• 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
big10-08-hdr-logo.gif

Logos gotta change if we add a team.
 
Upvote 0
It's hard to keep a secret around the state Capitol, especially when legislative talk turns from taxes to football.

So, in early 1994, when the buzz began that Texas and Texas A&M were preparing to leave the Southwest Conference, David Sibley went straight to a man he knew wouldn't deceive him.
Sibley, then a Republican state senator from Waco, buttonholed William Cunningham, the University of Texas chancellor, at a reception. He asked him point blank if the rumors that the Longhorns and Aggies were planning to desert the SWC were true.

A great article about the politics surrounding the pipe dream (and my dream) of Texas. It specifically mentions the Big 10 in one portion.

Power brokers: How tagalong Baylor, Tech crashed the revolt
 
Upvote 0
bigdog3300;1621009; said:
The "best/right thing to do" is debatable, but for the big wigs, numbers and money isn't. If the numbers are there, that's what matters. Those numbers would be TV contract boosts, new television shares, academic marks, etc.

If the big wigs make their decisions for "what's best" for the conference based solely on monetary gain, then they need to be relieved of their positions.

And simply adding a CCG won't result in any real "TV contract boosts" or "new television shares"...it's only one single game, likely coinciding with one or more other CCGs.
 
Upvote 0
OSU_D/;1621050; said:
A great article about the politics surrounding the pipe dream (and my dream) of Texas. It specifically mentions the Big 10 in one portion.

Power brokers: How tagalong Baylor, Tech crashed the revolt
The Longhorns next turned to the Big Ten. Having added Penn State in 1990, the Big Ten was now made of universities that, in the view of UT officials, matched UT's profile ? large state schools with strong academic reputations. Berdahl liked the fact that 10 conference members belonged to the American Association of Universities.
Yet, distance remained a disadvantage. Iowa, the closest Big Ten school to Austin, was 856 miles away ? but the appeal of having 10 of 12 schools in the same time zone was seen as a plus.
But after adding Penn State in 1990, Big Ten officials had put a four-year moratorium on expansion. Although admitting interest, Big Ten bosses ultimately rejected UT's overtures.
Sounds like this almost happened once before.
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top