• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

Which Teams Should the Big Ten Add? (please limit to four selections)

  • Boston College

    Votes: 32 10.2%
  • Cincinnati

    Votes: 19 6.1%
  • Connecticut

    Votes: 6 1.9%
  • Duke

    Votes: 21 6.7%
  • Georgia Tech

    Votes: 55 17.6%
  • Kansas

    Votes: 46 14.7%
  • Maryland

    Votes: 67 21.4%
  • Missouri

    Votes: 90 28.8%
  • North Carolina

    Votes: 39 12.5%
  • Notre Dame

    Votes: 209 66.8%
  • Oklahoma

    Votes: 78 24.9%
  • Pittsburgh

    Votes: 45 14.4%
  • Rutgers

    Votes: 40 12.8%
  • Syracuse

    Votes: 18 5.8%
  • Texas

    Votes: 121 38.7%
  • Vanderbilt

    Votes: 15 4.8%
  • Virginia

    Votes: 47 15.0%
  • Virginia Tech

    Votes: 62 19.8%
  • Stay at 12 teams and don't expand

    Votes: 27 8.6%
  • Add some other school(s) not listed

    Votes: 25 8.0%

  • Total voters
    313
I think the bigger takeaway from the MW announcement is the championship game venue provision. As far as I can recall, they are the only (?) conference to do that and under the upcoming 'playoff' format, it makes the absolute most sense. The other conferences are wrapped up in the 'super-bowl' type concept for the CCG and under the 'playoff' format, that model is obsolete, IMO. The CCG games are now more akin to AFC/NFC championship games which rightly give home field advantage to the 'more deserving' team.

My $0.02
 
Upvote 0
FCollinsBuckeye;2295822; said:
I think the bigger takeaway from the MW announcement is the championship game venue provision. As far as I can recall, they are the only (?) conference to do that and under the upcoming 'playoff' format, it makes the absolute most sense. The other conferences are wrapped up in the 'super-bowl' type concept for the CCG and under the 'playoff' format, that model is obsolete, IMO. The CCG games are now more akin to AFC/NFC championship games which rightly give home field advantage to the 'more deserving' team.

My $0.02

Agreed, when you also factor in the costs related to travel expenses for the fans, this seems to be a must.
 
Upvote 0
FCollinsBuckeye;2295822; said:
I think the bigger takeaway from the MW announcement is the championship game venue provision. As far as I can recall, they are the only (?) conference to do that and under the upcoming 'playoff' format, it makes the absolute most sense. The other conferences are wrapped up in the 'super-bowl' type concept for the CCG and under the 'playoff' format, that model is obsolete, IMO. The CCG games are now more akin to AFC/NFC championship games which rightly give home field advantage to the 'more deserving' team.

My $0.02

The Pac 12 does that too I believe.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeye Maniac;2295829; said:
The Pac 12 does that too I believe.

This is wise and affords the higher rated team a leg up entering the upcoming 'playoff' format. This concept has been discussed at length in this thread, iirc. I suspect the Pac officials considered this angle when setting up this format.

Bucknut24;2295830; said:
that is correct, CUSA does it as well

CUSA adopting this format is less about competitive advantage in the upcoming 'playoff' than getting butts in seats, imo. I can't imagine many people travelling to see UCF play Tulsa at some neutral locale. I had to Google the 2012 CUSA division champs. :lol:

Either way, the B1G should STRONGLY consider abandoning the neutral location 'super bowl' type format and give home field advantage to the higher ranked team.

As mentioned, this has already discussed at length, just seeing the MW take this step makes me question the B1G's decisions......
 
Upvote 0
FCollinsBuckeye;2295843; said:
This is wise and affords the higher rated team a leg up entering the upcoming 'playoff' format. This concept has been discussed at length in this thread, iirc. I suspect the Pac officials considered this angle when setting up this format.

You say this... then you say this?


FCollinsBuckeye;2295843; said:
CUSA adopting this format is less about competitive advantage in the upcoming 'playoff' than getting butts in seats, imo. I can't imagine many people travelling to see UCF play Tulsa at some neutral locale. I had to Google the 2012 CUSA division champs. :lol:

Either way, the B1G should STRONGLY consider abandoning the neutral location 'super bowl' type format and give home field advantage to the higher ranked team.

As mentioned, this has already discussed at length, just seeing the MW take this step makes me question the B1G's decisions......

MWest & PAC didn't think about the playoffs... it was ALL about getting butts in seats. PAC12 isn't known to have a big traveling fan base. So I tend to think they did the #1 seed having the home game more to get butts in seats.

And the B1G's decision was based on one thing... MONEY. Selling the game to the highest bidder adds money to the worth of the B1G Championship game. They can do this because their fans are known to travel and there are a few central located stadiums that are prime to hold such an event. The B1G just has had the misfortune of not having a Ohio State or Michigan in the title game yet.
 
Upvote 0
Piney;2295847; said:
You say this... then you say this?

Yes. I think the home-field advantage played into the Pac's decision to an extent, though I suppose you make a valid point about their fan bases not travelling as readily as the B1G.

CUSA has little chance of ever being a player in the 'playoff', which was my point.
 
Upvote 0
Piney;2295847; said:
The B1G just has had the misfortune of not having a Ohio State or Michigan in the title game yet.

Do people really think that's the cure for the B1G title game?

Nebraska travels as well as anybody, and they couldn't be bothered to go to Indianapolis.

My opinion: There's a gameday culture in the SEC that translates very well to the neutral-site format for their championship game. Since they were the first major conference with a championship game, that's the model that everybody has tried to emulate and none have approached the level of success of their event. The culture of B1G football is different. I think it is more closely tied to time and place, and to the campuses and grand coliseums and cathedrals to the game. The B1G championship game will always be sterile, soulless and a notch below until they figure out a way to tap into that sensibility.
 
Upvote 0
JLB may have hit the nail on the head. As much as we joke about the SEC chant and the fact that they seem to think winning the SEC is more important than the National Title itself, it's that sort of attitude which may be responsible for the relative success of their neutral site game.
 
Upvote 0
jlb1705;2295898; said:
Do people really think that's the cure for the B1G title game?

Nebraska travels as well as anybody, and they couldn't be bothered to go to Indianapolis.


My opinion: There's a gameday culture in the SEC that translates very well to the neutral-site format for their championship game. Since they were the first major conference with a championship game, that's the model that everybody has tried to emulate and none have approached the level of success of their event. The culture of B1G football is different. I think it is more closely tied to time and place, and to the campuses and grand coliseums and cathedrals to the game. The B1G championship game will always be sterile, soulless and a notch below until they figure out a way to tap into that sensibility.

To be fair, having the third best team in one of the divisions playing in the game did not help matters. It's also possible that some of the Nebraska fans overlooked Wisconsin, considering they were not division champs, and that Nebraska had already beaten them. Of course, that doesn't excuse the fact that the Nebraska football team did not show up to the game either.
 
Upvote 0
Woody1968;2295910; said:
To be fair, having the third best team in one of the divisions playing in the game did not help matters. It's also possible that some of the Nebraska fans overlooked Wisconsin, considering they were not division champs, and that Nebraska had already beaten them. Of course, that doesn't excuse the fact that the Nebraska football team did not show up to the game either.

:slappy:

You are probably right, the fans were just saving their money for a trip to the Rose Bowl.
 
Upvote 0
jlb1705;2295898; said:
My opinion: There's a gameday culture in the SEC that translates very well to the neutral-site format for their championship game. Since they were the first major conference with a championship game, that's the model that everybody has tried to emulate and none have approached the level of success of their event. The culture of B1G football is different. I think it is more closely tied to time and place,


Translation:

winter8bn.jpg
 
Upvote 0
Buckeyeskickbuttocks;2295903; said:
JLB may have hit the nail on the head. As much as we joke about the SEC chant and the fact that they seem to think winning the SEC is more important than the National Title itself, it's that sort of attitude which may be responsible for the relative success of their neutral site game.

That's really due to the fact they see it as the real championship game and the BCSNCG as just the coronation. Until someone knocks them off then it is hard to prove them wrong.
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top