Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[kn1f3party]

I think they would only pursue Texas if ND, Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers, West Virginia, Cincy and UConn turned the Big 10 down. I know everyone here is putting the odds on Texas being the team, but I have seen nothing to indicate that the Big 10 is even remotely interested in pursuing Texas. The only source for this proposed deal is in the minds of buckeye planet posters. Therefore, if they are offering Texas, it means that Notre Dame is already out of the picture.

We haven't seen anything because Delany hasn't put anything out about who he may be recommending to the COP/C. Texas will be on that list, they have been on several media reports regarding Big Ten expansion so the idea is out there and they are listening. You have Texas forums talking about it and various other college blogs. It isn't some zany idea we derived on our own--although I wish we had because I'd like to take credit for the genius of it.

There are many credible arguments why Texas would not be the best choice, the question is, will people who have a hard on for Texas joining the Big 10 even listen to them? The best argument is that The Big 10 has NEVER indicated any desire to take Texas. Texas has absolutely no traditional rivalries in the Big 10. Texas will have to incur huge expenses in travelling to any away games in every sport. Texas is different culturally form the Big 10 country. Texas will have to give up its traditional rivalries, or at least, decrease their importance. And Texas will start to get a recruiting foothold in Ohio.

Costs aren't an issue for the richest athletic department in the sport. Besides, they get an opportunity to further nationalize their brand and guaranteed revenue that exceeds double what they make from current contracts. If money is an issue, it is an issue reinforcing joining the Big Ten.

Conference Games suck, especially when the two participants are not traditional powers, and the ratings aren't there. They weaken the importance of traditional rivalry week games. More chance that crucial players could get injured. In some seasons, the undefeated team #1 or #2 loses the conference campionship and goes from a BCS bearth to the Poulan Weed Eater Independence Bowl, thereby actually costing the conference more money in lost BCS revenue. The Big 10 usually gets 2 teams in the BCS, why screw with this?

That is opinion. Based on television revenue it appears that more money is to be made from conference championship games. I would also contest that conference championship games cheapen rivalries. That would eliminate your argument for Texas needing to desperately cling on to important rivalries since they have a conference championship game. Plus, the last time I checked Alabama / Auburn and Texas / Oklahoma fans hate one another as much as they always have.

 

[Piney]

There are many credible arguments why Texas would not be the best choice, the question is, will people who have a hard on for Texas joining the Big 10 even listen to them? The best argument is that The Big 10 has NEVER indicated any desire to take Texas. Texas has absolutely no traditional rivalries in the Big 10. Texas will have to incur huge expenses in travelling to any away games in every sport. Texas is different culturally form the Big 10 country. Texas will have to give up its traditional rivalries, or at least, decrease their importance. And Texas will start to get a recruiting foothold in Ohio.

That part is untrue. After Penn St joined the conference and right before the Big 12 was forming Texas DID inquire about joining the Big 10. And the Big 10 was VERY interested. The problem was the self imposed 5 years after PSU joined they they would not expand. Texas couldn't wait and the Big 12 formed. Plus back then I would think the Big10 had a bigger crush on Notre Dame so they were willing to wait. But as you can tell from the tone of alot of posters here, Notre Dame might have burned that bridge (being the #1 and only choice for expansion and open that window to Texas)

 

[Woody1968]

That part is untrue. After Penn St joined the conference and right before the Big 12 was forming Texas DID inquire about joining the Big 10. And the Big 10 was VERY interested. The problem was the self imposed 5 years after PSU joined they they would not expand. Texas couldn't wait and the Big 12 formed. Plus back then I would think the Big10 had a bigger crush on Notre Dame so they were willing to wait. But as you can tell from the tone of alot of posters here, Notre Dame might have burned that bridge (being the #1 and only choice for expansion and open that window to Texas)

If the Big 10 REALLY had wanted Texas in 1995, they would have found a way around that 5 year moratorium.

 

[Woody1968]

We haven't seen anything because Delany hasn't put anything out about who he may be recommending to the COP/C. Texas will be on that list, they have been on several media reports regarding Big Ten expansion so the idea is out there and they are listening. You have Texas forums talking about it and various other college blogs. It isn't some zany idea we derived on our own--although I wish we had because I'd like to take credit for the genius of it.

So, in other words, it is still an internet rumor, even if it is not limited to BP.

Costs aren't an issue for the richest athletic department in the sport. Besides, they get an opportunity to further nationalize their brand and guaranteed revenue that exceeds double what they make from current contracts. If money is an issue, it is an issue reinforcing joining the Big Ten.

I hear you, but I can see Texas complaining about the costs. I can see the incentive from an academic standpoint, as I said. But I think the athletic incentives for Texas to join the Big 10 are being greatly inflated.

That is opinion. Based on television revenue it appears that more money is to be made from conference championship games. I would also contest that conference championship games cheapen rivalries. That would eliminate your argument for Texas needing to desperately cling on to important rivalries since they have a conference championship game. Plus, the last time I checked Alabama / Auburn and Texas / Oklahoma fans hate one another as much as they always have.

How many times has the Big 10 had 2 teams in BCS games? How many times has the Big 12, SEC and ACC had 2 teams in the BCS? How much money does the conference get from a championship game compared to a BCS game? I don't care about the Auburn/Alabama or the Texas/Oklahoma rivalries. I care about Ohio State vs Michigan. Those other games are fun to watch, but they don't really seem to hold the same value to me.

 

[Woody1968]

A word on "culture" because I don't agree with 1968's opinion....

I'm going to limit my remarks more to the football side of things, because that's the only exposure I have with Austin... but..

Texas fans strike me as very Big Ten like. More specifically, Texas fans strike me as Ohio State like. They live and die with their team, like we do. They support it hell or high water, they invest in football, they are smart fans, they are good fans (some might say even better fans than our own) and they know how to have a good time at a game - and that's the thing, maybe... at the end of the day, no matter how seriously we all take football.. they "get" it.. that it's just a game... no "real" bad blood between them and people they respect... and they seem willing to give you respect until you do something to lose it.

I don't know... I was really impressed with my interactions with Texas fans... good time ribbing, but always with a eye on reality.

You never met my former brother in law, or my former co-workers...

 

[kn1f3party]

So, in other words, it is still an internet rumor, even if it is not limited to BP.

I would consider any information regarding the Big Ten expansion an internet rumor at this point--even Notre Dame joining, which particularly seems unlikely since they have made official statements that they aren't interested.

How many times has the Big 10 had 2 teams in BCS games? How many times has the Big 12, SEC and ACC had 2 teams in the BCS? How much money does the conference get from a championship game compared to a BCS game? I don't care about the Auburn/Alabama or the Texas/Oklahoma rivalries. I care about Ohio State vs Michigan. Those other games are fun to watch, but they don't really seem to hold the same value to me.

The ACC earns $40M per year for their conference championship. The payout is $17.5M to the conference for each team in a BCS bowl. Having two teams isn't a guarantee or even likely every year. We have 4 more BCS appearances than the SEC but they have probably made more money between BCS appearances and conference championship games (I can't find the numbers on this). It stands that it financially makes sense though.

Having two teams in the BCS hasn't done much for our reputation anyway... I would hope those rivalries don't hold the same value, they don't for me either but their fans will tell you the same thing about ours.

 

[Buckeye Maniac]

I would hope those rivalries don't hold the same value, they don't for me either but their fans will tell you the same thing about ours.

Yes, but they're wrong.

 

[Piney]

If the Big 10 REALLY had wanted Texas in 1995, they would have found a way around that 5 year moratorium.

That part is true, I think if it was Notre Dame instead of Texas at that time they would have found a way around it. But times have changes, Notre Dame had there chance and declined and even now say they don't want to join a conference. And that might have put a bad taste in the mouth of the Big 10.

So besides Notre Dame there really isn't a "Penn St" type addition out there besides Texas.

Which is why I could see Texas being brought up. It adds a marque team plus a huge TV market which wasn't really that bigger deal now due to BTN. So while there was interest before, while it might not have been a huge interest, could be a bigger interest now versus back then.

And like I said before, I think a week or two after the national championship game there will probably be more said about Texas and the Big 10. It is still early in the game, I think this heats up big time over the summer (expansion candidates in general)

How many times has the Big 10 had 2 teams in BCS games? How many times has the Big 12, SEC and ACC had 2 teams in the BCS? How much money does the conference get from a championship game compared to a BCS game? I don't care about the Auburn/Alabama or the Texas/Oklahoma rivalries. I care about Ohio State vs Michigan. Those other games are fun to watch, but they don't really seem to hold the same value to me.

A 2nd team in the BCS only adds $4.5-$5 million as conferences that get a 2nd team in the BCS gets a discounted share of the money. So if the Big 10 title game can bring in $15-$20 million like the SEC title game then it would be worth it, as long as the 12th team can add another $5-$10 million in extra TV revenue.

 

[DaveyBoy]

I really think Kansas may be the next logical choice after Texas. Kansas brings one of the top 3 BB programs in CBB and a decent FB program. Kansas is a national brand in BB....moreso than Michigan State. KU also brings good minor sports, a good academic reputation (slightly better than Missouri and Nebraska).

Perhaps KU can't bolt without taking K-State. If that's the case, then forget them and go with another target.

my first choice would be: Texas, Notre Dame, Kansas

2nd: Texas, Kansas, Missouri

3rd: Texas, Texas A&M, Missouri

 

[Steve19]

A word on "culture" because I don't agree with 1968's opinion....

I'm going to limit my remarks more to the football side of things, because that's the only exposure I have with Austin... but..

Texas fans strike me as very Big Ten like. More specifically, Texas fans strike me as Ohio State like. They live and die with their team, like we do. They support it hell or high water, they invest in football, they are smart fans, they are good fans (some might say even better fans than our own) and they know how to have a good time at a game - and that's the thing, maybe... at the end of the day, no matter how seriously we all take football.. they "get" it.. that it's just a game... no "real" bad blood between them and people they respect... and they seem willing to give you respect until you do something to lose it.

I don't know... I was really impressed with my interactions with Texas fans... good time ribbing, but always with a eye on reality.

Just to support what you said, when I lived in Texas I found their fans to be just like Ohio State fans. Not once, not once, did anyone say anything bad about Ohio State, when I identified myself as a Buckeye alum. Many people did say something to the effect of, "Oh, Woody Hayes. So, you do understand how we feel about our football."

Look how they conducted themselves here. First class.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

Cornell

Well, my first choice was always getting U of C back up to speed. They have a standing invitation to rejoin if they ever have D1 sports again. Hell, they could play at Chicago's Olympic Stadium in Wash.....uhhh never mind.

 

[Woody1968]

Well, my first choice was always getting U of C back up to speed. They have a standing invitation to rejoin if they ever have D1 sports again. Hell, they could play at Chicago's Olympic Stadium in Wash.....uhhh never mind.

Cornell has a pretty good Hockey team...

 

[Jagdaddy]

Cornell has a pretty good Hockey team...

And pretty good hoops and lacrosse teams! And usually a pretty good wrestling team . . . although perhaps not by the ridiculously high standards of the Big Ten.

Gotta pimp one of my other alma maters

 

[IronBuckI]

A word on "culture" because I don't agree with 1968's opinion....

I'm going to limit my remarks more to the football side of things, because that's the only exposure I have with Austin... but..

Texas fans strike me as very Big Ten like. More specifically, Texas fans strike me as Ohio State like. They live and die with their team, like we do. They support it hell or high water, they invest in football, they are smart fans, they are good fans (some might say even better fans than our own) and they know how to have a good time at a game - and that's the thing, maybe... at the end of the day, no matter how seriously we all take football.. they "get" it.. that it's just a game... no "real" bad blood between them and people they respect... and they seem willing to give you respect until you do something to lose it.

I don't know... I was really impressed with my interactions with Texas fans... good time ribbing, but always with a eye on reality.

I didn't find 1968's opinion, but I thought that the "culture" question was directed at A&M.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

I didn't find 1968's opinion, but I thought that the "culture" question was directed at A&M.

I think the word culture was used regarding both.