Add Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah, Kansas and Texas Tech

Create a 12 team Big 10 west with these 10 additions +UCLA and USC. Next move is too create a 10-12 team big 10 east with ACC additions + shifting Rutgers and Maryland to the east. Eventually you will have a big 10 east, central and west consisting of 10-14 members in each division, something like:

Big 10 west (11 members)

Cal, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, ASU, Utah, Colorado, Texas Tech

Big 10 East (11 members)

BC, Syracuse, Rutgers, Maryland, ND, UVA, Va Tech, UNC, Duke, NC state, Miami

Big 10 Central 14 members

NW, ILL, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas
Michigan, MSU, IU, Purdue, Ohio State, Penn State, Pitt

Each division runs as a stand-alone. For football 4 team playoff, east vs west conference winners face the central winner in the rose bowl. The central will have its own title game in indy before the rose bowl.

(01-23-2023 01:36 PM)bluesox Wrote:  Add Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah, Kansas and Texas Tech

Create a 12 team Big 10 west with these 10 additions +UCLA and USC. Next move is too create a 10-12 team big 10 east with ACC additions + shifting Rutgers and Maryland to the east. Eventually you will have a big 10 east, central and west consisting of 10-14 members in each division.

Arizona State and Texas Tech are not AAU schools. Arizona State could be in the future however, and then they might be added to the fold. In their place for the time being, I would add Virginia and either Missouri or Pittsburgh.

Big Ten media deal will begin July 1, 2023, and run through the end of the 2029-30 athletic year.

No more expansion till 2030.

Realignment has always been a function of maximizing tv revenue.

The only possible Big Ten expansion I can see in the next year would be to add 2 more teams from the PAC, most likely Washington and Oregon.

The fact that the Big Ten is hesitating on these 2 additions is interesting, but that does not mean the idea is dead. At least not yet.

(01-23-2023 01:56 PM)goofus Wrote:  The only possible Big Ten expansion I can see in the next year would be to add 2 more teams from the PAC, most likely Washington and Oregon.

The fact that the Big Ten is hesitating on these 2 additions is interesting, but that does not mean the idea is dead. At least not yet.

The fact that the Big Ten AD has been on the public record saying there aren't any currently available adds that move the needle does seem like it puts it on life support. There are not a lot of strategic changes in the Big Ten without both the Buckeyes and That School Up North supporting them.

The SEC should beat the Big Ten to the punch.

Add Oregon, Washington, Stanford, Arizona State, Colorado, Utah, Kansas, and TCU. Add the remaining major western players and media markets outside of Los Angeles.

The SEC pays these new members a significantly reduced share, based on the additional conference revenue from ESPN, likely around $300M to $350M per year. Still a big pay raise for the newcomers. The SEC expands its reach to include the 10pm ET kickoff and tipoff timeslot as well as Friday football games.

With 24 teams, the SEC can set up new divisional structures using 4, 6 or 8-team scheduling division configurations. Sets the stage for 4-6 more additions from the ACC, when the timing is right.

(01-23-2023 01:41 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(01-23-2023 01:36 PM)bluesox Wrote:  Add Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah, Kansas and Texas Tech

Create a 12 team Big 10 west with these 10 additions +UCLA and USC. Next move is too create a 10-12 team big 10 east with ACC additions + shifting Rutgers and Maryland to the east. Eventually you will have a big 10 east, central and west consisting of 10-14 members in each division.

Arizona State and Texas Tech are not AAU schools. Arizona State could be in the future however, and then they might be added to the fold. In their place for the time being, I would add Virginia and either Missouri or Pittsburgh.

Doesn’t matter! Arizona & Tech extend their reach into recruiting hotbeds.

(01-23-2023 01:36 PM)bluesox Wrote:  Add Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah, Kansas and Texas Tech

Create a 12 team Big 10 west with these 10 additions +UCLA and USC. Next move is too create a 10-12 team big 10 east with ACC additions + shifting Rutgers and Maryland to the east. Eventually you will have a big 10 east, central and west consisting of 10-14 members in each division, something like:

Big 10 west (11 members)

Cal, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, ASU, Utah, Colorado, Texas Tech

Big 10 East (11 members)

BC, Syracuse, Rutgers, Maryland, ND, UVA, Va Tech, UNC, Duke, NC state, Miami

Big 10 Central 14 members

NW, ILL, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas
Michigan, MSU, IU, Purdue, Ohio State, Penn State, Pitt

Each division runs as a stand-alone. For football 4 team playoff, east vs west conference winners face the central winner in the rose bowl. The central will have its own title game in indy before the rose bowl.

So FSU, Clemson, WF and GT get what...$1 Billion or so each as the upholders of the GoR? I lost track once numbers get so big.

(01-23-2023 03:15 PM)Erictelevision Wrote:  

(01-23-2023 01:41 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(01-23-2023 01:36 PM)bluesox Wrote:  Add Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah, Kansas and Texas Tech

Create a 12 team Big 10 west with these 10 additions +UCLA and USC. Next move is too create a 10-12 team big 10 east with ACC additions + shifting Rutgers and Maryland to the east. Eventually you will have a big 10 east, central and west consisting of 10-14 members in each division.

Arizona State and Texas Tech are not AAU schools. Arizona State could be in the future however, and then they might be added to the fold. In their place for the time being, I would add Virginia and either Missouri or Pittsburgh.

Doesn’t matter! Arizona & Tech extend their reach into recruiting hotbeds.

They already have Arizona, so adding Arizona State would be pointless unless they were an AAU school. The Big 10 has an image to protect, and they don't want schools that are not AAU in their conference (with the exception of Notre Dame). They learned that lesson when they brought in Nebraska, who was voted out by some Big Ten members. If the Big 10 wants to get into Texas, they would be working out a deal with Texas to steal them away from the SEC. Texas Tech is nowhere near close to being an AAU school. Arizona State is closer but they're not there yet.

If the Big 10 really wants to get BIG, they would invite all the FBS AAU members to join the conference.

A nice infographic on the matter

(01-23-2023 04:35 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  A nice infographic on the matter

When you look at that it makes you ponder Oregon being included in B1G expansion.

(01-23-2023 03:47 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(01-23-2023 03:15 PM)Erictelevision Wrote:  

(01-23-2023 01:41 PM)andybible1995 Wrote:  

(01-23-2023 01:36 PM)bluesox Wrote:  Add Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah, Kansas and Texas Tech

Create a 12 team Big 10 west with these 10 additions +UCLA and USC. Next move is too create a 10-12 team big 10 east with ACC additions + shifting Rutgers and Maryland to the east. Eventually you will have a big 10 east, central and west consisting of 10-14 members in each division.

Arizona State and Texas Tech are not AAU schools. Arizona State could be in the future however, and then they might be added to the fold. In their place for the time being, I would add Virginia and either Missouri or Pittsburgh.

Doesn’t matter! Arizona & Tech extend their reach into recruiting hotbeds.

They already have Arizona, so adding Arizona State would be pointless unless they were an AAU school. The Big 10 has an image to protect, and they don't want schools that are not AAU in their conference (with the exception of Notre Dame). They learned that lesson when they brought in Nebraska, who was voted out by some Big Ten members. If the Big 10 wants to get into Texas, they would be working out a deal with Texas to steal them away from the SEC. Texas Tech is nowhere near close to being an AAU school. Arizona State is closer but they're not there yet.

ASU already does more research that AAU P5 members:

Iowa
Utah
Colorado
Virginia
Missouri
Kansas
Oregon

Almost at the same level as
Illinois
Rutgers
Purdue

ASU's media market dwarf's UA's.

I am pretty bullish on ASU having moved to near the top of the AAU list for large publics, but ASU’s size has to be taken into account when evaluating raw metrics. ASU has roughly twice the enrollment as UVA and has 5248 faculty compared to UVA’s 3083. The research funding has to be normalized to the size of the institution, and when this is done, ASU falls in line with the other cusp AAU large public universities.

Also, just because ASU is in The Phx DMA and AZ is in Tucson, doesn’t mean that these schools have different markets. AZ draws from the PHX metro and sends a plurality (if not a majority) of its alumni back to PHX. AZ delivers the Phoenix market as well as ASU does. ASU also delivers the Tucson market independently.

I’ve said this on another thread, but I’ll reiterate it again here. While I think the SEC could add 8-10 of the following, creating a mighty, Pan-Southern hegemony, I don’t think the Big 10 can have the same success by swallowing an equal number of PAC 10 programs and duplicate the same financial might.

FSU, Clemson, UNC, then some combo or all of UVA, VT, NC St, Duke, Louisville, GT, and/or Miami I believe would serve to bolster the SEC and I think the expansion schools would GAIN in fan support and value by such a move.

For the Big 10 on the other hand, I don’t think the West Coast brings the same sort of value added. Washington and Oregon might be sensible moves but I doubt going beyond 20 with exclusively Western moves behooves the Big 10. I think the Big 10 would need Notre Dame, Miami, and potentially others to justify a jump from 16 to 24.

(01-23-2023 04:58 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(01-23-2023 04:35 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  A nice infographic on the matter

When you look at that it makes you ponder Oregon being included in B1G expansion.

I'm sure infographics of TV ratings, attendance, and athletic department revenue prove out why Oregon is being included...and why they are well ahead of most of the rest of the PAC.

Nebraska and Oklahoma, as well as Alabama, Auburn, LSU, and Tennessee are dwarfed by Cal's academic research and local DMA TV market.

Good luck with that, PAC 12.

(01-23-2023 04:58 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(01-23-2023 04:35 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  A nice infographic on the matter

When you look at that it makes you ponder Oregon being included in B1G expansion.

At least it may tell us why the Big Ten is hesitating on Oregon. Washington seems even more of a no-brainer now with that graphic. The question must be who to pair Washington with. Stanford brings some big bucks in research but Cal and Arizona are not too far behind. Adding Cal could make UCLAs fund sharing problem go away, but then it becomes the Big Ten's fund sharing problem instead.

I wonder if the Big Ten could just add Washington and stop at 17. It leaves Washington on a big island but the Big Bucks might make it worth it.

(01-23-2023 04:58 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(01-23-2023 04:35 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  A nice infographic on the matter

When you look at that it makes you ponder Oregon being included in B1G expansion.

It also explains why the AAWU formed without UO, OSU, and WSU.

I know I get no traction with this, but when you take this in combination with this heat map of where FBS players come from, I think it makes the case that one major issue the PAC had/has is being doubled up in Oregon and Washington.

https://www.bannersociety.com/platform/a...where-from

(01-23-2023 06:24 PM)goofus Wrote:  

(01-23-2023 04:58 PM)SouthEastAlaska Wrote:  

(01-23-2023 04:35 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:   A nice infographic on the matter

When you look at that it makes you ponder Oregon being included in B1G expansion.

At least it may tell us why the Big Ten is hesitating on Oregon. Washington seems even more of a no-brainer now with that graphic. The question must be who to pair Washington with. Stanford brings some big bucks in research but Cal and Arizona are not too far behind. Adding Cal could make UCLAs fund sharing problem go away, but then it becomes the Big Ten's fund sharing problem instead.

Yes, Washington itself is not all that big a hot spot in terms of top tier talent, but the inside track in Washington and some spillover from Oregon with a single add is more appealing than dedicating two spots to the PNW.

Arizona State is a more attractive add in terms of media value, and the state of Arizona remains just as hot-spotty whether you add Arizona or Arizona State.

Note in the top talent table, Ohio is down in the second tier, a long slide from its position in the 70's, and the state of Michigan is even further down. Then the next two spots below Michigan are New Jersey and Maryland.

So Southern California marks a return of the Big Ten to a home base in top tier recruiting territory, and solidifying the second tier would ideally entail adding North Carolina and Virginia to the east cost presence in New Jersey and Maryland ... and the fight over Virginia and North Carolina is deferred until we come closer to the expiration of the ACC GOR.

So in the meantime, waiting to see whether Arizona State can make the next step up the academic status ladder and get into the AAU at the next house-cleaning might be an appealing strategy in the eyes of the Ohio State administration. There is an entire contract cycle that can compete and then the Big Ten take a hard look at where it stands heading into the '30s.

Quote: I wonder if the Big Ten could just add Washington and stop at 17. It leaves Washington on a big island but the Big Bucks might make it worth it.

That requires going to either eight or ten conference games. The media partners would squawk at eight, and the Big Stadium schools would squawk at ten ... they figure that they have already compromised on the best conference game number by going to nine.

(01-23-2023 01:36 PM)bluesox Wrote:  Add Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah, Kansas and Texas Tech

Create a 12 team Big 10 west with these 10 additions +UCLA and USC. Next move is too create a 10-12 team big 10 east with ACC additions + shifting Rutgers and Maryland to the east. Eventually you will have a big 10 east, central and west consisting of 10-14 members in each division, something like:

Big 10 west (11 members)

Cal, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, ASU, Utah, Colorado, Texas Tech

Big 10 East (11 members)

BC, Syracuse, Rutgers, Maryland, ND, UVA, Va Tech, UNC, Duke, NC state, Miami

Big 10 Central 14 members

NW, ILL, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas
Michigan, MSU, IU, Purdue, Ohio State, Penn State, Pitt

Each division runs as a stand-alone. For football 4 team playoff, east vs west conference winners face the central winner in the rose bowl. The central will have its own title game in indy before the rose bowl.