Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[Apache]

STOP THE INSANITY! All teams become independents. At the beginning of the year all teams go into a hopper just like the lottery. You can televise this.

All teams are picked at random for the first 4 games. Luck of the draw wins out. Then Teams can play two traditional rivalries, like OSU v UM and this can be scheduled at any time as in the last game of the year-to keep any traditions alive.

The comes the seeding for the BCA. Teams begin to play off and the winners and poll leaders go to the bowl games.

Crazy as it sounds (and it is totally insane) it is not too far from the media speculations and web-site speculations that abound.

Mega conferences..........You end up with just one mega conference this way. :tongue2::!

Just kidding.

 

[IronBuckI]

...

Simply hubris?

He does live in NYC.

 

[Woody1968]

I now have the opinion that PBC is purposely being used to spread some truth and some lies. His first post last year was probably accurate and ruffled some B1G feathers. They decided to use him.

My gut tells me he is being used in some sort of game of half-truth, half-misinfo from the B1G offices designed to somehow keep conferences at 12.

I'd be glad to be wrong and see us pick up UT, ND and at that point we could name the other two (probably Missouri and someone).

This is pure speculation, but if PBC is really being used by the Big Ten offices, I would expect that the post about Oklahoma was diversionary, and that the B1G is fully in negotiations with Oklahoma. This makes sense, since Oklahoma said they had interest from several conferences, and they haven't bolted for the PAC yet, even though the PAC said that they would take OK and OKState, even without Texas and Tech.

 

[Woody1968]

He does live in NYC.

Cynicism, not Hubris.

 

[Piney]

I now have the opinion that PBC is purposely being used to spread some truth and some lies. His first post last year was probably accurate and ruffled some B1G feathers. They decided to use him.

My gut tells me he is being used in some sort of game of half-truth, half-misinfo from the B1G offices designed to somehow keep conferences at 12.

I'd be glad to be wrong and see us pick up UT, ND and at that point we could name the other two (probably Missouri and someone).

That is what I posted yesterday, this could be something leaked on purpose to slow everything down.

While I don't put 100% faith in what PBC posts, because the fact it is from ONE point of view, the view from the B1G offices. What they are trying to do and what the believe what will happen. You just have to take his info from that point of view and digest it as such.

Was everything suppose to happen last year? Well, the Big Ten probably didn't think ESPN/Fox would throw so much money at the Big 12 to save it. They also probably didn't think ESPN would throw $300 million at Texas for their own network (heck, no one did). So then PBC's info proved wrong on that front because of actions outside of the B1G thinking.

So back to the latest from PBC.

Is the Big 10 talking to Notre Dame and Texas? I have no doubts that is happening. But at what level? WILL it happen? PBC said it himself that Texas prefers to keep the Big 12-2-1 alive and that Notre Dame prefers Independence. BUT, IF things hit the fan, they have the foundation of talks between them.

Why was it leaked? I now have 2 thoughts; #1 Like I said yesterday, The B1G, Texas & Notre Dame wants to keep the status quo, and nothing like keeping the status quo by scaring the heck out of everyone else by leaking that they would join the Big Ten and blow everyone else's plans out of the water.

Or #2, this is a total bluff by the Big Ten. While they have talked, nothing like this is close. BUT, they don't want expansion to happen yet. To continue the poker analogy, Delany pushed all his chips in the middle (ie leaking this info). Does the SEC, Pac12 want to call that bluff and find out Delany doesn't have two aces (Texas & Notre Dame) but god help them if Delany DOES have Texas & Notre Dame.

 

[FCollinsBuckeye]

:popcorn:

 

[Muck]

This is what a 19 y/o looks like in Dustlahoma.

While I don't put 100% faith in what PBC posts, because the fact it is from ONE point of view, the view from the B1G offices.

No it is not a fact. There has been nothing close to independent verification of PBC's connections let alone his claims.

 

[Mrstickball]

This is what a 19 y/o looks like in Dustlahoma.

You sure that's not Bob Stoops after the last PBC news leak?

 

[Piney]

No it is not a fact. There has been nothing close to independent verification of PBC's connections let alone his claims.

Didn't say it was a fact...

 

[Muck]

Didn't say it was a fact...

Your statement reads that it is a fact he is posting the view of the Big Ten office. Again, we do not know whether that is true or not. Keep in mind that PBC's biggest supporter on that board is a notorious troll.

It's certainly possible that PBC is telling the truth (as he/his source sees it) but we're a long way from being able to say that is the case with any certainty.

 

[Muck]

There's a lot of talk of a dystopian future featuring 4x 16 team super conferences. While fiddling looking at some of the various potential moves it almost appears as if 5x 14 team conferences is potentially more workable (in the short term).

If we assume:
SEC adds A&M & WVU
Pac adds Oklahoma & Oklahoma St (and no I have no idea how to split that into divisions)
B1G adds Texas & ND (I know, I know but that's allegedly the super secret
conspiracy theory end game)

That leaves the Big 12 with 6 remaining teams, the BEast with 8 & the ACC
completely untouched.

So does the ACC expand to keep up with the other B3 powers? If so who do they add?

Syracuse was a hair's breath away from joining last time around before VPI
pocket politicians scuttled the deal so the assumption is they'd be next in line. Who would be their partner? Pitt, Rutgers or UConn seem to be the best of the remaining options. For some reason I have a feeling Pitt would get the nod (does anyone really think Rutgers has solid long term viability?).

That leaves two decimated "half" conferences. You would think that the safest course of action would be for them to just band together in some sort of co-dependent survivor's pact.

Western division:
Missouri, Kansas, Kansas St, Texas Tech, Baylor, Iowa St

Eastern division:
Rutgers, Louisville, Cincy, UConn, USF & TCU

Outside of TCU that is almost a perfect geographic split. So what happens if you add a couple of teams & slide TCU to the West?

Big 14 West
Missouri, Kansas, Kansas St, TCU, Texas Tech, Baylor, Iowa St

Big 14 East
Rutgers, Lousiville, Cincy, UConn, USF, Central Florida & +1 (ECU? Memphis?)

Not exactly the NFC Central but it's definitely a step above the MWC & CUSA's of the world.

More importantly it preserves a coveted *BCS bid for every school that currently has one & even adds a couple of extra places at the table leaving fewer potential trouble makers in the future.

Even MORE importantly it does so while consolidating a single BCS bid among the group whereas they formerly took up two separate bids. That potentially frees up a spot each year for more lucrative schools from the Big Four conferences.

As an aside: Looking at the Big East after having it's most appealing members cherry picked really gives one a perspective of what a collection of have nots the conference really is.


Edit: For some reason I was overlooking the obvious...ACC stands pat leaving the B12East with no need to add anyone.

Big 14 West
Missouri, Kansas, Kansas St, Texas Tech, Baylor, Iowa St, TCU

Big 14 East
Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers, Lousiville, Cincy, UConn, USF

If they form under The Big East name you have a conference with upwards of 21 schools (no ND) for BB & other sports. Not idea by any means but potentially of value since the league's TV contract is up for negotiation next year. Is that a more lucrative lineup in FB than the current one?

If that is unimagenable, the BE football schools could split from the Catholics and seek sanctuary under the Big 12-2-1-2-1+8 banner. Even in reduced form that ain't a bad BB lineup.

 

[Piney]

Your statement reads that it is a fact he is posting the view of the Big Ten office. Again, we do not know whether that is true or not. Keep in mind that PBC's biggest supporter on that board is a notorious troll.

It's certainly possible that PBC is telling the truth (as he/his source sees it) but we're a long way from being able to say that is the case with any certainty.

See, this is where my grammer sucks as I am more of a numbers guy.

Not meant fact as in it is a fact that he is an insider. Meant it more of fact that his info (good or bad) is from the Big 10 office view.

Or for the grammer police and me misusing words I shouldn't have used the word fact, but instead should have said "While I don't put 100% faith in what PBC posts, because it is from ONE point of view, the view from the B1G offices."

 

[Muck]

See, this is where my grammer sucks as I am more of a numbers guy.

Not meant fact as in it is a fact that he is an insider. Meant it more of fact that his info (good or bad) is from the Big 10 office view.

Or for the grammer police and me misusing words I shouldn't have used the word fact, but instead should have said "While I don't put 100% faith in what PBC posts, because it is from ONE point of view, the view from the B1G offices."

Now the comm failure is on my end...lol

I was stating that we can't be 100% that he is definitely connected with the Big Ten office or that if he is that he is passing on actual inside info instead of blowing smoke (for fun &/or profit).

Anywhoo...why are we discussing this when we could be arguing about black uniforms?

 

[Piney]

Now the comm failure is on my end...lol

I was stating that we can't be 100% that he is definitely connected with the Big Ten office or that if he is that he is passing on actual inside info instead of blowing smoke (for fun &/or profit).

Anywhoo...why are we discussing this when we could be arguing about black uniforms?

It could be on both ends... but who knows. Needless to say he could or could not be connected and he is either making up stuff, gleaning stuff from a buddy of his that is connected, being fed info (either right or wrong)

Or...

Joe Lull (a Cleveland sports talker for 6 years) also was tweeting this same info yesterday. I just assumed he read it off from PBC and was just repackaging it on his own as he is on the new sports station in Cleveland and he might be trying to drive listeners. But he just tweeted this (@lullonsports)

What the Rivals.com Northwestern site has reported is similar to what I reported. And apparently both of us have sources inside the Big Ten.

BTW... this is much more fun than talking about black jerseys...

 

[Muck]

Or...

Joe Lull (a Cleveland sports talker for 6 years) also was tweeting this same info yesterday. I just assumed he read it off from PBC and was just repackaging it on his own as he is on the new sports station in Cleveland and he might be trying to drive listeners. But he just tweeted this (@lullonsports)

That's almost always the assumption I make these days when I see a 'journalist' type up something almost word for word that I saw on a popular message board or blog a few days earlier.

The news organizations are really in a sad state these days.