Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Hartford Courant: "There will be another round of movement [expansion]"
Author Message
domer1978 Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,469
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 367
I Root For: Notre Dame/Chaos
Location: California/Georgia
Post: #181
RE: Hartford Courant: "There will be another round of movement [expansion]"
(01-07-2015 06:50 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(01-07-2015 02:41 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  
(01-07-2015 01:21 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  
(01-02-2015 06:57 AM)David Krysakowski Wrote:  I am starting to think that the Big 12 is unstable. The Big Ten could go after Iowa State and West Virginia. The American could go after Baylor and TCU. The Big 12 then would be down to 6 teams.

If, and this is a big if, the Big XII is unstable. A hunch tells me that the B1G would be going after: Texas, Kansas, and maybe Oklahoma. West Virginia has been there for the taking for a century but the academic types don't like their profile especially with regards to research. Oklahoma has a similar academic profile problem but as a bridge to Texas, a major bone thrown to Nebraska & Texas, growing demographic base, and a fantastic football tradition... Oklahoma gets the nod.

Not sure if this has any bearing and it is not the way I feel, but West Virginia also has the perception among states that surround it that they are a bunch of inbred redneck hillbillies. In my view the old guard ACC schools in particular feels that way about West Virginia.

Iowa State just won't get the votes. If they were located in New York I think they would have long ago gotten the call. But while adding a new mouth to feed they aren't really a huge national brand so all they do is add content but little else.

To sum it up, if the Big 12 is collapsing (which I doubt) my guess would be the B1G goes to 18 with Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and UConn.

Divisions separated by time zones.

B1G East B1G West
UConn.................Northwestern
Rutgers...............Illinois
Maryland.............Wisconsin
Penn State.......... Minnesota
Ohio State.......... Iowa
Michigan............. Nebraska
Sparty................. Kansas
Indiana................Oklahoma
Purdue.................Texas

The problem in my opinion going into the future with a schedule like this is that after playing 8 division teams you really don't get to play the other division. 20 Teams is more workable that 18 because you can go to 4 divisions of 5, play 4 division games and one cross division game with each division so at minimum you can play every team in the league every 4 years.
Similarly 24 teams would cause problems because even if you split into quads, you're not going to play everyone in the league by the time a kid exxhausts his eligibility. So I think 20 is the upper threshold.

I believe that to be invited to join the B1G, you have to be a member of the AAU.

Currently, only Iowa State, Kansas and Texas are members so, they're the only universities eligible for an invitation. I doubt the B1G would loosen the rules to invite WVU or OU.

Nebraska was a member when they were invited to the B1G, but lost their membership in 2011.

There isn't a bylaw or anything to bind the Big Ten to only inviting a school if they are AAU. So you can believe whatever you want but there is nothing binding the Presidents to only approving an invitation if the Institution is a member of the AAU.


Yep,ND had an open invite and we're not AAU so the Big Ten is willing to stray off the AAU trail.
01-07-2015 06:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #182
RE: Hartford Courant: "There will be another round of movement [expansion]"
(01-07-2015 06:53 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  
(01-07-2015 06:50 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(01-07-2015 02:41 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  
(01-07-2015 01:21 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  
(01-02-2015 06:57 AM)David Krysakowski Wrote:  I am starting to think that the Big 12 is unstable. The Big Ten could go after Iowa State and West Virginia. The American could go after Baylor and TCU. The Big 12 then would be down to 6 teams.

If, and this is a big if, the Big XII is unstable. A hunch tells me that the B1G would be going after: Texas, Kansas, and maybe Oklahoma. West Virginia has been there for the taking for a century but the academic types don't like their profile especially with regards to research. Oklahoma has a similar academic profile problem but as a bridge to Texas, a major bone thrown to Nebraska & Texas, growing demographic base, and a fantastic football tradition... Oklahoma gets the nod.

Not sure if this has any bearing and it is not the way I feel, but West Virginia also has the perception among states that surround it that they are a bunch of inbred redneck hillbillies. In my view the old guard ACC schools in particular feels that way about West Virginia.

Iowa State just won't get the votes. If they were located in New York I think they would have long ago gotten the call. But while adding a new mouth to feed they aren't really a huge national brand so all they do is add content but little else.

To sum it up, if the Big 12 is collapsing (which I doubt) my guess would be the B1G goes to 18 with Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, and UConn.

Divisions separated by time zones.

B1G East B1G West
UConn.................Northwestern
Rutgers...............Illinois
Maryland.............Wisconsin
Penn State.......... Minnesota
Ohio State.......... Iowa
Michigan............. Nebraska
Sparty................. Kansas
Indiana................Oklahoma
Purdue.................Texas

The problem in my opinion going into the future with a schedule like this is that after playing 8 division teams you really don't get to play the other division. 20 Teams is more workable that 18 because you can go to 4 divisions of 5, play 4 division games and one cross division game with each division so at minimum you can play every team in the league every 4 years.
Similarly 24 teams would cause problems because even if you split into quads, you're not going to play everyone in the league by the time a kid exxhausts his eligibility. So I think 20 is the upper threshold.

I believe that to be invited to join the B1G, you have to be a member of the AAU.

Currently, only Iowa State, Kansas and Texas are members so, they're the only universities eligible for an invitation. I doubt the B1G would loosen the rules to invite WVU or OU.

Nebraska was a member when they were invited to the B1G, but lost their membership in 2011.

There isn't a bylaw or anything to bind the Big Ten to only inviting a school if they are AAU. So you can believe whatever you want but there is nothing binding the Presidents to only approving an invitation if the Institution is a member of the AAU.


Yep,ND had an open invite and we're not AAU so the Big Ten is willing to stray off the AAU trail.

Exactly, it is a much more complex equation than most of these folks realize. There isn't any one particular variable that matters more than any other. The variable that matters most in any particular institution's case is the variable that is worth the most to them.

That is why Notre Dame had an invite if they wanted one. Notre Dame is a small private catholic university. That alone is in the completely opposite direction of the rest of the Big Ten schools except maybe Northwestern. Yet that isn't enough to count them out. They absolutely are not a research school and whatever research they do, I highly doubt they are interested in sharing. They aren't AAU, they aren't a large University, they don't really have anything in common with any other Big Ten school yet they had a standing invite for awhile (they don't anymore). Why? Because their TV Contract with NBC was that big of a deal. Back then college football on tv was very limited. No one else could match the amount of exposure you would get with Notre Dame.

That one single variable was so strong for Notre Dame that everything else was mitigated.

The same can be said for a school now that may not be AAU but would be stronger in other areas that the Big Ten could heavily benefit from.

What does the Big Ten need?
01-07-2015 07:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
omniorange Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,144
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 251
I Root For: Syracuse
Location:

Donators
Post: #183
RE: Hartford Courant: "There will be another round of movement [expansion]"
(01-06-2015 10:04 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(01-04-2015 05:45 PM)omniorange Wrote:  
(01-04-2015 03:42 PM)XLance Wrote:  Swofford has been playing catch up since 2003, which I think just magnifies what a remarkable job he has done as his circumstances have continued to shift. The vision was to be the PAC of the east coast, but the members of the ACC were not prepared to move forward at the same pace.

If the opportunity presents itself, I don't think the ACC will hesitate to invite West Virginia as #15 to get contiguous again then stop and hope that further rules changes will eventually deliver the Irish into the fold as a full member.

IMO the ACC has no real interest in Texas even as a partial member. The ACC's need is to increase eyeballs in the Mid-Atlantic and New England markets to combat a strong presence of the B1G rather than try to build a relationship in a part time market half way across the country.

And waiting for ND to become a full member is still fool's gold to me. I think the best the ACC will likely get from ND in the future is the possibility of 6 games instead of 5.

To address the bolded point above, if the opportunity presents itself, take WVU and UConn and be done with it. Doesn't leaving UConn out there for the B1G as a potential pick-up increase that conference's already strong presence in the northeast and potentially weaken the ACC more in this regard?

If the ACC doesn't like 17 for basketball then add Georgetown and rotate the ACC championship game on an equal basis between Greensboro, DC, NYC, and Atlanta (which should be done anyway). The OOC schedule for men's basketball is getting pointless as well. The real games are the conference games and a few select OOC games. With conferences getting so large now, I'd like to see the ACC be the first to increase them from 18 to 20 or even 22.

If the ACC only adds WVU as #15, then that is fine as well (although it still risks the B1G getting UConn at a later point in time). But for that to happen, as you probably realize they likely need that change in the championship rule to occur. IF the conference goes this route of WVU only I just hope they don't assume or wish for ND joining full-time at any point in the future. IF it happens, fine, just don't plan or expect it to.

Cheers,
Neil

Bigger fools gold than Notre Dame? New York City!

Depends upon what one is trying to mine from NYC. If any one thinks a conference or a college team can "own" NYC, then that is fool's gold.

If the goal is to attempt to increase NYC's interest in college athletics by 2%, then I don't see that as fool's gold. And increasing NYC's interest by 2% is better than getting a 7% increase in any other DMA ranked 10 or lower.

As you know, my take on the ACC and it's identity paradigm shift to encompass the entire east coast needs to demonstrate a strong presence in the 3 most important states in that conference North Carolina (it's heart), plus Florida and New York.

The ACC's football championship is already well positioned in North Carolina.

It's contract Bowl is the Orange in the state of Florida.

It's basketball tourney should be in NYC more often than not. Personally I believe it should be there every year IF they can get MSG in the next round of negotiations. If they can't then I would be fine for an equal rotation between Greensboro, NYC, DC, and Atlanta.

Cheers,
Neil
(This post was last modified: 01-07-2015 07:05 PM by omniorange.)
01-07-2015 07:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
XLance Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 14,233
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 762
I Root For: Carolina
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post: #184
RE: Hartford Courant: "There will be another round of movement [expansion]"
(01-07-2015 06:48 PM)omniorange Wrote:  
(01-06-2015 09:50 PM)XLance Wrote:  
(01-04-2015 03:25 PM)omniorange Wrote:  
(01-04-2015 10:49 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  
(01-04-2015 02:04 AM)omniorange Wrote:  Again, think of this as initially attempting to change the identity of the conference by expanding out from the South Atlantic sub-region to become the East Coast Conference.

The following is from a 2000 ESPN/TNS sports poll right after the 1999 season that I found on the FSU site back in 2003. Don't think it's still out there, but this is what it has for favorite football team from the various sub-regions. ESPN/TNS polls with regional favorites were quite common on the internet until about 2007 or so. But to actually see the sub-region one was rare:

South Atlantic

1. Florida State 12.6
2. Florida 8.7
3. North Carolina 6.2
4. Georgia 5.4
5. Virginia Tech 5.1
6. West Virginia 4.1
7. Notre Dame 3.7
8. Miami 3.5
9. Penn State 3.1
10. Clemson 2.6

South Atlantic sub-region consists of Maryland, Delaware, West Virginia, DC, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida

Mid-Atlantic

1. Penn State 29.0
2. Notre Dame 13.1
3. Syracuse 6.0
4. Pittsburgh 4.1
5. Florida State 3.9
6. Michigan 3.4
7. Florida 1.6
8. Ohio State 1.4
9. Miami 1.3
10. Nebraska 1.3

Mid-Atlantic sub-region consists of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania

New England

1. Notre Dame 15.9
2. Boston College 12.6
3. Penn State 6.7
4. Florida State 3.8
5. Michigan 3.0
6. Maine 2.8
7. Florida 1.8
8. Nebraska 1.6
9. Yale 1.6
10. Ohio State 1.5

New England sub-region consists of the obvious states.

Granted, the last one I saw but wasn't allowed to make a copy of was back in 2007 when the Big Ten first made noises about expansion. It had differences in terms of percentages from the above one, but they were still pretty much the same at the top. Rutgers had cracked the Top 10 for mid-atlantic and I'm sure they have risen even further over the past six years or so. FSU was no longer in the Top 10 of that sub-region and Miami was barely holding on.

UConn was ahead of Yale and Nebraska in the New England sub-region but Ohio State and Florida jumped up to 4 and 5 (or 5 and 6, the memory is failing me) while Florida State was down toward the bottom.

I think the above makes it obvious what the conference of the East Coast needed to be about, but could the ACC pull it off without getting one of ND or PSU? If they got both they were in great shape, but there was no reason for either to jump back in 2003. And later when 1) Miami and FSU went down by their standards, 2) ND kicked to the curb the admins that almost brought them to the verge of joining a conference, and 3) the Big Ten implemented a successful BTN and then expanded with Maryland and Rutgers the dream of ever enticing ND or PSU to the ACC became less and less likely.

All of the recent moves by the ACC harken back to that vision of 2003 but in reality they have now only been reactive ones instead of truly implementing a paradigm shift for the conference.

It will be interesting to see what develops over the next 5-7 years. Will the ACC finally succeed in football? Can mediocre SU and Pitt join with BC to regain some of their lost support in football in the northeast?

Not to mention competition from the B1G in the northeast.

As I have said many times, I wish the ACC had simply bit the bullet back in 2011 and invited Pitt, WVU, SU, and Louisville. And then, when Maryland jumped replace them with UConn. ND is fool's gold. And Texas moreso.

Time will tell.

Cheers,
Neil
Given the smaller enrollments at the majority of ACC schools, state flagship schools should've been given priority. So I think both Rutgers and WVU should've preceded Cuse and Pitt to the ACC, giving the ACC a total of 16 schools.

A poster by the handle of Woad Blue who is a UNC fan advocated Pitt and WVU or Rutgers and WVU as well back around 2010 or so prior to ACC expansion. With the exception of PSU (which so dominates the landscape) I think the state flagships paradigm is pretty much meaningless in the Northeast overall myself. My take was take the institutions with the best combinations of football and basketball (since the ACC needed help in both). Besides, by 2010 I was convinced Rutgers would wind up in the Big Ten anyway.

Cheers,
Neil

Neil,
I would like to have access to your files.

WoadBlue did indeed advocate in 2010 that the ACC take West Virginia and Rutgers which would be the largest BE football fan base and the 2nd largest football fan base, or a combo of West Virginia and Pitt which would give the ACC the largest BE football fan base and the most football history of any school in the BE.
He also suggested that the best move for basketball would be for the ACC to take Syracuse and Pitt (because Pitt as a basketball program was overtaking UConn).

Which files? I have lots of them and most of them are not even sports related. 03-wink

At the point in time that Woad was advocating Rutgers and WVU on that basis (being large state schools), WVU and Pitt were the two highest in terms of average attendance the years of 2008, 2009, and 2010.

So the ACC would have gotten the best rivalry game from the Big East (and in my mind that would have immediately become the 2nd best ACC conference rivalry game - after FSU and Miami), the two football programs with the best history (taking into account both present and future, although SU has history as well, they just had been in a funk except for one Freeney led year since the McNabb years), and the two largest football fan bases left in the BE at that time.

When I would debate with Woad and say that the ACC would take SU and Pitt, he had no use for SU at all. I tried to explain that even if academics were taken off the table, the ACC would still take SU and Pitt (and why) he didn't think SU was necessary for particular goal. Which was fine. Ultimately I was proven right on that but it actually wasn't one of more my bolder predictions.

Anyway, in terms of football followings, except for a bad coach situation like Louisville had for a couple of those years, my feeling was that one could flip a coin between Louisville, Rutgers, and Pitt for the 2nd best football attendance in the Big East. But long term, my money was always on Louisville getting to WVU's level in that area and possibly even exceeding them.

They seemed to me at the time (and still do), the closest to becoming the Big East's (and now ACC's) next VT.

Time will tell.

While I don't recall this being Woad's stance but if he or anyone thought Pitt's basketball program was on the verge of overtaking UConn's, then i just have to shake my head at that. Maybe he thought it could happen if Pitt got into the ACC and UConn was left out?

Cheers,
Neil


WoadBlue was always truly football focused and really wanted the "backyard brawl" to be a part of the ACC not so much because of Pitt and West Virginia, but, because it was a "classic" rivalry. Maybe all football fans will be able to enjoy it again in the future.
Woad's comment on your remark about just taking West Virginia and UConn and be done with it....Can UConn football ever grow enough to truly help the ACC? Unlikely.

BTW Neil, Woad thought the key to taking as much of NYC as possible would have been with the combination of Syracuse and Rutgers.
(This post was last modified: 01-07-2015 09:36 PM by XLance.)
01-07-2015 09:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.