Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[zincfinger]

Asked and answered. If admitting Ntre Ame for simple reasons relating to football, then fine. But being a member of the Big Ten means more than football, more than athletics.

Right???

Okay, I understand your view that only large state schools should be considered for membership to the BigTen. And I could agree with your "lack of integrity" synopsis if we were talking about an academic basketcase of a school with a good football program. But when we're talking about a school that would have one of the strongest undergraduate academic reputations in the conference, and would be an outlier really only in its lack of a dominant graduate research focus, "lack of integrity" seems a bit strong to me.

edit: Although I'll readily admit my view of this is dominated by football. I'd probably be a little uncomfortable with it if we were talking about a Florida State, but let's not exaggerate what the BigTen is (or what the CIC is). It's not the Ivy Leage, it's a collection of solid-to-very-good state schools plus Northwestern (Plus Chicago in the case of the CIC). I personally don't see a problem if it were to become a collection of solid-to-very-good state schools plus Northwestern and Notre Dame (plus Chicago with the CIC).

 

[matcar]

I agree- but the point is that the Big 10 doesn't need to make it easy for Notre Dame. Michigan, Purdue and Michigan State gives the Irish 3 games close to their base each year against 3 nationally recognized programs. Where else are they going to find that? If they want to be "independent" and play a "national schedule" they'd have to play further away from their base - or they could schedule Ball State, Toledo and Army in Soldier Field.

- and no, Vanderbilt does not equal Purdue - Jay Cutler vs Drew Brees, Bob Griese, Gary Danielson, Len Dawson, Mike Phipps, Jeff George

Jeff George went to Illinois.


Arguments against ND joining are silly. I don't like those cocky fuckers either but it's clear that they would be a net benefit to the Big 10 in many ways.

 

[IronBuckI]

Jeff George went to Illinois.


Arguments against ND joining are silly. I don't like those cocky fuckers either but it's clear that they would be a net benefit to the Big 10 in many ways.

Jeff George spent a year at Purdue before ultimately ending up at Illinois.

 

[Buckeyefrankmp]

- and no, Vanderbilt does not equal Purdue

I think the point was that Notre Dame could play anybody and people would still watch. They could pick up Cincinnati, Kentucky or Louisville and get the same ratings as a Purdue/MSU/UM game. The only thing missing would be the "tradition".

 

[zincfinger]

I think the point was that Notre Dame could play anybody and people would still watch. They could pick up Cincinnati, Kentucky or Louisville and get the same ratings as a Purdue/MSU/UM game. The only thing missing would be the "tradition".

Notre Dame's a big draw, but I highly doubt they're going to get the same ratings playing Louisville as they are playing Michigan (certainly in most years, but probably even when Michigan stinks).

 

[cincibuck]

Jeff George spent a year at Purdue before ultimately ending up at Illinois.

OK, make it Jim Everret. The point is that Purdue has been much stronger than Vandy over a considerable period of time and they have had the kind of program that puts players into the NFL. While the average ND fan doesn't know that, the average football fan does -- and so do the whiz guys at ESPN and the rest of the media.

I've said repeatedly in this thread that I'd like to see ND in the Big 10 because of what I perceive as a win - win situation, but if Princess South Bend wants to remain single then let her figure out how to get along without the Big 10. On this I agree with Bo, ND needs us more than we need them. Of course that was said back when The Game was The Game.

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

Rittenberg is reporting that the league will explore the opportunity to move to a 9 game league schedule that is afforded by expansion to 12 teams.

Big Ten ADs to discuss more league games

then-Michigan athletic director and all-around magnificent son-of-a-bitch Bill Martin told me, "As the guarantees [for nonconference games] go up and up and up and the fans want to play our sister institutions in the conference, to me it's a no-brainer. Play 'em."

OK, I may have embellished that a smidge, though Jax gets original credit.

Overall, this is a good report for AR. Good information, good sources, well presented...

But...


You knew that was coming right? I do have to take issue with one minor thing:

As an 11-team conference, the Big Ten faced a major mathematical obstacle to playing nine conference games: one team would be limited to eight league games every year. This snag will no longer apply beginning in 2011, as Nebraska joins the Big Ten as its 12th member.

This is not strictly true. Instead of limiting one team to 8 games, you could have 9 teams play 9 league games and have the other 2 play 10 league games. There are other permutations as well, and I'll spare you the mathematical details. The point is, they could have made this happen some time ago. The move to 12 teams next year just makes it convenient.

 

[JCOSU86]

I was thinking about this last night and can boil the argument down to this (I think):

If the 4 mega-conference set up is coming, then there is no choice but include ND in what the Big Ten will become. There is no other place for them. ACC/Big East? Maybe, SEC- no, Big 12 - no, Pac-?? - No. So unless they are on the outside looking in (and I don't see that happening), the Big Ten is their most likely destination with the ACC/Big East hybrid as the runner up.

That being said, that saddens me. Perhaps I'm too much of a traditionalist. I liked the old conferences and their bowl tie-ins. Times are changing and I will miss the old days.

 

[zincfinger]

I was thinking about this last night and can boil the argument down to this (I think):

If the 4 mega-conference set up is coming, then there is no choice but include ND in what the Big Ten will become. There is no other place for them. ACC/Big East? Maybe, SEC- no, Big 12 - no, Pac-?? - No. So unless they are on the outside looking in (and I don't see that happening), the Big Ten is their most likely destination with the ACC/Big East hybrid as the runner up.

That being said, that saddens me. Perhaps I'm too much of a traditionalist. I liked the old conferences and their bowl tie-ins. Times are changing and I will miss the old days.

I agree with a large portion of that sentiment. But I would ask, do you think the addition of Penn State to the conference was, on the whole, a good thing or a bad thing? It certainly altered some traditions. Was it worth it?

My personal view is, if you have the opportunity to add an elite program, you do it. You don't beg, you don't camp outside their door, but if you have the opportunity, you have to take it. Some traditions will be mucked up, and that's the price you pay.

 

[DallasHusker]

I agree with a large portion of that sentiment. But I would ask, do you think the addition of Penn State to the conference was, on the whole, a good thing or a bad thing? It certainly altered some traditions. Was it worth it?

My personal view is, if you have the opportunity to add an elite program, you do it. You don't beg, you don't camp outside their door, but if you have the opportunity, you have to take it. Some traditions will be mucked up, and that's the price you pay.

As a Husker, I agree with you. I will say though, that you can add and still be very mindful of traditions, resulting in minimal "muck up" or you can do what Texas, et al did do the Big 12 and totally trash tradition - like the Nebraska - OU rivalry, which I'd say used to be similarly intense and elite as tOSU - TSUN, but which essentially died with the Big 12. The already-accomplished trashing of that tradition made it much easier for me and many Husker fans to be excited about the move to the Big Ten.

 

[JCOSU86]

I agree with a large portion of that sentiment. But I would ask, do you think the addition of Penn State to the conference was, on the whole, a good thing or a bad thing? It certainly altered some traditions. Was it worth it?

My personal view is, if you have the opportunity to add an elite program, you do it. You don't beg, you don't camp outside their door, but if you have the opportunity, you have to take it. Some traditions will be mucked up, and that's the price you pay.

I was against PSU at the time and in retrospect it hasn't really helped them too much. But it hasn't hurt them either. They have been to a couple of Rose Bowls, but have not contended for any MNCs. Their "rivalries" with UMd, Pitt and Rutgers has disappeared, but those were pretty much one-sided to begin with.

I 100% agree with your statement of "you don't beg". The Big Ten asked ND to join once, they turned them down. Will asking them again be like begging?

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

As a Husker, I agree with you. I will say though, that you can add and still be very mindful of traditions, resulting in minimal "muck up" or you can do what Texas, et al did do the Big 12 and totally trash tradition - like the Nebraska - OU rivalry, which I'd say used to be similarly intense and elite as tOSU - TSUN, but which essentially died with the Big 12. The already-accomplished trashing of that tradition made it much easier for me and many Husker fans to be excited about the move to the Big Ten.

Could not agree more with you about what happened to the Nebraska - OU rivalry. To prove it, I have quoted 3 of my own posts from (much) earlier in the thread where I argued against expansion, using the destruction of that rivalry as exhibit A.

Two things make me feel better about expansion, now that it's happened:

1. Since joining the board, UNL fans have illustrated how the Big 12 screwed the pooch when it came to that rivalry - and it was probably because UT sabotaged that rivalry on purpose to put more emphasis on the Red River Whatever. So The Game will still be hurt - but not as much as it might have been otherwise.
2. Nebraska: Isn't it ironic that the destruction of the UNL-OU rivalry actually made an expansion candidate available that was so attractive that you accept the consequences to The Game?

Well, there is the total destruction of the greatest rivalry in sports, but other than that...


And yes, even if it were a game that were only played "if needed", it would still diminish the importance of The Game. So many people claimed that nothing could harm the importance of the Oklahoma/Nebraska rivalry; now, I would bet there are people on this board who don't even know that OK/NE used to be a rivalry at all.

The very thought of a conference game involving either OSU or scUM being played AFTER the game is anathema to me.

Oh come on. The Oklahoma-Nebraska rivalry hasn't been hurt at all by the addition of a CCG to the Big 12...

Seriously though: Seeing what happened to that rivalry has me absolutely dead-set against any expansion of the Big Ten. Any suggestion that expansion would not lead to a CCG is naive at best, and if you don't think that hurts what we value most; read this again:


And if you don't value the rivalry with TSUN above ANYTHING that conference expansion or a CCG would bring; then our standards of value are so different that we have no basis for a discussion.

And that Sooners-Huskers rivalry was utterly destroyed by the formation of the Big 12. (the point that has been so often repeated as it is the most relevant to many of us)

But your post points out another danger to rivalries... new rivalries.

Ohio State fans, myself included, are loathe to admit that a de facto rivalry has arisen with Penn State. What if another de facto rival emerged?

What if Ohio State and Texas met for the conference championship game 8 times in a decade and split the series? And what if TSUN continued to suck during that decade (something that now seems possible)?

But then... maybe a new rivalry built on mutual respect is what we need to remind Ohio State and TSUN fans what rivalries are supposed to be.

To this one I will add that you can replace Texas with Nebraska in the above post and the point stands, or is maybe even enhanced.

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

I was against PSU at the time and in retrospect it hasn't really helped them too much. But it hasn't hurt them either. They have been to a couple of Rose Bowls, but have not contended for any MNCs. Their "rivalries" with UMd, Pitt and Rutgers has disappeared, but those were pretty much one-sided to begin with.

I 100% agree with your statement of "you don't beg". The Big Ten asked ND to join once, they turned them down. Will asking them again be like begging?

The New York Times begs to differ.

edit: I say this not to endorse PSU for anything, but to mock their retarded fanbase and school for hanging a banner in their stadium that said (says?) they were the 1994 New York Times CFB Champions.

 

[jwinslow]

I was against PSU at the time and in retrospect it hasn't really helped them too much. But it hasn't hurt them either. They have been to a couple of Rose Bowls, but have not contended for any MNCs.

00-04 hurt them big time, and they've only made rose bowls when Michigan sucked and OSU had major issues at QB.

Their "rivalries" with UMd, Pitt and Rutgers has disappeared, but those were pretty much one-sided to begin with.

And added a great one with OSU.[/27 friend]

 

[Jaxbuck]

This is not strictly true. Instead of limiting one team to 8 games, you could have 9 teams play 9 league games and have the other 2 play 10 league games. There are other permutations as well, and I'll spare you the mathematical details. The point is, they could have made this happen some time ago. The move to 12 teams next year just makes it convenient.

My understanding of the reason why they haven't done that was always the number of home games.


9 regular season conference games a year = 4 or 5 home games max
3 OOC games= have to all 3 be home games to get your 8 a year and in some years you are still only going to get 7.

If you play 10 regular season conf games you are guaranteed only 7 home games that year.

For obvious reasons that puts a pretty serious constraint on the types of teams you'll be able to play OOC and more importantly cuts into the bottom line. To feed the machine at OSU you need the 8 home games a year has always been my understanding.

I'll defer to you on the math, I could very well be wrong on this but that's always been the way I've understood it.