Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[LordJeffBuck]

Just some thoughts on each potential new additon to the Big Ten. I rated each school in seven categories - athletics, academics, rivalries, geography, television, compatibility, and perception - from one star (complete loser) to five stars (perfect fit). Geography rates how well a school fits into the current Big Ten, and television rates the new markets that a school would bring in.

Here are my ratings for each school - let me know what you think:

Notre Dame
Athletics: 4* (prestigious but fading football program; irrelevant basketball program; CCHA hockey; women's soccer is top rate)
Academics: 3* (very good undergraduate; weak graduate and research; not AAU)
Rivalries: 5* (Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue; would easily develop rivalries with the rest of the conference)
Geography: 5* (in the Big Ten heartland)
Television: 5* (one of the few national draws in college football)
Compatibility: 3* (will their snobbish, private school attitude fly in the Big Ten?)
Perception: 5* (regardless of the reality, snagging Notre Dame would be perceived as a tremendous coup)
Overall: 30* (in terms of prestige and perception, this move would really boost a sagging conference; a perfect fit geographically)
Likelihood: ? (they won't get special treatment in the Big Ten, so would they lower themselves to our level?)

Texas
Athletics: 5* (top-10 football program; very good basketball program; club hockey)
Academics: 5* (AAU; one of the top academic institutions in the world)
Rivalries: 1* (none, although they do have recent history with Ohio State)
Geography: 2* (at least it's not the West Coast....)
Television: 5* (would open a huge new market for the Big Ten)
Compatibility: 4* (some cultural differences, but otherwise a good fit)
Perception: 5* (stealing a top program from a top conference would immediately give the Big Ten renewed credibility)
Overall: 27* (the biggest prize both athleticially and academically, but geography is a big stumbling block)
Likelihood: ? (faculty would support; would lose big-time football rivalries; would they make a second move in 20 years?)

Missouri
Athletics: 3-1/2* (solid football and basketball programs; club hockey)
Academics: 3-1/2* (AAU; respectable, but would be at the bottom of the Big Ten)
Rivalries: 3* (Illinois; would be a natural rival of Iowa)
Geography: 4* (contiguous state; fits in nicely with the current Big Ten)
Television: 4* (adds St. Louis and Kansas City)
Compatibility: 5* (as a midwest state flagship, it is probably the best fit)
Perception: 3-1/2* (not nearly the home run that Notre Dame or Texas would be, but it's still a Big 12 school)
Overall: 26-1/2* (lots of "very good", not much "outstanding" ... perhaps the best overall fit, all things considered)
Likelihood: ? (would probably join tomorrow if given the opportunity)

Nebraska
Athletics: 4* (not much to add besides a top-10 football program)
Academics: 3-1/2* (AAU; like Missouri, they would enter the conference at the bottom)
Rivalries: 2* (minor rivalries with Minnesota and Iowa; would have difficulty generating rivalries with the "eastern" schools)
Geography: 3* (a contiguous state, but moves the conference pretty far west)
Television: 2* (Omaha, and that's about it)
Compatibility: 4-1/2* (like Missouri, it is a midwest state flagship)
Perception: 4-1/2* (not quite the "steal" that Texas would be, but it would still be perceived as a major move)
Overall: 23-1/2* (similar to Missouri in many ways, but a lower population base and a bit too far west)
Likelihood: ? (they already lost their rivalry with Oklahoma, and the B-12 is Texas-centric, so they might have some interest)

Pittsburgh
Athletics: 3-1/2* (solid football and basketball programs; club hockey)
Academics: 4-1/2* (AAU; would be in the middle of the pack in the Big Ten; heavily into research)
Rivalries: 4* (Penn State, Ohio State; might have difficulty in generating rivalries with the "western" schools)
Geography: 4* (in a Big Ten state, but not in the midwest heartland)
Television: 3* (would solidify a current market, but would not really expand the conference's reach)
Compatibility: 4* (not solidly midwest, but they should fit in just fine)
Perception: 3* (this move wouldn't really impress too many people outside of the State of Pennsylvania)
Overall: 26* (if the conference wants to head east, then this is the obvious choice)
Likelihood: ? (the Big East doesn't offer much, but would they ruin the conference just to take a better deal?)

Rutgers
Athletics: 2* (still trying to get acclimated to FBS; not much of a basketball program; club hockey)
Academics: 4* (AAU; very solid undergrad and grad programs; not heavy into research compared to the rest of the Big Ten)
Rivalries: 1-1/2* (used to be a Penn State whipping boy; no other ready-made rivalries)
Geography: 3-1/2* (a contiguous state near major cities, but this is really dragging the conference toward the East Coast)
Television: 3-1/2* (would this really open the New York market? will CFB sell in NYC? it might be worth a shot....)
Compatibility: 3* (a flagship state university, but New Jersey is very far removed from the midwest)
Perception: 1-1/2* (might as well target Kent State....)
Overall: 19* (outside of the academic fit, this seems like a mismatch; clearly weakens the conference athletically)
Likelihood: ? (a little to like, a lot not to like ... makes more sense if Pitt is also in the bargain)

Syracuse
Athletics: 3* (moribund football program; strong basketball program; club hockey; men's lacrosse is top rate; crappy stadium)
Academics: 2-1/2* (AAU; respectable undergraduate programs, not much in terms of graduate programs or research)
Rivalries: 2-1/2* (Penn State; only other natural rival would be Ohio State)
Geography: 3* (in the middle of nowhere in a contiguous state)
Television: 2-1/2* (not an entry into any big market, but might have some impact in the East Coast)
Compatibility: 2* (private school, not midwest)
Perception: 2* (would be perceived as a step backward for the Big Ten)
Overall: 17-1/2* (Syracuse makes no sense on any level, unless it is part of a package deal with Pitt)
Likelihood: ? (who knows, who really cares? doubt that they make the final cut, unless Pitt and/or Rutgers is also in the mix)

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

If the Big 10 wants that market, Virginia or Maryland would be better choices, or have Georgetown upgrade and join. VT is out in the middle of nowhere, MD is right next to DC and Virginia is a top university, and only about 100 miles from DC.

I honestly do not want an expansion that takes a team from a state that is not already represented in or bordering with a state that is represented in the Big 10. I do not think Boston College works in the ACC, it's kind of silly that they are there.

I think UVA is a great outside the box idea. That being said, I just don't see them leaving easily given the VA legislature's past actions of getting involved in these matters. Plus, I don't think they'd ever give up their tobacco road traditional rivalries with Duke and UNC.

 

[bigdog3300]

Well done LJB, but I assume that means you don't believe Toronto is a legit option?

Ugh, and everytime I listen to Andre Ware, my ears begin to bleed.

 

[Woody1968]

Just some thoughts on each potential new additon to the Big Ten. I rated each school in seven categories - athletics, academics, rivalries, geography, television, compatibility, and perception - from one star (complete loser) to five stars (perfect fit). Geography rates how well a school fits into the current Big Ten, and television rates the new markets that a school would bring in.

Here are my ratings for each school - let me know what you think:

Notre Dame
Athletics: 4* (prestigious but fading football program; irrelevant basketball program; CCHA hockey; women's soccer is top rate)
Academics: 3* (very good undergraduate; weak graduate and research; not AAU)
Rivalries: 5* (Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue; would easily develop rivalries with the rest of the conference)
Geography: 5* (in the Big Ten heartland)
Television: 5* (one of the few national draws in college football)
Compatibility: 3* (will their snobbish, private school attitude fly in the Big Ten?)
Perception: 5* (regardless of the reality, snagging Notre Dame would be perceived as a tremendous coup)
Overall: 30* (in terms of prestige and perception, this move would really boost a sagging conference; a perfect fit geographically)
Likelihood: ? (they won't get special treatment in the Big Ten, so would they lower themselves to our level?)

Texas
Athletics: 5* (top-10 football program; very good basketball program; club hockey)
Academics: 5* (AAU; one of the top academic institutions in the world)
Rivalries: 1* (none, although they do have recent history with Ohio State)
Geography: 2* (at least it's not the West Coast....)
Television: 5* (would open a huge new market for the Big Ten)
Compatibility: 4* (some cultural differences, but otherwise a good fit)
Perception: 5* (stealing a top program from a top conference would immediately give the Big Ten renewed credibility)
Overall: 27* (the biggest prize both athleticially and academically, but geography is a big stumbling block)
Likelihood: ? (faculty would support; would lose big-time football rivalries; would they make a second move in 20 years?)

Missouri
Athletics: 3-1/2* (solid football and basketball programs; club hockey)
Academics: 3-1/2* (AAU; respectable, but would be at the bottom of the Big Ten)
Rivalries: 3* (Illinois; would be a natural rival of Iowa)
Geography: 4* (contiguous state; fits in nicely with the current Big Ten)
Television: 4* (adds St. Louis and Kansas City)
Compatibility: 5* (as a midwest state flagship, it is probably the best fit)
Perception: 3-1/2* (not nearly the home run that Notre Dame or Texas would be, but it's still a Big 12 school)
Overall: 26-1/2* (lots of "very good", not much "outstanding" ... perhaps the best overall fit, all things considered)
Likelihood: ? (would probably join tomorrow if given the opportunity)

Nebraska
Athletics: 4* (not much to add besides a top-10 football program)
Academics: 3-1/2* (AAU; like Missouri, they would enter the conference at the bottom)
Rivalries: 2* (minor rivalries with Minnesota and Iowa; would have difficulty generating rivalries with the "eastern" schools)
Geography: 3* (a contiguous state, but moves the conference pretty far west)
Television: 2* (Omaha, and that's about it)
Compatibility: 4-1/2* (like Missouri, it is a midwest state flagship)
Perception: 4-1/2* (not quite the "steal" that Texas would be, but it would still be perceived as a major move)
Overall: 23-1/2* (similar to Missouri in many ways, but a lower population base and a bit too far west)
Likelihood: ? (they already lost their rivalry with Oklahoma, and the B-12 is Texas-centric, so they might have some interest)

Pittsburgh
Athletics: 3-1/2* (solid football and basketball programs; club hockey)
Academics: 4-1/2* (AAU; would be in the middle of the pack in the Big Ten; heavily into research)
Rivalries: 4* (Penn State, Ohio State; might have difficulty in generating rivalries with the "western" schools)
Geography: 4* (in a Big Ten state, but not in the midwest heartland)
Television: 3* (would solidify a current market, but would not really expand the conference's reach)
Compatibility: 4* (not solidly midwest, but they should fit in just fine)
Perception: 3* (this move wouldn't really impress too many people outside of the State of Pennsylvania)
Overall: 26* (if the conference wants to head east, then this is the obvious choice)
Likelihood: ? (the Big East doesn't offer much, but would they ruin the conference just to take a better deal?)

Rutgers
Athletics: 2* (still trying to get acclimated to FBS; not much of a basketball program; club hockey)
Academics: 4* (AAU; very solid undergrad and grad programs; not heavy into research compared to the rest of the Big Ten)
Rivalries: 1-1/2* (used to be a Penn State whipping boy; no other ready-made rivalries)
Geography: 3-1/2* (a contiguous state near major cities, but this is really dragging the conference toward the East Coast)
Television: 3-1/2* (would this really open the New York market? will CFB sell in NYC? it might be worth a shot....)
Compatibility: 3* (a flagship state university, but New Jersey is very far removed from the midwest)
Perception: 1-1/2* (might as well target Kent State....)
Overall: 19* (outside of the academic fit, this seems like a mismatch; clearly weakens the conference athletically)
Likelihood: ? (a little to like, a lot not to like ... makes more sense if Pitt is also in the bargain)

Syracuse
Athletics: 3* (moribund football program; strong basketball program; club hockey; men's lacrosse is top rate; crappy stadium)
Academics: 2-1/2* (AAU; respectable undergraduate programs, not much in terms of graduate programs or research)
Rivalries: 2-1/2* (Penn State; only other natural rival would be Ohio State)
Geography: 3* (in the middle of nowhere in a contiguous state)
Television: 2-1/2* (not an entry into any big market, but might have some impact in the East Coast)
Compatibility: 2* (private school, not midwest)
Perception: 2* (would be perceived as a step backward for the Big Ten)
Overall: 17-1/2* (Syracuse makes no sense on any level, unless it is part of a package deal with Pitt)
Likelihood: ? (who knows, who really cares? doubt that they make the final cut, unless Pitt and/or Rutgers is also in the mix)

Good post, but having lived in NYC for 12 years, I can tell you that Rutgers only recently has attracted attention in NYC. NYC is Syracuse territory, especially in Basketball. Rutgers might get about as much attention there as Buffalo or Army. Interestingly, The only NYC area team that got weekly coverage in the 12 years I was there (97-09) was Hofstra, which just dropped football, and was FCS. If the Big 10 wants the NYC market, Syracuse is the only logical choice, as they have had success at times. Rutgers is a johnny come lately, and besides alumnai, they have a small amount of bandwagon fans, that will jump ship the moment they finish 5-7

 

[Colvinnl]

re: Texas.

I think I remember hearing that the Big 12 has unequal revenue sharing, meaning when Texas is on national TV they get a much bigger chunk of the money. I think the Big 10 is more equal. So Texas could stand to lose money when you take that and the added travel costs into account.

Has anyone heard the same about revenue sharing?

 

[Woody1968]

I think UVA is a great outside the box idea. That being said, I just don't see them leaving easily given the VA legislature's past actions of getting involved in these matters. Plus, I don't think they'd ever give up their tobacco road traditional rivalries with Duke and UNC.

Yeah, they probably wouldn't leave the ACC, now that VT is in the conference with them too, plus the UNC rivalry. But academically they are strong, their football and basketball programs are solid, but they also are quite strong in other sports (soccer comes to mind). No hockey, though, sorry.

 

[Woody1968]

re: Texas.

I think I remember hearing that the Big 12 has unequal revenue sharing, meaning when Texas is on national TV they get a much bigger chunk of the money. I think the Big 10 is more equal. So Texas could stand to lose money when you take that and the added travel costs into account.

Has anyone heard the same about revenue sharing?

I don't know, but if the Big 10 does end up taking a Big 12 team, it will open the door for Colorado to go to the Pac 10, which has regained some buzz lately.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

Well done LJB, but I assume that means you don't believe Toronto is a legit option?

Ugh, and everytime I listen to Andre Ware, my ears begin to bleed.

Honestly, I don't know enough about Toronto to rate them ... but not having a BCS-ready football program is a big minus in my book. Maybe you let them into the CIC first, and then see whether they get their football program up to Big Ten standards, or whether they become another Chicago.

EDIT: That being said, I imagine that Toronto would rate 5* in academics, and pretty low in everything else, especially perception. Does the Big Ten really need to add a non-football school when the league is already considered somewhat of a non-entity in the CFB world at large? I mean, Missouri and Pitt would be just average in terms of added prestige, and the conference could really use a Notre Dame or a Texas to regain some status ... Toronto would make the Big Ten the butt of jokes on ESPN for the next decade, but if you're willing to look at this thing from a long-term perspective, then maybe they should be in the discussion.

Good post, but having lived in NYC for 12 years, I can tell you that Rutgers only recently has attracted attention in NYC. NYC is Syracuse territory, especially in Basketball. Rutgers might get about as much attention there as Buffalo or Army. Interestingly, The only NYC area team that got weekly coverage in the 12 years I was there (97-09) was Hofstra, which just dropped football, and was FCS. If the Big 10 wants the NYC market, Syracuse is the only logical choice, as they have had success at times. Rutgers is a johnny come lately, and besides alumnai, they have a small amount of bandwagon fans, that will jump ship the moment they finish 5-7

You're probably right - I figured that I'd make a few mistakes in my ratings.

Even with a better television audience, Syracuse is still not a very attractive option, especially as a stand-alone candidate.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

Big Ten looking to add 12th team - AltoonaMirror.com | News, Sports, Jobs, Community Information - The Altoona Mirror

For some reason, this guy is really pimping cincy:2004:for membership.

I just sent him a very cordial e-mail explaining, official policy or not, why AAU membership is a defining criteria and that the athletic departments will have input, while the faculties will have a veto, and the voting will be done by the Presidents. Offered to bet him dinner at any restaurant in Chicago (ORD is not going to Altoona!) if the chosen school is any non-AAU member not named Notre Dame.

 

[CHU]

Evidently, Andre Ware (on CF Live) would like the Big Ten to act now and not wait the 12-18 months to research the process.

In other words, don't even test drive that car, just buy it.

That house you want, forget about walking in and looking at it.

 

[jlb1705]

re: Texas.

I think I remember hearing that the Big 12 has unequal revenue sharing, meaning when Texas is on national TV they get a much bigger chunk of the money. I think the Big 10 is more equal. So Texas could stand to lose money when you take that and the added travel costs into account.

Has anyone heard the same about revenue sharing?

I would be very surprised if an equitable revenue-sharing arrangement in the Big Ten would not be more lucrative than their current arrangement in the Big Twelve. The Big Twelve does not have their own network and does not have a TV deal that guarantees every single game being available nationally. In fact, the Big Twelve's TV deal is quite crappy I believe compared to the other heavyweights.

Is travel really that big a concern? I mean, how many competitions are Texas teams traveling by bus to right now where they'd have to travel by plane? Is there a real difference between traveling to Ames & Boulder & Lawrence and traveling to Minneapolis & Bloomington & East Lansing? It seems to me those extra travel costs would be negligible compared to the other things being considered here - Mack Brown could probably find the extra jet fuel money under his couch cushions.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

I would be very surprised if an equitable revenue-sharing arrangement in the Big Ten would not be more lucrative than their current arrangement in the Big Twelve. The Big Twelve does not have their own network and does not have a TV deal that guarantees every single game being available nationally. In fact, the Big Twelve's TV deal is quite crappy I believe compared to the other heavyweights.

A great deal of the Big 12 territory truly is flyover country: sparsely populated with bad demographic projections. I'm not saying the Great Lakes states don't have some demographic problems amongst other issues, but they are a world removed from much of the Great Plains. If it weren't for the Texas and Colorado markets, there'd be very little tv money generated, and in any event, the Texas market will follow UT.

I agree that an equal share of Big Ten money is probably much greater than a lion's share of B12 money. Also, keep in mind that Texas is similar to Big Ten schools in that they have a relatively affluent, widespread alumni base with strong concentrations in most major urban areas in Chicago, the Northeast and West Coast. Linking Texas to the BTN would definitely be a win-win.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

Texas faculty is furious at Mack Brown's $2MM raise. Big Ten/CIC affiliation might be a nice kiss-and-make up gift for the trustees and President to send over.

texas faculty brown raise - Google News

 

[JXC]

This sounds just like you in the playoff thread.

Like I said...it could get better. But if they change things they will probably screw it up. So it may be best to just keep things the same. Big Ten expansion, playoffs, etc. They could all make it better, but the powers that be will probably screw it up, do it in a way that makes things worse. And that would suck.

 

[Gothmog8]

The idea that a conference that grants a quarter of the country's doctorates and would potentially have 4 of the top 7 winningest football programs of all time in football would have to "save face" over anything seems a bit absurd to me.

Oh I seriously doubted that they would change the name, but I was curious if they would, and the "save face" comment was me being cynical...