAFF WRITER
email
print
reprint
size
comments
3
options

POSTED: April 10, 2011
Source: ’Nova’s Big East vote delayed

By Mike Jensen

INQUIRER STAFF WRITER

According to a source within the Big East Conference, Villanova's board of trustees will not hold an anticipated Tuesday vote on whether to move up to Division I-A and join the Big East for football because the conference's football members are not ready to sign off on the Wildcats' plans.

The chief sticking point, according to the source, is Villanova's plan to use PPL Park in Chester, the 18,500-seat home of the Philadelphia Union, as its primary venue.

PPL Park would be the smallest stadium in the league. Potential plans to increase the seating capacity to roughly 30,000 have not convinced all the Big East schools to support the move. However, some Big East football members are in favor, and it still could be approved, the source said.

Villanova athletic director Vince Nicastro could not be reached for comment. Big East football members held a conference call Sunday to discuss Villanova's plans.

The Big East had informally invited Villanova to move up, and had been aware for months that Villanova, a Big East member for all other sports for the last three decades, had planned to use PPL Park for most of its games.

[Atocep]

Some speculation that the Big East is getting cold feet on this and may look to Houston or ECU now. I can see the appeal to adding Villanova; when the inevitable split between basketball and football happens it strengthens the football members standing. However, Villanova just doesn't have the facilities in place/planned that UConn had when they made the jump.

I also don't know what Villanova would do with a 30k seat stadium other than be outnumbered when they play WVU at home.

[Swaggs]

The most recent info was that the Big East football schools only (and without TCU) met with Villanova's leadership this weekend to look over their plans and that they would either vote to allow for admission (with Villanova going through the formality of voting with their Board of Trustees on Tuesday), vote them down, or vote to allow them more time.

I am kind of hoping that they are going to allow Villanova to save face by blaming it on their stadium problems and pull out of the process. I think Houston gets the call as #10/18 (with a slight chance that ECU joins up as a football only member) in the Big East (and gets it relatively soon) and that the conference will stick with 10 until a CUSA team emerges (a la TCU or Utah) as a viable option.

No need to go to 12, as there is not going to be a huge TV demand for a Big East championship game. In another 5-10 years, there could be some better options available from among programs like UCF, SMU, Memphis, ECU or Houston (if not added now). Thinking outside the box, there is always the possibility that the Pac 12 tries to pull out the Texas/Oklahoma block again and some combination of Kansas/Missouri/Kansas State/Iowa State become options.

[RedKingGold]

I live three miles away from Villanova and graduated from their law school. With over five years of experience witnessing the lack of alumni interest and student support in Villanova football, I cannot see the program succeeding at the I-A level.