Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[FCollinsBuckeye]

we can only hope that it turns out remotely close to what you outlined, because I would be on board 100% with a conference like that

Ditto.

I hope Jim Delany is following this thread.

:p

 

[OSU_D/]

interesting that, by that criterion, none of the candidates would rank higher than fourth in the conference

Keep in mind that this is after winter sports where northern schools may have an advantage. The same thing happens every year when softball, baseball, track and field, golf, lacrosse, etc. are included in the rankings; the southern ACC, SEC, southern BXII and some Pac Ten schools move up.

So as far as schools on that list, I'd take a look at how far Texas, TAMU, Virginia and Maryland rise at the end of the year.

I know that money is the driver in all of this, but I would like to see an approach where it is based more on Director's cup capabilities and not just football. Oh well, I will just have to dream. But I wouldn't mind adding Texas, TAMU, ND, Nebraska and anyone else (wouldn't matter to me) and call it a league.

 

[jwinslow]

I think I'm going to package this together into a formal writeup to make it a bit more readable.

Keep in mind that this is after winter sports where northern schools may have an advantage. The same thing happens every year when softball, baseball, track and field, golf, lacrosse, etc. are included in the rankings; the southern ACC, SEC, southern BXII and some Pac Ten schools move up.

I know you weren't arguing for rutgers, but my beef with their popularity springboarded from this suggestion:

2008-09 final standings:
The Director's Cup Final Standings For 2008-2009 - SECTalk Forums

6. Texas
13. Texas A&M
21. ND

Top-10 = UM, OSU, Texas
Top-25 = Minn, PSU, ILL, Notre Dame, Texas A&M
Top-40 = MSU, Nebraska, Missouri, Purdue
Top-50 = Wisc, NW, Iowa

55. Indiana
63. Syracuse
92 Rutgers
93 Pittsburgh

Pac-10: 1, 4, 7, 11, 12, 16, 22, 24, 70, NR (wsu not in top-100)

Big-Ten: 5, 10, 14, 19, 20, 27, 38*, 41, 44, 45, 55

New conf: 5, 6, 10, 13, 14, 19, 20, 21, 27, 31, 36, 38, 41, 44, 45, 55, 63**

* = Missouri. Alternate? #31 Nebraska
** = Syracuse. Alternate? #93 Pitt :(

 

[mross34]

interesting that, by that criterion, none of the candidates would rank higher than fourth in the conference

There are only two schools outside of the Big 10 that wouldn't have that problem.

 

[BrutusBobcat]

A scenario I've been wondering about is, if Texas says no, does the Big Ten take A&M instead? Do they make for a better candidate than Missouri or one of the Big East schools? Yes, it's not at all like getting UT, but it does expand the BTN into Texas. Plus, if A&M were to accept a Big Ten invite, does that change Texas' interests and motivations to join? Going with an "A&M first" strategy might pay dividends if UT has cold feet.

 

[jwinslow]

A&M will want to stick with Texas, especially since they will be joining the P10 or SEC if a deal with the 'conference of northern aggression' doesn't happen.

 

[MissouriFan]

Hey Missouri... what's your take on your boys leaving the Big 12 for the Big Ten? Do you think it's pretty much a done deal if there's more than one expansion team?

I don't know if it is a done deal but if the Big Ten expands by more than one team I would be surprised if Missouri isn't one of them.

Missouri is a safe pick for the Big Ten. We are solid in both major sports, we're the only football D1 school in a new state with two large media markets, we're an AAU member, did over $300 million in research last year, border two current Big Ten states with Illinois and Iowa, already have a rivalry with Illinois, and would help balance any expansion to the east by also adding a team in the midwest.

If the Big Ten comes calling, what would you say the odds of Mizzou switching conferences?

If I had to guess I would say 100%. It would hurt a little losing some of those long rivalries, Missouri was a founding member of the Big Eight back when it was the Big 6. The positives however in joining the Big Ten both academically and athletically far outweigh the loss of those games.


If I had my choice of five schools to join the Big Ten this is what I would like to see. Listed alphabetically Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Notre Dame, and Syracuse.

Kansas - Adds another state, is an AAU member, and an adds another elite hoops program with a national following.

Missouri - Adds another state, two large media markets, is an AAU member, and is good in both revenue sports.

Nebraska - Adds another state, is an AAU member, and an adds another elite football program with a national following.

Notre Dame - Adds another elite football program with a national following.

Syracuse - Adds the state of New York including NYC to the conference footprint, is an AAU member, and has a very good hoops program.

Split into 4 divisions

Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska
Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, and Wisconsin
Indiana, Michigan state, Notre Dame, and Purdue
Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, and Syracuse

This would also add some more long lasting rivalries to the conference. Existing rivalry games or at least games with a long history would be easy for the BTN to advertise and create additional interest.
- Missouri has played Nebraska 103 times and Kansas 118 times in football.
- Nebraska and Kansas have met 116 times
- Notre Dame has played Michigan State 73 times and Purdue 81 times.
- Syracuse has played Penn State 70 times.

 

[sflbuck]

Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but I do not believe current NCAA rules allow for football divisional playoffs. It hard to see university presidents approving an extra game or SEC or Big 12 presidents allow changes to the rules that will aid the Big 10.

 

[TheIronColonel]

Notre Dame - Adds another elite football program with a national following.

You must be thinking of a different Notre Dame than I am. Notre Dame would be like adding another Wisconsin or Iowa - good 3 times per decade, but never great.

 

[Piney]

They get a huge perk & boost by tapping into the BTN/ESPN revenue, especially with the uptick that Notre Dame will bring.

Oh, I know that. But the elitist prick domers would want even MORE revenue all because they are elitist pricks.

Why isn't he doing it now though? Since their glorious 06 season, he has finished the regular season 7-5, 7-5 & 8-4.

Could it happen? Sure, but I'm not sure it's probable. The b10 already has Rutgers like teams in Ill, Purd, MSU & some of the additions (A&M, Miz, Neb if they don't sustain success).

I'm not sure they can consistently beat MSU, UM, PUR, NW (w/ Fitz), or a number of the West division. UM is not going to be this weak by the time expansion happens. Harbaugh or someone will have them respectable.

There is a reason it is called 'potential' . But at worst they can be a Illinois/Purdue/MSU level team. At least it won't be at the Indiana level. But no one will know til about 5+ years after expansion has happened.

To get to 16, I moved IU-PUR to the west to preserve that rivalry and brought NW over.

Possible expansion:

east: OSU, UM, MSU, PSU, NW, ND, RUT, SYR
west: WIS, MIN, IOW, IU, PUR, ILL, MIZ, NEB


My ideal conf:
X - should be Cuse, but we'll leave it as Rutgers for this discussion.

The east is about the same, but the west 2 games become brutal.

1) TEX, NEB/MIZ, A&M, WIS, IOW, NW are tough games
2) ILL & MINN are on similar footing to rutgers

I really think they will not go the traditional two division route, but instead do a pod system of 4 teams.

Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but I do not believe current NCAA rules allow for football divisional playoffs. It hard to see university presidents approving an extra game or SEC or Big 12 presidents allow changes to the rules that will aid the Big 10.

Back to the 4 team pods. The pod system does not mean there will be a Big 10 mini playoff. The most likely way the pod system will work is by rotating the pods to create the 8 team division to feed into the championship game. The rotating pods allows you play every member on a more regular basis. You can do either 8 or 9 conference games. 3 games from your own pod + 4 games from your paired pod to form the division + 1/2 games from your non-division pods that can either be random or they could be tied together.

Example: (assuming the 5 teams most likely rumored)

Pod 1 - Penn State, Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers
Pod 2 - Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana
Pod 3 - Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Purdue
Pod 4 - Nebraska, Missouri, Illinois, Northwestern

How the schedule would work out is as follows:

Pod 1&2 grouped together. So Ohio State plays everyone in Pod 1 & 2 for a total of 7 games. In a 8 conference game schedule let us assume that 8th game is a 'protected' rival. So that 8th game every year could be Illinois. In a 9 conference game schedule there might be a 'protected' team in for each pod. So then the 9th game could be Wisconsin.

In year two Pod 2 & 3 are together and Ohio St plays everyone in their pod. Then their protected Illinois game and since they play pod 3 already, they then play they protected game from Pod 1, Penn State.

Then in Year three Pod 2 & 4 form a division.

Of course they might rotate every two years so one year is home and the other year is away. And there might be some other way to determine that 8th/9th conference game. But that is just at first thought.

If you saw the Tom Dienhart report about the potential pods that had Ohio State & Michigan in separate pods. I DOUBT that it will happen and would hate to see that happen, but that is how it could potentially happen and still have an annual OSU/UM game by having a protected rival game as the 8th game.

 

[jimotis4heisman]

I don't know if it is a done deal but if the Big Ten expands by more than one team I would be surprised if Missouri isn't one of them.

Missouri is a safe pick for the Big Ten. We are solid in both major sports, we're the only football D1 school in a new state with two large media markets, we're an AAU member, did over $300 million in research last year, border two current Big Ten states with Illinois and Iowa, already have a rivalry with Illinois, and would help balance any expansion to the east by also adding a team in the midwest.




If I had to guess I would say 100%. It would hurt a little losing some of those long rivalries, Missouri was a founding member of the Big Eight back when it was the Big 6. The positives however in joining the Big Ten both academically and athletically far outweigh the loss of those games.


If I had my choice of five schools to join the Big Ten this is what I would like to see. Listed alphabetically Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Notre Dame, and Syracuse.

Kansas - Adds another state, is an AAU member, and an adds another elite hoops program with a national following.

Missouri - Adds another state, two large media markets, is an AAU member, and is good in both revenue sports.

Nebraska - Adds another state, is an AAU member, and an adds another elite football program with a national following.

Notre Dame - Adds another elite football program with a national following.

Syracuse - Adds the state of New York including NYC to the conference footprint, is an AAU member, and has a very good hoops program.

Split into 4 divisions

Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska
Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern, and Wisconsin
Indiana, Michigan state, Notre Dame, and Purdue
Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, and Syracuse

This would also add some more long lasting rivalries to the conference. Existing rivalry games or at least games with a long history would be easy for the BTN to advertise and create additional interest.
- Missouri has played Nebraska 103 times and Kansas 118 times in football.
- Nebraska and Kansas have met 116 times
- Notre Dame has played Michigan State 73 times and Purdue 81 times.
- Syracuse has played Penn State 70 times.

welcome to bp. nice post. however two issues:
1-you cant have um, psu and osu in the same division. the three best football schools in one division.

on another crazy thought/idea, are division necessary? cant you use some sort of rotating schedule, say 7 of those games, plus allow each team to continue to have two "rivals" like the conference has now? create a couple of tie breakers, let those two play for the ccg?

for basketball this would mean 15 games, which we recently expanded to 18 conf games. you could do some sort of two week tournament or expand your 15 games to 18, getting three home and homes a year. or some combination of five/six home and homes drawn and then the rest one way visits, etc

2-what are your thougths on no touch icing?

 

[jwinslow]

1-you cant have um, psu and osu in the same division. the three best football schools in one division.

You can't have OSU & UM in different divisions, and I'd argue that ruining the OSU-PSU rivalry would be a mistake as well.

on another crazy thought/idea, are division necessary? cant you use some sort of rotating schedule, say 7 of those games, plus allow each team to continue to have two "rivals" like the conference has now? create a couple of tie breakers, let those two play for the ccg?

What tie breakers would those be? BCS rankings?

 

[jlb1705]

I'm frequently seeing scenarios that are assuming the Big Ten will add a ninth regular season conference game to the schedule. What makes people assume that?

If I recall, one of the reasons that a ninth conference game wasn't added to the schedule when the 12-game regular season went into effect was that it would take away from the gate. On any give week, a non-conference game means that most if not all schools are playing a home game and collecting at the gate. If those are converted to an extra conference game, half the conference is automatically on the road and therefore not collecting at the gate at their home stadium.

 

[jimotis4heisman]

You can't have OSU & UM in different divisions, and I'd argue that ruining the OSU-PSU rivalry would be a mistake as well.What tie breakers would those be? BCS rankings?

id go with head to head first.
sure you can toss in bcs or overall record?
then on to the bs ones...

i dont necessarily think that moving teams destroys rivalries, but htat is my view. as long as they still play. if you stay in divison you can create some sort of one cross divisional rivalry, or something. i think you hit on a point, it is important to recognize psu biggest rival is ohio state...

 

[jimotis4heisman]

I'm frequently seeing scenarios that are assuming the Big Ten will add a ninth regular season conference game to the schedule. What makes people assume that?

If I recall, one of the reasons that a ninth conference game wasn't added to the schedule when the 12-game regular season went into effect was that it would take away from the gate. On any give week, a non-conference game means that most if not all schools are playing a home game and collecting at the gate. If those are converted to an extra conference game, half the conference is automatically on the road and therefore not collecting at the gate at their home stadium.

true, however the same logic was not applied to expanding basketball from 16 to 18 games. and there it hurts you more, id say since the move it has cost the conference ncaa tournament bids every year. assuming teams would schedule games they are more likely to win, vs the new expanded conf season in which the conference is guaranteed to go .500