(05-14-2020 10:11 AM)schmolik Wrote:  If we're about taking back, can the Big 12 take back Nebraska and take Iowa too so the Big Ten can be entirely East of the Mississippi?

/said not a single Big Ten fan, ever.

(05-14-2020 03:15 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-14-2020 02:57 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(05-14-2020 10:11 AM)schmolik Wrote:  If we're about taking back, can the Big 12 take back Nebraska and take Iowa too so the Big Ten can be entirely East of the Mississippi?

I actually like having Nebraska around and I wish we’d bring in more AAU Big 8 schools.

My ideal Big Ten would be 20 schools with Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa St, Missouri, ND, and Pitt joining.

4 pods of 5.

If we could do a take back let’s give up Maryland and Rutgers—we already had Indiana, Illinois, and Northwestern as our dumpster fire programs. They are encroaching on that role.

I take it geography means nothing to you. You'd probably rather have Oregon in the Big Ten than Maryland even though you could drive from Columbus to College Park. Geography means something to me. Sue me. And Maryland has more in common with Pennsylvania and Ohio than Oregon does (or Nebraska and Iowa do).

Did you read the whole post? Oregon isn’t on that list.

Earlier in this thread there’s a comment I made in response to JRsec where I specifically say no to PAC 12 schools in the Big Ten.

Among those 6 schools two are bona fide college football bluebloods:

Oklahoma
Notre Dame

They get a pass for not being AAU.

Kansas, Iowa St, and Missouri are all Midwestern schools with over 100 years of shared history with Oklahoma and Nebraska. They fit the profile of a Big Ten school.

Pitt is AAU and sits comfortably between Ohio St and Penn St. They get the 20th spot.

The expansion options in the East simply aren’t that good. BC and Syracuse have terrible fan support and don’t fit the academic profile.

UVA, UNC, Duke, and GT have the academics but don’t fit the culture. They also aren’t particularly great football programs.

Academically, Iowa and Nebraska fit in quite well with the Big Ten. They may be on the bottom end of the metrics but they are in the ball park. neither of them is going to be shown the door.

(05-14-2020 04:44 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(05-14-2020 03:15 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-14-2020 02:57 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(05-14-2020 10:11 AM)schmolik Wrote:  If we're about taking back, can the Big 12 take back Nebraska and take Iowa too so the Big Ten can be entirely East of the Mississippi?

I actually like having Nebraska around and I wish we’d bring in more AAU Big 8 schools.

My ideal Big Ten would be 20 schools with Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa St, Missouri, ND, and Pitt joining.

4 pods of 5.

If we could do a take back let’s give up Maryland and Rutgers—we already had Indiana, Illinois, and Northwestern as our dumpster fire programs. They are encroaching on that role.

I take it geography means nothing to you. You'd probably rather have Oregon in the Big Ten than Maryland even though you could drive from Columbus to College Park. Geography means something to me. Sue me. And Maryland has more in common with Pennsylvania and Ohio than Oregon does (or Nebraska and Iowa do).

Did you read the whole post? Oregon isn’t on that list.

Earlier in this thread there’s a comment I made in response to JRsec where I specifically say no to PAC 12 schools in the Big Ten.

Among those 6 schools two are bona fide college football bluebloods:

Oklahoma
Notre Dame

They get a pass for not being AAU.

Kansas, Iowa St, and Missouri are all Midwestern schools with over 100 years of shared history with Oklahoma and Nebraska. They fit the profile of a Big Ten school.

Pitt is AAU and sits comfortably between Ohio St and Penn St. They get the 20th spot.

The expansion options in the East simply aren’t that good. BC and Syracuse have terrible fan support and don’t fit the academic profile.

UVA, UNC, Duke, and GT have the academics but don’t fit the culture. They also aren’t particularly great football programs.

Academically, Iowa and Nebraska fit in quite well with the Big Ten. They may be on the bottom end of the metrics but they are in the ball park. neither of them is going to be shown the door.

California and maybe Oregon will be calling off classes in state institutions of higher learning until Fall of 2021. This likely means no football as well and if they do follow through until Fall of 2021 no basketball, baseball or softball in the Spring of 2021.

I'd say that could open the door for Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and privates like U.S.C. to make other considerations. Big 12? If so that changes the whole perspective about who might be on the expansion menu.

I'd have to be curious if a school like Notre Dame might be interested in a Big 12, signed up with ESPN, if it meant that Texas, U.S.C. and Oklahoma were there for the big games. Even if it doesn't it puts pressure back on the ACC. If UT and OU are safe and secure and the PAC commits suicide, would the SEC and Big 10 look East again? Is there any real value there?

I think we could very well see a temporary situation where the Big 12 takes in PAC 12 schools who still want to play a 2020 season. My guess is that it will be a temporary set up but who knows, AZ, AZ St, Utah, and Colorado may find they like that arrangement and want to keep it long term.

I’ve been questioning the long term viability of the PAC 12 for a while now. It may take 30 years but I can see a future where they are no longer considered major contenders. If anyone in that conference wants to maintain “big time” athletics jumping now might be wise.

If the Big 12 gets propped up with some PAC 12 talent then the ACC is the only place the SEC and Big Ten can expand. I don’t see ND in the Big 12 without USC. The SEC can definitely pick up programs like Florida St and Clemson but the only school that could move the needle for the Big Ten from that league is the Irish.

(05-14-2020 08:11 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I think we could very well see a temporary situation where the Big 12 takes in PAC 12 schools who still want to play a 2020 season. My guess is that it will be a temporary set up but who knows, AZ, AZ St, Utah, and Colorado may find they like that arrangement and want to keep it long term.

I’ve been questioning the long term viability of the PAC 12 for a while now. It may take 30 years but I can see a future where they are no longer considered major contenders. If anyone in that conference wants to maintain “big time” athletics jumping now might be wise.

If the Big 12 gets propped up with some PAC 12 talent then the ACC is the only place the SEC and Big Ten can expand. I don’t see ND in the Big 12 without USC. The SEC can definitely pick up programs like Florida St and Clemson but the only school that could move the needle for the Big Ten from that league is the Irish.

Muskie what we could be looking at is the beginning of the breakaway of the Big 10 and SEC and the cherry picking of the schools that add value to them collectively.

We're both at 14. Texas, Oklahoma, U.S.C. Notre Dame, Clemson and Florida State for the first 6 in. After that we set the size and see who applies. 20 apiece and we start the a new independent upper tier. 4 division champs play it off for the conference title (there's your 8 school playoff) and the two champs meet for the title. People who have speculated about this think that by having a top 40 or even 48 payouts per school could reach as high as 110-120 million per school.

I don’t know that the COVID panic is going to trigger that 2 mega conference set up just yet. It would be different if it were the ACC or Big 12 were the ones talking about shuttering conference sports for a year but for right now it’s just the PAC 12.

I like the concept though. I built a 20 team Big Ten that I like. I can’t seem to find a divisional arrangement that I like for the SEC at 20–but I did with 24. Do you have a set up for your conference that you’re partial to?

(05-15-2020 06:54 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I don’t know that the COVID panic is going to trigger that 2 mega conference set up just yet. It would be different if it were the ACC or Big 12 were the ones talking about shuttering conference sports for a year but for right now it’s just the PAC 12.

I like the concept though. I built a 20 team Big Ten that I like. I can’t seem to find a divisional arrangement that I like for the SEC at 20–but I did with 24. Do you have a set up for your conference that you’re partial to?

Auburn, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech
(This division reunites the two oldest rivals in the SEC and Auburn has played Florida and Florida State numerous times in history and it's geographically very tight.)
Clemson, Kentucky, N.C. State, South Carolina, Virginia Tech
(A new division from which Clemson will emerge most years but also geographically tight and solid for Kentucky basketball)
Alabama, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Tennessee, Vanderbilt.
(Another very tight division from which Alabama will emerge most years. Vandy/Ole Miss long time rivals as are Alabama/Tennessee and it too is geographically tight)
Arkansas, Louisiana State, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas A&M
(An extremely competitive division not relying upon Texas. If Oklahoma isn't included you can slip either Miami or Louisville into it easily. Columbia to Louisville is close or Miami gives them trips to Florida for recruiting. Also works well if just Texas comes. Works best if Texas and Oklahoma join, but Kansas and Missouri head to the Big 10.)

You play 4 divisional games per year, 1 permanent rival, and rotate another whole division in annually for a 10 game conference schedule. That leaves 2 P games OOC that may be played. The Spring game moves to mid to late August may be against an in state FCS or FBS program that is not a P school and is played as an opening to the season exhibition game but sold as the 7th home game in the season ticket book.

Permanent rivals cover Florida/Tennessee, Alabama/Auburn, etc.

JR—

Not bad. So you added Oklahoma, GT, Clemson, FSU, NC St, and VT.

I find it interesting that you passed on Texas. I’ve included them in most every 18-24 team model for the SEC. I just see them fitting better in your conference than ours. I just don’t seen them making road trips to Minnesota.

How do you see NC St and VT getting away from UNC and UVA? I feel like their big brothers would not approve of being left behind. This is why I end up with 24 rather than 20.

I also like Missouri and Oklahoma in the Big Ten in a Big 8 reunion division with Nebraska, Iowa St, and Kansas.

(05-15-2020 10:25 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  JR—

How do you see NC St and VT getting away from UNC and UVA? I feel like their big brothers would not approve of being left behind. This is why I end up with 24 rather than 20.

Was discussed in an ACC thread the other way, the common theme is that UNC/UVA to the Big Ten and NCSt/VT to the SEC. Seems like a win/win for both states and all four public schools involved.

Financially I'd want Texas in the Big Ten (they'd be one school west of the Mississippi I'd want in the Big Ten), geographically I'd rather them be in the SEC (and so they'd be with Texas A&M). If I had to pick six, I'd say Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Pitt, Virginia, North Carolina with Syracuse and Duke if Texas/Oklahoma go to the SEC and/or Notre Dame doesn't want to come. I'd also love Florida State.

(05-15-2020 11:52 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 10:25 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  JR—

How do you see NC St and VT getting away from UNC and UVA? I feel like their big brothers would not approve of being left behind. This is why I end up with 24 rather than 20.

Was discussed in an ACC thread the other way, the common theme is that UNC/UVA to the Big Ten and NCSt/VT to the SEC. Seems like a win/win for both states and all four public schools involved.

Financially I'd want Texas in the Big Ten (they'd be one school west of the Mississippi I'd want in the Big Ten), geographically I'd rather them be in the SEC (and so they'd be with Texas A&M). If I had to pick six, I'd say Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Pitt, Virginia, North Carolina with Syracuse and Duke if Texas/Oklahoma go to the SEC and/or Notre Dame doesn't want to come. I'd also love Florida State.

How is it you want trash football programs like UVA and UNC but you’ve argued against adding Oklahoma and for expelling Nebraska and Iowa in other posts?

Duke? Syracuse? It’s a hard no on both of those.

(05-13-2020 09:39 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  Yeah, I wasn't a fan of BYU being in the Big 12.. Already have a cult in Waco. That FOX sports person was smart to say that. Glad the Big 12 didn't expand with BYU or Cincy or Memphis. Seems like the two AZ schools would be a perfect pair to make the Big 12, 12 again.

I’m the opposite. I love BYU as an addition. This is doubly true if the Arizona schools are available.

The real problem is there just isn’t a real solid #2 for BYU to join with. Cincy is the closest in my mind. But they are Louisville-lite. Big 12 should’ve grabbed Louisville back in 2012 and held onto them while the ACC replaces Maryland with UConn and we wait for the bottom to fall out of the ACC barrel.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

(05-15-2020 12:35 PM)Baylorbears11 Wrote:  

(05-13-2020 09:39 AM)Thiefery Wrote:  Yeah, I wasn't a fan of BYU being in the Big 12.. Already have a cult in Waco. That FOX sports person was smart to say that. Glad the Big 12 didn't expand with BYU or Cincy or Memphis. Seems like the two AZ schools would be a perfect pair to make the Big 12, 12 again.

I’m the opposite. I love BYU as an addition. This is doubly true if the Arizona schools are available.

The real problem is there just isn’t a real solid #2 for BYU to join with. Cincy is the closest in my mind. But they are Louisville-lite. Big 12 should’ve grabbed Louisville back in 2012 and held onto them while the ACC replaces Maryland with UConn and we wait for the bottom to fall out of the ACC barrel.

Hindsight is always 20/20.

no offense but I would kick baylor out if i could for Tulane in a heartbeat.. but in your scenario I would want Tulane in .. but i just think that would boost the big 12 conference.. road trips to Nawlins, finally get another school in a talent rich state. Coach O and his swamp politicians can't close satellite camps like they do now.

(05-15-2020 12:10 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 11:52 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 10:25 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  JR—

How do you see NC St and VT getting away from UNC and UVA? I feel like their big brothers would not approve of being left behind. This is why I end up with 24 rather than 20.

Was discussed in an ACC thread the other way, the common theme is that UNC/UVA to the Big Ten and NCSt/VT to the SEC. Seems like a win/win for both states and all four public schools involved.

Financially I'd want Texas in the Big Ten (they'd be one school west of the Mississippi I'd want in the Big Ten), geographically I'd rather them be in the SEC (and so they'd be with Texas A&M). If I had to pick six, I'd say Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Pitt, Virginia, North Carolina with Syracuse and Duke if Texas/Oklahoma go to the SEC and/or Notre Dame doesn't want to come. I'd also love Florida State.

How is it you want trash football programs like UVA and UNC but you’ve argued against adding Oklahoma and for expelling Nebraska and Iowa in other posts?

Duke? Syracuse? It’s a hard no on both of those.

Because shockingly I value other things than football. I know football is important at Ohio State but I would think OSU would realize there's more to life than football. You act as like a school with a second rate football team is a second rate university. I expect that from Alabama and Clemson. I thought Ohio State was better than that. Should OSU be in the Big Ten or the SEC?

(05-15-2020 01:16 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 12:10 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 11:52 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 10:25 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  JR—

How do you see NC St and VT getting away from UNC and UVA? I feel like their big brothers would not approve of being left behind. This is why I end up with 24 rather than 20.

Was discussed in an ACC thread the other way, the common theme is that UNC/UVA to the Big Ten and NCSt/VT to the SEC. Seems like a win/win for both states and all four public schools involved.

Financially I'd want Texas in the Big Ten (they'd be one school west of the Mississippi I'd want in the Big Ten), geographically I'd rather them be in the SEC (and so they'd be with Texas A&M). If I had to pick six, I'd say Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Pitt, Virginia, North Carolina with Syracuse and Duke if Texas/Oklahoma go to the SEC and/or Notre Dame doesn't want to come. I'd also love Florida State.

How is it you want trash football programs like UVA and UNC but you’ve argued against adding Oklahoma and for expelling Nebraska and Iowa in other posts?

Duke? Syracuse? It’s a hard no on both of those.

Because shockingly I value other things than football. I know football is important at Ohio State but I would think OSU would realize there's more to life than football. You act as like a school with a second rate football team is a second rate university. I expect that from Alabama and Clemson. I thought Ohio State was better than that. Should OSU be in the Big Ten or the SEC?

You make a ridiculous assumption that it is not possible to both kick everybody's butt in football and be a great university. It's not a zero sum option. The objective should be both at every university.

(05-15-2020 01:16 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 12:10 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 11:52 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 10:25 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  JR—

How do you see NC St and VT getting away from UNC and UVA? I feel like their big brothers would not approve of being left behind. This is why I end up with 24 rather than 20.

Was discussed in an ACC thread the other way, the common theme is that UNC/UVA to the Big Ten and NCSt/VT to the SEC. Seems like a win/win for both states and all four public schools involved.

Financially I'd want Texas in the Big Ten (they'd be one school west of the Mississippi I'd want in the Big Ten), geographically I'd rather them be in the SEC (and so they'd be with Texas A&M). If I had to pick six, I'd say Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Pitt, Virginia, North Carolina with Syracuse and Duke if Texas/Oklahoma go to the SEC and/or Notre Dame doesn't want to come. I'd also love Florida State.

How is it you want trash football programs like UVA and UNC but you’ve argued against adding Oklahoma and for expelling Nebraska and Iowa in other posts?

Duke? Syracuse? It’s a hard no on both of those.

Because shockingly I value other things than football. I know football is important at Ohio State but I would think OSU would realize there's more to life than football. You act as like a school with a second rate football team is a second rate university. I expect that from Alabama and Clemson. I thought Ohio State was better than that. Should OSU be in the Big Ten or the SEC?

I respect your opinion but the Big Ten is first and foremost an athletic conference. The quality of the athletic program has to have a large bearing on admission decisions. Good academics gets on the list of possibilities but if your athletic house isn’t in order you’re not going to be an asset that’s going to raise the overall value of the consortium. No one can argue that Rice and Tulane aren’t great universities. The same can be said of Chicago, Washington U (St L), Case Western Reserve, and Carnegie-Mellon. But none of those schools fits the athletic profile of the conference so they aren’t going to be pursued.

(05-15-2020 01:40 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 01:16 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 12:10 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 11:52 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 10:25 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  JR—

How do you see NC St and VT getting away from UNC and UVA? I feel like their big brothers would not approve of being left behind. This is why I end up with 24 rather than 20.

Was discussed in an ACC thread the other way, the common theme is that UNC/UVA to the Big Ten and NCSt/VT to the SEC. Seems like a win/win for both states and all four public schools involved.

Financially I'd want Texas in the Big Ten (they'd be one school west of the Mississippi I'd want in the Big Ten), geographically I'd rather them be in the SEC (and so they'd be with Texas A&M). If I had to pick six, I'd say Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Pitt, Virginia, North Carolina with Syracuse and Duke if Texas/Oklahoma go to the SEC and/or Notre Dame doesn't want to come. I'd also love Florida State.

How is it you want trash football programs like UVA and UNC but you’ve argued against adding Oklahoma and for expelling Nebraska and Iowa in other posts?

Duke? Syracuse? It’s a hard no on both of those.

Because shockingly I value other things than football. I know football is important at Ohio State but I would think OSU would realize there's more to life than football. You act as like a school with a second rate football team is a second rate university. I expect that from Alabama and Clemson. I thought Ohio State was better than that. Should OSU be in the Big Ten or the SEC?

I respect your opinion but the Big Ten is first and foremost an athletic conference. The quality of the athletic program has to have a large bearing on admission decisions. Good academics gets on the list of possibilities but if your athletic house isn’t in order you’re not going to be an asset that’s going to raise the overall value of the consortium. No one can argue that Rice and Tulane aren’t great universities. The same can be said of Chicago, Washington U (St L), Case Western Reserve, and Carnegie-Mellon. But none of those schools fits the athletic profile of the conference so they aren’t going to be pursued.

Do you really want to compare UNC, UVa, and Duke to Rice, Tulane, Chicago, and WUSTL, CWRU, and CMU? Come on!

Also, can you actually say their men's basketball teams mean something and you're willing to overlook that their football teams aren't so good? If you want to say "athletic" conference, there is more than just one sport and men's basketball makes a ton of money too. It's not like Ohio State can't play, they're pretty decent in it. By contrast, Alabama and Clemson aren't that good so that's another reason I don't respect the schools that much (neither is Nebraska).

Basketball is generally considered to only be about 1/5th of a P5’s media contract so good basketball isn’t an end all be all.

I mentioned those DIII schools to illustrate that academics + geography isn’t enough.

I bring up Rice and Tulane to illustrate that academics + FBS status isn’t enough.

Have you looked at the recently released NCAA football attendance report? Duke’s 25.8K attendance looks a lot more like Rice’s 22.2K and Tulane’s 20.3K than any Big Ten school.

UVA and UNC would both fall in the bottom half of the standings and are half of what Ohio St, Penn St, and Michigan had.

(05-15-2020 02:28 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 01:40 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 01:16 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 12:10 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 11:52 AM)schmolik Wrote:  Was discussed in an ACC thread the other way, the common theme is that UNC/UVA to the Big Ten and NCSt/VT to the SEC. Seems like a win/win for both states and all four public schools involved.

Financially I'd want Texas in the Big Ten (they'd be one school west of the Mississippi I'd want in the Big Ten), geographically I'd rather them be in the SEC (and so they'd be with Texas A&M). If I had to pick six, I'd say Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Pitt, Virginia, North Carolina with Syracuse and Duke if Texas/Oklahoma go to the SEC and/or Notre Dame doesn't want to come. I'd also love Florida State.

How is it you want trash football programs like UVA and UNC but you’ve argued against adding Oklahoma and for expelling Nebraska and Iowa in other posts?

Duke? Syracuse? It’s a hard no on both of those.

Because shockingly I value other things than football. I know football is important at Ohio State but I would think OSU would realize there's more to life than football. You act as like a school with a second rate football team is a second rate university. I expect that from Alabama and Clemson. I thought Ohio State was better than that. Should OSU be in the Big Ten or the SEC?

I respect your opinion but the Big Ten is first and foremost an athletic conference. The quality of the athletic program has to have a large bearing on admission decisions. Good academics gets on the list of possibilities but if your athletic house isn’t in order you’re not going to be an asset that’s going to raise the overall value of the consortium. No one can argue that Rice and Tulane aren’t great universities. The same can be said of Chicago, Washington U (St L), Case Western Reserve, and Carnegie-Mellon. But none of those schools fits the athletic profile of the conference so they aren’t going to be pursued.

Do you really want to compare UNC, UVa, and Duke to Rice, Tulane, Chicago, and WUSTL, CWRU, and CMU? Come on!

Also, can you actually say their men's basketball teams mean something and you're willing to overlook that their football teams aren't so good? If you want to say "athletic" conference, there is more than just one sport and men's basketball makes a ton of money too. It's not like Ohio State can't play, they're pretty decent in it. By contrast, Alabama and Clemson aren't that good so that's another reason I don't respect the schools that much (neither is Nebraska).

Ok, you're full of hot air! You're original argument was all about geography and now it's this?

The BIG conference went and grabbed two large markets, wrapped them up and placed a big pretty bow on them and delivered them to State College. This then created two divisions. Penn State is in the east with their furthest peer being Indiana at ~550 miles. The other 5 are all at very reasonable distances. Was that all not good enough for your geography?

There is a western division too. Sorry you don't like them, too bad! Maybe Penn State needs to find a home in the ACC? Trust me, we would be perfectly fine without them, but I don't think the same could be said for Penn State.

Careful what you wish for, the University may get silly ideas like yours and do something stupid.

Peace!

(05-15-2020 02:56 PM)cubucks Wrote:  Ok, you're full of hot air! You're original argument was all about geography and now it's this?

The BIG conference went and grabbed two large markets, wrapped them up and placed a big pretty bow on them and delivered them to State College. This then created two divisions. Penn State is in the east with their furthest peer being Indiana at ~550 miles. The other 5 are all at very reasonable distances. Was that all not good enough for your geography?

There is a western division too. Sorry you don't like them, too bad! Maybe Penn State needs to find a home in the ACC? Trust me, we would be perfectly fine without them, but I don't think the same could be said for Penn State.

Careful what you wish for, the University may get silly ideas like yours and do something stupid.

Peace!

You're kidding yourself if you think the Big Ten would be where they are today if it weren't for Penn State being in the conference. Maryland and Rutgers (even if they stayed) are irrelevant in football (Rutgers is irrelevant in men's basketball too). Without Penn State, the Big Ten is entirely a Midwestern conference with no East Coast presence. Now being an entirely regional conference works for the SEC but they're at a higher level than the Big Ten. Sure, Ohio State-Michigan will always be one of the biggest games of the year if not the game of the year. But if Penn State left the Big Ten, who would be Ohio State's second best game every year? Wisconsin (assuming the Big Ten changed it so they played every year)? Good program but not as popular as Penn State. Meanwhile, PSU would certainly raise the popularity of the ACC. I'm not saying the ACC would pass the Big Ten but the gap would be closer. They'd definitely be 3rd, way ahead of the Pac 12 and Big 12. The Big Ten works well because a huge chunk of the Northeast fan interest in football belongs to them. If ALL of it went to the ACC, everything changes.

I believe anything west of the Mississippi is western crap but I think Fighting Muskie believes anything that isn't Midwest is non Midwestern crap. UNC and Virginia have no business being in the Big Ten because their football programs aren't good and yet KANSAS does????

OSU to UNC: 457 miles
OSU to Kansas: 700 miles

North Carolina football in the 2010's: 67-60 (including 3-4 in bowl games)
Kansas football in the 2010's: 21-99 (NO bowl games, best season was 3-9)

But Kansas is Midwest so they belong in the Big Ten!

Call me old, I grew up when the Phillies and Cubs were both in the NL East. I have no problems with East and "Midwest" (whatever that means, I never really understood the phrase Midwest) playing each other. The East is not a bad thing. The West is. Ask the Cubs. They fought to stay out of the NL West and succeeded.

(05-15-2020 01:16 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 12:10 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 11:52 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(05-15-2020 10:25 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  JR—

How do you see NC St and VT getting away from UNC and UVA? I feel like their big brothers would not approve of being left behind. This is why I end up with 24 rather than 20.

Was discussed in an ACC thread the other way, the common theme is that UNC/UVA to the Big Ten and NCSt/VT to the SEC. Seems like a win/win for both states and all four public schools involved.

Financially I'd want Texas in the Big Ten (they'd be one school west of the Mississippi I'd want in the Big Ten), geographically I'd rather them be in the SEC (and so they'd be with Texas A&M). If I had to pick six, I'd say Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Pitt, Virginia, North Carolina with Syracuse and Duke if Texas/Oklahoma go to the SEC and/or Notre Dame doesn't want to come. I'd also love Florida State.

How is it you want trash football programs like UVA and UNC but you’ve argued against adding Oklahoma and for expelling Nebraska and Iowa in other posts?

Duke? Syracuse? It’s a hard no on both of those.

Because shockingly I value other things than football. I know football is important at Ohio State but I would think OSU would realize there's more to life than football. You act as like a school with a second rate football team is a second rate university. I expect that from Alabama and Clemson. I thought Ohio State was better than that. Should OSU be in the Big Ten or the SEC?

Are you suggesting that Clemson is a second rate University like Alabama is?
Granted, Clemson is not Carolina or UVa, but they are an anomaly in academic standings.
Clemson is the second state school in South Carolina, like NC State is to Carolina. Clemson is small for a state STEM, about half the size of the Univ. of South Carolina, much harder to get in, but with much better academic status than the State flagship. Only in South Carolina.