Right off the bat, the best North Carolina team since Jesus was a baby is playing on the CW Network this week with their NFL first round QB-WR combo and a nationally recognizable head coach who won a natty in a region of the country where football is a religion. My point? Neither UNC nor UVA are worthy of being the Big Ten's number 20.

So, who's 20? Miami.

*Note: Notre Dame is 19... and was 11, and was 12, and was 13-18.

The case for Miami as 20 boils down to this...

Florida State isn't coming. The Noles are not a cultural fit, although as a Big Ten lifer, I have nothing against them other than that. Clemson isn't worthy of being 20 because Clemson has already done the best they will ever do in the next 200 years. And, more importantly, for TV viewers and casual fans, Miami would not be seen as anything special in the SEC. To elaborate further on this point, Miami's maximum leverage for recruiting 4-star and 5-star athletes is and has always been, the beautiful city of Miami itself and cocaine cowboys funding the team. Proof? It was flat out easy for Miami to win while leveraging this in the Big East and compete for Nattys because Miami could breeze through league play (no injuries, relatively no wear and tear) and then play (sometimes) home games for the natty.

Additionally, Miami would be a styles clash for all other Big Ten opponents. This matters for TV ratings because "styles make fights." For example, Miami-Iowa, Miami-Nebraska, Miami-Wisconsin, etc. add a bit of juice to the TV match-ups where a team like Virginia-Iowa, Virginia-Nebraska, Virginia-Wisconsin are just Big Ten Network games.

Finally (Frank), don't even bother bringing up academics or acting like Stanford, Cal, Virginia, Duke, UNC have some huge chip they can play to jump Miami in the Big Ten line based on their mere existence in a TV market that doesn't care about football at all. I know that argument is meaningless because veritably Ivy League Stanford is playing in the ACC for minimum wage (and going against its on roots (tree pun intended) because Stanford and Cal are ludicrously burning down the planet/earth's trees) in the process by flying all of their 400+ non-revenue sponsored sports to road games in Louisville, Boston, Durham, etc. for at last another 13 years.

All that is to say, the Big Ten doesn't even want Stanford at minimum wage (folks, you're all kidding yourselves if you don't think Stanford asked the Big Ten for the same payment plan in the Big Ten before signing up to the ACC's eternal grant of rights). And, Frank, I say this as someone who has been reading your stuff since you started Frank the Tank blogging, but you whiffed hard on Stanford and Cal and you should give up defending them. They literally aren't worth the Big Ten's time and will be a massive drain on the dying ACC in any sense that a school could be a drain on a conference for at minimum until 2036, when the ACC, like their former conference, dies and has no use for them.

Anyway, Miami is it, folks. Penn State can finally have a rival and Catholics-Convicts can be a thing again (I might be wishing here, but come on Domers, just do it). And if you are a Canes fan, think about this, Miami with an annual Big Ten cash boost could actually be legit again. And when they are, Round 2 loaded Miami versus loaded Ohio State would get 10-15 million viewers easily (whenever that happens in the future).

To say nothing of the fact that it will make for the best road trip of any of the remaining candidates.

I would be stunned if Miami isn't invited by the B1G. With no teams in TX, they desperately need one in FL.

Let’s compare Miami to UNC:

UNC: Flagship AAU, dominates 10.5m pop state, top 4 all time basketball, average in football. Adjacent to B1G footprint.

Miami: AAU, Flagship of about 4m pop area in south Florida, 5 football titles, though more “average” than “great” since joining the ACC 2 decades ago. Better on the basketball court than UNC is on the football field. Distant geographically from B1G with no real prospect for even a close travel partner.

Miami doesn’t get much credit for being in Florida, they’re too distant from much of the State, and they’re a pretty weak #3 statewide these days.

I’d grab UNC in a heartbeat over Miami, they’re like a slightly better version of UCLA. Miami is more of a throw in school to get a 20th if either of the P2 finds ourselves with an uneven number after more desirable adds.

UNC is "worthy" to any conference out there.

(10-16-2023 01:47 PM)Sparty Baby 84 Wrote:  Right off the bat, the best North Carolina team since Jesus was a baby is playing on the CW Network this week with their NFL first round QB-WR combo and a nationally recognizable head coach who won a natty in a region of the country where football is a religion. My point? Neither UNC nor UVA are worthy of being the Big Ten's number 20.

So, who's 20? Miami.

*Note: Notre Dame is 19... and was 11, and was 12, and was 13-18.

The case for Miami as 20 boils down to this...

Florida State isn't coming. The Noles are not a cultural fit, although as a Big Ten lifer, I have nothing against them other than that. Clemson isn't worthy of being 20 because Clemson has already done the best they will ever do in the next 200 years. And, more importantly, for TV viewers and casual fans, Miami would not be seen as anything special in the SEC. To elaborate further on this point, Miami's maximum leverage for recruiting 4-star and 5-star athletes is and has always been, the beautiful city of Miami itself and cocaine cowboys funding the team. Proof? It was flat out easy for Miami to win while leveraging this in the Big East and compete for Nattys because Miami could breeze through league play (no injuries, relatively no wear and tear) and then play (sometimes) home games for the natty.

Additionally, Miami would be a styles clash for all other Big Ten opponents. This matters for TV ratings because "styles make fights." For example, Miami-Iowa, Miami-Nebraska, Miami-Wisconsin, etc. add a bit of juice to the TV match-ups where a team like Virginia-Iowa, Virginia-Nebraska, Virginia-Wisconsin are just Big Ten Network games.

Finally (Frank), don't even bother bringing up academics or acting like Stanford, Cal, Virginia, Duke, UNC have some huge chip they can play to jump Miami in the Big Ten line based on their mere existence in a TV market that doesn't care about football at all. I know that argument is meaningless because veritably Ivy League Stanford is playing in the ACC for minimum wage (and going against its on roots (tree pun intended) because Stanford and Cal are ludicrously burning down the planet/earth's trees) in the process by flying all of their 400+ non-revenue sponsored sports to road games in Louisville, Boston, Durham, etc. for at last another 13 years.

All that is to say, the Big Ten doesn't even want Stanford at minimum wage (folks, you're all kidding yourselves if you don't think Stanford asked the Big Ten for the same payment plan in the Big Ten before signing up to the ACC's eternal grant of rights). And, Frank, I say this as someone who has been reading your stuff since you started Frank the Tank blogging, but you whiffed hard on Stanford and Cal and you should give up defending them. They literally aren't worth the Big Ten's time and will be a massive drain on the dying ACC in any sense that a school could be a drain on a conference for at minimum until 2036, when the ACC, like their former conference, dies and has no use for them.

Anyway, Miami is it, folks. Penn State can finally have a rival and Catholics-Convicts can be a thing again (I might be wishing here, but come on Domers, just do it). And if you are a Canes fan, think about this, Miami with an annual Big Ten cash boost could actually be legit again. And when they are, Round 2 loaded Miami versus loaded Ohio State would get 10-15 million viewers easily (whenever that happens in the future).

Alas, if only this were true...

(10-16-2023 01:47 PM)Sparty Baby 84 Wrote:  Right off the bat, the best North Carolina team since Jesus was a baby is playing on the CW Network this week with their NFL first round QB-WR combo and a nationally recognizable head coach who won a natty in a region of the country where football is a religion. My point? Neither UNC nor UVA are worthy of being the Big Ten's number 20.

So, who's 20? Miami.

*Note: Notre Dame is 19... and was 11, and was 12, and was 13-18.

The case for Miami as 20 boils down to this...

Florida State isn't coming. The Noles are not a cultural fit, although as a Big Ten lifer, I have nothing against them other than that. Clemson isn't worthy of being 20 because Clemson has already done the best they will ever do in the next 200 years. And, more importantly, for TV viewers and casual fans, Miami would not be seen as anything special in the SEC. To elaborate further on this point, Miami's maximum leverage for recruiting 4-star and 5-star athletes is and has always been, the beautiful city of Miami itself and cocaine cowboys funding the team. Proof? It was flat out easy for Miami to win while leveraging this in the Big East and compete for Nattys because Miami could breeze through league play (no injuries, relatively no wear and tear) and then play (sometimes) home games for the natty.

Additionally, Miami would be a styles clash for all other Big Ten opponents. This matters for TV ratings because "styles make fights." For example, Miami-Iowa, Miami-Nebraska, Miami-Wisconsin, etc. add a bit of juice to the TV match-ups where a team like Virginia-Iowa, Virginia-Nebraska, Virginia-Wisconsin are just Big Ten Network games.

Finally (Frank), don't even bother bringing up academics or acting like Stanford, Cal, Virginia, Duke, UNC have some huge chip they can play to jump Miami in the Big Ten line based on their mere existence in a TV market that doesn't care about football at all. I know that argument is meaningless because veritably Ivy League Stanford is playing in the ACC for minimum wage (and going against its on roots (tree pun intended) because Stanford and Cal are ludicrously burning down the planet/earth's trees) in the process by flying all of their 400+ non-revenue sponsored sports to road games in Louisville, Boston, Durham, etc. for at last another 13 years.

All that is to say, the Big Ten doesn't even want Stanford at minimum wage (folks, you're all kidding yourselves if you don't think Stanford asked the Big Ten for the same payment plan in the Big Ten before signing up to the ACC's eternal grant of rights). And, Frank, I say this as someone who has been reading your stuff since you started Frank the Tank blogging, but you whiffed hard on Stanford and Cal and you should give up defending them. They literally aren't worth the Big Ten's time and will be a massive drain on the dying ACC in any sense that a school could be a drain on a conference for at minimum until 2036, when the ACC, like their former conference, dies and has no use for them.

Anyway, Miami is it, folks. Penn State can finally have a rival and Catholics-Convicts can be a thing again (I might be wishing here, but come on Domers, just do it). And if you are a Canes fan, think about this, Miami with an annual Big Ten cash boost could actually be legit again. And when they are, Round 2 loaded Miami versus loaded Ohio State would get 10-15 million viewers easily (whenever that happens in the future).

Not sure if you’ve been reading my posts here lately, but I’ve been saying that quite repeatedly: the markets/academics expansion framework is over and the only ones that add value are clear unambiguous football brands (albeit UNC is a strategic exception that the Big Ten and SEC will fight over). I just spent a ton of time defending Miami on how they’re being underrated as a Big Ten expansion candidate on another thread. To me, future Big Ten expansion would need to have some combo of ND, FSU, UNC and/or Miami. I don’t think the Southern tilt of this forum appreciates just how attractive Miami is to the Big Ten when it’s physically in Florida and the South but not Southern in culture at all (not to mention all of the East Coast and Midwest transplants living there).

Meh, Miami averages 44k attendance and does not have it's own stadium on campus. Football was great in 80's and again around 2001. But not so great since. Academics are good but not as good as UNC or VA. Geographically kind of an outlier.

Like others were saying, not sure why you would take Miami first.

(10-16-2023 03:51 PM)goofus Wrote:  Meh, Miami averages 44k attendance and does not have it's own stadium on campus. Football was great in 80's and again around 2001. But not so great since. Academics are good but not as good as UNC or VA. Geographically kind of an outlier.

Like others were saying, not sure why you would take Miami first.

You just described UCLA.

Attendance/on campus stadium/geography don't matter anymore. Miami will get in for many of the same reasons as UCLA: location, big enough brand.

(10-16-2023 03:51 PM)goofus Wrote:  Meh, Miami averages 44k attendance and does not have it's own stadium on campus. Football was great in 80's and again around 2001. But not so great since. Academics are good but not as good as UNC or VA. Geographically kind of an outlier.

Like others were saying, not sure why you would take Miami first.

I think UNC is a different case because both the Big Ten and SEC see that school as particularly strategic (even though it’s not a football brand).

The geography of Miami, though, doesn’t matter. Even if we hadn’t already crossed the rubicon of having West Coast schools in the Big Ten, the big thing for me is that Miami culturally has a ton of people from the Northeast and Midwest (as is the case for the whole Southern half of Florida in general). (Fun fact: Indiana University is closer to Miami than the LA schools are to Seattle.) It’s more “Northern” than any other location in the entire South culturally. The Southern half of Florida is also arguably pound-for-pound the best football recruiting area in the country.

Miami is also AAU - they clearly academically qualify. As we just saw with the Big Ten passing over Stanford and Cal, no school gets extra points beyond clearing the minimum academic bar.

I’m just more confused as to how anyone doesn’t believe that Miami wouldn’t be attractive to the Big Ten. While FSU is more attractive in a vacuum, they are much more of an SEC school culturally while Miami isn’t an SEC school at all. It’s a national TV football brand directly in one of the best football recruiting territories in the country and a city and school in the South that is more Big Ten-like than SEC-like. Geography and attendance are irrelevant factors.

(10-16-2023 03:41 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-16-2023 01:47 PM)Sparty Baby 84 Wrote:  Right off the bat, the best North Carolina team since Jesus was a baby is playing on the CW Network this week with their NFL first round QB-WR combo and a nationally recognizable head coach who won a natty in a region of the country where football is a religion. My point? Neither UNC nor UVA are worthy of being the Big Ten's number 20.

So, who's 20? Miami.

*Note: Notre Dame is 19... and was 11, and was 12, and was 13-18.

The case for Miami as 20 boils down to this...

Florida State isn't coming. The Noles are not a cultural fit, although as a Big Ten lifer, I have nothing against them other than that. Clemson isn't worthy of being 20 because Clemson has already done the best they will ever do in the next 200 years. And, more importantly, for TV viewers and casual fans, Miami would not be seen as anything special in the SEC. To elaborate further on this point, Miami's maximum leverage for recruiting 4-star and 5-star athletes is and has always been, the beautiful city of Miami itself and cocaine cowboys funding the team. Proof? It was flat out easy for Miami to win while leveraging this in the Big East and compete for Nattys because Miami could breeze through league play (no injuries, relatively no wear and tear) and then play (sometimes) home games for the natty.

Additionally, Miami would be a styles clash for all other Big Ten opponents. This matters for TV ratings because "styles make fights." For example, Miami-Iowa, Miami-Nebraska, Miami-Wisconsin, etc. add a bit of juice to the TV match-ups where a team like Virginia-Iowa, Virginia-Nebraska, Virginia-Wisconsin are just Big Ten Network games.

Finally (Frank), don't even bother bringing up academics or acting like Stanford, Cal, Virginia, Duke, UNC have some huge chip they can play to jump Miami in the Big Ten line based on their mere existence in a TV market that doesn't care about football at all. I know that argument is meaningless because veritably Ivy League Stanford is playing in the ACC for minimum wage (and going against its on roots (tree pun intended) because Stanford and Cal are ludicrously burning down the planet/earth's trees) in the process by flying all of their 400+ non-revenue sponsored sports to road games in Louisville, Boston, Durham, etc. for at last another 13 years.

All that is to say, the Big Ten doesn't even want Stanford at minimum wage (folks, you're all kidding yourselves if you don't think Stanford asked the Big Ten for the same payment plan in the Big Ten before signing up to the ACC's eternal grant of rights). And, Frank, I say this as someone who has been reading your stuff since you started Frank the Tank blogging, but you whiffed hard on Stanford and Cal and you should give up defending them. They literally aren't worth the Big Ten's time and will be a massive drain on the dying ACC in any sense that a school could be a drain on a conference for at minimum until 2036, when the ACC, like their former conference, dies and has no use for them.

Anyway, Miami is it, folks. Penn State can finally have a rival and Catholics-Convicts can be a thing again (I might be wishing here, but come on Domers, just do it). And if you are a Canes fan, think about this, Miami with an annual Big Ten cash boost could actually be legit again. And when they are, Round 2 loaded Miami versus loaded Ohio State would get 10-15 million viewers easily (whenever that happens in the future).

Not sure if you’ve been reading my posts here lately, but I’ve been saying that quite repeatedly: the markets/academics expansion framework is over and the only ones that add value are clear unambiguous football brands (albeit UNC is a strategic exception that the Big Ten and SEC will fight over). I just spent a ton of time defending Miami on how they’re being underrated as a Big Ten expansion candidate on another thread. To me, future Big Ten expansion would need to have some combo of ND, FSU, UNC and/or Miami. I don’t think the Southern tilt of this forum appreciates just how attractive Miami is to the Big Ten when it’s physically in Florida and the South but not Southern in culture at all (not to mention all of the East Coast and Midwest transplants living there).

While perhaps not southern in culture, all the reasons it is a good fit for the Big 10 also make it a good fit for the SEC (perhaps proving your "Southern tilt of this forum" point). Of the four you listed (ND, FSU, UNC, Miami), at least 3 (FSU, Miami, UNC) could easily wind up in the SEC, and ND is a possibility as well. If the SEC went to 24 with FSU, Miami, UNC, Clemson, VT (or UVA), ND, Kansas, + 1 other, the Big 10 would wind up with Duke, VT/UVA, possibly NC State?, Georgia Tech, Stanford, Cal. Maybe USF if they really want the AAU Florida school?

Not trying to disparage the Big 10 or say they get the "leftovers," just trying to make an argument for the SEC having more leverage on some schools (like UNC) than many realize. Miami could well go to the Big 10 but I'm not certain it is a sure thing.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again here. I don't think 20 is a hard and fast number. For that reason, Miami vs. North Carolina is a false dichotomy.

With that said, I think Miami is a more important add for the B1G than North Carolina, based on the following:

1. Football history. Miami has a much better football history than North Carolina.
2. Football ceiling. Even though Miami's program has been relatively down in recent years, it still has a higher ceiling than North Carolina.
3. Recruiting base in Florida. No explanation necessary.
4. Availability of adequate replacements (assuming Florida State goes to SEC). The drop-off from UNC to NCSU/Duke certainly is much lesser than is the drop-off from Miami to UCF/USF.
5. Miami basketball > UNC football. TBF, this is the least important of these considerations, much as many on this board wish otherwise. My personal opinion is that this board, as a whole, values basketball success far too highly in the realignment process, especially when applied to FBS conferences.

As for the argument about proximity to current Big Ten footprint, that argument is, or at least should be, a non-starter in light of most recent Big Ten expansion. The Big Ten added USC, UCLA, Oregon and Washington, yet passed on Colorado, who is geographically adjacent to their existing footprint. Not exactly an analogous situation here, but the precedent still exists.

(10-16-2023 04:09 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  ....

I’m just more confused as to how anyone doesn’t believe that Miami wouldn’t be attractive to the Big Ten. While FSU is more attractive in a vacuum, they are much more of an SEC school culturally while Miami isn’t an SEC school at all. It’s a national TV football brand directly in one of the best football recruiting territories in the country and a city and school in the South that is more Big Ten-like than SEC-like. Geography and attendance are irrelevant factors.

A misconception exists outside the region that Florida State University alumni hail predominantly from north Florida and that Tallahassee itself is some sort of Orange Blossom Special version of Tuscaloosa or Auburn. Not so.

Florida State is a true state school and draws from Miami, Orlando, Tampa, Jacksonville, the works. These areas are mainly urban. The Seminoles' season opener against LSU this year packed a big stadium in central Florida. Tallahassee itself, the state capital, is Florida's 8th largest city and home to its most educated population.

Miami does work as an addition to the B1G Ten. So does Florida State—for many of the same reasons, though the bullet points work in slightly differing proportion.

I half agree with you.

I disagree that Notre Dame will be #19. They have even less incentive to join a conf in a 12 team playoff. All they have to do is field a Top 10 ranked team and they're in (no way the cmte doesn't want the ratings of ND on the field).

So if ND remains and independent -

I think UNC is #19. They are a flagship AAU school in a large state with a bonus blue blood basketball program that will significantly class up the B1G basketball profile.

I would make the case for Miami as #20:
-AAU in a major market city the B1G is not in
-So FL is a major recruiting hub and you open up B1G football to recruit So FL
-History. Miami has a solid history - similar to Nebraska's.
-Awesome every other year trip for those kids from Minnesota and Wisconsin
-The SEC will take them and lock up FL unless B1G steps up

After that...
Virginia, AAU superb academics in a largish state with huge following but not as much history
Kansas, AAU geographic fit, bring UNC and KS into same conference and your basketball bonafides slide into place
Stanford, you're gonna want at least one more on the west coast and Stanford is solid
After that- Georgia Tech?
Duke (they would be so much more comfortable in SEC)
Missouri - steal MO from the SEC? Lock up KS and IL rivalries
Cal?

(10-16-2023 03:41 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-16-2023 01:47 PM)Sparty Baby 84 Wrote:  Right off the bat, the best North Carolina team since Jesus was a baby is playing on the CW Network this week with their NFL first round QB-WR combo and a nationally recognizable head coach who won a natty in a region of the country where football is a religion. My point? Neither UNC nor UVA are worthy of being the Big Ten's number 20.

So, who's 20? Miami.

*Note: Notre Dame is 19... and was 11, and was 12, and was 13-18.

The case for Miami as 20 boils down to this...

Florida State isn't coming. The Noles are not a cultural fit, although as a Big Ten lifer, I have nothing against them other than that. Clemson isn't worthy of being 20 because Clemson has already done the best they will ever do in the next 200 years. And, more importantly, for TV viewers and casual fans, Miami would not be seen as anything special in the SEC. To elaborate further on this point, Miami's maximum leverage for recruiting 4-star and 5-star athletes is and has always been, the beautiful city of Miami itself and cocaine cowboys funding the team. Proof? It was flat out easy for Miami to win while leveraging this in the Big East and compete for Nattys because Miami could breeze through league play (no injuries, relatively no wear and tear) and then play (sometimes) home games for the natty.

Additionally, Miami would be a styles clash for all other Big Ten opponents. This matters for TV ratings because "styles make fights." For example, Miami-Iowa, Miami-Nebraska, Miami-Wisconsin, etc. add a bit of juice to the TV match-ups where a team like Virginia-Iowa, Virginia-Nebraska, Virginia-Wisconsin are just Big Ten Network games.

Finally (Frank), don't even bother bringing up academics or acting like Stanford, Cal, Virginia, Duke, UNC have some huge chip they can play to jump Miami in the Big Ten line based on their mere existence in a TV market that doesn't care about football at all. I know that argument is meaningless because veritably Ivy League Stanford is playing in the ACC for minimum wage (and going against its on roots (tree pun intended) because Stanford and Cal are ludicrously burning down the planet/earth's trees) in the process by flying all of their 400+ non-revenue sponsored sports to road games in Louisville, Boston, Durham, etc. for at last another 13 years.

All that is to say, the Big Ten doesn't even want Stanford at minimum wage (folks, you're all kidding yourselves if you don't think Stanford asked the Big Ten for the same payment plan in the Big Ten before signing up to the ACC's eternal grant of rights). And, Frank, I say this as someone who has been reading your stuff since you started Frank the Tank blogging, but you whiffed hard on Stanford and Cal and you should give up defending them. They literally aren't worth the Big Ten's time and will be a massive drain on the dying ACC in any sense that a school could be a drain on a conference for at minimum until 2036, when the ACC, like their former conference, dies and has no use for them.

Anyway, Miami is it, folks. Penn State can finally have a rival and Catholics-Convicts can be a thing again (I might be wishing here, but come on Domers, just do it). And if you are a Canes fan, think about this, Miami with an annual Big Ten cash boost could actually be legit again. And when they are, Round 2 loaded Miami versus loaded Ohio State would get 10-15 million viewers easily (whenever that happens in the future).

Not sure if you’ve been reading my posts here lately, but I’ve been saying that quite repeatedly: the markets/academics expansion framework is over and the only ones that add value are clear unambiguous football brands (albeit UNC is a strategic exception that the Big Ten and SEC will fight over). I just spent a ton of time defending Miami on how they’re being underrated as a Big Ten expansion candidate on another thread. To me, future Big Ten expansion would need to have some combo of ND, FSU, UNC and/or Miami. I don’t think the Southern tilt of this forum appreciates just how attractive Miami is to the Big Ten when it’s physically in Florida and the South but not Southern in culture at all (not to mention all of the East Coast and Midwest transplants living there).

I think that both of the P2 appreciate what Miami has to offer, they're just clearly a step down from UNC/FSU/Clemson for Realignment purposes. They're "good enough" that I think they'll get in, with their only real issue being if some sort of seismic shift comes over ND and they decide they want to join the B1G and they bring UNC with them. In that scenario, the SEC might just add FSU/Clemson and call it a day.

If I were the B10, I would target FSU and Miami.

This move would be very similar to taking USC/UCLA.

Florida is the most important market/recruiting base to the ACC as So Cal was to the Pac 12.

As the Pac 12 was trying to add SDSU to recapture some of that market, the ACC would have to approach USF.

But I don’t think Miami would move before 2036. UNC is definetely not in my opinion. If the B10 wants to expand around 2029, they probably need to persuade FSU and Clemson to challenge the GoR.

(10-16-2023 04:46 PM)jgkojak Wrote:  I half agree with you.

I disagree that Notre Dame will be #19. They have even less incentive to join a conf in a 12 team playoff. All they have to do is field a Top 10 ranked team and they're in (no way the cmte doesn't want the ratings of ND on the field).

So if ND remains and independent -

I think UNC is #19. They are a flagship AAU school in a large state with a bonus blue blood basketball program that will significantly class up the B1G basketball profile.

I would make the case for Miami as #20:
-AAU in a major market city the B1G is not in
-So FL is a major recruiting hub and you open up B1G football to recruit So FL
-History. Miami has a solid history - similar to Nebraska's.
-Awesome every other year trip for those kids from Minnesota and Wisconsin
-The SEC will take them and lock up FL unless B1G steps up

After that...
Virginia, AAU superb academics in a largish state with huge following but not as much history
Kansas, AAU geographic fit, bring UNC and KS into same conference and your basketball bonafides slide into place
Stanford, you're gonna want at least one more on the west coast and Stanford is solid
After that- Georgia Tech?
Duke (they would be so much more comfortable in SEC)
Missouri - steal MO from the SEC? Lock up KS and IL rivalries
Cal?

Mostly agree with you about ND. Agree that they have less incentive to join a conference with CFP expansion. However, depending on format, a Top 10 finish might not be good enough. With the consolidation of top teams into the P2, the cutoff for at-large bids could be as high as #8 in a 6+6 format. And the NY6 has been fastidious, since its creation, about inviting the highest-ranked teams within the parameters of the rules involved. I don't see any reason why that might change now.

(10-16-2023 04:09 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-16-2023 03:51 PM)goofus Wrote:  Meh, Miami averages 44k attendance and does not have it's own stadium on campus. Football was great in 80's and again around 2001. But not so great since. Academics are good but not as good as UNC or VA. Geographically kind of an outlier.

Like others were saying, not sure why you would take Miami first.

I think UNC is a different case because both the Big Ten and SEC see that school as particularly strategic (even though it’s not a football brand).

The geography of Miami, though, doesn’t matter. Even if we hadn’t already crossed the rubicon of having West Coast schools in the Big Ten, the big thing for me is that Miami culturally has a ton of people from the Northeast and Midwest (as is the case for the whole Southern half of Florida in general). (Fun fact: Indiana University is closer to Miami than the LA schools are to Seattle.) It’s more “Northern” than any other location in the entire South culturally. The Southern half of Florida is also arguably pound-for-pound the best football recruiting area in the country.

Miami is also AAU - they clearly academically qualify. As we just saw with the Big Ten passing over Stanford and Cal, no school gets extra points beyond clearing the minimum academic bar.

I’m just more confused as to how anyone doesn’t believe that Miami wouldn’t be attractive to the Big Ten. While FSU is more attractive in a vacuum, they are much more of an SEC school culturally while Miami isn’t an SEC school at all. It’s a national TV football brand directly in one of the best football recruiting territories in the country and a city and school in the South that is more Big Ten-like than SEC-like. Geography and attendance are irrelevant factors.

Miami isn't Big 10 like, nor is the university. FSU is much more like the Big 10 schools than Miami. Its an enormous state research university. Not as enormous nor quite as big in research, but its the same basic model. State College, Ann Arbor, Lansing, Bloomington, Lafayette, etc. just aren't that urban.

I also think you are letting personal anti-south bigotry get in the way. Yes, many of the presidents share that, but they also know the other presidents. The major state research universities are much like the burbs. They are pretty much the same across the country.

(10-16-2023 05:11 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-16-2023 04:09 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-16-2023 03:51 PM)goofus Wrote:  Meh, Miami averages 44k attendance and does not have it's own stadium on campus. Football was great in 80's and again around 2001. But not so great since. Academics are good but not as good as UNC or VA. Geographically kind of an outlier.

Like others were saying, not sure why you would take Miami first.

I think UNC is a different case because both the Big Ten and SEC see that school as particularly strategic (even though it’s not a football brand).

The geography of Miami, though, doesn’t matter. Even if we hadn’t already crossed the rubicon of having West Coast schools in the Big Ten, the big thing for me is that Miami culturally has a ton of people from the Northeast and Midwest (as is the case for the whole Southern half of Florida in general). (Fun fact: Indiana University is closer to Miami than the LA schools are to Seattle.) It’s more “Northern” than any other location in the entire South culturally. The Southern half of Florida is also arguably pound-for-pound the best football recruiting area in the country.

Miami is also AAU - they clearly academically qualify. As we just saw with the Big Ten passing over Stanford and Cal, no school gets extra points beyond clearing the minimum academic bar.

I’m just more confused as to how anyone doesn’t believe that Miami wouldn’t be attractive to the Big Ten. While FSU is more attractive in a vacuum, they are much more of an SEC school culturally while Miami isn’t an SEC school at all. It’s a national TV football brand directly in one of the best football recruiting territories in the country and a city and school in the South that is more Big Ten-like than SEC-like. Geography and attendance are irrelevant factors.

Miami isn't Big 10 like, nor is the university. FSU is much more like the Big 10 schools than Miami. Its an enormous state research university. Not as enormous nor quite as big in research, but its the same basic model. State College, Ann Arbor, Lansing, Bloomington, Lafayette, etc. just aren't that urban.

I’m taking about student body-wise: where they’re from, where their alums end up, the Big Ten footprint transplants that live in South Florida, etc.

So, I’m talking more culturally (although yes, any large state university is going to see Big Ten-like at some level, but you could also say that about the SEC and I don’t think all or even any Big Ten state universities really fit into the SEC or vice versa besides maybe Mizzou being Big Ten-like).

(10-16-2023 04:09 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(10-16-2023 03:51 PM)goofus Wrote:  Meh, Miami averages 44k attendance and does not have it's own stadium on campus. Football was great in 80's and again around 2001. But not so great since. Academics are good but not as good as UNC or VA. Geographically kind of an outlier.

Like others were saying, not sure why you would take Miami first.

I think UNC is a different case because both the Big Ten and SEC see that school as particularly strategic (even though it’s not a football brand).

The geography of Miami, though, doesn’t matter. Even if we hadn’t already crossed the rubicon of having West Coast schools in the Big Ten, the big thing for me is that Miami culturally has a ton of people from the Northeast and Midwest (as is the case for the whole Southern half of Florida in general). (Fun fact: Indiana University is closer to Miami than the LA schools are to Seattle.) It’s more “Northern” than any other location in the entire South culturally. The Southern half of Florida is also arguably pound-for-pound the best football recruiting area in the country.

Miami is also AAU - they clearly academically qualify. As we just saw with the Big Ten passing over Stanford and Cal, no school gets extra points beyond clearing the minimum academic bar.

I’m just more confused as to how anyone doesn’t believe that Miami wouldn’t be attractive to the Big Ten. While FSU is more attractive in a vacuum, they are much more of an SEC school culturally while Miami isn’t an SEC school at all. It’s a national TV football brand directly in one of the best football recruiting territories in the country and a city and school in the South that is more Big Ten-like than SEC-like. Geography and attendance are irrelevant factors.

I'm not so sure about that. Cal and Stanford are FAR below the threshold for a B1G invite, but their Academic heft at least got them into the discussion. Another way to look at their situation is that they are both just too weak Athletically in the sports that matter for their outstanding Academics to get them across the finish line. They didn't have to de-emphasize football and MBB over the past few decades, they made a conscious decision to do so and instead focus on sports that 95% of the country care about once every 4 years. They're now reaping what they they sowed.