Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[Gatorubet]

ESPN Radio
From the Scott Van Pelt Show:

Not much new said here on the Big Ten front, but they do make some interesting points about the SEC. They see the SEC adding Florida State, Miami, Georgia Tech, and Clemson, which makes total sense.

The biggest obstacle could be Florida's refusal to let the other 2 Florida schools into the SEC. But to me that brings up an interesting point for the Big Ten.

 

[Buckskin86]

How big?
When it comes to Big Ten expansion, that's the question
Sunday, May 2, 2010
By Bill Rabinowitz
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

It wasn't long ago that the Big Ten's relevance on the national stage seemed to be fading.

A wave of high-profile football losses, particularly by Ohio State in consecutive national championship games, made the conference a target of derision.

Well, no one's laughing at the Big Ten anymore. The success of the Big Ten Network has replenished members' coffers in a time of financial hardship and spurred the conference to announce in December that it would explore the possibility of expansion.

As a result, the Big Ten is in an enviable position as the fulcrum that may decide the future course of college athletics. But in the 4 months since the Big Ten made the simple declaration that it would pursue expansion, nothing has been easy to decipher about where that path will end.

The few who know anything either aren't talking or are saying as little as possible when they do. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany spoke to reporters for 30 minutes last week in Arizona. New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick would have been proud of the dearth of insight Delany provided. In essence, Delany said expansion might happen, or it might not.

How big? | BuckeyeXtra

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

How big? | BuckeyeXtra

In a companion piece to the above, they provide the pros and cons for each of the Expansion Candidates.

They had this to say about Notre Dame:

Not the power it used to be or thinks it is.

ND arrogance reported as fact. Nice

 

[BB73]

If they add: Mizzou/Nebraska/Texas/aTm along with Rutgers/Syracuse/Pitt/UConn/ND, and split into 2 ten-team divisions that would play a full round robin in football, but only play teams in their own division:

THE BIG TwENty

 

[kinch]

If they add: Mizzou/Nebraska/Texas/aTm along with Rutgers/Syracuse/Pitt/UConn/ND, and split into 2 ten-team divisions that would play a full round robin in football, but only play teams in their own division:

THE BIG TwENty

This is getting out of hand.

And am I the only one feverishly reading this thread and discussion boards and google news about expansion? I can only imagine what the school administrators in other conferences are experiencing. I am like a heroine addict.

Also, I hate that this thread always has one last page that isn't really a page just to make me feel like there is one more hit!

 

[MaxBuck]

I am like a heroine addict.

I know what you mean. I can't start the day without my daily fix of Joan of Arc.

 

[woofermazing]

Can the SEC even expand right now and improve their position financially? They have 14 years left with ESPN, and adding teams right now would just dilute the money each school receives (unless there is something in the contract I don't know about). Their talk sounds like panic from realizing the SEC could be seriously handicapped while the world of college football radically changes shape.

Also, Texas will never join the SEC due to the lack of academic prowess. The Pac-10 makes no sense financially if we are still an option. The ACC is a possibility, but again, why do that if you could join the Big Ten? If the Big 12 crumbles, they will go independent before joining anyone other conference. They could also make a good wad of cash from that too.

 

[Gatorubet]

I know what you mean. I can't start the day without my daily fix of Joan of Arc.

Hawt!!!

 

[BrutusBobcat]

Hawt!!!

Sometimes your posts really burn me up.

 

[MaxBuck]

Hawt!!!

Just trying to point out how much conflagration a bunch of faggots can cause, I see.

 

[Piney]

This is getting out of hand.

And am I the only one feverishly reading this thread and discussion boards and google news about expansion? I can only imagine what the school administrators in other conferences are experiencing. I am like a heroine addict.

Also, I hate that this thread always has one last page that isn't really a page just to make me feel like there is one more hit!

You are not the only one. I cannot find enough expansion talk on message boards/articles/twitter and anywhere else I can find my fix.

All I know is this is going to be a long 12-18 months :dead:

Can the SEC even expand right now and improve their position financially? They have 14 years left with ESPN, and adding teams right now would just dilute the money each school receives (unless there is something in the contract I don't know about). Their talk sounds like panic from realizing the SEC could be seriously handicapped while the world of college football radically changes shape.

Also, Texas will never join the SEC due to the lack of academic prowess. The Pac-10 makes no sense financially if we are still an option. The ACC is a possibility, but again, why do that if you could join the Big Ten? If the Big 12 crumbles, they will go independent before joining anyone other conference. They could also make a good wad of cash from that too.

Totally agree about other conferences expanding. The only REAL way to be able to expand is to increase the money the conference brings in. Luckily the Big 10 has that vehicle with the BTN. No other conference has that right now. While I am sure ESPN/CBS would give the SEC a bump if they add teams, but it won't be a big enough bump to cover the additional cost of having 16 teams versus 12 teams splitting up the revenue.

Plus it isn't like the SEC will be growing TV coverage as most of the new teams they could add would be duplicate or small markets with the exception of Texas. But I also agree Texas would rather go Independent that go to the SEC.

If anything the SEC will probably try to start a TV network pronto as their 'answer' to the Big 10 expansion and then once that is up and running THEN they will expand.

 

[MissouriFan]

Here is my take on what I could see happening.

Missouri, Nebraska, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, and Syracuse go to the Big Ten as rumored unless Notre Dame wakes up first and then they replace Pitt in that line up.

We form 4 divisions of 4 teams also as rumored. This makes the most sense for a 16 team conference. In football play each team in your division every year and two teams from each of the other divisions giving you a 9 game conference schedule. It also allows each team to play in each venue at least once every four years. Plus how profitable would the conference tournament be. The entire college football world would be watching. In basketball it works even better. Play each team in your division home and away for 6 games and each other team once for an 18 game conference schedule.


The Pacific 10 follows the Big Ten's example and expands to 16. The Pac 10 hired Kevin Weiberg for a reason. Weiberg was the the Big 12 commissioner until he left to work for the Big Ten Network. Now the Pac 10 has hired him to help set up a network of their own and help with expansion. He has a lot of connections in Texas and knows how profitable a conference network is. Plus from his time with the Big Ten he knows how to go about setting one up.

The Pac 10 adds Colorado, Utah, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas A&M.

This gives them 4 clean divisions.
- Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, and Washington State
- California, UCLA, USC, and Stanford
- Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah
- Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, and Texas A&M

This also gives them the following media markets. LA, San Francisco, San Diego, Seattle, Portland, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, Denver, Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, San Antonio, Oklahoma City, and Kansas City.

That would help give them a network that could compete with the Big Ten's

In this senario the Big Ten's Network would include the following media Markets. New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Detroit, Indianapolis, Chicago, St. Louis, Kansas City, Omaha, Minneapolis, and Milwaukee.


This would give us the first two 16 team super conferences. The Big Ten already has it's own network and the Pac 10 looking at starting their own so these two conferences would be in the best position to profit the most from expansion. Whatever happens next with the SEC, ACC, and remaining Big East and Big 12 teams would be interesting.

If we eventually end up with four 16 team super conferences one or two teams currently in the BCS would be left out since that only creates 64 spots and their are currently 65 teams. If someone expands with a current non BCS team like Utah or BYU then two current BCS teams might be left out of the next realignment.

Four 16 team conferences would also set up nicely for a playoff. Each conference sends their champion for a 4 team tournament to determine the National Champion. This is why I could see Notre Dame waking up and taking a spot in the Big Ten before they miss out and end up in either an expanded 16 team ACC, SEC, or left out and unable to play for a national championship.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

The notion that we end up with Nebraska and the Pac 10 gets Texas makes me sick to my fucking stomach!

 

[jwinslow]

In this senario the Big Ten's Network would include the following media Markets. New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Detroit, Indianapolis, Chicago, St. Louis, Kansas City, Omaha, Minneapolis, and Milwaukee.

Doesn't the BTN already have St. Louis, Pittsburgh & a decent presence in NY & Philly (at least in contrast to the risky premise of huge ratings for basement dwelling Rutgers and no-football Syracuse?)

I'm with ORD. The Big Ten is the powerhouse of the NCAA. You want NYC ratings? Put Notre Dame & Texas on your network regularly. That's far more compelling TV than what Syracuse & Rutgers bring in 1 of the 2 big sports.

 

[Piney]

Doesn't the BTN already have St. Louis, Pittsburgh & a decent presence in NY & Philly (at least in contrast to the risky premise of huge ratings for basement dwelling Rutgers and no-football Syracuse?)

I'm with ORD. The Big Ten is the powerhouse of the NCAA. You want NYC ratings? Put Notre Dame & Texas on your network regularly. That's far more compelling TV than what Syracuse & Rutgers bring in 1 of the 2 big sports.

Agree about already having PA with Penn State, but how much do we have St. Louis? It is all about rates, while the BTN might be in St. Louis, is it at a full price, or a lower rate since they are a fringe market for Illinois? So maybe they can charge more by having Missouri in it.

And that is why Syracuse/Rutgers is important for NYC. Will they bring ratings? Who cares! It is all about giving the BTN a foot in the door to get it on a higher cable tier and charging a higher rate. Once you can get the BTN on NYC cable, the ratings will come from the Ohio State, Penn State and Michigan and other Big Ten alums that live there. But it is ALL about going from $.10/household to $.50+/household and being on a higher tier.

Also, while football drives all of this, I am sure Syracuse will get decent basketball ratings in NYC.

But I do agree getting Notre Dame & Texas would help too, but the way things are going it just doesn't seem like they will be coming. Notre Dame is just too afraid and living in the dark ages to move.

Texas... I still hold out hope for them, but it seems like Texas prefers the PAC10 for whatever reasons.