Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[Woody1968]

The options are, IMHO: Texas, Missouri, Syracuse, and Rutgers. That's it -- that's the whole list. The only way the Big Ten "settles" for a school already in a state currently occupied by another Big Ten school is if it's Notre Dame. Either go to 12 (Texas) or goto 14 (Texas, Missouri, and Syracuse). Don't jump to 16 (or more) yet. Make the move, see what the Pac 10 does (and what happens to the Big XII after it collapses), get to 14, then the Big Ten has 2 more slots left in the bag for future considerations if there is a shift to 4 16-team Super Conferences.

I'm starting to think you could also add UConn, for a piece of New England and NY, although it would be a stretch, but certainly a women's basketball coup.

 

[MaxBuck]

I'm starting to think you could also add UConn, for a piece of New England and NY, although it would be a stretch, but certainly a women's basketball coup.

I think you may be right. UConn football would certainly compare favorably to Northwestern, Minnesota and Illinois, and it would be superior to Indiana.

 

[jwinslow]

How many TV sets does UConn command? They do not fill up their 40k stadium (38.3k avg).

 

[gracelhink]

Sorry to interupt the scholarly discussion on the expansion of Big Ten, but this old article neglected some interesting details of the decision of the expansion committee.

Big Ten hires firm to research potential expansion candidates - JSOnline

Big Ten hires firm to research potential expansion candidates

Initial list of 15 doesn't include Texas;

Madison ? Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez said Friday that Big Ten officials have hired a firm to research potential candidates as the conference considers expansion and that 15 programs were included in an initial report.

"They basically broke down what they would bring to the table," Alvarez said at a meeting of the UW athletic board. "They talked about academics. They talked about size. They talked about size of their arenas. They talked about attendance. They talked about the populace in that specific area."

The JS interview with Barry Alvarez neglected to include the following:

JS "So Barry, you indicate that a consulting firm has been hired to explore what potential candidates would bring to the table in a Big 10 relationship.
Any word on the firm that has been hired and what additional information they might offer?"

BA "Yes we considered many of those match making services that offer a picture and a paragraph, but chose a company that through scientific research and study discovers certain characteristics can predict compatibility, and lead to more satisfying relationships. They also promised us compatibility at a deeper level of intimacy. The Big 10 is a family and we want to continue that facade.
In consultating with the founder, Dr. Neil Clark Warren, he recommended, "Prospective Big 10 members will complete a proprietary questionnaire that purports to determine characteristics, beliefs, values, emotional health and skills. Matching algorithms ? the basis of the matching system Warren developed, we believe matches school's core traits and values to replicate the traits of happy couples." These answers will best match our member institutions with potential compatible candidates."

JS "Were there any other options for researching potential candidates beside hiring a consulting firm?"

BA "Well actually yea, Smith and Gee wanted us to take a look at this website out of Columbus, Buckeye Planet. They have an online survey of Big 10 fans and some of the best research about potential candidates that had ever been compiled. He moved that we take the top three from the poll and extend offers to those schools. When it came down to a vote his idea lost by a 6-5 margin and the penalty for losing was that Gee would have to pay for the Eharmony consulting firm."

JS "Any idea how OSU plans to come up with the millions in consulting fees?"

BA "Yeah Gee said he was going to recommend to his trustees that they go first after renegade tailgaters with the secondary option of a price increase on tickets."

 

[Gatorubet]

Why would anyone care about the other teams in one's conference and their level of success?

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Don't fuck up The Game by going to 12+ teams for the likes of Pitt, Rutgers or anybody else not named Texas and or Notre Dame.

Or simply don't expand...

 

[Woody1968]

How many TV sets does UConn command? They do not fill up their 40k stadium (38.3k avg).

I certainly think they would command enough sets to put the Big 10 Network into pretty much every household in New England and New York City. South Western Connecticut is part of the New York Metro Area, while the rest is New Englandy. They don't have to be the dominant program in those areas, they just have to have enough interest to justify the cable companies expense in picking up the channel.

 

[sepia5]

I certainly think they would command enough sets to put the Big 10 Network into pretty much every household in New England and New York City. South Western Connecticut is part of the New York Metro Area, while the rest is New Englandy. They don't have to be the dominant program in those areas, they just have to have enough interest to justify the cable companies expense in picking up the channel.

Candidly, I live in Southern Connecticut, and I just don't see college football ever being much of a ratings graber here. I go out to the local bars to watch the noon games on Saturday sometimes, and they're almost empty, even when UCONN is playing. There's loyalty to pro football franchises (mostly the Giants and Pats), but otherwise this region is crazy for college and pro basketball, as well as baseball. UCONN can barely fill its tiny, brand-spakin-new stadium, and there's very little football talent produced in all of New England. I think that program has gone about as far as it's ever going to go (mid-tier D-1 power), and that isn't exactly enough to excite the locals even in the program's successful infancy.

Now, the college basketball audience, on the other hand . . . .

I just think Syracuse is by far and away a better option if we're comparing it with UCONN: some football tradition; better recruiting grounds; more pull in NYC; better graduate programs (for instance, Maxwell is arguably the best public policy center in the US); etc.

 

[jwinslow]

I think that program has gone about as far as it's ever going to go (mid-tier D-1 power), and that isn't exactly enough to excite the locals even in the program's successful infancy.

Rutgers & UConn are plateauing against lousy big east opponents, yet they're going to be a big asset when they have to play UM, OSU, PSU every year and Texas, Wisconsin, Iowa every so often? Even if they start out with a good chunk of TV sets, you wonder how long that would last.

I just think Syracuse is by far and away a better option if we're comparing it with UCONN: some football tradition; better recruiting grounds; more pull in NYC; better graduate programs (for instance, Maxwell is arguably the best public policy center in the US); etc.

As long as they ban those all orange football unis :sick:

 

[BuckTwenty]

You don't need a consulting firm to tell you that Texas or ND would be no-brainer options for Big Ten expansion. That's why they're not on the list. They're paying to figure out who else might be a decent candidate, either to come along with UT/ND, or in their place.

By using that logic though, couldn't you come to the conclusion that Mizzou, Syracuse, Rutgers, and Pitt would be just as obvious an option as those two?

This consulting research dealy was made for a school like U of Toronto. This is their big chance. If Texas isn't on it, I'm interested to see if Texas A&M is. If they aren't I'm wondering if Texas actually IS under consideration. I'd also be interested to see how schools like Maryland, Kentucky, and Boston College stand up in it against some of the popular back-up choices to a Texas or ND.

 

[mross34]

Rutgers & UConn are plateauing against lousy big east opponents...

Disagree that we've seen either of these programs plateau for the foreseeable future, particularly Rutgers. These programs have just recently built up their football programs. UConn has a stadium that's less than ten years old. Rutgers just added 8,000 seats to its stadium (room to expand more) built brand new training and recruiting facilities after years of being one of the worst programs in the country.

I can't speak to Connecticut, but in NJ, the bottom line is interest is still growing in Rutgers football. Their application and retention rates are way, way up. Their donation numbers are on the rise. A good portion of New Jersey's population cares about Rutgers football. If Rutgers keeps this up and keeps the talent in NJ at home, they can be a Wisconsin like team in the Big 10.

Look at Rutgers recent recruiting success in NJ according to Rivals:
2010
4 Stars - 0/3
3 Stars - 5/27

2009
4 Stars - 2/10
3 Stars - 7/19

2008
5 Stars - 0/1
4 Stars - 1/5
3 Stars - 3/17

If they can shift this trend, something that a school that is the only FBS program in the state, much less BCS, should be able to do, and a catalyst like moving to the Big 10 and the ensuing excitement could cause, I think they could have sustainable success.

 

[JCOSU86]

Expanding will forever fuck up the legacy that is the Big Ten and the rivalry with Michigan. It will be a very, very bad move.

But I don't see it stopping now.

Nebraska?
Fucking UConn? Are you serious? What the fuck is that all about?

Missouri is THE ONLY school that fits all sensible criteria: size, location, academics, sports, TV markets, etc, etc.

Rutgers

 

[jwinslow]

Disagree that we've seen either of these programs plateau for the foreseeable future, particularly Rutgers. These programs have just recently built up their football programs. UConn has a stadium that's less than ten years old. Rutgers just added 8,000 seats to its stadium (room to expand more) built brand new training and recruiting facilities after years of being one of the worst programs in the country.

Perhaps in the big east, but is it really going to keep building when they have to play actual BCS powers every year?

OSU, UM & PSU are 3 losses almost every year and Sparty/Fightin-Fitzgeralds are not easy wins. The opposite division matchups are pretty tough, with Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, Texas A&M & Missouri as potential teams.

4-5 loss seasons would be an accomplishment for that program, but not really the type of results to build up a program.

I can't speak to Connecticut, but in NJ, the bottom line is interest is still growing in Rutgers football. Their application and retention rates are way, way up. Their donation numbers are on the rise. A good portion of New Jersey's population cares about Rutgers football. If Rutgers keeps this up and keeps the talent in NJ at home, they can be a Wisconsin like team in the Big 10.

Wisconsin has 3 programs with more talent than them in the b10.
Rutgers has 5-7 programs with more talent than them in the expanded conference.
That's a huge difference. Wisconsin can beat 1 of those 3 and still have a good year. Rutgers has to beat 4-5 of them to have a good year.

 

[IronBuckI]

Perhaps in the big east, but is it really going to keep building when they have to play actual BCS powers every year?
...

Do you think that it would be easier for Rutgers to recruit the wealth of in-state talent if they played BCS powers every year, or if they played in the Big East? Do you think that it would be easier to get, and keep, a head coach in the Big Ten or the Big East?

I think that the Big East will continue to be all peaks and valleys for their programs. One program will get a good coach to stay long enough to rise to the top, then that guy will leave, and then another program will become the new Big East pretender. If Rutgers has to stay in the Big East, I think that they will have to ride the pretender roller coaster with the rest of the conference. If they're allowed in the Big Ten, then I think that they will have a legitimate shot at becoming a dangerous program. Especially if Schiano doesn't take over, at Penn State, when JoePa dies on the sidelines.

 

[jwinslow]

If we're going to blow it up, it better be worth it. What is a best case scenario for Rutgers over the next decade? Another sparty? fitzgerald's NW program? Is that worth it?

Rutgers has a ton to gain financially. Unless they're a throw-in with 1-2 heavy hitters, it seems like a very one-sided trade for the big ten.

Do you think that it would be easier for Rutgers to recruit the wealth of in-state talent if they played BCS powers every year, or if they played in the Big East?

It would legitimize their program, but it might also prove them as unworthy of competing with the big boys (including the 2nd tier schools like Wisconsin/Iowa).

It would give them a boost in the first year or two, but what happens if the wins continue to be sparse?

Do you think that it would be easier to get, and keep, a head coach in the Big Ten or the Big East?

Easier in the big ten to keep an 8-4 coach. I don't think they could keep a 10-2 type coach at either spot (other than a coach who was determined to be a lifer regardless of the conference).

I think that the Big East will continue to be all peaks and valleys for their programs. One program will get a good coach to stay long enough to rise to the top, then that guy will leave, and then another program will become the new Big East pretender. If Rutgers has to stay in the Big East, I think that they will have to ride the pretender roller coaster with the rest of the conference. If they're allowed in the Big Ten, then I think that they will have a legitimate shot at becoming a dangerous program. Especially if Schiano doesn't take over, at Penn State, when JoePa dies on the sidelines.

Sure they'll have a shot, just like Cincinnati would if they joined. I just don't think it would be a positive one.

Maybe they'd get closer to filling up their 50k stadium and that would be enough for them.