CSNbbs

Which expansion is more acceptable to the Big 10

To get (must add)

why should they add anyone? what is the freaking need of you people to create 4x16? College football was great because it was different from the NFL. NYD used to be the best sports day in the year. The BCS and now playoff have ruined that.

Edit before Disney Frank weighs in. I'm a fan. I want the best fan experience. I don't care about Disney's or Fox's profits.

Neither is acceptable. Virginia's the only school mentioned I would want in the Big Ten. Kansas is a school I'd accept as a tagalong with someone else, not the school to get more schools I don't want.

Those who have been here for a decade remember the "Tech problem." The Big Ten couldn't add Texas because they didn't want to take Texas Tech.

Personally I think the Big Ten has no problem with Virginia or Virginia Tech. But only as add-ons for the bigger prize: North Carolina. Big Ten expansion is dead unless UNC, Texas, Florida, Georgia, Notre Dame, or one of the 4 California schools are part of the expansion.

I think to the Big Ten, Virginia is a prize unto itself. Regarding schools the conference might be "forced" to add, such a scenario would probably only take place if politicians started throwing their weight around (such as Baylor and Texas Tech joining the Big 12 and Virginia Tech joining the ACC). And even then, I don't know if they have enough influence to compel the Big Ten to add redundant or undesirable schools like Iowa State or Kansas State.

(03-18-2020 04:56 AM)VCE Wrote: [ -> ]why should they add anyone? what is the freaking need of you people to create 4x16? College football was great because it was different from the NFL. NYD used to be the best sports day in the year. The BCS and now playoff have ruined that.

Edit before Disney Frank weighs in. I'm a fan. I want the best fan experience. I don't care about Disney's or Fox's profits.

Virginia is not Maryland, they have no interest in the Big 10.

(03-18-2020 07:55 AM)esayem Wrote: [ -> ]Virginia is not Maryland, they have no interest in the Big 10.

What Swofford did at Florida State in selling humbugs on staying with the conference, he apparently also did in Virginia. But, was it ever confirmed whether this was Tech, or was it UVA? Also heard it was NCSU?

I agree that UVA doesn't look like a jumper the same way as UMD and FSU did; they'll likely go where UNC and Duke go. Doesn't mean they didn't have some concerns from within, though.

As for Kansas, they made it known they don't have a State problem. They'd prefer to move along with ISU and KSU, but, you worry about you first.

(03-18-2020 07:55 AM)esayem Wrote: [ -> ]Virginia is not Maryland, they have no interest in the Big 10.

I used to think the same thing about Maryland.

Then the Big 10 showed Maryland's administrators how much more money they could make in the Big 10. I'm not joking - I remember reading several articles which said that was when Maryland started even considering the Big 10's sales pitch.

3 of the 4 schools in parentheses will ever be in the Big Ten. In some bizarro world scenario Iowa St maybe sneaks in.

Here are the schools the Big Ten would WANT:

Oklahoma
Texas
Notre Dame

They’d accept Kansas as a filler school to go with one of the Big 12 schools. For a companion school to pair with ND I think your pool is: BC, Pitt, Cuse, UVA, UNC, Duke, or GT but any of those 7 are strictly filler—those are not high profile targets that the Big Ten is actively trying acquire.

They'd take KU as a partner for Texas or OU. I actually have my doubts that the B1G would reach out to OU first, but I could be wrong. Texas is the prize for them from the B12.

They'd take UVa alone or with UNC. They're not taking any partners with them as a cost of expansion. VT might be on the table, but WVU is a big no for the B1G.

(03-18-2020 08:18 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: [ -> ]3 of the 4 schools in parentheses will ever be in the Big Ten. In some bizarro world scenario Iowa St maybe sneaks in.

Here are the schools the Big Ten would WANT:

Oklahoma
Texas
Notre Dame

They’d accept Kansas as a filler school to go with one of the Big 12 schools. For a companion school to pair with ND I think your pool is: BC, Pitt, Cuse, UVA, UNC, Duke, or GT but any of those 7 are strictly filler—those are not high profile targets that the Big Ten is actively trying acquire.

I've argued Oklahoma is a filler too. We get too caught up on the current state of the football program. If somehow the Big Ten could get Alabama or LSU from the SEC should we try for them too? Is Clemson the most valuable ACC school? Schools need to be more to the Big Ten than just a football program to be a Big Ten target (now filler/companion school is a different story). Ask yourself if the football team becomes Florida State or Nebraska what value would the school be to the Big Ten? Even if Texas is a .500 school they're still valuable to the Big Ten in other ways. You can say the same about Notre Dame. Can you say the same about Oklahoma? My answer is no. I don't think Penn State's other sports want to be traveling to Oklahoma. It's bad enough they have to go to Nebraska. Cable TV/the BTN may not be as big a deal 20-30 years from now as it is today but still population will matter. If Florida State ever gets good again, you have a much larger potential audience from the state of Florida than you would for Clemson. Same with Texas compared to Oklahoma. Sure, I'd rather have an undefeated Clemson than a 7-5 FSU but I'd rather an undefeated FSU than an undefeated Clemson and a 7-5 Texas than a 7-5 Oklahoma.

(03-18-2020 08:16 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-18-2020 07:55 AM)esayem Wrote: [ -> ]Virginia is not Maryland, they have no interest in the Big 10.

I used to think the same thing about Maryland.

Then the Big 10 showed Maryland's administrators how much more money they could make in the Big 10. I'm not joking - I remember reading several articles which said that was when Maryland started even considering the Big 10's sales pitch.

One can wonder how much of a stickler they were for change for some time that it wasn't brewing within them longer. They didn't want Penn State in the ACC, and weren't loving the expansion issues. I think the Cuse and Pitt one really did it for them, especially when the revenue disparities between the ACC and Big Ten and SEC became so pronounced.

Consider what Maryland was to the ACC before the acquisition of BC, Tech, and Miami: the northeastern most member. It had some advantages, if never fully realized or utilized by UMD. As expansion shunted them more toward the core/middle of the conference, and they lost some access to that core due to scheduling, I think the seeds were sewn back then. Then they got a former Big Ten school guy to lead them. And when he spoke up at the AAU meetings, it started to move. We know the Big Ten had them on their list for some time.

With how top-heavy power conferences have evolved into, I would not be surprised to eventually see the P5 add programs not only for additional content, and likely added revenue, but also to "help-out" the middle-programs and even lower-programs for competitive parity reasons.

For the B1G, SEC and ACC, 14-team leagues have eliminated - just 30 years ago - the ability to have smaller leagues each have a top-level program representing it. Back then, you could have had Michigan (B1G), Clemson (ACC), Nebraska (Big 8), USC (PAC 10), Alabama (SEC), Texas (SWC), Miami (Big East) and Notre Dame (Independent) all legitimately have top-10 teams, and each representing its conference. However, with mass consolidation, there only are five leagues that can really have representatives in the final rankings - which, IMO, has hurt a number of programs that were once able to compete for top-level status annually. The elimination of major leagues, has eliminated the quantity of perceived top-level teams too. For schools now, there are no complaints about the money they are earning; however, long-term, it is only a matter of time before the notion of being "too big" might be revealed, where there can be a pursuit from the middle-to-low programs wishing more competitive balance and/or opportunity. No school wants to be cemented into the bottom of a major sport long-term, which is where a significant number of power programs find themselves in at present.

I am not arguing to move backwards, but - with this topic in mind - what we could find is the opposite: power conferences moving to super-conference status not just in the name of more content, exposure and, likely, revenues, but also for the ability to create more parity and competition for its middle and bottom programs by establishing additional divisions/leagues within the conference. Maybe we see the evolution of super-conferences to four divisions, creating two additional recognitions and/or achievements that could create competitive incentives for many programs that, at present, simply is unrealistic (or so far away) that is is unattainable. For a program like Rutgers or Maryland or Indiana, for example, their ability to win a B1G East title with Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and Michigan State is - long-term - remarkably low. Similarly, programs like Duke, UNC, NC State and Virginia have each had either one or zero ACC Championship game appearances (zero wins) in the ACC Championship game. The middle and bottom programs can only accept checks for so long before they will begin to desire ways to win more.

With five power conferences, there can only be five true champions, and only eight divisional champions (Big 12 has no divisional champions). At some point, there will be push back from schools within the P5 that will want ways to be able to win more (and not just be lambs for the slaughter for the blue blood dynasties that have been formed).

Note to self: stay off VCE's lawn!

I see the angle that the consolidation of the mega conferences have made it so there are much fewer accolades for teams to chase. For blue bloods, if you don’t win your conference or qualify for the playoff it’s pretty much a disappointment.

With that said, some mega conferences made up of smaller divisions and a conference playoff could put that back in place.

ex. The Big 10 with 20 members

4 divisions of 5 with the same sort of playoff as the AFC and NFC have now: 6 team playoff among 4 division champs and 2 wildcards. That gives lots of achievements for teams to strive for, short of winning the whole conference and/or a national title.

as a Rutgers fan, I'd love to see WVU in the B1G to restart Guidos vs Hillbillies Week but that will never happen given their academics and lack of population.

(03-18-2020 08:16 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-18-2020 07:55 AM)esayem Wrote: [ -> ]Virginia is not Maryland, they have no interest in the Big 10.

I used to think the same thing about Maryland.

Then the Big 10 showed Maryland's administrators how much more money they could make in the Big 10. I'm not joking - I remember reading several articles which said that was when Maryland started even considering the Big 10's sales pitch.

When did anyone have time to think about or speculate where Maryland would move? They were asked and jumped in a DC minute! Nobody saw that coming except their academic leaders who made it happen. There has always been a faction at UMD that wanted to be aligned with Penn State.

UVA has a much healthier athletic department than Maryland did at that time. They also have much stronger institutional ties with the research triangle.

Nebraska and Wisconsin fatting up their resumes and getting 10 to 11 wins would be better off for the Big Ten than trying to get more big boys in. Kansas and Iowa State would play a very important role in that regard.

(03-18-2020 04:56 AM)VCE Wrote: [ -> ]why should they add anyone? what is the freaking need of you people to create 4x16? College football was great because it was different from the NFL. NYD used to be the best sports day in the year. The BCS and now playoff have ruined that.

Edit before Disney Frank weighs in. I'm a fan. I want the best fan experience. I don't care about Disney's or Fox's profits.

Disney Frank? That's a new one! (Granted, I actually do love Disney World and theme parks in general.)

Putting aside whether 4x16 is a good or bad thing, the specific proposals from the OP would be poor ideas for the Big Ten. They'll have no expansion at all instead of being forced to take an "undesirable" school.

Adding Oklahoma and Kansas is the only combo from the Big 12 that work for the Big Ten that doesn't involve Texas. Iowa State, as much as I respect that school and its fan base, will *never* be in the Big Ten.

There's a little bit more of a rationale for adding both UVA and VT since that's a region that's much more important for the Big Ten demographically in the long-term. I can squint and see that one as at least something that could get batted around by the university presidents, but I don't think that ultimately makes money for the league. The goal for the Big Ten would be UVA plus a school like UNC or Georgia Tech if they ever went down that road.