RE: Least Valuable Additions in Realignment
Some folks here are going way back in time - It tough to compare additions made by the Big 5 between 1990 and 2003 and those made when the B10 restarted realignment with Nebraska in 2010, but hell, let's try:
Top addtions:
1. ND to the ACC in 2012 - don't be fooled by the Irish only playing 5 ACC games, the ACC got the number one brand in the nation and opened Chicagoland, the Midwest and tightened it's hold on NY with ND. A top national power at the time of addtion. This was the big prize.
2. Penn State to the B10 in 1990 - put the Big 10 on the East Coast - a top national power at the time of addition.
3. FSU to the ACC in 1992 - put the ACC in Florida - at top national power at the time of addition
4. TAMU to the SEC in 2011 - put the SEC in Texas - then TAMU overperformed their first year - the biggest positive suprise
5. Nebraska to the B10 in 2010 - the best name out there other than ND at the time
6. Miami to the ACC in 2003 - the best independent other than ND at the time - a top national power
7. VT to the ACC in 2003 - a huge suprise that needed to perform when FSU and Miami had coaching issues that festered too long.
8. Arkansas to the SEC 1992 - overperformed for a number of years until the Petrino disaster
These 8 are clear - unqualified winners for their conferences, even those that have taken a bit of a dip as Penn State, Nebraska, Miami, FSU and Arkansas have since joining their conferences.
The next 7 are solid additions - carry their own load so to speak in football or basketball or deliver a solid market that the conference did not have.
9. South Carolina to the SEC in 1992 - gets SEC to 12
10. Mizzou - adds the KC and St. Louis markets and keeps them from the B10
11. Louisville - adds Kentucky and southside Indiana markets - comming off fantastic sucess in the major sports - hurt the B12 with this addition
12. Syracuse - added New York to the ACC despite the current state of any of their programs
13. BC - added Boston and New England to ACC markets although program has tanked in recent years
14. MD - retaliation against the ACC for hitting ND in the heart of the B10, captures Baltimore market allows B10 to share DC, however the programs are in terrible shape and there are real management questions at the very top of the universtiy
15. Pitt - the weakest ACC addition, but they are important to ND and they bring Pittsburgh and Western PA
This last set is the dog set so to speak - they add little, they look to be uncompetative.
16. WVa - taken because the B12 was desperate - far and away the best of this group. Distance to the rest of the conference is a real issue.
17. Colorado - a bad set of teams, but a good expansion to Denver getting the P12 closer to 12
18. Rutgers - a real mess, but supposedly helps the B10 keep Penn State in the B10. Not a lot of upside on this addition.
19. Utah - a placeholder to get the P12 to 12
20. TCU - a placeholder to get the B12 to 10 - other than that adds the least to a major conference
If you go back to 1992 there are three clear winners in the expansion wars - the ACC, SEC, and B10. The P12 and the B12 barely stayed in the game and the if you average all the addtions and range them you get the following:
SEC - 7.75 4-10 (That's pretty consistant)
ACC - 8.50 1-15 (Four top addtions, but several average)
B10 - 9.75 2-18 (They started out fastest and finshest slowest)
B10 - 18.00 16-20 (Barely survived)
P12 - 18.00 17-19 (Got to 12 but did it with next to nothing)
Back in 1991, the ACC had just 8 schools the SEC, P12, and B10 had 10 of course. Since then the Big 8 effectively died, the SW conference effectively died, and the the Big East effectively died. By most long term measures the ACC is the clear winner and the clear losers are the Big East, and what's left of the Big 8 and Southwest Conference.
This is why all eyes are on Oklahoma and Texas for the next decade or so as they are what holds the B12 together.
|
/
Least Valuable Additions in Realignment
