Is it time for the NCAA to wish the Big Ten well in its future endeavors and let them move on with what they have?

(10-16-2025 09:42 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Is it time for the NCAA to wish the Big Ten well in its future endeavors and let them move on with what they have?

Why would the NCAA remove it's 2nd largest money maker?

(10-16-2025 11:22 AM)MaverickManiac Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 09:42 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Is it time for the NCAA to wish the Big Ten well in its future endeavors and let them move on with what they have?

Why would the NCAA remove it's 2nd largest money maker?

The NCAA makes its money on the basketball tournament, with or without the B10. It makes comparatively nothing on FBS football, where the money goes to the conferences.

By contrast, the B10 is on a mission to turn college athletics into professional sports at the expense of 1,020 other schools who do not have the capacity or the will to do so.

They would grab some of the ACC conference along with any interested Big 12 schools (Kansas, Colorado, 2 AZ, Utah) and form their own entity.

The SEC would add the B12 afterthoughts and some of the ACC and start their own entity.

They'd fight over talent for 7 years before agreeing to have their champions play each other in a Super Bowl-type game in January before ultimately deciding to merge 3 years later.

Sound familiar?

(10-16-2025 11:30 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 11:22 AM)MaverickManiac Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 09:42 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Is it time for the NCAA to wish the Big Ten well in its future endeavors and let them move on with what they have?

Why would the NCAA remove it's 2nd largest money maker?

The NCAA makes its money on the basketball tournament, with or without the B10. It makes comparatively nothing on FBS football, where the money goes to the conferences.

By contrast, the B10 is on a mission to turn college athletics into professional sports at the expense of 1,020 other schools who do not have the capacity or the will to do so.

True points, but since when has the NCAA ever thought about the schools/conferences that aren't making it the money.

As long as the B1G keeps being profitable the NCAA will continue on bending to them and the SEC.

Where does the SEC stand? I don't think the B1G can go it alone. I don't think the SEC is going with them either.

The OP post is essentially proposing for the NCAA to shoot itself in the face. The Big Ten is the biggest moneymaker in *basketball*, by the way, so the sub-point thought that the NCAA Tournament would continue on just fine is also ridiculous.

If the Big Ten and SEC split off, everyone else WILL be killed financially. I don’t understand the people that have completely misplaced notions of who has leverage versus who doesn’t (and the only one that has any leverage compared to the Big Ten is the SEC - the rest of the NCAA is irrelevant).

(10-16-2025 11:30 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 11:22 AM)MaverickManiac Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 09:42 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Is it time for the NCAA to wish the Big Ten well in its future endeavors and let them move on with what they have?

Why would the NCAA remove it's 2nd largest money maker?

The NCAA makes its money on the basketball tournament, with or without the B10. It makes comparatively nothing on FBS football, where the money goes to the conferences.

By contrast, the B10 is on a mission to turn college athletics into professional sports at the expense of 1,020 other schools who do not have the capacity or the will to do so.

LOL if you think the Big 10 is the only conference who would do this if they could.

And LOL if you think the Big 10 is the only conference doing these things.

(10-16-2025 11:30 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 11:22 AM)MaverickManiac Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 09:42 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Is it time for the NCAA to wish the Big Ten well in its future endeavors and let them move on with what they have?

Why would the NCAA remove it's 2nd largest money maker?

The NCAA makes its money on the basketball tournament, with or without the B10. It makes comparatively nothing on FBS football, where the money goes to the conferences.

By contrast, the B10 is on a mission to turn college athletics into professional sports at the expense of 1,020 other schools who do not have the capacity or the will to do so.

If you don’t think the rest of the P4 is 95%-plus in alignment with the Big Ten in terms of overall structural matters, then you’re being totally naive. They may be disagreeing on the margins, but the big picture is that they do agree that they shouldn’t be letting the other 1000 schools in the NCAA be dictating to them (hence the uniform P4 pushing for an expansion of the NCAA Tournament). There are the 68 P4 teams that matter and then everyone else.

(10-16-2025 11:48 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 11:30 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 11:22 AM)MaverickManiac Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 09:42 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Is it time for the NCAA to wish the Big Ten well in its future endeavors and let them move on with what they have?

Why would the NCAA remove it's 2nd largest money maker?

The NCAA makes its money on the basketball tournament, with or without the B10. It makes comparatively nothing on FBS football, where the money goes to the conferences.

By contrast, the B10 is on a mission to turn college athletics into professional sports at the expense of 1,020 other schools who do not have the capacity or the will to do so.

If you don’t think the rest of the P4 is 95%-plus in alignment with the Big Ten in terms of overall structural matters, then you’re being totally naive. They may be disagreeing on the margins, but the big picture is that they do agree that they shouldn’t be letting the other 1000 schools in the NCAA be dictating to them (hence the uniform P4 pushing for an expansion of the NCAA Tournament). There are the 68 P4 teams that matter and then everyone else.

There are only about 20 P4 schools that matter tops and then everyone else.

(10-16-2025 11:48 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  If you don’t think the rest of the P4 is 95%-plus in alignment with the Big Ten in terms of overall structural matters, then you’re being totally naive. They may be disagreeing on the margins, but the big picture is that they do agree that they shouldn’t be letting the other 1000 schools in the NCAA be dictating to them (hence the uniform P4 pushing for an expansion of the NCAA Tournament). There are the 68 P4 teams that matter and then everyone else.

I do not dispute this, but I'm raising a question: does the eventual P2 need to go, to allow the remainder of schools to reorganize for a 21st century model of athletics?

Let's be clear: the Big Ten cares nothing about the ACC or Big 12, much less the Big East, Sun Belt, Missouri Valley, MAC, or even Ivy. If it wants to be "NFL-C" (NFL-College), at what point does the NCAA hierarchy need to let them go and do it on its own? No one expects the other 300-odd Division I schools to follow their lead and we all know that the Big Ten doesn't want those 300 schools in the club to begin with.

You ding dongs have it backwards. The NCAA does not tell the big conferences and big schools what to do, the big conferences and big schools tell the NCAA what to do on their behalf. The B1G, SEC, ACC and Big 12 are like the four largest shareholders accounting for 90% of the value of the NCAA enterprises. The NCAA is a shell that does their bidding, makes rules that formalize what the powerful conferences are already doing as practice. Financially its tournament is dependents on the enthusiastic participation of these conferences.

The squabble between the big four conferences changes dynamics all the time. Often one is out of sync with the other (remember when the B1G, ACC and Pac-12 attempted to form an alliance to overcome the then uppity SEC that was doing things that upset the group). This time around it is the B1G. The NCAA has no incentive or reason to involve itself in position jockeying amongst its four most powerful board members. Those four will hash it out as they always do, because they have to for their own business success. Just because we get a glimpse from time to time where one is ahead or behind the others or pushing for a different direction and they debate forcefully, doesn't mean this doesn't happen out of our sight frequently at a lower decibel level.

The four have united very recently, with the Big East also riding with them, to revise the tournament to 76 teams effectively adding 8 more at-large play-in slots amongst themselves and relegating 8 more AQs to play-in (12 in all). Also, after a couple years of wrangling they expanded and agreed on a new
CFP structure and payout system with a look-in (B1G and SEC get ~29% of non-performance distributions, ACC ~17%, Big 12 ~15% and so on). This was sausage making with a lot of ranker and public lobbying (remember the Big 12 pushing for a look-in to sign on). The NCAA was almost a bystander, as their job is simply to sanction the decision and then write new byLaws to codify the new arrangement (ex post facto like everything else the NCAA does).

You guys have it completely backwards to think the NCAA can tell the big schools and conferences anything.

Why just the Big 10? If a breakaway occurs, expect the P4 and potentially the Big East to all be part of the exodus.

(10-16-2025 12:05 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 11:48 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  If you don’t think the rest of the P4 is 95%-plus in alignment with the Big Ten in terms of overall structural matters, then you’re being totally naive. They may be disagreeing on the margins, but the big picture is that they do agree that they shouldn’t be letting the other 1000 schools in the NCAA be dictating to them (hence the uniform P4 pushing for an expansion of the NCAA Tournament). There are the 68 P4 teams that matter and then everyone else.

I do not dispute this, but I'm raising a question: does the eventual P2 need to go, to allow the remainder of schools to reorganize for a 21st century model of athletics?

Let's be clear: the Big Ten cares nothing about the ACC or Big 12, much less the Big East, Sun Belt, Missouri Valley, MAC, or even Ivy. If it wants to be "NFL-C" (NFL-College), at what point does the NCAA hierarchy need to let them go and do it on its own? No one expects the other 300-odd Division I schools to follow their lead and we all know that the Big Ten doesn't want those 300 schools in the club to begin with.

Why do you keep singling out the B1G when the SEC is exactly the same?

Is this over the CSC thing? If anything them not signing helps the NCAA retain power.

(10-16-2025 12:59 PM)The Beaver Wrote:  Is this over the CSC thing? If anything them not signing helps the NCAA retain power.

Pardon my ignorance, but what is the "CSC thing" and how does it help the NCAA retain power?

(10-16-2025 01:33 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 12:59 PM)The Beaver Wrote:  Is this over the CSC thing? If anything them not signing helps the NCAA retain power.

Pardon my ignorance, but what is the "CSC thing" and how does it help the NCAA retain power?

College Sports Commission, was supposed to take over governance of the P4 after House but the Big Ten isn’t signing off on it. Its the only difference I can see between them and the SEC.

(10-16-2025 11:30 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 11:22 AM)MaverickManiac Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 09:42 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Is it time for the NCAA to wish the Big Ten well in its future endeavors and let them move on with what they have?

Why would the NCAA remove it's 2nd largest money maker?

The NCAA makes its money on the basketball tournament, with or without the B10. It makes comparatively nothing on FBS football, where the money goes to the conferences.

By contrast, the B10 is on a mission to turn college athletics into professional sports at the expense of 1,020 other schools who do not have the capacity or the will to do so.

The basketball tournament is worthless without the P4, all of whom would join the Big Ten out the door. Even if they all left, it wouldn't change the fact that all those other schools would still have to conform to SCOTUS rulings. I don't believe they would be allowed to just return to the amateur model that was so spectacularly blown out of the water. They would just have to live with whatever level of professionalism they can afford, which won't be much.

(10-16-2025 12:05 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 11:48 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  If you don’t think the rest of the P4 is 95%-plus in alignment with the Big Ten in terms of overall structural matters, then you’re being totally naive. They may be disagreeing on the margins, but the big picture is that they do agree that they shouldn’t be letting the other 1000 schools in the NCAA be dictating to them (hence the uniform P4 pushing for an expansion of the NCAA Tournament). There are the 68 P4 teams that matter and then everyone else.

I do not dispute this, but I'm raising a question: does the eventual P2 need to go, to allow the remainder of schools to reorganize for a 21st century model of athletics?

Let's be clear: the Big Ten cares nothing about the ACC or Big 12, much less the Big East, Sun Belt, Missouri Valley, MAC, or even Ivy. If it wants to be "NFL-C" (NFL-College), at what point does the NCAA hierarchy need to let them go and do it on its own? No one expects the other 300-odd Division I schools to follow their lead and we all know that the Big Ten doesn't want those 300 schools in the club to begin with.

If the P2 go, the rest of the schools simply won't 'reorganize'. They will slowly wither and die on the vine, not grow and/or thrive. If all the big name schools in the SEC and Big10 proverbially take their ball and go home in ALL sports, everyone else is in big trouble, even if they don't take anyone from the current ACC or B12 with them. Sure, if it's a football only breakaway, then the Georgetowns and UConns of the world will still be ok. But if they leave for everything then the rest is screwed.

(10-16-2025 02:38 PM)forphase1 Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 12:05 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(10-16-2025 11:48 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  If you don’t think the rest of the P4 is 95%-plus in alignment with the Big Ten in terms of overall structural matters, then you’re being totally naive. They may be disagreeing on the margins, but the big picture is that they do agree that they shouldn’t be letting the other 1000 schools in the NCAA be dictating to them (hence the uniform P4 pushing for an expansion of the NCAA Tournament). There are the 68 P4 teams that matter and then everyone else.

I do not dispute this, but I'm raising a question: does the eventual P2 need to go, to allow the remainder of schools to reorganize for a 21st century model of athletics?

Let's be clear: the Big Ten cares nothing about the ACC or Big 12, much less the Big East, Sun Belt, Missouri Valley, MAC, or even Ivy. If it wants to be "NFL-C" (NFL-College), at what point does the NCAA hierarchy need to let them go and do it on its own? No one expects the other 300-odd Division I schools to follow their lead and we all know that the Big Ten doesn't want those 300 schools in the club to begin with.

If the P2 go, the rest of the schools simply won't 'reorganize'. They will slowly wither and die on the vine, not grow and/or thrive. If all the big name schools in the SEC and Big10 proverbially take their ball and go home if ALL sports, everyone else is in big trouble, even if they don't take anyone from the current ACC or B12 with them. Sure, if it's a football only breakaway, then the Georgetowns and UConns of the world will still be ok. But if they leave for everything then the rest is screwed.

I agree, if it is football only the world moves on essentially with no difference. If they take all their sports and only the say top 100 teams from the P4 conferences the rest are no better than the FCS as far as viewership goes.