Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[BuckeyeNation27]

How are colleges even going to be affiliated if it goes to a semi-pro model? I feel like the SEC wins the expansion battle, thus killing college football.

 

[ScriptOhio]

I just don't see the AAU thing remaining relevant to the B1G if this goes to a semi-pro model. I can see them extending membership to schools but excluding them from the Big Ten Academic Alliance to placate the academics. Or else a bunch of schools may have their football programs break off the conferences altogether and form a football only super league.

Re: if this goes to a semi-pro model.

I can't really see the colleges essentially hiring "mercenary" football players that aren't "real" students. Full time students, academically eligible, and taking classes that would actually lead toward a degree in something, etc. will always be a requirement. If there is enough interest (i.e. players not wanting to attend college or NFL teams wanting to give some marginal players more reps for further development, etc.) in a NFL minor league; the NFL should start and fund their own G League like the NBA does.

 

[Woody1968]

How are colleges even going to be affiliated if it goes to a semi-pro model? I feel like the SEC wins the expansion battle, thus killing college football.

I can see major schools untethering their football programs from the NCAA and forming some new model of affiliation. Whether that be a 4 way league consisting of the B1G, ACC, SEC and PAC with a playoff between the champions and perhaps runners up, or a new model entirely, i.e., super league, I don't know.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

Take the Cali schools, OU and UW, and make that the Pacific division.

You'd have to take one more school in order to have 3 divisions of 7 teams each:

East: Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan State, Michigan, Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana

Mid: Purdue, Illinois, Wisky, Minny, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern

West: USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Washington, ????

Who do you add? Colorado and/or Utah and/or Arizona, all of which are AAU universities.

Do you take all 9 PAC-AAU schools and try to add some others for a 24-team conference? Kansas? Missouri? Virginia? Notre Dame? Even Iowa State would be a lot more palatable if you could get the top PAC schools as part of the deal.

I can see major schools untethering their football programs from the NCAA and forming some new model of affiliation. Whether that be a 4 way league consisting of the B1G, ACC, SEC and PAC with a playoff between the champions and perhaps runners up, or a new model entirely, i.e., super league, I don't know.

I could also see a B1G-PAC merger/alliance where they tell ESPN to go to Hell and play for their own trophy, a true "national" champion (coast-to-coast), not just a Southeast regional champion.

 

[Woody1968]

Re: if this goes to a semi-pro model.

I can't really see the colleges essentially hiring "mercenary" football players that aren't "real" students. Full time students, academically eligible, and taking classes that would actually lead toward a degree in something, etc. will always be a requirement. If there is enough interest (i.e. players not wanting to attend college or NFL teams wanting to give some marginal players more reps for further development, etc.) in a NFL minor league; the NFL should start and fund their own G League like the NBA does.

I don't see that happening either, but the reality is that over the last month and a half, the NCAA has collapsed as a viable structure for big time college football. The writing is on the wall & all of the old considerations are out the window. Unfortunately.

 

[Woody1968]

I could also see a B1G-PAC merger/alliance where they tell ESPN to go to Hell and play for their own trophy, a true "national" champion (coast-to-coast), not just a Southeast champion.

I can see that too, and I'd probably prefer it to some of the other alternatives. But I can also see that after a few years of ABC/ESPN airing SEC and ACC games and a championship played between the winners of those two conferences, while Fox shows the B1G vs Pac League, eventually there will be a match up between SEC/ACC winner and B1G/Pac winner. The demand (and $$$) would just be too great.

 

[Abenaki]

I could also see a B1G-PAC merger/alliance where they tell ESPN to go to Hell and play for their own trophy, a true "national" champion (coast-to-coast), not just a Southeast regional champion.

Seems like a good way to end up as the football equivalent of the NIT.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

You'd have to take one more school in order to have 3 divisions of 7 teams each:

East: Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan State, Michigan, Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana

Mid: Purdue, Illinois, Wisky, Minny, Iowa, Nebraska, Northwestern

West: USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Washington, ????

Who do you add? Colorado and/or Utah and/or Arizona, all of which are AAU universities.

Do you take all 9 PAC-AAU schools and try to add some others for a 24-team conference? Kansas? Missouri? Virginia? Notre Dame? Even Iowa State would be a lot more palatable if you could get the top PAC schools as part of the deal.


I could also see a B1G-PAC merger/alliance where they tell ESPN to go to Hell and play for their own trophy, a true "national" champion (coast-to-coast), not just a Southeast regional champion.

I'd stick with 6 out West because it allows them to rotate an additional B10 original on to the schedule every year. If you wanted to go to 7, then I think Colorado is the money play.

 

[ScriptOhio]

I could also see a B1G-PAC merger/alliance where they tell ESPN to go to Hell and play for their own trophy, a true "national" champion (coast-to-coast), not just a Southeast regional champion.

Seems like a good way to end up as the football equivalent of the NIT.

The B1G/PAC winner vs the Southeast winner "seems like a good way to end up as the college football equivalent of the SuperBowl"....

I'd stick with 6 out West because it allows them to rotate an additional B10 original on to the schedule every year. If you wanted to go to 7, then I think Colorado is the money play.

I don't think that's very likely to happen. It would be very difficult to get the PAC-12 to arbitrarily jettison some of their teams; especially when the B1G stands pat.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

The B1G/PAC winner vs the Southeast winner "seems like a good way to end up as the college football equivalent of the SuperBowl"....



I don't think that's very likely to happen. It would be very difficult to get the PAC-12 to arbitrarily jettison some of their teams; especially when the B1G stands pat.

Who said it was a merger?

 

[AuTX Buckeye]

Hey @ORD_Buckeye
In the tejas political structure you forgot about lieutenant Dan (think Forest Gump when you read it)

 

[AuTX Buckeye]

Omg they are delusional

 

[ScriptOhio]

Who said it was a merger?

Didn't you read my entire post? The only mention of a "merger" was in LordJeffBuck's post that I referenced (and you also referenced it too):

I could also see a B1G-PAC merger/alliance where they tell ESPN to go to Hell and play for their own trophy, a true "national" champion (coast-to-coast), not just a Southeast regional champion.

 

[Mike80]

Omg they are delusional

Well yeah...they played aTm and Arkansas for decades....

 

[ScriptOhio]

Omg they are delusional

Alabama: The Longhorns first played the Crimson Tide in 1902, winning the game 10-0

Arkansas: Longhorns first played the Razorbacks in 1894, winning by a whopping 54-0.

Auburn: The Longhorns first played and beat Auburn 9-0 in 1910.

Florida: Their first matchup in 1924 ended in a 7-7 tie.

Georgia: The first game in this series was the 1949 Orange Bowl

Kentucky: Texas claiming a 7-6 victory in a home game in 1951.

LSU: Despite being shutout 14-0 in the first ever meeting against Louisiana Tech in 1896

Mississippi: Texas first played the University of Mississippi in 1912, winning 53-14.

Mississippi State: The Longhorns opened the series with a 54-7 victory in 1921.

Missouri: Texas opened the series with a 28-0 win in 1894.

South Carolina: It's all thanks to a 27-21 win in 1957 by South Carolina.

Tennessee: The Volunteers won the first meeting 20-14 in 1951

Texas A & M: the Longhorns and Aggies have played one another more than 100 times since their first meeting in 1894

Vanderbilt: The Commodores won the first matchup in the series in 1899

Just sayin': At least they aren't claiming relevancy by beating nobody teams over 100 years ago like scUM:

Yeah, man...if only we could've padded our win totals and NCs by fielding teams with pros and whooping up on Albion, Beloit, Ohio Northern, Case, Physicians & Surgeons, American Medical and Kalamazoo (all actual claimed wins, look it up, it's just the tip of the iceberg) back in the nineteen-aughts...

At least they aren't claiming wins from over 100 years ago against "nothing schools" like scUM...