Big Ten

[jake44np]

Quote: Originally Posted by yanks26ngoin

I hope this isnt true. A 16 team conference would be way too big. And would not preserve rivalries that should be preserved, like Michigan/Ohio State, Michigan/Little Brother, Michigan/Minnesota, and even the non conference Michigan/Notre Shame rivalry. Michigan should play those 4 teams every year. Last year didnt feel like a full season as Michigan and Minnesota didnt play for the Little Brown Jug, and this year will feel empty to because of the scheduling! We cant have more of this. A 16 team conference will make this even worse.

As a Michigan fan do you really want to keep playing (losing) to OSU every year???!! lol

[HuskAir]

Quote: Originally Posted by Captain Mallow

I find it hard to believe Nebraska would leave the Big 12. It has so much history, rivalries, and natural geographic ties to the schools in that conference (most of which are leftovers from the Big 8, of course). Like someone else said, Notre Dame won't go into a conference willingly. I don't think that happens until they lose their NBC contract (which actually has been a curse, I think, considering their performance since signing it). On the other hand, getting all the teams into a handful of conferences really strengthens the chance of someday going to a playoff, I would think.

If the Big XII needs Nebraska to stay with them, then maybe they should quit treating us like a red-headed step child. This conference has dumped on us consistently since the first minute of its conception. Please don't even mention tradition as a reason for us to stay.

Our traditional rival had always been Oklahoma--one of the best college football rivalries of all time.

Step one of the formation of the Big XII was to take that away from us. We haven't had a traditional rival since....

Step two was to move the conference offices out of Kansas City and down to Texas.

Step 3 was the elimination of partial qualifiers--and then characterizing Nebraska as an academic backwater, despite the fact that our graduation rates and academic all-Americans outdistanced everyone else by a wide margin.

Championships? Are you kidding me? We stand at least as good or better chance playing for conference and national championships in the Big 10 (and we wouldn't have to play Texas in Dallas where time magically appears on the clock at the end of the game).

Money? Big XII teams get between $8 and $14 million in television money depending upon how often they appear on television. The Big 10 schools get $22 million each across the board.

Texas continues to block any possibility of a league network because they intend to start their own. We've been on the short end of far too many 11-1 votes in this league to feel a whole lot of loyalty towards it.

[DonkeyJote]

Quote: Originally Posted by HuskAir

If the Big XII needs Nebraska to stay with them, then maybe they should quit treating us like a red-headed step child. This conference has dumped on us consistently since the first minute of its conception. Please don't even mention tradition as a reason for us to stay. Our traditional rival had always been Oklahoma--one of the best college football rivalries of all time. Step one of the formation of the Big XII was to take that away from us. We haven't had a traditional rival since.... Step two was to move the conference offices out of Kansas City and down to Texas. Step 3 was the elimination of partial qualifiers--and then characterizing Nebraska as an academic backwater, despite the fact that our graduation rates and academic all-Americans outdistanced everyone else by a wide margin. Championships? Are you kidding me? We stand at least as good or better chance playing for conference and national championships in the Big 10 (and we wouldn't have to play Texas in Dallas where time magically appears on the clock at the end of the game). Money? Big XII teams get between $8 and $14 million in television money depending upon how often they appear on television. The Big 10 schools get $22 million each across the board. Texas continues to block any possibility of a league network because they intend to start their own. We've been on the short end of far too many 11-1 votes in this league to feel a whole lot of loyalty towards it.

Exactly. Nebraska would be dumb not to consider leaving for the Big 10 or, if that offer never materializes, the Pac 10.

[utahman19]

The PAC-10 will actually be the first conference to make their move by adding Colorado and Utah - expect that announcement before July as Colorado needs to give the Big 12 two years notice, and coincidentally enough any new PAC TV deal will start with the 2012 season. There has been talk that Utah would actually start PAC-12 play in 2011, though I have a hard time believing the PAC-10 would try and do a round-robin schedule with 11 teams.

This is not just about sports and TV dollars, especially with the Big 10 and PAC 10 - this is also about academics. Colorado is an Association of America Universities school as is most of the PAC 10 (everyone but the State schools - WSU, OSU, and ASU), and Utah is very, very close to being accepted into the AAU and is one of the top research and medical schools in the West. Both schools have sizeable alumni bases in California and both already do significant amounts of research shared with PAC schools. In other words, Utah and Colorado add TV sets (Denver/Boulder is a top-20 market, SLC is top-30 and one of the fastest growing markets in the nation - expected to be a top-20 market in 10-15 years), fit the academic profile, and are solid fits athletically. Perfect fits. New Mexico is really the only other school in the West that fits the profile as they are a solid research school in a growing market (outside, of course, of Texas and A&M, who I doubt are going anywhere as they (more specifically Texas) own the Big 12).

The Big 10 is also looking to bring in other solid academic programs to add to their conference as all 11 of the Big 10 schools are AAU schools (always makes me laugh that arguably the most prestigious academic conference can't count past 10). That would include candidates such as Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, Iowa State, Rutgers, Syracuse, and Pittsburgh, as well as the darkhorses Texas and Texas A&M. AAU membership and the research dollars that come with it add as much or more money to schools as athletics does.

While expansion has roots in athletics, academics will be what get school presidents to vote in the affirmative. Adding two or more AAU schools will bring even more money to conference schools than a football championship game, expanded TV revenues, and potentially more BCS spots due to increased research dollars, applications, admissions, non-athletic donations and many other things that the average sports fan does not think about. I would be shocked if the PAC-10 or Big 10 expanded and took schools that do not fit the academic profile (such as UConn, BYU, UNLV, or State schools in the PAC footprint such as Boise, Fresno or San Diego State).

[DonkeyJote]

Quote: Originally Posted by utahman19

The PAC-10 will actually be the first conference to make their move by adding Colorado and Utah - expect that announcement before July as Colorado needs to give the Big 12 two years notice, and coincidentally enough any new PAC TV deal will start with the 2012 season. There has been talk that Utah would actually start PAC-12 play in 2011, though I have a hard time believing the PAC-10 would try and do a round-robin schedule with 11 teams. This is not just about sports and TV dollars, especially with the Big 10 and PAC 10 - this is also about academics. Colorado is an Association of America Universities school as is most of the PAC 10 (everyone but the State schools - WSU, OSU, and ASU), and Utah is very, very close to being accepted into the AAU and is one of the top research and medical schools in the West. Both schools have sizeable alumni bases in California and both already do significant amounts of research shared with PAC schools. In other words, Utah and Colorado add TV sets (Denver/Boulder is a top-20 market, SLC is top-30 and one of the fastest growing markets in the nation - expected to be a top-20 market in 10-15 years), fit the academic profile, and are solid fits athletically. Perfect fits. New Mexico is really the only other school in the West that fits the profile as they are a solid research school in a growing market (outside, of course, of Texas and A&M, who I doubt are going anywhere as they (more specifically Texas) own the Big 12). The Big 10 is also looking to bring in other solid academic programs to add to their conference as all 11 of the Big 10 schools are AAU schools (always makes me laugh that arguably the most prestigious academic conference can't count past 10). That would include candidates such as Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, Iowa State, Rutgers, Syracuse, and Pittsburgh, as well as the darkhorses Texas and Texas A&M. AAU membership and the research dollars that come with it add as much or more money to schools as athletics does. While expansion has roots in athletics, academics will be what get school presidents to vote in the affirmative. Adding two or more AAU schools will bring even more money to conference schools than a football championship game, expanded TV revenues, and potentially more BCS spots due to increased research dollars, applications, admissions, non-athletic donations and many other things that the average sports fan does not think about. I would be shocked if the PAC-10 or Big 10 expanded and took schools that do not fit the academic profile (such as UConn, BYU, UNLV, or State schools in the PAC footprint such as Boise, Fresno or San Diego State).

I'd say San Diego St. is more likely than New Mexico as a backup plan. They are also a solid research school, and they are in a much bigger market (San Diego, No. 28) than New Mexico (Albuquerque, No. 44). And San Diego St. has the NFL Stadium.

Speaking of all this though, where do you guys think these title games will be played? Big 10 would probably have to pick from Soldier Field, Lucas Oil Stadium, or Ford Field (kicking the MAC out). The Pac 10 would probably go Qualcomm Stadium, Candlestick, or Qwest Field, at least until there is an NFL Stadium in LA.

[utahman19]

Except San Diego is not a SDSU town - the PAC (USC and UCLA) already have a strong foothold in that market. Adding SDSU adds absolutely nothing other than another California school, where New Mexico brings better academics and a growing market that is passionate about their school (just watch a NM basketball game). As for the NFL stadium, Qualcomm is a dump and it remains to be seen just how long the Aztecs can continue to play there - they've had lease issues before.

Best bet for a PAC title game would be University Stadium in Phoenix. Completely takes weather out of the equation, and the city and stadium are experienced in hosting similar events. The only other real option would be the LA Coliseum or like you said a future venue in LA.

As for the Big 10 (14...16...) you would think that they would play it at Ford Field or Lucas Oil, but I think they would think long and hard about keeping it in a college stadium seeing how the three biggest stadiums in the country are Beaver Stadium (Penn St, 107, 282), Michigan Stadium (106,201) and Ohio Stadium (102,329). Ford Field holds 65,000 and Lucas Oil 63,000. If they do add Missouri, I think that brings Arrowhead Stadium and its 79,101 capacity into the picture as well.

[DonkeyJote]

Quote: Originally Posted by utahman19

Except San Diego is not a SDSU town - the PAC (USC and UCLA) already have a strong foothold in that market. Adding SDSU adds absolutely nothing other than another California school, where New Mexico brings better academics and a growing market that is passionate about their school (just watch a NM basketball game). As for the NFL stadium, Qualcomm is a dump and it remains to be seen just how long the Aztecs can continue to play there - they've had lease issues before. Best bet for a PAC title game would be University Stadium in Phoenix. Completely takes weather out of the equation, and the city and stadium are experienced in hosting similar events. The only other real option would be the LA Coliseum or like you said a future venue in LA. As for the Big 10 (14...16...) you would think that they would play it at Ford Field or Lucas Oil, but I think they would think long and hard about keeping it in a college stadium seeing how the three biggest stadiums in the country are Beaver Stadium (Penn St, 107, 282), Michigan Stadium (106,201) and Ohio Stadium (102,329). Ford Field holds 65,000 and Lucas Oil 63,000. If they do add Missouri, I think that brings Arrowhead Stadium and its 79,101 capacity into the picture as well.

Normally though, you want to avoid using a team in your conference's stadium because you want the game to be neutral site.

As far as San Diego, having lived there, it's not as much of a UCLA/USC town as you think. Sure, those schools have fans, but SDSU has them too. San Diego State drew 24000 fans a game last year, and that's in a down year. A move to the Pac 10 could put them closer to 35000 a game, which ain't too shabby.

[smace767]

Quote: Originally Posted by utahman19

The PAC-10 will actually be the first conference to make their move by adding Colorado and Utah - expect that announcement before July as Colorado needs to give the Big 12 two years notice, and coincidentally enough any new PAC TV deal will start with the 2012 season. There has been talk that Utah would actually start PAC-12 play in 2011, though I have a hard time believing the PAC-10 would try and do a round-robin schedule with 11 teams. This is not just about sports and TV dollars, especially with the Big 10 and PAC 10 - this is also about academics. Colorado is an Association of America Universities school as is most of the PAC 10 (everyone but the State schools - WSU, OSU, and ASU), and Utah is very, very close to being accepted into the AAU and is one of the top research and medical schools in the West. Both schools have sizeable alumni bases in California and both already do significant amounts of research shared with PAC schools. In other words, Utah and Colorado add TV sets (Denver/Boulder is a top-20 market, SLC is top-30 and one of the fastest growing markets in the nation - expected to be a top-20 market in 10-15 years), fit the academic profile, and are solid fits athletically. Perfect fits. New Mexico is really the only other school in the West that fits the profile as they are a solid research school in a growing market (outside, of course, of Texas and A&M, who I doubt are going anywhere as they (more specifically Texas) own the Big 12). The Big 10 is also looking to bring in other solid academic programs to add to their conference as all 11 of the Big 10 schools are AAU schools (always makes me laugh that arguably the most prestigious academic conference can't count past 10). That would include candidates such as Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, Iowa State, Rutgers, Syracuse, and Pittsburgh, as well as the darkhorses Texas and Texas A&M. AAU membership and the research dollars that come with it add as much or more money to schools as athletics does. While expansion has roots in athletics, academics will be what get school presidents to vote in the affirmative. Adding two or more AAU schools will bring even more money to conference schools than a football championship game, expanded TV revenues, and potentially more BCS spots due to increased research dollars, applications, admissions, non-athletic donations and many other things that the average sports fan does not think about. I would be shocked if the PAC-10 or Big 10 expanded and took schools that do not fit the academic profile (such as UConn, BYU, UNLV, or State schools in the PAC footprint such as Boise, Fresno or San Diego State).

I agree with most of what you have said. I didnt go as in depth as to not steer the thread away from the main point. however, like i said this has been going on for almost a year in big east country. First some speculation then specific statements this winter. How ever Joe Paterno himself mentioned that he would like Uconn in the BIG TEN.

some facts.
UConn is rated the 66th best college in the nation tied with Rutgers according to US news 2010.
Ahead of Arizona , Oregon and the STate schools in the PAC10. Ahead of Indiana, Mich st and Iowa in the Big Ten, and ahead of FSU NCS and VA Tech in the ACC. and it is a state school and all faculty are state employees just like WSU, oregon st, ASU, and MSU.

US news assessment.

The University of Connecticut delivers a remarkable range of educational opportunities, including more than 100 academic majors, all at an exceptional value. Ranked one of the top public universities in the United States, UConn is the only public university in New England with its own Schools of Law, Social Work, Medicine and Dentistry. The outstanding average SAT scores of enrolled students indicate the high-caliber undergraduate education program, while the level of student satisfaction is evident in record-high retention rates and the largest percentage of students living on campus among public universities in the nation. The diverse student body at New England's "Public Ivy" enjoys state-of-the-art facilities on a campus vibrant with living and learning opportunities inside and outside the classroom, from the Honors and study abroad programs to more than 400 student clubs and avid campus-wide support for UConn's elite Division I athletics teams, known as "Huskymania."

Uconn is not an AAU member, but neither is Notre Dame.

Academics will not be why Uconn does not go to the Big 10.

A post from a Chicago / Big ten paper:
I strongly disagree that Nebraska is going to be invited.
Teddy Greenstein of the Chicago Tribune has been at the forefront of this story since the beginning. He has consistently listed Syracuse, Rutgers and Pitt as prime candidates in every single story that he was written on the subject. I doubt he is speculating.
Now, today he has also thrown Connecticut — a school that has funds research $$ then AAU Kansas and will probably make the AAU in no time — into the mix. I think the expansion is based on two factors.
1. Capture NYC
2. Get Notre Dame
#2 gives the Big 10 the best opportunity long term, in conjunction with UM, PSU and OSU, to have a syndicated TV channel on basic cable everywhere.
I’ve thought the five schools leaked in initial report — Syracuse, Rutgers, Pitt, ND and Missouri — were the five schools likely to join the conference. I believe four of those schools are at the top of the list, and the 16th spot is between Connecticut and Missouri.
If the Big Ten can land Notre Dame by inviting Uconn over Missouri, I believe the Huskies — with their powerful basketball programs — will get the call.
So put me on record, the schools invited will be Notre Dame, Syracuse, Connecticut, Rutgers and Pitt.


a few links
http://www.dispatch.com/live/content...kr8co6p-1.html

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoot...ines;headlines