Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[Dryden]

The idea of the Big 10 raiding the Big 12 for two or three teams and pioneering a 14 (or bigger) team conference is interesting if only because it would cripple the Big 12 and set off a series of dominos. If the Big 10 bagged Missouri, Texas, and somebody else, would the SEC go after Texas A&M and maybe Clemson? Would that force the Pac 10 to consider bringing in Utah and BYU? Does the now wounded Big 12 go nab TCU and Boise?

The chaos would be wonderful!

 

[MuckFighigan]

I can see Big Ten grab a Big East team and ECU go replace that team

 

[mross34]

Bylaw 17.9.5.2 (c) (page 241) of the 2009-10 NCAA Division 1 Manual states that conferences with championship games must be between divisional champs that have played a round robin within their division. The conferences must have at least 12 members, and each division must have at least 6 members.


This Bylaw is actually just an exemption to the maximum of 12 games allowed. It would probably never happen, because of revenue, but I would think that a conference could theoretically only schedule 11 games in a season, and hold a championship game, as the 12th game, without having to worry about meeting the NCAAs exemption rules.

This post didn't seem to draw a reaction but this is the answer to a question many have posed in this thread.

I can't really find anything other NCAA rules on how conferences determine their champion or structure themselves. So it seems like the only options with expansion would be:

1) Expand to 12 and let the regular season decide it. (Deciding it this way with 14 is just begging for trouble)

2) Expand to 12 or 14, play 11 (8-3 Conference/OOC Split or 7-4) regular season games and replace the 12th game with a CCG and have no divisions.

3) Expand to 12 or 14, play 12 reg + CCG and split into two divisions with round robin scheduling intradivision.

Interestingly enough, there may be a loophole to all of this:

(k) Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico. [FBS/FCS] Any football games played in Hawaii, Alaska or Puerto Rico, respectively, either against or under the sponsorship of an active member institution located in Hawaii, Alaska or Puerto Rico, by a Division I member institution located outside the area in question

If the Big 10 were to work out some sort of arrangement with the University of Hawaii where:
a) Big 10 Championship game is sponsored by Hawaii and played at Aloha Stadium.
or perhaps more interesting
b) every Big 10 Team plays an OOC or in-conference game in Hawaii, sponsored by Hawaii.

Under the current rules this wouldn't count against the game total.

Which brings me to my ridiculous albeit interesting proposal:

Big 10 adds Texas and Missouri. Doesn't split into two divisions.

Big 10 switches to a 9 game conference, 3 game OOC schedule.

Big 10 works out a deal with Hawaii and the SEC in a mish-mash of the Big 10-ACC Challenge and the Maui Invitational.

Enter: The Big 10-SEC Kickoff Luau.

Over the first two weeks of the college football season, each of the 13 Big 10 teams will play one of the 12 SEC teams + Hawaii at Aloha Stadium.

This game doesn't count against the total tally for games, allowing the 12th game that is counted to be a non-divisional CCG.

Will this ever happen? No. Would it be a lot of fun if it did, absolutely.

 

[mross34]

Will this ever happen? No. Would it be a lot of fun if it did, absolutely.

I was pretty zonked when I wrote this, but I seemed to have neglected the idea that Big 10 scheduling would then depend on another conference. No way would that be a smart decision, so I guess this idea is pretty much shot.

 

[BUCKYLE]

The idea of the Big 10 raiding the Big 12 for two or three teams and pioneering a 14 (or bigger) team conference is interesting if only because it would cripple the Big 12 and set off a series of dominos. If the Big 10 bagged Missouri, Texas, and somebody else, would the SEC go after Texas A&M and maybe Clemson? Would that force the Pac 10 to consider bringing in Utah and BYU? Does the now wounded Big 12 go nab TCU and Boise?

The chaos would be wonderful!

Maybe the B10 is convinced a massive conference re-alignment is coming, so why not go after who we want instead of getting leftovers.

If that's the case, convince Texas of the same.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

Maybe the B10 is convinced a massive conference re-alignment is coming, so why not go after who we want instead of getting leftovers.

If that's the case, convince Texas of the same.

I believe that massive conference realignment is coming.

Right now, there are 66 BCS teams, with maybe a half dozen more that could move into the club (TCU, Utah, Boise State ... ???). Bump the number of BCS schools up to 70, and that leaves five conferences of fourteen teams each. Drop a couple of the weaklings and get the number down to 64, and that leaves four conferences of sixteen teams each.

With only eight teams and no marquee programs, the Big East is by far the weakest BCS conference ... and there are not enough quality programs available to bump the conference up to twelve teams, let alone fourteen or sixteen. So the Big East will eventually dissolve, with its members heading off to the Big Ten, ACC, and SEC.

The Big 12 could also implode, especially if Texas bolts. With their history of NCAA violations, A+M, Oklahoma, and Okie State would fit in nicely in the SEC, while Colorado could be headed for the Pac 10. The rest of the schools would be scrambling around, trying to hook up with the Big Ten or the Pac 10, or drop down to a non-BCS conference.

It's best for the Big Ten to be the active force here, taregting the school(s) that they want, whether it be Texas or Mizzou or Rutgers or Notre Dame or any combination thereof, and then let the remaining viable conferences fight for the leftovers.

The powers that be at the Big 12 and Big East schools have to know that their respective conferences are already on the brink of collapse, and that a Big Ten expansion that involves anyone other than Notre Dame could send the CFB world into a state of chaos. If you are the president of one of those schools, wouldn't you start sending out feelers to the Big Ten now, instead of waiting for someone else to get the invite? If your conference is going to unravel anyway, you might as well be the one calling the shots.

And if the right FIVE schools are available, then the Big Ten would really have to consider it. I mean, could the conference really turn down a package that consisted of Texas and Missouri and Notre Dame and Pittsburgh and Rutgers? That's five top academic institutions and two top-eight football programs, plus television markets in Houston, Dallas, New York City, St. Louis, and Kansas City ... not to mention Notre Dame's national audience.

Yep, if Texas accepts a bid to join the Big Ten, then the telephones in the conference offices will be ringing off their hooks.

 

[Dryden]

And if the right FIVE schools are available, then the Big Ten would really have to consider it. I mean, could the conference really turn down a package that consisted of Texas and Missouri and Notre Dame and Pittsburgh and Rutgers? That's five top academic institutions and two top-eight football programs, plus television markets in Houston, Dallas, New York City, St. Louis, and Kansas City ... not to mention Notre Dame's national audience.

Progressive, but then you have to sell all the schools that only two of them can get BCS berths in the short-term under the existing system due to preexisting TV contracts through 2014(?). That's a bitter pill to swallow. That considered, the Big 10 would probably best consider "radical" expansion targeting the 2014 regular season as the innaugural season of the "Big 16." A conference with OSU, UM, PSU, ND, and Texas, backed by their own TV network, could strong-arm any TV network or Bowl Coalition into anything they want on their terms as far as college football is considered.

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

I believe that massive conference realignment is coming.

Right now, there are 66 BCS teams, with maybe a half dozen more that could move into the club (TCU, Utah, Boise State ... ???). Bump the number of BCS schools up to 70, and that leaves five conferences of fourteen teams each. Drop a couple of the weaklings and get the number down to 64, and that leaves four conferences of sixteen teams each.

With only eight teams and no marquee programs, the Big East is by far the weakest BCS conference ... and there are not enough quality programs available to bump the conference up to twelve teams, let alone fourteen or sixteen. So the Big East will eventually dissolve, with its members heading off to the Big Ten, ACC, and SEC.

The Big 12 could also implode, especially if Texas bolts. With their history of NCAA violations, A+M, Oklahoma, and Okie State would fit in nicely in the SEC, while Colorado could be headed for the Pac 10. The rest of the schools would be scrambling around, trying to hook up with the Big Ten or the Pac 10, or drop down to a non-BCS conference.

It's best for the Big Ten to be the active force here, taregting the school(s) that they want, whether it be Texas or Mizzou or Rutgers or Notre Dame or any combination thereof, and then let the remaining viable conferences fight for the leftovers.

The powers that be at the Big 12 and Big East schools have to know that their respective conferences are already on the brink of collapse, and that a Big Ten expansion that involves anyone other than Notre Dame could send the CFB world into a state of chaos. If you are the president of one of those schools, wouldn't you start sending out feelers to the Big Ten now, instead of waiting for someone else to get the invite? If your conference is going to unravel anyway, you might as well be the one calling the shots.

And if the right FIVE schools are available, then the Big Ten would really have to consider it. I mean, could the conference really turn down a package that consisted of Texas and Missouri and Notre Dame and Pittsburgh and Rutgers? That's five top academic institutions and two top-eight football programs, plus television markets in Houston, Dallas, New York City, St. Louis, and Kansas City ... not to mention Notre Dame's national audience.

Yep, if Texas accepts a bid to join the Big Ten, then the telephones in the conference offices will be ringing off their hooks.

 

[glenn]

I believe that massive conference realignment is coming.

that is stout. had to think about it a while.

four major conferences. i think the bcs arrangement would adjust so that the bcs bowls would go on about as they do now. which is dopey, of course. begs for a playoff. it could be populated by sub-conference winners. that would be great.

i think everybody sees that something major is in the wind. i think your scenario is absolutely as viable as any other right now, jeff.

i also think you are absolutely right about a proactive stance for the big ten. this isn't the time to sit back and watch. only the sec is situated as well as the big ten. with numerous major programs--at least athletically--and the network perks they enjoy, the sec is positioned to become the dark giant, in my view. the big 12 is a shambles, and the pac-10 suffers from too many mediocre programs both athletically and academically. the big east is the big east, and the acc has never come close to the dream of being a big dog when they expanded with miami, etc.

by the way, i commented the other day about there seeming to be some sort of need on the part of national sports writers and networks to champion a lesser known big 12 or big 12 region team every year. obviously tcu was tagged 'it' this season since oklahoma state fizzled early. i think we saw last night how dominant tcu is. good team, no doubt, and no shame to lose to boise. boise is a good program. but can you see either of those teams hanging with florida any better than cincinnati did?

maybe the big downer for me last night is that the national drums beating for tcu just went quiet. had tcu won convincingly, and if we barely scrape by bama on thursday, the calls for a playoff would be deafening. i am severely torn between wanting us to win a convincing title and wanting anything that promotes the bcs to go away. i guess i should always hope for the latter because i believe that once a more sensible method of crowning a champion is in place that championships won under this system will be seriously discounted in the minds of future generations.

speaking of boise, with the flurry of coaching changes, can you see boise keeping their coach? i don't care what, some big-time program is going to go after that guy hammer and tong. have to wonder if ttun wouldn't like to make a switch. i don't know anything about petersen personally, but surely he is a better fit for the big ten than stinky ole rich.

'sending out feelers.' yeah, you just have to believe that there is a lot of talk going on right now. with the revelation that pelini paid a visit to tusks-are-looser like bob did, can you imagine the level of disgust in the texas program offices and with the major boosters? i just can't see texas hanging in that fetid environment beyond whatever it takes to get out. it is obvious that much of the conference is absolutely dedicated to holding texas back. that's not a home. it's an ant bed. and as i've said ad nauseum, i only see one viable direction to go.

good post, jeff.

 

[glenn]

thursday.

i don't know why, but there is a predisposition in the genetics of our species to make predictions. why in the world do we feel the need to do that? isn't analysis of what happened infinitely more useful and compelling than trying to outguess the future? and the way we play this game right now, there isn't enough cross-conference competition prior to the bowl games to make a halfway informed guess anyway.

so i don't have a clue what to expect. i won't be at all surprised by anything, really. if at gunpoint, i had to make a guess, though, i would guess that bama won't put up the fight that the nebs did. i highly suspect stoops and pelini fear the same. hence the visits to alabam.

the one thing i do know, however, is that if texas wins convincingly, that would pave the way--what with you guys' smacking the pac-10 champion--for a glorious move to the big ten. can you imagine the chagrin for the big 12 to lose the reigning national title game winner and two-time champion this half-decade to a rival conference? especially to the reigning rose bowl champion conference?

mmm . . . mmm . . . good.

 

[muffler dragon]

glenn:

May I ask what source/link you have that Stoops and Pelini have been visiting Alabama with the intent of helping the Tide against Texas?

 

[glenn]

glenn:

May I ask what source/link you have that Stoops and Pelini have been visiting Alabama with the intent of helping the Tide against Texas?

muff, that's the scuttlebutt on the texas boards. your point is a good one and i'll try to chase down something substantive. incidentally, i pay almost no attention to the texas boards that mostly offer prattle. i've mentioned two boards, burnt orange nation and barking carnival, that are head, shoulders, and belly button above the others. as i said the other day, when i say the texas boards are saying something, i almost always mean the clued-in posters at those two boards.

 

[scarletmike]

I believe I remember hearing mention during the game last night or during post-game coverage about Pelini supposedly taking a trip to Bama. I may have simply heard the discussion wrong, but for some reason that is sitting at the back of my mind as having happened.

 

[glenn]

mike is right. that's the source of the pelini talk. the horns talk that i can quickly find is a discussion on the shaggy bevo site concerning commentary during the holiday bowl, in which nebraska played, of course, where the pelini trip was mentioned. i didn't hear that myself, but multiple horn posters heard it. i'll continue to look. apparently it was discussed again last night.

the source of the stoops half of the issue is this:

What was Oklahoma's Bob Stoops doing in Tuscaloosa again? | The Bama Beat - al.com

i don't think anyone in his right mind would believe the talk about stoops just dropping by. much of the trouble ou had this year was the direct result of how they played last year. bob pulled out all the stops last year to keep us out of the title game. that string of 60-point games that offset the fact that they lost by 10 points to us came about by keeping his starters in to get the scores up. not nearly enough play by up-and-comers to get them ready for this year. he essentially sacrificed this season to go to the title game, whether he really had much hope of winning it or not, in my opinion.

 

[RugbyBuck]

I have been reading through the thread and other than the odd rant about Notre Lame haven't contributed anything. Thanks for contributing to the level of discussion, glenn. ORD, LBJ and the others needed someone on their intellectual level.

As for BigTen proactivity, I agree that change is a'coming and we need to be ready, but wonder if we should let the SEC take the first step. Texas isn't going to go with them, but I don't know that they would jump first to us or the Pac10 either. It's, I imagine, a better sell to the less progressive wing of the Texas family if the SEC steals another school from the Big12 first. After that, UT would be freed up to go wherever makes the most sense. I know this has been discussed above with various youtube links and fantasy maps, but I just have a hard time seeing Texas pulling off a preemptive jump to the Big10. All that said, we should have the paperwork drawn up and ready to sign as soon as the SEC goon squad goes on its panty raid for the Aggies or whomever else they can sign up.