It will be one of these in the order of preference.

1. Notre Dame
2. Nebraska (this is possible)
3. Missouri (only if their FB program gets nationally signifigant)

I see the schools like this:

1. Pittsburgh
2. Rutgers
3. Syracuse
4. Missouri

Notre Dame would top the list, but they'll have to lose their network contract, first.

Missouri obviously makes some sense, as the only D I-A school in the state, but here is why it doesn't:

1. Missouri would leave behind Kansas, a big time rivalry game that (in football) is of Cincinnati-Miami proportions.

2. It would leave behind the Big 12, a great conference, for the Big Ten, another great conference. Why bother?

2. From the Big Ten's perspective, adding in the East is more important than adding out west.

Think about it. Is Iowa or Minnesota really crying out for a rival? Iowa plays Iowa State every year, anyway. Minnesota always has Wisconsin. Both schools have been in the conference for 100 years.

Penn State, on the other hand, is still a wee bit lost out here. It could use a conference rival.

I know Penn State looks down on Pitt, but the move would still make Penn State a little more secure in the conference (just as adding an Illinois State or an Albany would make certain schools in our conference feel more secure). Maybe they wait for Joe Pa to leave, then permit the addition of Pitt.

Syracuse would make Penn State happy, too. The Syracuse-Penn State series was hot for many, many years.

Maybe it will end up Syracuse as No. 12 in the Big Ten. But I'd be gravely disappointed. It just doesn't seem like a good fit to me.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by RochesterFalcon:
I see the schools like this: </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I see a 22-post thread, started by a Louisville fan, about the Big freakin' WROTBROT ** on a MAC board.

Why bother? I like to watch the Big Ten on the rare occasions when I'm actually home at a time when a game is on, but I root for Miami.

** Note: WROTBROT is short for "We Ran Outta Toes Before We Ran Outta Teams."

Exactly, DG. The most ardent supporters of the MAC generally hate the Big 11, and take great pleasures when the MAC knocks them off at anything.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Kit-Cat:
Thats Bullshet. Mizzou has a good basketball program. I agree that the Big10 doesnt need to expand for Basketball. But Mizzou is the only school in the West with the potential to be a solid Big10 school in both basketball and football.

Mizzou averages 60k in FB even though they have never done anything. If they could get that FB program on the tracks in a "soft" Big10 West division, they could average 80k or more.

KC</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What's B***** is the opinion that Missouri would EVER become a football power - in the Big 12 or the Big 10. Besides, they wouldn't add them UNTIL they become a power and we know how close they've come to that in their entire history in the Big 12 and the Big 8. Face it, they're a perrenial middle of the road BCS conference team. ANd by your own admission, basketball is irrelevant to the Big 10 for the purposes of adding a team.

Finally, Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin and occasionally Purdue all draw very well (Northwestern not so much) -- but that doesn't make them perrenial powers in football. Would you (if you were a network) pay the really big bucks for a championship game between one of the eastern football powers (PSU, OSU or UM) against the best the west could offer? (Wisc, Illinois, Iowa)? It would be a lopsided game in almost every year.

Now if they could divide the conference with Michigan and OSU on one side and PSU in the other, it would be a whole different story - but those 3 are the 3 most eastern teams in the whole conference. It makes no geographic sense to divide them any other way.

With Gary Pinkel as their coach, I wouldn't put it past Missouri to rise above their traditional place in the college football world. History isn't on their side, unless you go by GP's history.

One last thing about the Big10 addition of Mizzou...

Just think about the addition of South Carolina to the SEC in 1990. They never did anything in Football, until Lou Holtz arrived on the scene...

KC

Why would Missouri leave the Big 12 to join a weaker conference? The Big 12 is the nations premier football conference, and it makes no sense for them to leave whether the program is good or not. The Big 12 is also a stronger basketball conference than the Big Ten.

Plus, Missouri is much more of a midwestern state than a mideastern state, and it has very deep roots in the Big 12. Missouri would never even consider leaving, especially for a conference on a serious downturn like the Big Ten.

All those years of it being Nebraska and the 11 Dwarfs, now a couple of good years, and suddenly Big 12 fans can point to a couple of off years as a "serious decline in the Big 10"? Funny stuff. These things tend to be cyclical. Fact is, both are fine conferences that, for the most part, play by the rules. Another fact is, the top MAC teams will still be sniping off teams from both conferences. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="tongue.gif" /> ~