Which Team(s) Will Join the Big Ten?

[LordJeffBuck]

i agree, jeff, but i would like to know what priority you place on each category. some are more important than others to you i am sure. also, some may be temporal issues (eg rivalries) and others (eg geography) would be difficult to improve, and i wonder if that might shade your weighting.

1a. Academics
1b. Football
1c. Television

Geography, rivalries, and compatibility are minor considerations that must be "sold" to the fanbase ... why did we offer Texas when Notre Dame is in our own backyard? ... why did we offer a private, Catholic school (Notre Dame) when we could have got a land grant flagship university (Missouri) ... why did we offer Missouri when Pitt has natural rivalries with the top two teams in the Big Ten (Ohio State and Penn State)? ... but if the candidate meets the academics, football, and televsion requirements, then the other factors won't matter at all, and the "perception value" of the selection will be high anyway.

EDIT: Texas A+M would be a perfect example of a school that would fit the three primary categories (solid football program, AAU membership, potentially large television market), but would probably not earn an invitation due to the minor factors - the Aggies seem completely incompatible with the Big Ten, and the geography argument becomes more pronounced because they are not located in a major city.

my bad on rutgers. i was ambiguous. i just meant when i add their scores here i only get 18-1/2.

Typo. I changed their score to 18-1/2.

 

[CentralMOBuck]

I'm from Missouri and would love nothing more than to see them join the Big 10. A lot of my friends trash the Buckeyes and I would love to see them kick Mizzou's ass ever year in football and I even go to the damn school. One problem you didn't mention about them is their rivalry with KU. Football would be easy to do(see past years with Illinois), but basketball is a different story.

 

[glenn]

very good response, jeff. thank you. and almost exactly what i would expect from a longhorn fan, were the roles reversed.

good point, too, about lesser considerations combining to make a larger impact. and your point about geography being a smaller concern when the target facility is near a major airport. improved connections and reduced travel costs (in the overall scheme of things) is what i had in mind when i was thinking of possible improvements to the geographic picture being slight and slow to come to pass.

one thing that puzzles me a little bit is the emphasis that i've picked up from several posters regarding rivalries. rivalries are a no joke deal with lots of passion and television dollars in the balance, but in our part of the country i think we just assume that rivalries are going to spring up. smu got strong for a while and we had a heck of a rivalry with them. then a&m when it was a$m for a while. i'm going to bet nearly no longhorns are going to give that a moment's thought. we walked away from 80 years, i think, of rivalry with arkansas and didn't bat an eye over it. we just want to know who's next. just thought i'd mention that.

 

[Piney]

one thing that puzzles me a little bit is the emphasis that i've picked up from several posters regarding rivalries. rivalries are a no joke deal with lots of passion and television dollars in the balance, but in our part of the country i think we just assume that rivalries are going to spring up. smu got strong for a while and we had a heck of a rivalry with them. then a&m when it was a for a while. i'm going to bet nearly no longhorns are going to give that a moment's thought. we walked away from 80 years, i think, of rivalry with arkansas and didn't bat an eye over it. we just want to know who's next. just thought i'd mention that.

I think the emphasis we put on rivalries come from the fact that we are from a culture that grew up with the biggest rivalry in college football. In addition the Big 10 is ripe with them throughout the conference with trophies and tradition going back 100 years.

Maybe Texas is a lil different since basically every team considers Texas a rivalry but Texas only considers them a rivalry when/if they can be considered equals on the field and no one else stays on equal footing with Texas for long. (correct me if I am wrong) Which to us seems foreign based on how entrenched the rivalries in the Big 10 are. So we then reflect those feelings onto Texas just assuming they are a big deal for you too.

 

[Basebuck]

I think the emphasis we put on rivalries come from the fact that we are from a culture that grew up with the biggest rivalry in college football. In addition the Big 10 is ripe with them throughout the conference with trophies and tradition going back 100 years.

Maybe Texas is a lil different since basically every team considers Texas a rivalry but Texas only considers them a rivalry when/if they can be considered equals on the field and no one else stays on equal footing with Texas for long. (correct me if I am wrong) Which to us seems foreign based on how entrenched the rivalries in the Big 10 are. So we then reflect those feelings onto Texas just assuming they are a big deal for you too.

Just from living in Central Texas for several years I get the feeling from Longhorn fans that every other school in the state is their little brother. They dont want to be their little brother but they are. It's kind of like a scum - MSU thing. If all is right and Texas is beating up on A&M all is well and no one considers it a rivalry. If little brother hops up and beats Texas it becomes an embarassment.

Even though the Red River Rivalry is treated as a big deal it really feels manufactured by ESPiN. It's not like it's a game that gets talked about all year or anything. Reminds me of like tOSU and Iowa. Big deal that week but in general, not so much.

 

[glenn]

you pretty much nailed it, base. except for the tex/ou rivalry. in recent years since the contest was named, yes, it is a manipulated event, but for many years it was one heck of a rivalry. both programs sagged badly in the nineties, and so did national interest and the sense of rivalry. for the fans it never went away, and i think the fans pretty much ignore the dr pepper/espin baloney wagon.

i can assure you that both teams recruit and train with that game in mind. also, much like a&m, you can usually forget the won/loss records when you tune in. i'm sure it is very much like that for the buckeye/wolverine series and others you participate in.

i just looked up the texas/arkansas record. 76 games since 1894. only a few incidental games since 1991, but the wikipedia entry for razorback football says some arkies still consider us to be their big rival. we were scheduled to play this year but arkansas begged out in order to pair with a&m to play the first college game in jerry's cry/stall palace.

76 games over almost a century and we never noticed they were gone. if the tx/ou series ends, it will be essentially similar, i would imagine.

 

[buckgeis]

Nice analysis Sir Jeff. One problem I do have is with your take on Nebraska. Traditionally, or so I have been led to believe, all of the surrounding states not in the Big 10 or Big 12 follow Nebraska football since their are no big time BCS schools in these states. So, you could add Wyoming, Montana, and the Dakotas to their football fan base. We're still not talking a huge number of people but these fans could force cable companies to add the BTN to their regular offerings rather than as a subscription.

 

[Laser110]

I am going to put my money on Rutgers. I live right by Rutgers and have seen this team develop over the past few years. They are heavily recruiting in NJ and in FL, both locations OSU recruits in. Malcolm Jenkins grew up in the shadow of Rutgers Stadium. Had they been an Big Ten team at the time, likely he would have been a Scarlet Knight instead of a Buckeye.

Speaking of the stadium, I think they have the most to gain. The recent expansions went waay over budget, so some that Big Ten money will look nice in helping repay that debt. This a team that has lately risen to big games and gone 3-0 in Bowl games. Will they run with the Big Ten Big Dogs, no. Will they run with the Indianas, Purdues, Northwesterns and Mich State's of the conference? I think they can and will.

Overall RU basketball is an ok program that could highly benefit from Big Ten exposure, better recruits from that exposure and an improved overall perception, Like the football team they have risen to the big games when they need too and the RAC is a great place to watch a game.

An expanded TV market is also a favorable incentive for the Big Ten.

Teams that make no sense to me- Missouri, Texas and Nebraska. Successful Big 12 Teams that have nothing to gain by joining the Big Ten. Texas geography wise makes no sense to me as their travel budget goes through the roof. Someone is going to tell they will come play in Minnesota in November - LOL NOT!

Team not likely - Notre Dame. Unless the NCAA forces independants to join a conference, it's likely not to happen. I truely don't want them. A team that continually lives on it's past accomplishments and not it's present ones. Not Big Ten like at all.

Scott

 

[smithlabs]

A team that continually lives on it's past accomplishments and not it's present ones. Not Big Ten like at all.

Scott

Michigan?

 

[sepia5]

I am going to put my money on Rutgers. I live right by Rutgers and have seen this team develop over the past few years. They are heavily recruiting in NJ and in FL, both locations OSU recruits in. Malcolm Jenkins grew up in the shadow of Rutgers Stadium. Had they been an Big Ten team at the time, likely he would have been a Scarlet Knight instead of a Buckeye.

Speaking of the stadium, I think they have the most to gain. The recent expansions went waay over budget, so some that Big Ten money will look nice in helping repay that debt. This a team that has lately risen to big games and gone 3-0 in Bowl games. Will they run with the Big Ten Big Dogs, no. Will they run with the Indianas, Purdues, Northwesterns and Mich State's of the conference? I think they can and will.

Overall RU basketball is an ok program that could highly benefit from Big Ten exposure, better recruits from that exposure and an improved overall perception, Like the football team they have risen to the big games when they need too and the RAC is a great place to watch a game.

An expanded TV market is also a favorable incentive for the Big Ten.

Teams that make no sense to me- Missouri, Texas and Nebraska. Successful Big 12 Teams that have nothing to gain by joining the Big Ten. Texas geography wise makes no sense to me as their travel budget goes through the roof. Someone is going to tell they will come play in Minnesota in November - LOL NOT!

Team not likely - Notre Dame. Unless the NCAA forces independants to join a conference, it's likely not to happen. I truely don't want them. A team that continually lives on it's past accomplishments and not it's present ones. Not Big Ten like at all.

Scott

You really need to spend some time reading through the Big Ten Expansion thread.

 

[Laser110]

Why? That is my opinion. I see what they are saying here at RU and I know what they need in terms of money. I know Texas and Nebraska are high on everyone's list, it just doens't make sense to me.

Scott

 

[Steve19]

Laser110, I think he means the discussion about what is good for the Big Ten. Sure, joining the Big Ten and getting into that cash flow is good for most teams, but what does the team bring to the Big Ten. You are just describing why it would be good for Rutgers and, by implication, readers might think you are suggesting that the Big Ten needs them. See?

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

...then there are the links to UT message boards where numerous Horn Fans cite chapter and verse on the myriad ways that the Horns would benefit from joining the Big Ten. Simply stating that they have nothing to gain as an opinion is fine, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. You are not, however, entitled to your own facts.

 

[Laser110]

Steve19, my misinterpretation possibly. For the Big Ten adding Rutgers means a larger share of a TV audience in the NY/NJ Market. I have read claims that people in this area don't care about college football. In some cases that is true, but over the past few yeasr Rutgers has taken on some good teams and come out ahead and the area does notice. It's hard to get excited when Navy or USF come to town, but imagine a schedule that included Ohio State, TSUN, Wisco, and PSU? Big Games would attract big crowds and news. I saw it when Miami was part of the Big East and the stadium would fill up to see the 'Canes.

Academically Rutgers is no slouch school and I think would fit in well with the Big Ten in terms of academics. Like OSU, Rutgers has alot of reserach going on daily which it finds important.

Rutgers "traditional" sports are well within the Big Ten. Football (the obvious one), basketball, gymnastics, soccer, and swimming are all major RU sports and I think they would fall in well in competition. On the other thead, some mentioned hockey. RU does have a club team, which I don't think would be able to keep up early with the rest of the Big Ten (if the CCHA should desolve) give it time though, being a Big Ten school would attract a higher caliber of player, and they could be competitive in 4 or 5 seasons.

Scott

 

[BB73]

Damn. 3 weeks ago, why did I not throw a fair amount of vCash on Missouri, Rutgers, Syracuse, Nebraska, and the 14 and 16-team betting lines?