Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[ORD_Buckeye]

The apparent obsession with Notre Dame is both nauseating and quite annoying. After living in NE Indiana for the past seven years, I want nothing to do with those stuck up elitist "independent" pricks in South Bend. Their time has come and gone. Yeah, they'd be killer for the BTN, but does anyone really think the Domers (other than the faculty) will go for it? They may be rolling in cash, but that doesn't mean they care more about that than being special and clinging to independence.

Absolutely agree. While the B10 may be attempting to force their hand, I think it's a waste of time. If this is all some strategic end game to get the domers, they seriously misunderestimate the mind-numbing level of domer arrogance. First of all, they have their latest savior in town, and this time it really, really, really is a return to glory. Second, they are so [censored]ing arrogant that they truly think they can come to us at any time of their choosing, and we'd kick out a school to make room for them. Third, as long as the Big East continues to grab their ankles for the domers, there's really no economic rationale to put their (entire) athletic department in the Big Ten. Fourth, they've already made it clear that the wishes of their faculty come far behind what's best for the football program.

I've said it in this thread going back two years, the Big Ten will NOT publicly court ND. There's no way the conference schools will ever allow themselves to again be used so that the priests can turn around and hold a grandstanding press conference to reject the Big Ten. If it was me, I wouldn't even make a backdoor overture to them, which they would probably still try to publicize as their turning us down. They come to us and request membership, or we move ahead with our plans and freeze them out forever.

 

[buckiprof]

Absolutely agree. While the B10 may be attempting to force their hand, I think it's a waste of time. They seriously misunderestimate the mind-numbing level of domer arrogance. First of all, they have their latest savior in town, and this time it really, really, really is a return to glory. Second, they are so fucking arrogant that they truly think they can come to us at any time of their choosing, and we'd kick out a school to make room for them. Third, as long as the Big East continues to grab their ankles for the domers, there's really no economic rationale to put their (entire) athletic department in the Big Ten. Fourth, they've already made it clear that the wishes of their faculty come far behind what's best for the football program.

I've said it in this thread going back two years, the Big Ten will NOT publicly court ND. There's no way the conference schools will ever allow themselves to again be used so that the priests can turn around and hold a grandstanding press conference to reject the Big Ten. If it was me, I wouldn't even make a backdoor overture to them, which they would probably still try to publicize as their turning us down. They come to us and request membership, or we move ahead with our plans and freeze them out forever.

Good post.

I really feel it is time for the Big Ten to play serious hard ball, hard ball that the faculty at ND would maybe appreciate.

Specifically, members of the Big Ten should be prohibited from scheduling games with ND. Hit them in their arrogant snouts. Let them know, and I believe this with every fiber of my being, that they need the Big Ten much more than the Big Ten needs them.

There is a huge difference between want and need and maybe the time has come to illustrate this to ND.

 

[JBaney45]

I just don't see it from Texas's perspective

I mean sure they would open themselves up to some big match ups, but so would OSU if they joined the SEC, that doesn't necessarily mean they'd be interested in doing so.

I mean Texas still makes pretty good money in the Big 12 and they keep their rivalries intact.


The only way I could see it happening is if we had a big time purge of the Big 12 and got Oklahoma/Nebraska/Mizzou as well to expand into the "Super conference" that is rumored. Obviously it's pretty far fetched


But just to stay a moment in fantasy land just because it's fun to do, let's look at these potential divisions

East:

Ohio State
Michigan
Penn State
Notre Dame (oh come on they would/should be BEGGING us to join this party, if not we can still get Pitt and be in great shop)
Michigan State
Indiana
Purdue
Northwestern


West:

Texas
Oklahoma
Nebraska
Missouri
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Iowa
Illinois


Basically the SEC would be sitting on the outside drooling. The 2 best rivalries in college football in the same conference on top of all the other big time games. Obviously from a football perspective being that big we wouldn't get to see many match ups from the other side of the division, but at least we wouldn't see many rematches in the conference title game, think about the anticipation for those potential games, Ohio State-Texas, Michigan (some day maybe?)-Oklahoma, Notre Dame (again maybe someday)-Nebraska. That would be the only thing that would make a conference title game worth it from my perspective lol (because I generally find the concept to be pretty dumb)

Not to mention in other sports it would be fine for the most part and we'd get loads of big time games


Ok back to the real world

 

[LordJeffBuck]

I'd put the odds of Texas joining the Big Ten at about 10,000:1

Hmmm, same odds as Terrelle Pryor starting a game in 2008. I'd say it's a done deal....

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

Nebraska and Oklahoma don't bring anything but a football program, and neither makes it past the faculties when we would, in effect, be spurning Pitt, Syracuse and Rutgers for them. If we do go to 14, we'll definitely take one school that, hypothetically, brings us the NYC market. For 14, I'd see the following:

Syracuse or Rutgers
Texas
Missouri.

Then, the Pac 10 takes Colorado and maybe A&M.



No more Big 12.

 

[BuckeyePride]

Good post.

I really feel it is time for the Big Ten to play serious hard ball, hard ball that the faculty at ND would maybe appreciate.

Specifically, members of the Big Ten should be prohibited from scheduling games with ND. Hit them in their arrogant snouts. Let them know, and I believe this with every fiber of my being, that they need the Big Ten much more than the Big Ten needs them.

There is a huge difference between want and need and maybe the time has come to illustrate this to ND.

That would also take away their midwest exposure and force them to play with teams not in B10 country. I believe that can impact recruiting a bit.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

That would also take away their midwest exposure and force them to play with teams not in B10 country. I believe that can impact recruiting a bit.

Watch them turn to the MAC, and us tell the MAC that your conference chooses either 2 payday games in South Bend each year or 10-15 paydays at Big Ten stadiums. Your choice. You can't have both.

Not saying we would do this. I'd just love to see the domers persona non grata in their home region. You fucks keeps talking about how you're a "national program." Go out and prove it.

 

[buckiprof]

Watch them turn to the MAC, and us tell the MAC that your conference chooses either 2 payday games in South Bend each year or 10-15 paydays at Big Ten stadiums. Your choice. You can't have both.

Not saying we would do this. I'd just love to see the domers persona non grata in their home region. You fucks keeps talking about how you're a "national program." Go out and prove it.

And that continues the hard ball playing that maybe is necessary.

Again, while many may want ND in the Big Ten the Big Ten does not need ND. ND should be shown how much it needs the Big Ten.

 

[glenn]

some really good commentary here. i am very much enjoying it.

some here have said that travel cost is not going to be an issue for texas, and that is not entirely true. if it were, texas would never have teamed up with the big 12. the big 12 was a poor fit from the outset, and serious problems erupted long before the ink was dry. but the southwest conference was dead, and we had no choice but to go somewhere or go independent.

there was a lot of talk then about the possibility of joining you guys or the pac guys. the difficulties and costs of transportation drove texas to join with the other three texas schools and form a new conference with the old big 8. and hope for the best.

the discomfort level has never abated to any notable degree, but the events at the conclusion of last season sealed the situation in my best guess. can you imagine ohio state in a conference where nearly all the members are like insecure marriage partners? they berate you constantly but cling like drowning rats. then let's say you beat the stiffest competition -- let's say michigan but a historically crooked michigan -- in a tough game in which you pull away in the fourth quarter and win by 10. one more quarter like the fourth quarter and people would term it a blowout. later, after playing three top teams in a row and your squad is tired and beat up, you lose to another highly-ranked conference team by a whisker on what amounts to a hail mary play. ohio state regroups and finishes the season well, but after the voting you discover that several little conference brothers voted you fifth, and you are certain they didn't vote their conscience but teamed up to send the team you beat by ten to the title game. how long does ohio state stay in that conference?

in other words, it is no longer a matter of discomfort for texas. texas in the big 12 is dead. it just hasn't hit the floor yet.

so now what? the southeastern conference is an impossibility today for exactly the same reasons it was an impossibility 15 years ago. i don't think the independent route is realistic. neither the acc or the big east is attractive enough to overcome the distance issue. that pretty much leaves you guys and the pac 10, assuming both are interested. both would be a much better fit than the big 12, but, as i've said, i think the level of discomfort with the behavior of the pac-10 regarding usc's highly-publicized scandals -- or should i say the LACK of behavior! they haven't even said one word about it to my knowledge -- disqualifies that conference. i just don't think our guys can look past that.

sooo . . . that pretty much leaves you guys as the only reasonable option, in my opinion. i like a more wide open offensive philosophy than the big ten employs, but that's pretty much a non-issue in the grand scheme. in nearly every important regard the fit is ideal. in one of the conversations i linked, the initial writer commented that texas has not been a good conference partner, in that texas has never gone the extra mile to ensure the continued existence of a conference or behaved in a manner that could be generally termed as a sharing or caring behavior. but texas has never been in a conference where it didn't have to put its hand on its wallet when another member came into the room. i very much like the thought of our being in a mutually supportive environment, and i think if this comes to pass, you guys will find that mack and deloss and the powers of the program are pretty good citizens when they feel at ease.

that leaves the issue of distance, and i agree with what some of you who say that the additional income from big ten membership -- especially, as you've also noted, if enhanced bargaining position due to lots of new tv viewers and maybe now a championship game -- more than offsets the cost and time lost by traveling farther. you have noted that numerous other programs travel farther. one i haven't seen mentioned is florida state and boston college sharing the same division of the acc. regarding hawaii, don't look at it from their perspective. hawaii has to travel regardless. look at it from the perspective of the other conference members who had to vote to accept them.

one other possibility is the superconference that someone mentioned. i'm just another longtime observer, but i very seriously doubt that is going to happen. it would be a serious gut-wrench that i cannot imagine would garner enough serious support to happen. regarding oklahoma or nebraska membership: i hope you guys like the thought of unlimited qualifiers and the like. oklahoma and nebraska want to be able to take kids who the sec schools can't admit. limitations on nebraska doing that when the big 12 formed is one of the most rancorous issues right now. do you really like the thought of getting into that sort of situation?

also, what is this new york market you speak of? i am a long-term contractor, and i've lived extended periods numerous times on long island and a couple of places in connecticut. the people up there live and breathe big-league baseball and, to a lesser degree, college basketball. when you try to talk college football to them, they stare blankly and blink. maybe they would develop an interest in watching you guys pummel syracuse or rutgers, but i doubt it.

notre dame? do you really think they would lower themselves to anything like an ordinary human status? get real. that's not worth the breath you are wasting on it.

 

[JBaney45]

Nebraska and Oklahoma don't bring anything but a football program, and neither makes it past the faculties when we would, in effect, be spurning Pitt, Syracuse and Rutgers for them. If we do go to 14, we'll definitely take one school that, hypothetically, brings us the NYC market. For 14, I'd see the following:

Syracuse or Rutgers
Texas
Missouri.

Then, the Pac 10 takes Colorado and maybe A&M.


No more Big 12.

Yea i'm just saying, theres no chance that Texas would go without bringing at least 1 rival with them (Oklahoma or A&M) with them if not a bigger chunk of schools they already identify with. It just doesn't seem realistic, the only reason for Texas to enter the talks is to use it as a bargaining chip to try to keep/push forward their hold on the Big 12 in terms of the revenue they receive (it doesn't get split up evenly there). Obviously I'm not saying that we would take those schools because something like that would never happen, I'm just saying what would have to happen

 

[glenn]

jbaney, you bring up an important issue: that of texas willingness or permission to go our own way.

the political climate in texas is very different from what it was when the swc went cold. the governor then was a baylor grad and the attorney general was a tech grad with baylor ties, i believe it was. the attorney general, particularly, was super powerful. also, the state legislature was dominated at that moment by west texans. those folks got together to force things in a way that would not happen today. i've seen it said that the politicos might balk at our leaving unless the other big 12 texas schools have secured a place to go, but i think the days of making us drag along some nursers is past. for one thing, i don't think the baylor people are convinced that big 12 membership did them a favor. things have gone notably better for tcu which got no favors, for instance.

texas membership in the big ten wouldn't necessarily end our rivalry with a&m, but it would be a non-con game. the annual game with ou might go away. that happened when arkansas bolted for the sec. assuming strong new rivalries in the big ten would rise up, i don't think it would hurt us to not schedule ou. my personal dislike for that is that mack has not yet evened the score with stoops. but i could live with that. especially if we got to watch ou struggle for recruits like arkansas did. i'd buy popcorn for us all to watch that.

 

[Buckeye86]

Texas in the Big Ten would be so sweet for so many reasons (not the least of which is they are the closest thing to Ohio State in college football,which is awesome)

I never really thought it was a realistic possibility, but glenn, you are getting my hopes up

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

regarding oklahoma or nebraska membership: i hope you guys like the thought of unlimited qualifiers and the like. oklahoma and nebraska want to be able to take kids who the sec schools can't admit. limitations on nebraska doing that when the big 12 formed is one of the most rancorous issues right now. do you really like the thought of getting into that sort of situation?

+1,000!

Thank you. Neither school is worthy of Big Ten membership. Yes, Stoops has cleaned up Oklahoma to a degree, but that is a function of his own personality and values. The core program and boosters remain corrupt to the core. Hell, they named a [censored]ing building after Barry [censored]ing Switzer! This is a program that relegated The U to second worst, most corrupt and most thuggish program of its era. Do we really want them anywhere near the Big Ten? Nebraska's not much better--Lawrence Phillips, anyone? How about Christian Peter? Personally, I don't think Nebraska would ever subject their athletic program to Big Ten academic/admission requirements. They know it, and we know it. And, they know that we know that they know it. They are a non-starter.

 

[glenn]

86, i'm not privy to any insider skinny, but i really think it is the thing to do, and i'm betting heavily on it.

as far as texas using all this to bargain a better deal with the big 12? don't make me laugh. ohio state doesn't do things like that and neither does texas. how many of you remember mack flirting with other programs in order to get a raise back when some thought he wouldn't stay at texas? what did you say? yeah, me, too.

another thing about the pac-10. i'm working up some info showing relative distances from austin to the schools in the big ten and pac-10 and some info showing the assumed scholastic status of the various schools. i think between those two issues it shows -- thoroughly irrespective of the usc situation -- why the big ten is a better fit.

one thing does puzzle me. i know the big ten and pac-10 have a storied history, but it never had occurred to me that the big ten might intentionally soft pedal to give the pac-10 first shot. i hope that isn't the case.

 

[scarletmike]

one thing does puzzle me. i know the big ten and pac-10 have a storied history, but it never had occurred to me that the big ten might intentionally soft pedal to give the pac-10 first shot. i hope that isn't the case.

So do I, glenn. Although I have every confidence that the powers that be at Texas would make the right decision.