Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[sepia5]

Sepia

There is 1 thing your missing, the PAC 12 is pushing the Pac 12 Network + regional networks.. So SO Cal gets theirs, San Fran schools get theirs, Oregon, Washington etc etc... so the Longhorn network fits perfectly into their plans if they can convince UT to make it regional, then you'll have the OU Network for OU & OkState and Longhorn Network for UT & Tech....

Well, one thing is for sure: money trumps all as a factor in expansion. I guess if providers can be convinced that there is a market for the Pacific Northwest Network sufficient to charge customers an extra several dollars a month, it could work. Selling a network like that in sports-crazy Texas is one thing. I'm just not convinced that people in Seattle and Portland are as interested.

 

[sepia5]

A lot of it really has to do with football credibility. The Pac 12 did not really gain much in the area of prestige with Colorado and Utah. Colorado was briefly good in the 90s, and Utah has built a decent program in a mid-major conference, but the only real gain was the ability to have a championship game. Scott needs to score a marquee program this time. Anything else will be a falure for him. Let's face it. BYU is not going to get a Pac-whatever invite, because of the religious affiliation. They just aren't going to come out and say it. Otherwise, Pac would have taken BYU and Colorado State to keep the pattern of two schools for each state. (Northern Cal and Southern Cal counting as seperate states here, I know) That may still factor into the plans if the Tex/TTech/OK/OKState deal falls through. But right now Texas, OK or both is the only thing that is going to make the situation a win for that conference.

The B1G and SEC don't necessarily need another program the caliber of Texas or Oklahoma. The B1G has tOSU, scUM, State Penn and Neb. The SEC has Bama, Fla, LSU and you can make a case for Tenn and Aub too, since all of these teams have had success and are watched by people all over the country. The Pac-12, has USC, which is down, and everyone else. It's really debatable if it is even a better league than the ACC!

Eh. To be perfectly honest, in the hierarchy of factors driving expansion, I just don't see conference credibility in football as one of the more compelling ones. Again, all conference members have to agree to expansion, if I'm not mistaken. I could totally see Stanford, with its $12.6 billion endowment, Ivy-quality academics, and across-the-board excellence in athletics, saying fuck you to a proposal that includes Texas Tech and Okie State. If I'm not mistaken, when the Pac-8 added the Arizona schools, Washington, Stanford, and Berkley initially balked due to ASU's inclusion. USC threatening to walk away from the conference is what changed that. I'm not sure USC is in a position to do that again, or would even consider it.

I understood adding Utah and Colorado to get to 12 teams to enable a conference championship game. Plus, Colorado fit well anyway. Texas is obviously the critical component in this. Without Texas, none of it makes sense to me. And I just don't see Stanford, USC, UCLA, Cal Berkley, and Washington rolling over for Texas whenever it makes an absurd demand, as the Big 12 members did for years and years. So, I'm not convinced Texas will prefer a Pac-16 to independent status. That's going to be a tough call for it.

All just my opinion. Who knows. In a few weeks, we'll probably have a PAC 16.

 

[Nicknam4]

The PAC can go beat their meat with 16 teams, I'd rather the B1G stay at 12. I don't see any teams that really stick out and belong in the Big Ten at the moment.

 

[Woody1968]

Eh. To be perfectly honest, in the hierarchy of factors driving expansion, I just don't see conference credibility in football as one of the more compelling ones. Again, all conference members have to agree to expansion, if I'm not mistaken. I could totally see Stanford, with its $12.6 billion endowment, Ivy-quality academics, and across-the-board excellence in athletics, saying fuck you to a proposal that includes Texas Tech and Okie State. If I'm not mistaken, when the Pac-8 added the Arizona schools, Washington, Stanford, and Berkley initially balked due to ASU's inclusion. USC threatening to walk away from the conference is what changed that. I'm not sure USC is in a position to do that again, or would even consider it.

I understood adding Utah and Colorado to get to 12 teams to enable a conference championship game. Plus, Colorado fit well anyway. Texas is obviously the critical component in this. Without Texas, none of it makes sense to me. And I just don't see Stanford, USC, UCLA, Cal Berkley, and Washington rolling over for Texas whenever it makes an absurd demand, as the Big 12 members did for years and years. So, I'm not convinced Texas will prefer a Pac-16 to independent status. That's going to be a tough call for it.

All just my opinion. Who knows. In a few weeks, we'll probably have a PAC 16.

Texas needs a conference for their olympic sports - Otherwise, they probably would consider going independent.

As for everything else, I absolutely agree that Stanford and Cal probably don't want Texas Tech and OkState, but Texas and Oklahoma represent enough $$$ for them to look the other way.

Look at it this way: Stanford is more than willing to suck some Texas Tech and OkieState dick, since the money from Texas and Oklahoma will buy a lot of mouthwash.

 

[Buckeye doc]

I think teams in conferences have to realize that you don't really want to add all football heavyweights in a rush to 16 teams. Imagine a conference of all the best teams (as Texas, with their usual modesty and humility, was supposedly proposing). Say Florida, LSU, Ala, Neb, tOSU, scUM, Tejas, Oklahoma, USC, Ore, Miami, FSU, etc. I know all aren't currently at the top of their game but you get the idea. Only 1 champion every year and that's alot of losses for some teams that aren't accustomed to it. Just sayin.

If the PAC gobble up those 4, my preference would be to try to get a little southern exposure. GTech, VTech, Maryland and Missouri (no, not southern, just being nice to a neighbor ).

Anyone hearing anything aboot who gets brung to the esseesee with the Aggies?

 

[BuckTwenty]

Anyone hearing anything aboot who gets brung to the esseesee with the Aggies?

To make 14? Suppposedly, the short list includes Missouri and Clemson. Florida State seems to be as wet as A&M to join the conference as well, but not getting the vibes that the feeling is necessarily mutual.

My bet would be Mizzou. Butt-hurt over getting bypassed by the B1G, and the ACC seems to be a tough nut to get cracked.

 

[Dryden]

The PAC can go beat their meat with 16 teams, I'd rather the B1G stay at 12. I don't see any teams that really stick out and belong in the Big Ten at the moment.

I still think 'Cuse and Maryland bring the B1G a lot of value. Not-bad football, and HUGE cred in basketball. The Orange and Twerps would make B1G basketball must-see TV in NE. That's nothing to sneeze at. NE may not give a rats ass for college football unless BC and/or Notre Dame are good, but they love them some college basketball. That's a lot of TV sets tuned into BTN every night for five months out of the year.

Syracuse is ripe for the picking. Maryland would be a tougher nut to crack, but if the SEC is simultaneously pressuring to raid the ACC for Clemson or FSU, Maryland might bail.

 

[LovelandBuckeye]

Syracuse is ripe for the picking. Maryland would be a tougher nut to crack, but if the SEC is simultaneously pressuring to raid the ACC for Clemson or FSU, Maryland might bail.

Where would that leave the NC schools? Big Least? The new Conference USA with Kansas, KSU, ISU?

 

[Dryden]

Where would that leave the NC schools? Big Least? The new Conference USA with Kansas, KSU, ISU?

I think the football playing members of the Big East likely head to the ACC in the ACC's attempt to race to 16 teams, and the Big East becomes a basketball-only league. Whether Notre Dame calls Delany is the X-factor since they're a Big East member in everything other than football.

Kansas, KSU and ISU would probably fall to the Mountain West. Kansas is interesting though because of their basketball pedigree. I think the SEC has to look at them (the B1G probably would not). We beat the drum on the football dollars, but mens basketball has become a big business too. If the SEC could sell a Kansas/Kentucky game twice a year with them in the same division, they have to consider it.

 

[jlb1705]

Why not Kansas in the B1G? After all, we're talking about leagues that are eventually going to end up at 16 teams each. In most realistic scenarios, what better options is there for that 16th spot?

If the B1G first grabs Syracuse and Maryland or some pair similar to that, I think that would be part of a series of developments that would finally shake loose Notre Dame, and they could then become the B1G's 15th team. After that, and the accompanying moves by other conferences, the options for a 16th team are all going to have their warts. At that point I'd like to see them pick up a school that at least moves the needle in basketball rather than being thoroughly mediocre at everything (like Missouri).

 

[Buckeye doc]

I think the football playing members of the Big East likely head to the ACC in the ACC's attempt to race to 16 teams, and the Big East becomes a basketball-only league. Whether Notre Dame calls Delany is the X-factor since they're a Big East member in everything other than football.

Kansas, KSU and ISU would probably fall to the Mountain West. Kansas is interesting though because of their basketball pedigree. I think the SEC has to look at them (the B1G probably would not). We beat the drum on the football dollars, but mens basketball has become a big business too. If the SEC could sell a Kansas/Kentucky game twice a year with them in the same division, they have to consider it.

I didn't mention the domers for the exact reason you mentioned; we won't call them again and they won't call us. They have been independent so long I don't think the prospect of superconferences bothers them. They probably figure they'll get some kind of sweetheart deal like they have with the BCS (and oh, how I hope they do not!).

 

[BB73]

If ND joins the B1G, I don't see Syracuse getting a spot. ND brings the NYC market, and Syracuse and Rutgers are both unnecessary.

I see the other candidates for spots 14-16 being (about in this order) Maryland, Virginia, Mizzou, GT, and Kansas. I don't think North Carolina or Duke would leave the ACC, and I don't see VT in the B1G. And other than ND, geographic expansion into solid TV markets and good academics is what will generate the offers from Delany.

Texas in the PAC could be what forces ND into the B1G. Once the PAC gets to 16, the B1G and SEC will do the same, and then the 4-team playoff among the 4 16-team super-conference CCG winners could shut out anybody not in those 4 leagues from National Title contention.

It would be a scramble to see what's left of the ACC/Big East (after the SEC and B1G expand) survive and become the 4th super-conference.

 

[jlb1705]

I didn't mention the domers for the exact reason you mentioned; we won't call them again and they won't call us. They have been independent so long I don't think the prospect of superconferences bothers them. They probably figure they'll get some kind of sweetheart deal like they have with the BCS (and oh, how I hope they do not!).

When they get to four 16-team superconferences, a 4-team playoff among the conference champions will most certainly follow. (It would be a de-facto 8-team playoff if you consider the CCGs as the first round.) In that kind of system, there's no deal available for Notre Dame (or BYU for that matter). You either have a seat at the table or you don't.

 

[NateG]

I didn't mention the domers for the exact reason you mentioned; we won't call them again and they won't call us. They have been independent so long I don't think the prospect of superconferences bothers them. They probably figure they'll get some kind of sweetheart deal like they have with the BCS (and oh, how I hope they do not!).

There really isn't a reason to give them a sweetheart deal. the premise of a super-conference gives the best ability for all teams to get money. this is the reason that the Big 12/10/8 is folding like a cheap tent. Texas got a sweetheart deal and the other teams got pissed. Notre Dame's sweetheart deal with NBC is not so hot anymore when you talk about Indiana and Purdue making more annually than them. So, either they make a call or they get left. And their arrogance could leave them out unless they find a way into the ACC/Big Least blend super. Saying something to the effect of "we are already in that conference let's just move football in there too".

 

[NateG]

If ND joins the B1G, I don't see Syracuse getting a spot. ND brings the NYC market, and Syracuse and Rutgers are both unnecessary.

I see the other candidates for spots 14-16 being (about in this order) Maryland, Virginia, Mizzou, GT, and Kansas. I don't think North Carolina or Duke would leave the ACC, and I don't see VT in the B1G. And other than ND, geographic expansion into solid TV markets and good academics is what will generate the offers from Delany.

Texas in the PAC could be what forces ND into the B1G. Once the PAC gets to 16, the B1G and SEC will do the same, and then the 4-team playoff among the 4 16-team super-conference CCG winners could shut out anybody not in those 4 leagues from National Title contention.

It would be a scramble to see what's left of the ACC/Big East (after the SEC and B1G expand) survive and become the 4th super-conference.

What about Pitt joining us?