Here’s the latest chatter from the world of conference realignment:
Multiple sources have told me that Notre Dame, Missouri and Nebraska are all poised to receive invites from the Big Ten. An announcement could come as early as Wednesday, with other projections looking toward before the end of this month. Of course, this scenario has been rumored on message boards over the last day, so whether this is a legitimate deal remains to be seen. With the Big Ten’s past experiences in attempting to invite Notre Dame, nothing can be guaranteed until Jim Delany and Father Jenkins make an announcement together. Note that I stated Father Jenkins, who has to make the ultimate call for the Domers, as opposed to Jack Swarbrick.
There are a few takeaways from this formulation being put out there. At the top, if Missouri gets an invite to the Big Ten, it will have Notre Dame to thank. Without Notre Dame, the Big Ten would not have an interest in breaking up the Big XII and pushing Texas to the Pac-10, so it would likely have only invited one school to the immediate west: Nebraska. Indeed, Teddy Greenstein from the Chicago Tribune put up some analysis focused specifically about the prospect of Nebraska going to the Big Ten and he’s not going to be just engaging in idle speculation at this point in the game. However, if Notre Dame is in the fold, then the Big Ten does not have as much of a need to go after Big East schools (even though it still might) with the heavy Irish fan base in places like the New York area. A lot of the demographic factors that might have tipped the edge toward a school like Syracuse over Missouri without Notre Dame included would now be switched around. At the same time, it allows the Big Ten to make one last massive power play. The most interesting comment that Jim Delany had in his press conference was that this could be a multi-phase expansion for the Big Ten. This sounds a whole lot like attempting to build a Super Death Star Conference. I’ll explain that in a moment.
The Pac-10 hired an interesting choice to analyze its expansion options: Creative Arts Agency, the high-powered Hollywood entertainment industry firm. Contrast this with the Big Ten, who has been using investment bankers to perform analysis. In a slightly off-topic note, CAA also represents LeBron James, which means that entire worlds of college sports and NBA basketball are probably going to determined by a line of cubicles in LA.
What is CAA all about? Package deals. The franchise that gets LeBron isn’t just going to be able to sign him based on the quality of the existing team in place right now. Otherwise, there are only 2 choices for him in that scenario: staying with Cleveland or heading to the Chicago Bulls. On paper, the Clippers might have the talent, but that’s ignoring the fact that every good or decent player in that team’s history has broken a leg, torn an ACL or lost the use of both knees within a month of joining. The Knicks and Nets shouldn’t even be in the discussion. Instead, LeBron wants “his team” (meaning all of his handlers that don’t add value to any franchise) taken care of.
So, it’s not a surprise that the Pac-10/CAA is approaching Texas, the equivalent of LeBron in the conference expansion sweepstakes, with the idea of selling the school a package. (Another sports columnist made that LeBron/Texas comparison but I can’t find the applicable article to give the appropriate credit. I’ll put up a link as soon as I can locate it again.) If this were about making the most money for Texas, then there are only 2 real choices for the school: the Big Ten and SEC. The proposed Pac-10 expansion is projected to only hopefully match the per school revenue that the Big Ten and SEC members already enjoy today. CAA understood that it couldn’t win the financial game for its client, so what it recommended the Pac-10 to sell Texas is “comfort”. It’s all about making it as easy as possible for Texas to make a move: politically expedient, easy travel companions and keeping all of its Big XII South rivalries on the conference slate. Who cares if the Pac-10 has rejected the notion of adding BYU for many years based on religious grounds and then all of the sudden has Baylor fever when Texas is now an option. (I have nothing against Baylor, but shame on the Pac-10 if it adds that school while turning its back on BYU for so long.) It’s like buying a Kia – you’re not going to break the bank, it’s certainly better than the used Ford Pinto of the Big XII that Texas is currently driving, and it won’t upset the neighbors in Waco and Lubbock. This can only mean one thing for the Pac-10: it’s inviting LeBron to become a member, moving its conference headquarters to Akron, and John Calipari will be installed as the new commissioner. Worldwide Wes will get it done.
Does that mean that Jim Delany and the Big Ten are just going to give up on Texas? Hell to naw! Anyone that thinks otherwise clearly doesn’t understand the long-term demographic, academic and financial ambitions of the conference. The double chess smack talk has only begun. IF the Big Ten gets a commitment from Notre Dame (and once again, that’s a massive IF), then the conference has a completely different sale strategy to make one final power play to Texas. The Big XII will effectively be destroyed with Nebraska and Missouri joining. That leaves the Big Ten at 14 schools with 2 natural spots remaining to get up to 16. Instead of selling a quick and easy Kia like the Pac-10, it’s telling Texas that it can have a Rolls Royce. Imagine Delany calling up UT president Bill Powers over the next few days:
“Bill, we’ve got 2 spots left reserved for you and the Aggies. With Notre Dame aboard, we’re going to be the most powerful entity in all of sports outside of the NFL with or without you. You can receive around $40 million per year in TV revenue just for showing up and we’re not even getting into the academic benefits of the CIC. Are you going to let some meth-on-the-breath legislators down the street from your campus determine your future and shackle you with a ‘Tech-Baylor-UTEP-UTSA-UTD-Northeast Texas Community College problem’ forever? Maybe you can tell them that the legislature is going to have to figure out a way to make up for the $20 million per year in athletic money that you’re leaving on the table if you don’t get to actually do what’s best for your school, you know, like any other president of a world-class university is empowered to do without thinking about appeasing some overzealous politicians that would rather save a couple of football games in Waco and Lubbock than create the best flagship school possible. Heh, your friends at Missouri and Nebraska are looking to make twice as much TV money as you because they don’t have a ‘Tech problem’. That would suck for you. Let me know. We’ll need to know by June 30th whether we’re going to invade New York and New Jersey instead. Delany out.”
The Big Ten has to be true to its brand – its selling point to Texas is to be the highest class academic and athletic conference top-to-bottom. It can’t and shouldn’t try to get into a fight with the Pac-10 on concessions on the low end. If Texas can’t fend off the legislators or the school actually would rather be part of a provincial Eastern appendage to the Pac-10 or keep the Big XII as opposed to joining the top national conference, then it is what it is. At that point, Jim Delany just has to say, WTF and make his move. Looks like the University of Pittgers!
(Follow Frank the Tank’s Slant on Twitter @frankthetank111)
(Image from Chess Variants)
FRANK THE TANK'S SLANT 
Is it Septmeber yet?
LikeLike
Eh, you’ve all been played. After the first domino falls you’ll see ND, TX, aTm, and TTech join the same conference:
The ACC is Keyser Soze.
LikeLike
This needs to be brought over here:
http://www.bringonthecats.com/2010/6/7/1506558/adventures-of-the-big-12-twelve
LikeLike
Playoffs..
thanks! one of the best ones so far.. at the 12 angry men thing just adds to the ironic humor.
LikeLike
I feel like I’ve seen this somewhere before.
LikeLike
Kinda like a john McCain presidential campaign meeting. But More amusing
LikeLike
I want to keep reading …
LikeLike
adding
LikeLike
adding
LikeLike
Here’s the latest Tuesday from Orangebloods.com on the possibility of college realignment. … stay tuned. … http://bit.ly/9RcMZG 5 minutes ago via TweetDeck
Perfect timing Frank because Chip Brown just released his newest piece.
“Each day gives Missouri and Nebraska fans more time to hope Notre Dame decides by June 15 to stand alone so they can say they finally stuck it to Texas.”
LikeLike
I wonder if DeLoss Dodds’ hand is getting tired making Chip Brown’s mouth move.
LikeLike
LOL
LikeLike
All right Frank, time to start a new thread. This one is over. This comment will not be topped.
LikeLike
Awesome!
WHy the BTN would stop at 12 is beyond me, even if Notre Dame demands it. As we discussed before the potential revenue in ‘feeding the beast’ (BTN) demands a larger expansion. If any school wants to come in with any idiotic special demends then screw them.
I saw the piece in the NYT about ND wanting to stay at 12 teams to make higher revenue shares for each of the 12 teams. The guy that wrote that piece is grasping at straws, more inventory, more revenue for everyone. The reasoning behind ND wanting to stay at 12 did not make sense.
The Big Ten has the model and the cash and if school X would like to join…. great, if you think you are getting some special treatment, well, F’ off.
Our game, our rules, our conference…. want to play?
LikeLike
What about the SEC?
LikeLike
What about it? You mean for Texas?
Take a look at academics…
LikeLike
Here’s an alternative version of what might be going on:
I’m starting to think the Big Ten is being snookered by Texas and Notre Dame.
It is now Tuesday, June 8th, three days before the Friday, June 11th deadline for Nebraska & Missouri. The fact that Nebraska, Missouri, and Rutgers have not been issued invites leads me to think that what Chip Brown at Orangebloods.com has reported is in fact the case. That the Big Ten is furiously trying to get a committment from Notre Dame in these days before the Big XII deadline. And more importantly, should that commitment happen then the Big Ten expansion will stop at twelve members.
I ask you to consider who is that non-Big Ten AD that Brown says is his source. I’d bet my next paycheck that it’s DeLoss Dodds. I’ve said before that both Texas & Notre Dame are hoping the Big Ten’s expansion plans fail. Now, however, I think both schools are being proactive in ensuring those plans fail.
It’s aleady been proven that there has been communication between the Big Ten and Texas. And a representative who was foolish enough to discuss that communication via email, might also have been foolish enough to discuss some of the conference’s goals and strategies with the Texas president. (Thanks Gordon Gee.)
That PAC-10 invite was very timely, don’t you think? Beebe had no leverage to issue an ultimatum prior to Larry Scott’s announcement. All of a sudden though, the Big XII’s ultimatum now has some teeth. But how in the hell does the PAC-10 get Stanford to go along with admitting Texas Tech (a Tier 3 school) to the conference when as recently as 1996 they rejected Texas because of academics. Or maybe the PAC-10 merger with the Big XII-South is a red herring devised to create leverage. Maybe this plan is a by-product of the recent PAC-10/Big XII tv network discussions. Should both conferences remain intact then that tv network can proceed as planned.
Which brings me to Notre Dame. It’s crystal clear to everyone that the Notre Dame community is vehemently opposed to joining the Big Ten. Yet Jack Swarbrick has stated that ND might have to join a conference if a “seismic change occurred in the college football landscape.” If the Big East dissolves as a result of the Big Ten creating a super-conference, most college football analysts would qualify this as such a “seismic change”. It has also been common knowledge that Big Ten expansion doesn’t occur without a signature school. Currently, that signature school is believed to be Nebraska.
So how does Jack Swarbrick prevent the Big Ten from raiding the Big East thereby forcing Notre Dame’s hand? The answer is that Notre Dame involves the Big Ten in complicated and lengthy discussions which prevents the Big Ten from issuing invitations to Nebraska, Missouri, & Rutgers before the Friday deadline. Should this strategy work, I believe Nebraska will comply with that loyalty oath thinking that the Big Ten is not sufficiently interested in them. At least not to the degree that the Cornhuskers would risk becoming orphaned from a conference.
Is this a pretty crazy conspiracy theory? Sure. But if you ask Husker fans they’ll tell you that this is totally within Texas’ modus operandi. Moreover, it’s one of the reasons Nebraska doesn’t want to be in a conference with them anymore.
Is Notre Dame capable of this kind of duplicity? I think they are given that the ND community believes the Big Ten is using underhanded tactics to force them to do something they have no interest in doing.
Would Nebraska renege on the oath once the Big Ten issues an invitation? Most Husker fans will tell you that Osborne is widely regarded as a man of honor and class. No I don’t think he would go back on his word. Plus, I think the pleas of Kansas, Kansas State, & Iowa State are having an effect on Osborne and the Huskers.
So Mr. Delaney, if an agreement is not reached with Notre Dame by close of business today — then tomorrow morning I’d contact John Marinatto and Dan Beebe and by noon tomorrow I’d publicly announce invitations to Nebraska, Missouri, and Rutgers.
Don’t let Texas and Notre Dame benefit from this elaborate con job.
LikeLike
Bravo. Well put.
LikeLike
I was operating under the assumption that the deadline was this Friday. Further investigation now leads me to believe it is next Tuesday, June 15th.
LikeLike
What’s funny/sad is that I called Chip Brown out as a bagman a while back, and the ‘Whorn contingent got all pouty about it.
It’s obvious to all but the ‘Whorn faithful that Chip Brown is nothing more than Deloss Dodd’s muppet. Whatever credibility Chip possessed he cashed in to suckle from Bevo a long time ago.
LikeLike
WE ARE PENN STATE
LikeLike
The chant isn’t WE ARE PENN STATE, the chant is WE OWN PENN STATE. GO HAWKS
LikeLike
You don’t even own your own jerseys, which you stole from the Sixburgh Stillers. How could you own us?
LikeLike
well, they did ask the rooneys first.
LikeLike
@PSU
7-1.
LikeLike
The chant is only partially “GO HAWKS”. The full chant is “GO HAWKS! RUN AWAY FROM THE WILDCATS!”.
LikeLike
THEY WILL EAT YOU
LikeLike
Kinda hard to “own” when the all-time series between the two schools is knotted at 11 wins apiece, but who’s counting?
LikeLike
It’s comments like these that make me think Iowa and Penn State ought to be a protected rivalry in some way after realignment, whether that means they’re same-division or cross-division rivals.
Granted, Iowa will most prefer to play Minnesota, Wisconisn, and Nebraska annually, and Penn State will want Ohio State and an eastern addition, if there is one.
But the animosity resulting from the PSU-Iowa series is intriguing. It certainly seems more interesting than PSU-MSU. The Iowa-PSU rivalry emerged naturally, the way all good rivalries do; PSU-MSU and the “Land Grant Trophy” was forced.
What do you think, Hawkeye & Nittany Lion fans?
LikeLike
Being a State & BigTen fan I’d have to agree. I think Iowa/PSU is better for the BigTen as a whole. Rivalry’s can’t be forced. They need to develop on the field.
FWIW, I’d be happy with a season ending game against Rutgers or better yet Pitt (luv me some Pitt) if either get an invite.
*** I also wanted to note that I find it shocking that certain fans will abandon support for their schools if they make a move they dislike. I just don’t understand that sentiment.
To me that’s the same mentality as telling your kids if they do something you disagree with that you’d disown them.
LikeLike
But does the Big Ten really need to invite Mizzou to put the screws to UT? Can’t inviting Nebraska accomplish the same goal — collapsing the BigXII and save a spot in the Big Ten for a better partner? (Is Kansas a better partner? I’m not sure of KU’s academics, but hoops is clearly better, and in my eyes Mizzou and KU are roughly the same in football.
I sense that inviting Pitt (or another Big East member — Rutgers, Syracuse) instead of Mizzou may be better as plucking Nebraska would force the end of the Big 12 and plucking a major member of the Big East would help force ND into the Big Ten fold more so than two Big 12 members.
LikeLike
losing Nebraska alone probably wouldn’t collapse the Big 12. it would really hurt but they could probably replace them. losing both Nebraska and Missouri costs them an elite football name and the St Louis market. thats not as replaceable.
LikeLike
Hank–Nebraska is the second-biggest college football property and ratings generator in the conference. While the Big XII could limp along, there would be no way they could replace Nebraska, and that would have long-term repercussions.
LikeLike
I suspect that the Big Ten has already made too many “unofficial” promises to Missouri behind the scenes to now stab them in the back in hopes of getting Kansas instead.
LikeLike
Besides poor demographics, the ticket scandal may have put the any hope to bed
LikeLike
I would hope the Big Ten wouldn’t let something like that stand in the way. The ticket scandal certainly is a big deal, but if the Big Ten was already considering KU as a strong candidate, that shouldn’t change.
Remember that this isn’t a change focused only on the short-term. The repercussions for KU will only be short-term (3 to 6 years at absolute worst). Big Ten expansion is meant for the next 50+ years.
LikeLike
The ticket “scandal” is misunderstood. Kansas (and probably a number of other schools) was the victim, not the beneficiary. It lost a lot of money from the whole thing, and it certainly did not gain any competitive advantages. It’s not as though KU is in danger of going on probation.
LikeLike
Kansas has also publicly aligned itself with KSU.
LikeLike
No it hasn’t. Kansas wants nothing to do with K-State, at least if it hurts its chances to be in the best possible conference.
There have been conflicting statements from the regents on that issue, and no one knows at this point how things would come out, but it’s unlikely that the board would prevent KU from going to a major conference if KSU were already doomed.
LikeLike
Frank— ND’s not coming to the BT….at least for now. The BT will go ahead and invite RU, Neb, and Missouri…..that will give political cover for the ND Pres and AD……then the ND family will have a hell of a debate…..
LikeLike
http://www.ndnation.com/blog/2009/12/no-means-no.html
LikeLike
You offer up something written 6 months ago?
LikeLike
Yes.
#1, it was just referenced by Brian Bennett today.
#2, I never really understood the Notre Dame desire for independence. I merely dismissed it as arrogance, part of what fuels my desire to see them lose every time they take the field. However, this explanation made some sense for me.
#3, I don’t think the people who agree with this blog are going to change their minds simply because Missouri is coming to the Big 10 or the Pac 10 might go to 16 teams.
So, yeah.
LikeLike
They’re thinking like fans, not University Presidents. 🙂
LikeLike
Dude, is it possible for you to post something other than XXXX won’t come to the Big Ten?
LikeLike
Astute observation. 🙂
LikeLike
Hell, I’d add Syracuse as well. Now, with Nebraska, Missouri, Rutgers, and Syracuse in the BT, ND would fold it’s tent before Delaney gives Texas a deal that it can’t refuse.
LikeLike
That would make for some TERRIBLE conference!
LikeLike
excellent
LikeLike
Frank,
You once again nailed it all! I drew some similar conclusions about the Pac 10’s “Texas, bring whoever you want to bring to the party” invite…That and the fact that Notre Dame now has the excuse that, “Look, we don’t KNOW what the future is going to hold and the Big 10 is better than an unknown alternative….”
Texas is probably sick and tired of dragging its little sibs to the drive in, and they are happy to make a point once the Pac 10 vote is in. When they reject Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Tech, and Baylor, well, the rest will be elementary.
Of course, this will take several months to get it all heading in the direction that I’m sure Texas wants it to head. But it’ll be worth the wait. Then, Mr. Powers will make the phone call.
“Hello, Jim? Let’s have that beer…”
LikeLike
Geography still matters.
If you are a Michigan or Michigan State fan, would you want Michigan and Michigan State to leave the Big Ten to join the ACC for twice as much money (assuming that were possible)? Or would you rather stay in your comfortable surroundings with Penn State, Ohio State, Wisconsin, etc.?
A move by Texas and A&M to the Big Ten (without Oklahoma) would be extremely unpopular in Texas (with the people buying tickets). That has to count for something to the people calling the shots. Not to mention the real problems associated with sending your ladies softball team to Minneapolis and Columbus.
Add to that the perception of the midwest/rust belt as a dying region with no great football recruiting and Texas will persuade itself that its long term best interests would be better served by associating with Arizona and California.
LikeLike
Agree with this…the TX ship has sailed…..ND may be in play after the BT adds 3 and TX jumps to the PAC 10–all down the road a bit.
LikeLike
A move by Texas and A&M to the Big Ten (without Oklahoma) would be extremely unpopular in Texas (with the people buying tickets).
Up until 15 years ago, OU was an OOC game for Texas, and OU and A&M didn’t play at all. I would imagine it wouldn’t be too difficult for the fans of the two Texas schools to reacquaint themselves to the way things were.
Splitting Texas and A&M is the politically harder, but still feasible, move.
LikeLike
@HH According to Dean Blevins (former OU QB, and news director at channel 9 in OKC, and big time OU insider) UT WANTS A&M, and OU to come along. They don’t want to lose the rivalries.
You are correct OU/UT was an OOC game, and OU/A&M didn’t play. However, Blevins pointed out how Arkansas lost it’s #1 rival in UT when it moved, and how Neb lost it’s in OU when the Big 12 formed. Blevin said having rivals was important to the fan base (who buy the tickets and make donations)
LikeLike
@Paul:
I was referring to the comment about fans in particular.
Would OU fans (or A&M fans, for that matter) really care all that much if circumstances dictated that OU and A&M never played each other anymore? I don’t get the sense that either school cares one way or the other.
LikeLike
While I’ve enjoyed games against Oklahoma, it’s always felt like a second hand rivalry, since they were UT’s rival long before we started playing them.
It wouldn’t be a big deal to me if we never played.
LikeLike
I would think Texas fans would rather have the Oklahoma game count as a conference game rather than having to beat both Ohio State and Oklahoma.
I was thinking more about UT than A&M, since UT would be driving the ship north.
LikeLike
In an ideal world, probably, but I think it’s far, far down the list of make-or-break items.
LikeLike
and sending your ladies softball team to Corvallis & Pullman is more enticing?
LikeLike
Let me get this straight. California is facing financial bankruptcy, a mexican invasion and the nightmarish echo of a Jerry Brown Governorship and yet the midwest is a dying region? I think you’re living back in the postcard California of the Beach Boys era. Bleak doesn’t begin to describe the road California is racing down- with no brakes.
I invite you to go spend a week in Los Angeles then come back and extoll upon California’s long term outlook.
LikeLike
Huh??
Los Angeles is in far better shape and is a far more desirable place than ANYWHERE in the midwest. The only city that comes remotely close is Chicago.
“Mexican Invasion”? “Nightmarish echo of Jerry Brown”?
LOL.
LikeLike
Totally true. The spelling family owns about 99.764% of cal’s wealth and the rest is distributed among the other 34.99 million people. There is greater OUT-migration from the state than coming IN. Beach boys analogy was perfect – CA’s been in decline as a whole since the 70s (the bradys wouldn’t recognize it today – they’d have moved to Denver or Atlanta 20 yrs ago)…
LikeLike
Habla espanol? The Big Ten will punk the PAC 10 and their Texan orphans. Mark my words. When Nebraska, Missouri, Rutgers, and Syracuse join the Big Ten, Notre Dame and Texas will grovel for a piece of the pie.
Now, please pass the cornbread and Kool-Aid.
LikeLike
Hawkeyes are always in the top 10!!!
LikeLike
You still have not convinced me that Missouri is essential to this process/plan.
I don’t think its a horrible addition or anything, but why does the inclusion of Missouri get Texas more excited than any other school? If Nebraska was replaceable, the Big 12 would move on. It isn’t.
Meanwhile, Missouri is just the extra-point to the Nebraska touchdown. I just don’t buy it as part of the Texas strategy.
LikeLike
I think Mizzou does bring something to the table in terms of the STL and KC markets, respectable athletic programs, and a solid (not sterling) academic rep. They really do fit the mold of a Big 10 school as well as Nebraska, without the national brand football team.
And, we know they wanna be here, which is important in some ways.
LikeLike
Missouri does make sense as part of a Texas strategy.
The goal would be to get ND/Missouri/Texas/A&M as a pod. That way the fourth member is a relatively close member that’s satisfactory for both.
Texas cares about regionality in terms of its division/pod and would want to play ND.
LikeLike
Zeek – I’m on board. Be a leader B10, just take Mizz and Neb. This kills BXII for good. Publicly invite UT/A&M making it clear no one else meets your academic standards. If they pass because of Tech, I don’t see how that looks bad for the B10.
LikeLike
Missouri has been mentioned for 10-15 years, not just as part of a TX strategy. They’ll add MO because it’s a large, state school in a populous state, with a solid athletic program and a natural rivalry with Illinois.
LikeLike
Yes, nowhere am I debating the value of Missouri.
Missouri is essential to the process though because it fits perfectly into a pod with Texas/A&M/ND. It is the best possible fit…
LikeLike
Zeek,
Enjoyed reading your posts, but I think its a stretch to say TX is influential to getting ND in the B10 so that ND can continue their “national” schedule.
Even if you buy into the idea that adding another member to the conference meets this need for ND, I don’t see TX as a big deal for ND.
They have no special history and aren’t terribly far apart geographically. You could just as easily make a better case for NE (which I’m not). At least NE-ND has some history as well as being in different timezones.
LikeLike
Sure. I’m just going off the NW Rivals rumor, which got a lot of credence after the reports that Delany was angry about that “leak”.
There’s a lot to argue for a ND/Texas rivalry including Latino population trends and other such stuff generally.
That’s the basis of all of the ND-Texas joint package rumors or reports.
Whether it’s all really what’s going on is questionable, but it is compelling in that Texas does have strong Latino demographics that ND may want to tap into with a rivalry with Texas. And it would be a cross-country rivalry of sorts in the central timezone.
Perhaps Nebraska does that, in that case the Big Ten will look east to Syracuse and Rutgers.
I’m not really foreclosing anything I suppose. I just tend to think that the NW Rivals rumor was among the more credible scenarios.
LikeLike
“[Missouri] a solid athletic program”.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/OU/article.aspx?subjectid=92&articleid=20100519_202_B1_ANYONE178350
LikeLike
Missouri makes sense if the goal is texas and texas A&M… give them one more school that is closer in travel.
LikeLike
My guess: If Frank’s sources are right, then the Big 10 has been talking with MU for quite some time. And since those talks have left MU in a somewhat vulnerable position with regard to the Big 12, the most ethical course is to bring them in. Otherwise, let’s face it, Missouri is a “complementary” school, not a main course. From a PSU perspective, this is a disappointing result since there is no eastern partner a la RU, Pitt or Maryland.
LikeLike
I don’t have any sources…but it seems to me that simply adding Nebraska and Notre Dame for now would accomplish PERFECTLY what Frank has laid out above.
It sufficiently destroys the Big 12…
Gives the Big 10 two ENORMOUS assets to its brand…
Rests the Big 10 at an awkward 13, which ensures that the expansion chaos will continue on…
Missouri COULD be an addition if Texas and A/M say NO…they’re certainly not a BAD choice…but if Texas and A/M say YES, I think the Big 10 would take their POWERHOUSE 4 (ND, NE, UT, aTm) and add Rutgers for the market.
LikeLike
The Big Ten will cast it’s eyes to the East. Only after acquiring Nebraska, and Missouri in the West. Joe Paterno all but insists upon it, and it makes sense.
Now, that 16th team becomes a Texas/ND grovelling contest. If they play coy at this point, then forget them and go after Maryland, or even Pitt.
LikeLike
Appeasing a 90 year old coach who probably doesn’t even know what teams he is playing from week to week does not strike me as sound strategery.
LikeLike
add(icted)
LikeLike
I’m not counting on that decision by Wednesday. Anyone else?
LikeLike
Since ESPN has reported a dozen different “X school has accepted an invitation to the Big Ten,” unless Delany says it, no.
LikeLike
The reporting on this topic has been atrocious; there are still reporters calling for the Big Ten to go after Tech or whatnot. The commentators on this blog have been ahead of the curve almost the entire time. We dismissed the Tech approach a full day or two before MSU’s prez came out and made that public, etc.
LikeLike
I’m sensing a season-ending cliffhanger that will have us on the edge of our seats until Conference Realignment Armageddon resumes its regular broadcast schedule this fall.
LikeLike
Well, I’ve always said that Texas and the Big Ten will be on the Big Ten’s terms.
But still the Longhorns make me worried. The Big Ten is a family, but Texas doesn’t seem to care about anyone but themselves.
LikeLike
It would be so awesome if Delany actually said to Texas verbatim. I laughed audibly at “Delany out”.
LikeLike
I guess the question posed above is why is Miss necessary for that strategy to work. I don’t understand why ND would want Mizzou. At this point, I think the B10 should just openly come out with an invitation to UT and A&M, and say the spots are yours if you want, but Tech is not getting in. Maybe you have to take Neb and Mizzou to really end the BXII to work that strategy. If Texas can’t come along, I don’t think it will reflect badly on B10, rather everyone will understand that UT had a Tech problem. In fact, B10 could spin it that we asked the two scools we wanted, we were up front with who would be acceptable, but the politicians didn’t allow it. I say make this an open public fight. Would be more interesting, no?
LikeLike
@SH – ND doesn’t care about Mizzou. However, it cares a whole lot about having the chance to be in the same conference as Texas. That moves the needle more than anything for the Irish.
LikeLike
Why is it necessary for Missouri to be in the Big Ten for Texas to join? I was under the impression that if Nebraska stays, Texas will remain in the Big 12, but if Nebraska leaves, Texas is going to pursue other opportunities.
You think it would take the Missouri/Nebraska combo to force Texas to leave? I guess it just seems strange to me that Missouri would be the linchpin to Texas’ plans.
LikeLike
Because the pod would be ND/Missouri/Texas/A&M
That’s the best pod the Big Ten can offer to Texas/A&m.
LikeLike
I think Missouri coming along has helped to persuade Nebraska to look elsewhere from the Big XII North.
I read a Nebraska board last year and almost everyone was dead set against the Big Ten. A lot has changed in the past few months and Missouri has been part of that.
LikeLike
@Zeek:
Why would we prefer Mizzou over Nebraska? We enjoy beating Nebraska more than we do Mizzou.
LikeLike
You could have Nebraska as the outside guaranteed rivalry game.
Nebraska/Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota makes sense as a pod objectively alongside Texas/A&M/Missouri/ND.
LikeLike
Zing!
LikeLike
Hopkins:
Good stuff. I don’t think NU would shy away from being in a pod with Texas.
But fans are excited about Wisconsin and Iowa.
LikeLike
@Paul,
Don’t judge Husker fans by the free Rivals boards. Those tend to be filled with traditionalists (e.g. philosophy, coaches, conference). Most of the fans I’ve talked to have been salivating over the Big Ten from the beginning.
As far as Missouri is concerned, they’re the least liked/respected of our conference opponents (CU close second). Their move to the Big Ten would not increase our interest in the least.
LikeLike
Zeek, you keep harping on this POD thing. Do you have a source?
The way I worked up my pods, ND can have UM, MSU, Purdue, and Texas as yearly foes…while the rest of the teams they play 2 of every 6 years.
What is their interest in yearly games with Texas A/M or Missouri? No tradition…it’s not THAT “national”…I just don’t the pod thing is all you have it cracked up to be.
LikeLike
Will,
Did 52-17 have anything to do with that?
LikeLike
@Ryan
Nope it has to do with a level of respect. It’s a spectrum with Oklahoma at the top and Missouri at the bottom.
The NUs and OUs of the world aren’t so petty to focus on a single year. It’s bigger than that, and that’s part of where the respect comes from.
It also comes from fans not being huge assholes, but ulimately that’s tied up with the respect issue too.
LikeLike
How about these pods:
TX/AM/MU/IL
NB/IA/MN/WI
ND/NW/PU/IN
OH/MI/MS/PS
Balanced geographically with one primary and one secondary football power in each pod, except for the last with two-three powers.
LikeLike
I believe Notre Dame loves them some Notre Dame. They would likewise love them some Big Ten should the opportunity present itself to bask in the glory of a Texas, Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan and Nebraska. As they continue to lose regularly to Big Ten teams the blow can be soften if they are in the same conference. The stakes are also higher for both winning and joining.
LikeLike
@SH–
The B10 will make it an open public fight when they add 3 and only have 2 spots left. That’s the whole problem with the PAC16 scenario. There are open spots for the Texas pols to fight over. If the B10 is at 14 members and 2 spots remain there isn’t anything to fight over. UT and A&M can argue to be allowed to do what’s best for them.
Phase I—-Nebraska & Mizzou
Phase II—ND
Phase III—UT/A&M or the Pittgers combo
Once the B10 adds 2 schools it’s off to the races time. The SEC ego is not going to sit by and watch another big conference “out-member” them so to speak. ND isn’t moving until it’s scorched earth time and the B12’s collapse by adding Neb. and Mizzou does just that.
To me the people who are in control or most confident in their ultimate destination have been the quietest the last 2 weeks.
LikeLike
The only LeBron/Big Ten related article I can find is
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/402592-how-lebron-james-could-impact-big-ten-expansion
Have you been slumming at Bleacher Report again?
LikeLike
I agree. Bleacher Report is such a joke. That are the kings of wish projection.
LikeLike
Add
LikeLike
This is brilliant!
LikeLike
If the BT adds NU, ND, UT, TAMU & Kirkwood Community College; the BT would be the premier academic/athletic conference.
LikeLike
I think you guys are missing the point with Missouri (or else I am). If ND is on board, the point in bringing in east coast schools drops as ND can deliver the market better than anyone. That makes Rutgers, Syracuse, etc. less attractive and makes Missouri more likely.
All the same, I doubt ND ends up anywhere.
LikeLike
agreed. and if ND, Texas and TAMU don’t drop there are still plenty of slot for an East Coast strategy.
LikeLike
The Big 10 will add Mo because the BT wants to add MO, not because of a particular Tx or ND strategy.
LikeLike
That is the right reason to add a school. In the long run, it is the only way to assure that everyone is happy. Don’t want to be sitting at a meeting 20 years from now, only to hear the OSU President tell the Miss President to “pipe down, the only reason you are even here is because we needed you to get Texas.”
LikeLike
So where does this leave the east coast expansion? Rutgers, Syracuse, or Pitt? If the BigTen lands ND, does this bump up Pitts chances of getting an invite if they decide to go to 16 teams? Do they even need to go to 16 if they get ND? As a Penn State guy nothing would make me happier than to see Pitt join the conference.
LikeLike
ND IS East Coast Expansion. That’s the point.
LikeLike
ND and the rest of the Big Ten would still love a place to play closer to NYC. ND’s biggest concern about the Big Ten is that the conference is too midwestern. These concerns would be alleviated by adding new teams outside of the footprint, such as Rutgers/Syracuse or Ga Tech/Miami. So I don’t think ND helps Pitt (unless I am underestimating the importance of the Pitt-ND rivalry.)
LikeLike
I wasn’t talking so much about the ND-Pitt rival, but the fact that ND “supposedly” can deliver the NY market better than Rutgers or Syracuse. With adding two western schools (Mizzou and Nebraska) along with ND, my thought process was if the Big Ten still wanted to bring in an eastern school Pitt would be the perfect choice even if it doesn’t widen the footprint. Fact is, if Pitt was outside of the Big Ten footprint, they would be the #1 choice behind ND and TX.
LikeLike
Good point, Derek. ND has such a huge national footprint that Rutgers, Maryland, Syracuse, and that other non AAU school – UCONN would be rendered irrelevent. N/D’s quantity has a quality of it’s own.
LikeLike
I agree about Pitt. The only two universities that I’m certain I want is Pitt & NU. I’d really like UT & TAMU, but not if the cost was too high (read TTU, OU…). As for ND, I’m just not sure they would be a good fit, in the long-run.
LikeLike
ND’s not coming at this time……IF ND comes later Pitt would be the most likely 16th team.
LikeLike
I have to agree with sportsman. All the talk of the Big 10 looking for like minded institutions that are the flag ship universities of their respective state, focus on graduate education (including medical schools which add billions in revenue) and research revenues also in the billions and they look at a private catholic undergraduate school to get the east coast tvs and increased BTN money – Really?
If the Big 10 is looking to add schools that fit their profile and are looking to the future, Maryland and Uva would be better choices. If you can add Texas and A&M and then round out with Vanderbilt as we have heard from others what a win – head south both east and west.
Let ND head to the ACC where with realignment they can focus on the atlantic and northeast. FSU, Miami, VTech and Clemson will be happy in the sec and it fits there current revenue model.
LikeLike
The only way the Big Ten ends up at 16 without ND is if Texas comes.
It just isn’t happening. Delany won’t do that. ND has a place in the Big Ten whenever it sees the 4×16 end of the world coming… (Delany’s job is to speed up ND’s perception of that future).
LikeLike
Pitt is not being considered for the B10, don’t know about any other expansion but I heard they were eliminated early in the discussion.
LikeLike
That what we need: more unqualified declarative statements.
LikeLike
Let it be, let it be, let it be, let it be.
Whisper words of wisdom, let it be.
LikeLike
CUSA has hired ex-Big 8 Commissioner Chuck Neinas as an expansion consultant. I guess we’ll look to see if there are any crumbs left over for us.
LikeLike
I read your comment as “Chuck Norris,” and I got a little bit excited.
LikeLike
Iowa State is looking to rent.
LikeLike
Why do you insist the ND will take this invite. They are not coming
LikeLike
@NDman – I’m not insisting on it and won’t believe it until I see it. However, the Big Ten isn’t inviting ND unless it knows that it will say yes. This isn’t going to be an open invite where ND’s leadership is going to chew on it for months like in 1999. If the Big Ten invites ND, then it means that ND has accepted.
LikeLike
You just wrote they are being invited – from that logic, you think they will accept. Not happening
LikeLike
He wrote that his sources are telling him ND will be invited. That doesn’t necessarily mean he believes it will happen.
LikeLike
It’s no happening……
LikeLike
mushroomgod is omniscient.
LikeLike
I’d love to see ND get invited and accept just for the comedy that would ensue on every ND board. That meltdown would (will?) be comedic gold.
Adding.
LikeLike
Agreed, that would be the best part of this whole process for me.
LikeLike
you’d need to repeatedly archive a few as the guardiand of truth and justice would start flushing the board.
LikeLike
I expect to post “won’t somebody please think of the children!” images many, many times this summer in response to Notre Dame fans.
LikeLike
@Manifesto,
Yes! Yes! The Domers boards would light up and probably cause server crashes across the nations….I would help organize a “group hug” where we could show up and publicly ask them why they believed their independence was so important if TPTB didn’t thinkg it was….
Actually, it’s probably a bad idea…if you got them all together, they might actually threaten a group suicide unless there was a reversal of the decision…
LikeLike
Jonestown in South Bend?
LikeLike
Pretty sure (mass) suicide is a sin in the eyes of the church, so I dunno how many Domers would take their own lives.
I wonder if anyone has started a ND-BigTen Suicide Prevention Hotline though just in case.
LikeLike
“Pretty sure (mass) suicide is a sin in the eyes of the church, so I dunno how many Domers would take their own lives.”
Drinking cyanide laced kool-aid is a sin. Drinking yourself to death one bottle of Gin at a time might be ok though
LikeLike
If you’re so certain ND won’t be invited or accept, why are you on this blog? Doesn’t that make it a total waste of your time? It would be like spending hours and hours on a Kucinich4President blog.
LikeLike
No, you participate in the K4P blog for the pure comedic value.
LikeLike
Love to see people make fools of themselves. Its good thought – heard that all the stuff about ND going B10 from yesterday turned the admins office at ND into a near riot from negative calls/emails. Nobody at ND wants this
LikeLike
Frankly, I don’t know many B10 fans who want ND. But unlike Domers, at least the B10 fans can see and make the rational argument for wanting ND – it would be beneficial for both. Domers think only the B10 would benefit. They are scared that by joining the B10, then ND would simply become a regional school. I think that is a rational worry, but why would it be in the B10’s interest to let that happen. If that were the case, then adding ND was nothing more than a short term play. I think the B10 is smarter than that. But NDman is the perfect reason for not taking ND. You will always have to deal with the whining alumni. I mean if ND was truly not interested, all it would take would be a public statement by Fr. Jenkins.
LikeLike
I love ND fans. You guys are going to make great conference mates. 🙂
LikeLike
Ah, DK. While he’s the mayor of The Cleve the river is so polluted it gets set ablaze, he almost drove the city into bankruptcy (which wouldve been a first for a US muni of that size). He looks at this body of mayoral work and says, “fuck it. I’m gonna run for congress!”… AND HE WINS! And tOSU fans aren’t imbalanced. Riiiiight.
LikeLike
Always love the logical, well-reasoned Domer responses like….
Not Gonna Happen.
I think that ND football would be schedule challenged after a few years of Big 16 and Pac 16. For reasons that have been discussed, financially, home and home series are going to be dead or nearly dead in this senario. Michigan will NEED to bring in non-AQ schools to beat up on for the financial benifits, plus the conference schedule with Nebraska, Penn State, Wisconsin, Ohio State will be strong enough to scdhedule weaker non-con games. In the Big 10, the only money not shared is the home non-conference ticket bonanza. In this example, Michigan will sell out regardless, so why bother traveling to Notre Dame every other year and losing out on that revenue.
The same arguement can be made for USC, Stanford, Purdue, and Michigan State. In very strong 16 team leagues, they want the money from those home games. Take USC, they have away games with Texas, Oklahoma, Oregon, and UCLA…. why travel to Notre Dame for another tough away game? It is not needed.
So, by staying independent Notre Dame is reduced to a schedule of
Boston College
Pittsburgh
Western Michigan
Navy
Tulsa
Utah
Army
The question is… can that schedule keep Notre Dame relevant?
Probably Not.
LikeLike
I’m not sure Mich or USC would ever drop ND (maybe Mich but not USC). Unless that is, ND just falls so far off the map, that the game becomes irrelevant (and the ratings show it). There is still a benefit for USC to go to ND every other year. It gets them a good prime time game enhancing their brand in the east. But I get your point.
I guess the question for ND should be, can they stay relevant and good staying as an independent – which will be tougher and tougher as they fall further and further behind in terms of the money they receive. If yes, then stay Indep. But I think only Domers truly believe that will be the case. For the rest of us, it is a legitimate question. I guess I’m not saying anything that we don’t already know.
LikeLike
You are saying the USC, Michigan, Michigan St, & Purdue are all going to walk away from their annual ND games?
If you are from a B10 school, the academics angle has been way overplayed.
LikeLike
Yes, maybe not all of them but most of them would because they want the home game ticket sales. Traveling to ND and losing that ticket revenue on top of adding another difficult game (when you already have a very tough conference schedule) is pointless.
Acedemics will play a huge part in this for the Big Ten. CIC is a big deal. Wisconsin / Michigan spent 10 times as much for acedemic research as they made in Athletic revenue. Presidents are going to make the decision, not AD’s, so when you have a budget item that is 10 x higher than athletics…. it is a higher priority.
LikeLike
I actually asked this question to FLP before, if the Pac10 went with the Big6 bloc, and he said he wasn’t sure.
It would take a lot, and wouldn’t be immediate by any means, but if USC’s suddenly facing Oklahoma, Texas, and A&M plus their original Pac10 members every year I could see them walking away from ND eventually. Winning titles and championships are going to outweigh OOC opponents, and it might not be worth it for them in the long run. Not to mention, new conference members means new rivalries will form. Texas and USC could form a hell of a rivalry in time.
I’m unsure if it’s the same case with Michigan. In that scenario only Nebraska would be a new, constant threat.
As for Michigan State and Purdue? Don’t know to be honest. The exposure is nice. But they could definitely find themselves losing games to all three expansion schools (Missouri, Nebraska, Rutgers). For Purdue and MSU, adding those three does make the league significantly more difficult. The exposure they get from the ND game might not be worth it if they find themselves missing bowl eligibility consistently.
Ultimately, it’s a valid question. Two 16-team conferences changes the landscape into something no one knows about. It seems silly to dismiss things out of hand just because you doubt it.
As for the “academics angle”, don’t know what to tell you. It matters to the BigTen. If it didn’t we’d probably agree to Tech and/or OU to get UT/A&M, but it seems unlikely at this point. Have a friend who’s an Auburn fan, and he doesn’t understand why academics should matter when trying to pick teams for an athletic conference. Told him it just matters to the BigTen.
Although, in this particular case, I’m wondering if your comment of it being “way overblown” contains the unspoken comment of “because all BigTen universities suck anyway.” Perhaps that’s just a stereotype I’ve come to expect from ND fans though.
LikeLike
I guess a good point was raised. Why do you even care about conference expansion NDman. How does it concern you if ND will never join B10?
LikeLike
“You are saying the USC, Michigan, Michigan St, & Purdue are all going to walk away from their annual ND games?”
It wasn’t that many years ago that not having Nebraska and Oklahoma to watch as the turkey digested would be unimaginable. Then Donnie Duncan, faced with having a one game tougher schedule than other teams, sh*tcanned that game.
Don’t assume anything.
LikeLike
How could you forget that ND would also get to play Reno?
LikeLike
Patrick, I think you missed NDman’s point RE Big Ten academics.
He was labeling you an idiot for daring to disagree with his opinion and he was suggesting that if you went to a Big Ten school, then all Big Ten schools academics must not be very good.
You should really spend more time on the other 500 bazillion sports blogs and message boards on the interweb and learn how to properly detect ad homonym attacks.
LikeLike
How do you feel about an open invite to UT/A&M. I guess that would affect your ND plans.
LikeLike
The more I think about it, the more it seems that ND will only join a conference if the ultimate result of all of the expansion is going to be four super conferences. The keys to ND, then, are (1) getting the Big XII South into the Pac Ten, and (2) having the SEC desire to expand to keep up with Pac Ten and the Big Ten.
If that plays out, then the ACC will surely absorb the leftover Big East teams in order to become the fourth super conference. Notre Dame will want to be a part of either the Big Ten or the ACC/Big East.
But I now agree that ND will not commit in the near future. It needs to see the Pac 16 form and the SEC 16 forming before it pulls the trigger. The Big Ten will have a spot open for ND when that happens.
LikeLike
I think Mizzo has great upside. I believe they are only now starting to come into their own and with the help of the Big Ten has top tier potential. I would take them over Syracuse all day long. I wish Oklahoma was had better academics with a larger population because I think they would have been a nice trophy as well.
LikeLike
Posted this on the last thread but it was killed right after I did with the new blog post, so thought I’d put it up here:
Let’s talk about the ACC for a second. Let’s assume the Pac 16 comes to fruition and the Big 10 moves to 16 as well. Wouldn’t it then be in the ACC’s best interests to be proactive and try to move before the SEC does?
I realize the ACC just signed a pretty nice deal and moving to 16 teams would probably mean less money for its current members. But the upside is that if you move before the SEC and get to 16 teams first, maybe your conference is stronger in the long run.
Maybe it doesn’t matter, and Florida State, Miami, Clemson and whoever the SEC may target jump regardless if they get an SEC offer. But I have to think if you’re in a stable 16-team conference already, you’re far more likely to stay put than if you’re at 12 teams and you fear the SEC is going to tear your conference apart.
LikeLike
I’ve been saying for weeks that the ACC is missing out on a huge opportunity and could have done the exact same thing the Pac-10 is doing right now. If the ACC were smart, they would go to UConn, Syracuse, Rutgers and either Pitt, West Virginia or East Carolina right now (I would recommend WVU) and invite them to join the ACC, making the conference much more powerful, and claiming some of the NY market in the process. They would also be cutting off the Big Ten and the SEC from going after some of their members in the process. So why won’t they? I read somewhere that the reason why is because John Swofford is spineless, and UNC/Duke are too stodgy to realize what’s best for them. Sounds about right.
LikeLike
I have been saying that too. If they grab Syracuse, UConn, Pitt, and WVU… that is two great football teams and two great basketball teams. Pitt/WVU are no slouches in hoops either. Meanwhile, Syracuse and UConn can return/get to regional relevance again soon.
With BC, Virginia, Va Tech, and Maryland, you have a great ACC North. The South would be Miami, FSU, Duke, UNC, Wake Forest, Clemson, NC State, Ga Tech.
Who leaves that?
And if someone does leave for the SEC… you replace them… East Carolina, USF, Cincy, Louisville.
The ACC can let the Big 10 have Rutgers.
LikeLike
If I’m the ACC, and let’s assume the Big 10 takes Syracuse and Rutgers, I target Kansas, Louisville, UConn and either Pitt/K-State (only taking K-State if its tied to KU).
I realize that’s not a lot on the football side. But the ACC is never going to be huge football conference. It tried that move and failed with Miami and VT. It’s just not in the ACC’s blood. So it might as well become the hands-down best basketball conference it can.
Besides of the school’s the ACC can pluck, there’s not really a big football brand anyway. So I wouldn’t even bother with that.
LikeLike
Re ACC expansion (ezdozen)
Such an expansion package would almost certainly be very attractive to the northern schools and could lay the basis for an ACC channel by adding northeast markets.
The Pac 10 has absolutely set an example for the ACC. The question is motivation despite the fact the ACC now extends from FL to Mass.
Perhaps there is no single school like Texas that galvanizes action. Yet combined there is a lot of population that could be added to the ACC footprint.
LikeLike
While true, the problem for the ACC still remains the lack of conference network.
People need to remember having 16 teams, especially if most of them are regional draws, only dilutes the national tv contract signed with ABC/ESPN. Eventually, the national networks say “thanks, but no thanks” and you are left with a bunch of non-national programs playing without any tv coverage to help pay for the event. The conference tv channel rectifies this problem, but until you have a conference tv channel (and even then it could be argued a conference tv channel will only be successful under very specific circumstances) you can’t just assume 16 teams will work, let alone well.
LikeLike
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This. This is why the SEC and ACC will stay at 12 for the next decade. Preventing this is the brilliance of the BTN.
LikeLike
The biggest problem with that is if you dilute the money that much by adding four more teams, what stops any of your new members from jumping ship to the Big Ten or SEC? If each member is now getting $12 or $13 annually, which is what I think it is from their new deal, that’s about $144 million to $156 million for the conference, which is more like $9-10 million a piece. If the SEC can give them closer to $15 million, and the Big Ten can offer them $22-40 million, is Rutgers really worried about the ACC? Especially because any team would get more academic benefits joining the Big Ten than they would the ACC with the CIC. I can’t imagine a school like Rutgers or Pitt wouldn’t leave in a couple years anyways.
I will be disappointed if Missouri gets invited and Rutgers ends up missing the cut. Missouri is marginal academically for the Big Ten and should be seen as a mild concession, where Rutgers would fit perfectly in that mold. They are the Big Ten’s biggest chance to get into the NYC market. Without them, the only other way to grab the Northeast is for the BTN to become a national network ala ESPN for college sports, and that would be very hard to do without the Northeast.
LikeLike
Nice “Risky Business” reference, Frank.
LikeLike
Let’s play “Guess when this one will cross the thousand mark”.
I got 11:30 a.m. tomorrow.
LikeLike
Loki – I’m in. I’m predicting 2:30 tomorrow when a big rumor comes out. It will turn out to be false of course. I’m just not sure there is much of anything left to be said that wasn’t stated on the last board.
LikeLike
Pacific Time, of course, because now that’s the only time zone that matters anymore. 🙂
LikeLike
Don’t you mean SPECIFIC time? 🙂
This one is crossing the threshold tomorrow morning, whether it’s at 4 or 11 AM. There’s just too much going on right now for the rate of posting to slow down from the last thread (1700 posts in two days, which was itself faster than the previous thread). Sorry for going all meta, but if the posts so far are any indication, we’re starting to move past the hypothetical expansion posts and forming opinions about moves that are happening, like Nebraska and Missouri going to the Big Ten and the ND posters going apeshit, which require less time to type–hence, more posts.
LikeLike
@ Loki,
Dude…I’ll take 11:00 P.M. tonight.
Everybody in for $10?
LikeLike
35 posts left…
LikeLike
@loki_the_bubba – FYI – This is the highest traffic day in the history of the blog by a good margin, so we’re getting to that 1000 comment mark quicker than anticipated.
LikeLike
No doubt. Kudos to you, sir. Imagine how it will be when actual announcements occur.
LikeLike
10:30 am tomorrow. No trolls planting false rumors to make it happen quicker!
LikeLike
Seven hours and we’re half way there. Doubt we make it overnight unless something interesting happens. But I fear 11:30 is just too far from now.
LikeLike
As of 8:57 AM EST, we’re at 1075.
LikeLike
Regardless of what Notre Dame does, I think I´m convinced and comfortable with a first phase expansion of Nebraska and Missouri.
With ND:
12: ND
13: NU
14: MU
At this point, you wait for the Big 12 to crumble and the rest of the dominoes to fall. First option is still UT and A&M. If they come around to the B10, you stop at 16 and have your super deathstar conference.
If UT, A&M and OU head West, you wait out the SEC. In this case, the SEC presumably looks to FSU, VTech or NC State. If they add two, then, as the Big 10, you pounce. GTech and Miami are the first additions and put you up to 16. Then, like before, you sit back and wait. Maryland, UVa, UNC and Duke are most likely a package, and if they are decide to give up on the ACC, you expand to 20 and call it a day.
Without ND:
12 and 13: NU and MU
Then, like in the other scenario, you wait. Maybe ND, UT and A&M step to the table as conference affiliation starts to crumble. If not, you wait on the SEC again and try your luck on three of the big 6 from the ACC.
Either way, I think the Big East, apart from ND, is a last resort. First you try for the home runs from the Big 12 and then you move to the ACC. If both fail, then you finally consider the Big East.
Like someone else posted, the Big East is much safer than we all originally presumed for the exact reasons they were supposedly vulnerable: their weaknesses. Apart from ND, there are no home runs in the Big East.
LikeLike
I’d also invite RU….then you could wait for TX/A&M (won’t happen) or ND/Pitt (50% chance 2 years from now).
LikeLike
If Texas/TAMU go to the Pac the Big10 needs to get to 16 immediately. Take the best of the rest and let the SEC/ACC/BigEast scramble.
LikeLike
The BYU-religious angle is way overblown. BYU doesn’t have academic freedom. They pay some of their professors there NOT to publish.
In other words, the objection to BYU isn’t on religious grounds but on grounds of how the school’s religion curtails academic freedom. I don’t know if that’s a problem at Baylor or not, but it’s not a problem at many religious schools in the country.
No one would object to Notre Dame joining the Pac-10.
LikeLike
You mean like a conservative or libertarian on Berkeley’s campus? The curtailing of freedom-of-thought is an epidemic on campuses around this country but religion has little to do with it.
No, I am not trying to insert politics into this discussion, just responding to Dan’s comment.
LikeLike
“They pay some of their professors there NOT to publish?”
Come on, Dan. Seriously? I went to school there for seven years. The school has been pushing for its professors to publish more than they currently are. That assertion is absurd.
LikeLike
This is an overlooked point – all religious schools are not exactly the same. There’s a spectrum, with BYU on one end being very dogmatic (to the point that professors clearly don’t have freedom to publish/teach anything the church doesn’t approve) and schools like TCU and Wake Forest that have only nominal religious ties and confine religiosity to their separate divinity schools. Notre Dame is much closer to the Wake end re: academic freedom, although their religious commitment is more than nominal, as their position on stem cells reflects.
Baylor consciously tries to pattern itself after Notre Dame and takes the academic-freedom-vs.-faith issue very seriously, to the point that it actually has a small academic division (Institute of Faith and Learning) that researches and publishes on the proper balance between the two. If it’s true that the Pac-10 would not reject ND on religious grounds, it’s plausible that they would also accept Baylor.
LikeLike
So after months of everyone deciding how the Big East will fall apart, it seems they might come out of this relatively unscathed. The headlines went from them losing rutgers, pitt and syracuse, to them losing notre dame basketball. I think they can live with that.
LikeLike
maybe. or maybe the Big East will have to look fearfully at the SEC’s potential expansion. Louisville and WVU are somewhat attractive for SEC expansion, or maybe they’ll take some ACC members and then the Big East will have to worry about their invites.
LikeLike
add
LikeLike
Good read, Frank, Just one minor quibble:
If Texas can’t fend off the legislators or the school actually would rather be part of a provincial Eastern appendage to the Pac-10 or keep the Big XII as opposed to joining the top national conference, then it is what it is.
I would call an eight-state, three-time-zone, 16-school conference, with seven (or, sigh, eight) schools from the two most populous states in the country, a pretty damn good national conference as well.
Still personally hoping for the Big 10 solution, but, as I’ve said before, I’d be quite OK with the Pac 10 move, as proposed, if the Baylor Problem can be resolved.
LikeLike
If Texas is off the table and Colorado is available:
ND, Nebraska, Mizz, Colorado and whoever would be a great expamsion.
LikeLike
I see your point Hopkins (btw really enjoy your posts) but there is a risk to the national status of a Pac 16. It certainly would be in name but what is the perception if predictions that this merely recreats the old Pac 8 and an upgraded SWC? If the sceduling focus and the like really is on the division you wind up with with two regional conferences that just happen to have a shared television contract, some share resources and an agreed championship game. Texas will still in effect be in the Big 12 South but expanded to include the Arizona schools. The affiliation with the Pac 8 will be realtively loose and eventually the perception as well.
LikeLike
f the sceduling focus and the like really is on the division you wind up with with two regional conferences
No offense meant, because I would certainly call myself a realignment nerd, but I think the only people who would look at the proposed Pac 16 and term it this way are realignment nerds. I think the vast majority of people who don’t follow realignment as obsessively as we do will see the conference but not the supposed segregation.
LikeLike
perhaps.
still hoping for Texas in the Big Ten
LikeLike
Lol HH, you are the king realignment nerd, or at least second in command to Frank.
It’s hard to say what the perception will be as far a separate conferences, but it is a definite risk. The Big XII had a lot of North v South divisiveness in perception (e.g. the Big XII North sucks meme) and that was with less of a physical/cultural divide and with playing each other more often (once every two years). In the new setup, there would be more natural physical division (Surf vs Turf) and cultural division (Southwest vs West Coast). Add in playing the other teams less often (once every 4 years with 9 conference games or once every 8 years with 8 conference games) and who knows what perception will be.
LikeLike
This is a good reason why the division concept is a bad one (or has negatives). Only the SEC has made it work. It may simply be a unique circumstance.
LikeLike
And why pods are a great way to counter the issue and help to maintain scheduling flexibility and some level of conference cohesiveness.
LikeLike
@HH, How do t.u. & A&M end up in the B10?
The only way I currently see it is if we can get BU and TT a home prior to us bouncing. How does that happen?
LikeLike
If, as rumored, the Pac 10 says they can’t take Texas Tech or Baylor, it would seem to give the administrators some cover to then accept a Big 10 invite as a pair. They can say that they can’t really accept the downgrade in academic standards* that the SEC would entail.
In any event, I’m confident there will still be a BCS conference that will include the Big 12 schools that are left behind with some other MWC/Wac schools. TCU and Houston will likely see their situation improved by this move.
*Yes, I’ve heard A&M is studying the SEC. I’m hoping they really prefer the Big 10.
LikeLike
I don’t believe the Big Ten will risk another rejection by Notre Dame. That is, I don’t believe we’ll extend an invitation unless we already know the answer is “Yes.”
LikeLike
adding
LikeLike
add
LikeLike
Add
LikeLike
2nd attempt
LikeLike
Best thing about this post for me is that Delany’s “double chess # of moving parts” now actually makes some sort of sense. 🙂
LikeLike
“KU Pleads to Nebraska” Not a great headline on ESPN.com for Kansas. I guess they could be the big loser in all of this. Would you ever want them in the B10? Just goes to show you, how much lower basketball is viewed.
LikeLike
If it was up to me, I’d pick Kansas over Mizzou 99 out of 100 times. Is Kansas really that far behind Missouri academically? From my perspective Kansas is superior when it comes to athletics. Maybe I’m missing something though. I did read somewhere Missouri has the least amount of Big 12 championships…even behind Baylor.
LikeLike
Kansas is only superior to MO in basketball. Missouri has a much larger stadium, and a much stronger football history. Missouri has a larger enrollment, and is in a more populous state. Missouri is a better gepgraphic fit.
LikeLike
Although I prefer KU, too, KU has a “State” problem.
LikeLike
“even behind Baylor”
Baylor is actually third with 28 Big 12 titles, behind only UT and A&M. This illustrates the reason why, as a Baylor alum, I want Baylor in the Mountain West: Baylor has an outstanding overall sports program and is nationally competitive in sports like track, tennis, baseball, etc., but because the football team is outclassed in the Big 12, the frequent perception (not just Derek here, but lots of people) is that Baylor must be crappy at everything.
LikeLike
Baylor is behind NU in conference championships as well. I’m almost certain OU has more too. I would agree with your main point though that Baylor has a better program than the credit it receives.
LikeLike
Guilty as charged. Thank you for enlightening me!
LikeLike
You’re missing lots of things. KU is only superior in basketball. MU is a solid basketball program with a lot of tradition, but it can’t match up to KU in that regard. However, the team has been quite strong in recent years (4 NCAA wins over past 2 seasons) and will continue to improve under Mike Anderson.
MU is far superior to KU on the football side of things. Better team, more stable, solid coach, nice stadium, KC and STL fans, etc.
LikeLike
@SH,
You need to read all the prior posts…It’s all in black and white in Frank’s blogs…Mizzou is bigger financially for the Big 10. Plain and simple. Kansas is actually quite low in the Big 12, if I recall.
LikeLike
@MIRuss,
I don’t disagree with Mizzou being better than Kansas (for B10 purposes). I was just pointing out two things I guess: 1) for a school with such a rich basketball history, that sort of headline has to hit the school pride – pleading to Neb, and 2) with that being the case, you really see how in this country, football moves the needle much more than bball (which I think we already knew).
But I certainly didn’t mean that KU was a better get than Mizzou. But if B10 was at 15, would KU ever make a good 16th team? I guess it depends on who those 4 other schools are and who else is available?
LikeLike
@SH,
Unfortunately, you’re thinking like a fan, not a school president that has to start dividing his share of the pie with more schools. If you’re already sitting on $22M annually, why settle for $22M with another mouth to feed when $30M or more is out there looking for some place to go?
Yes, the appeal of Kansas from a B-Bal viewpoint is clearly superior to Mizzou…just not dollars and cents wise…
LikeLike
How am I thinking like a fan? I’m not even advocating anything. I’m merely making an observation, and then asking if Kansas would ever make a fit. You say no. I bet a lot of people would say yes. I really don’t care. I think my whole point was basically sux to be Kansas and football trumps bball.
LikeLike
Back in one of the earlier iterations (between ND invites), KU was one of the 3 finalists with RU, UM. BTN has changed things, but KU would still be a possibility as a #16. Having a bb school gives the fb schools someone to beat. Its probably not likely, but I don’t think they can be counted out if TX & TX A&M don’t join.
LikeLike
I’ve loved your blog, Frank. I, however, think you haven’t caught onto the fact that Texas WANTS to bring its conference mates along. It wants to bring 3 (maybe 5) rubber stamp votes into whatever conference it ends up with. Texas is more than happy to see Baylor replace CU with regards to the Pac 10. In UT’s eyes, Colorado is an alien university whose culture and alumni would lead it to vote with existing Pac 10 schools on conference matters. The B12 South schools will be reliable rubber stamps for everything Texas wants–special financial splits, the “longhorn network,” and moving the championship game to the Jerry Bowl.
What scares the hell out of Texas is ending up in the Big Ten…alone and with no special privileges.
People of the Pac 10: The University of Texas is of Peace…Always.
LikeLike
The B12 South schools will be reliable rubber stamps for everything Texas wants–special financial splits, the “longhorn network,” and moving the championship game to the Jerry Bowl
Do you know anything about the voting patterns within the Big XII on issues like revenue sharing and a Big XII Network and tiebreaker procedures?
LikeLike
Speaking of voting patterns in the Big XII…
Right now, it requires a >3/4s vote in the conference to change the revenue distribution model. As you know, Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, and Nebraska form that block currently. In the new conference (“Not Mexico Anymore”), it would presumably also take >3/4s or 5 votes. I am wondering who the 5th vote would be, as Texas, A&M, Oklahoma, and USC would all be in favor. UCLA? Cal? Oregon?? I really have no idea. Does anyone know how the uneven split is currently maintained in the Pac-10?
LikeLike
UCLA currently supports it in the Pac-10. Oregon is becoming something of a big player in college football, so I would expect them to vote for an uneven split if it is determined by TV appearances.
You’re assuming A&M would be one of the supporters, which I think makes sense to appease Texas, so wouldn’t it follow that Texas Tech would also vote with Texas?
My guess is USC, UCLA, Berkeley, Oregon, Texas, A&M, and Tech would all vote for unequal shares.
LikeLike
Hopkins is right. NU has certainly agreed with Texas on most of the revenue questions. My understanding is there have been disagreements as to how specific things would be implemented, but by and large this is a Big Revenue/Small Revenue issue with the middle schools usually following the Big.
Whether that was to change with the LSN is speculation at this point.
LikeLike
Pingback: According to Frank the Tank..... - Page 4 - HawkeyeNation Forum
Alright, for some reason people in the previous thread were skeptical that Nebraska would get an invite (despite that fact that Frank and most commentators on this site have re-iterated that Nebraska is guaranteed an invite).
Here’s why. Nebraska is guaranteed to be #12 or #13 in any scenario that plays out. There’s no way the Big Ten stays at 11 this time with Nebraska on the board.
Scenario #1 = Delany’s preferred scenario (ultimate offer to Texas/A&M)
ND -> Nebraska/Missouri -> Texas/A&M
(Texas/A&M/ND/Mizzouri pod for regional travel for Texas/A&M -> Mizz)
Scenario #2 = Delany’s preferred backup; dependent on Deloss Dodds hinting that Texas would stay in Big 12 if only Nebraska leaves.
Nebraska is 12. Nebraska isn’t Arkansas; no Pac-16, etc. Pac-10 probably just gets Colorado/Utah.
This scenario is preferable because it allows the Big Ten to easily have space for ND/Texas/A&M + 1 more later on, while getting one of the 3 whales in play. While I doubt this would play out, it might if Texas crunches the numbers and doesn’t think the Pac-16 pays off as well as it could by staying in a slightly depleted Big 12.
Scenario #3 = Delany’s second backup if Dodds and co. at Texas hint that they will leave for Pac-16 if Nebraska is pulled.
Nebraska is 12, Missouri and Rutgers or whoever are probably 13-14 if Texas is gone to the Pac-16. We only need 1 or 2 spots open to get ND at the end when 4×16 is upon us and ND finally joins.
Scenario #4 = no one goes anywhere.
Won’t happen. Nebraska pays off as #12 in spades.
The question in all of this is how long does Nebraska have to commit to the Big 12 and set this rolling. This isn’t Osborne’s first rodeo. He knows exactly how the scenarios will play out with Nebraska, and he knows that Nebraska is guaranteed of being #12 or #13.
In fact, Tom Osborne would prefer to be #13 and Notre Dame #12 because he can see the big picture and would prefer a Big Ten (14 with ND/Nebraska/Missouri) for the sheer profitability and the ability to make a final offer to Nebraska.
So Nebraska is in on all of this in my mind. Nebraska is in no hurry to set off the dominoes and play the role of Arkansas if Delany’s preferred strategy is in play. After all, it may just be Osborne’s preferred strategy as well. He knows he’s going to have Nebraska in the Big Ten so he wants as strong a Big Ten as possible. That means waiting to see if Notre Dame will join.
Of course, both Osborne and Delany are realistic. They know that at some point they have to strike if ND says it won’t be #12. At that point Nebraska will be #12 and it will be up to Dodds to indicate whether Texas is going to leave. Then we’ll see the rest of the pieces fall where they may…
LikeLike
that was make a final offer to Texas/A&M in the 3rd to last paragraph…
LikeLike
Do you think that Nebraska has been a B10 target (or on the wish list) for a long time (whether as a one off or part of a strategy to get TX/ND), just that Callahan threw a wrench in the whole plan by tanking the Neb program. I doubt the B10 wanted to take a program that looked liked it was dying (of course they always want ND). Now it appears that Neb is on the rise again, so it is a good time to get them.
LikeLike
I’m skeptical that Nebraska ever lost value at any point. Nebraska’s always been valuable in terms of tradition/brand/fans/TV ratings, etc.
The thing is, that people who are watching this process need to understand that Osborne and the Nebraska brass should want the Big Ten to get Notre Dame before pulling the trigger on Nebraska. That fact has been lost.
Of course it’s much easier for a program to move when things are much more stable (i.e. not Kansas).
Regardless, I’m one of those who think the process is going along fine.
It had to be a very public, very noisy process with Pac-16, SEC-16, ACC-16 threats on the horizon for ND to ever consider joining first.
Nebraska knows that. Osborne knows that. He’s probably as much in on Delany’s thinking as anyone out there.
He also knows that once Nebraska leaves, the Big 12 either collapses totally or it goes on, so he would want the Big Ten to also have ND locked in by that time as well, so there’s not a scramble for Texas and ND at the same time, which is not going to work as well…
LikeLike
I think you may be wrong about who’s in charge of Nebraska’s effort, zeek. With all due respect to T.O., this is Perlman’s baby. The academic side is the big win here. Nebraska writers have focused on Ozzie, in words and pictures, because that’s what they do. And that may be the way Perlman wants it, with the spotlight off him. But before Texans get all giddy with thoughts about Delany using Nebraska as a pawn, and they’ll eventually come crawling back hat in hand, well no. An article that kind of got lost in all this talk, complete with a couple of important titles Harvey Perlman currently sports, which put him in a good place to quietly shepherd Nebraska into the Big Ten:
http://www.omaha.com/article/20100424/BIGRED/704249814
Perhaps why you read articles about Osborne being serene about all this.
LikeLike
Great comment. Thank you. Makes perfect sense. But I can’t see scenario one happening unless ND knows that Texas is coming through to the Big Ten (which would seem to be an impossible thing to know, given all the politics involved). ND really only makes sense in a 4×16 world. That requires Tex to go to Pac 16. Getting both Nebraska and Missouri into the fold early is the best way to prompt a 4×16 world.
LikeLike
Agreed. That’s scenario 3 in a nutshell.
If Nebraska is pulled and Dodds says “we’re Pac-16”, then the Big Ten will grab Missouri and probably Rutgers.
Then we’ll be at 14, Pac-16, SEC makes its moves on ACC, and perhaps we get Maryland or GTech or whoever and ND.
Note that the Big Ten is going to feel out Dodds first on what Texas plans to do.
If they don’t plan to actually pull the trigger on the Pac-16, then the Big Ten may just take Nebraska as #12 and roll it back.
The Big Ten won’t force Texas into the Pac-16 arms if it doesn’t have to, but we’re not waiting forever.
We will pull the trigger on Nebraska even if Texas indicates it’s going to the Pac-16.
I’ve laid out the reasoning before that Texas/OU/OSU/A&M going to the Pac-16 forces an SEC raid on the ACC which may open the Big Ten up to coveted schools in Maryland/VA/NC region.
There’s a lot at play here, we just have to focus on which parts know what’s going on and when.
LikeLike
Since Nebraska fits into all scenarios, the Big Ten should invite them soon.
Missouri would freak out if the invite included only Nebraska. I think they are coming as a package (based on promises already informally extended).
LikeLike
Fair enough, but that’s consistent with what I say.
I say only that Nebraska would be “#12 and stop” if Dodds/Texas indicates that they’ll stay in the Big 12.
We’re not going to leave Missouri high and dry either way. I’m sure Delany is telling them that under the table.
Frankly, if you are a Missouri or Rutgers fan, you should be cheering for a Pac-16 as hard as you can.
If you’re a Rutgers fan, you do not want ND to sign onto the Big Ten until after Rutgers does.
ND signing onto the Big Ten early means that Texas is in play…
LikeLike
Given that MSU’s Simon declared that academics are the most important priority, BT would look pretty silly inviting only MO and NEB at this time. Both would be rated at the bottom of the BT academically. I think RU also gets invited, because that’s been the p[lan all along, and for some academic cover.
LikeLike
Neither Nebraska nor Missouri do much to help the Texas schools from a travel standpoint. Once you get on a plane, there’s not much difference between Lincoln and Minneapolis.
LikeLike
@twk – The thing is that the only road trips for UT are to Waco and College Station. The state of Texas is massive, so even Lubbock is a plane flight from Austin. I think that the geography is more psychological than truly being related to travel costs and time.
LikeLike
Don’t have to tell me how big Texas is. Texas spends money like it’s going out of style, thus, they charter a plane to Lubbock even in non-revenue sports like baseball. A&M usually busses, unless there is a convenient commercial connection. It’s the travel in the non-revenue sporst that makes the Pac 16 proposal look attractive, and one reason why Baylor would be fine with Texas–even the Horns bus to Waco.
LikeLike
frank, not only is the distance to lubbock an issue, but there is no relief in the form of limited access roads unless one wants to loop around through okla city and amarillo. the trip up through goldthwaite and roscoe is slow-going and grim.
you wanna fly.
LikeLike
It appears that NU will be invited. The ultimatum gives the impression that NU has significant value. But there were good reasons to doubt NU would be invited. They are in a small, slow growing state, raising questions as to how much TV value they have. They really don’t match the B10 universities except for Iowa as they are not very restrictive in enrollment. They have been anything but leaders in improving academic qualifications among athletes (not that they haven’t done pretty well in graduating those they bring in). The B10 has been talking about like schools with a focus on academics. NU is not a like school academically. What they are is a top flight athletic program and a football national power.
What all this says is that we have probably been over-estimating demographics. Maybe the SEC discussion of FSU makes sense even though they already have FL. Demographics matters, but its not destiny.
It also means its really hard to judge the meaning of what these people are saying. We were mostly convinced the P10 comment about changing college fb had to do with a network, not expansion. And almost noone thought it would be a massive expansion proposal. Delaney also claimed this was heavily about academics and would be an open process. Maybe academics have to be at an acceptable level (read AAU), but beyond that they are irrelevant. It clearly has not been an open process and was always much further along than publically indicated.
LikeLike
“They are in a small, slow growing state, raising questions as to how much TV value they have.”
NU’s 3.7 average national TV rating over nine games last year seemed to surprise a lot of people.
LikeLike
Number 1 this makes no sense, one rumor has Mizz, Nu and ND all getting invites, another rumor has ND coming in and stopping at 12, wow someone must have bad sources.
Number 2 if ND comes in with and the little 10 does not stop at 12, you can best be gauranteed that Pitt will be included, out of all the schools being courted by the big 10 they have the best research aside from Maybe Texas, look it up, find the facts the info is out there. By adding in Pitt the CIC can increase their income by millions and I mean millions of dollars, many more than any athletic income will bring. Also Pitt-ND have been rivals for years, check the record books, who do you think they would want to come with them if this goes more than 12.
LikeLike
To further my point, look at the recent study produced by Arizona State on the top research universities, Pitt ranks right up there with Mich, Illinois, Wisc, OSU and PSU, the other schools be considered for expansion are nowhere near the research powerhouse that Pitt is, not even in the ballpark.
On top of that remember on Sunday Mich St president alluded to the fact that academics are extremely important in this process, do not lose sight of that.
LikeLike
Certainly, if B10 gets ND and Neb, but can’t pick up UT (and haven’t already picked up Mizzou), Pitt may make perfect sense. Getting some big national brands gives you leeway to invite Pitt which seems to have everything except a good location (for expansion purposes that is).
LikeLike
Again another good point, with big national brands on board it does cushion the blow of Pittsburgh not bringing in a new market. It also does not dilute the quality of football or basketball like a Rutgers would. And it satisfies Penn St’s request for an East coast partner.
LikeLike
I love Pitt as a school so nothing against them but why would the Big Ten feel a need to take a hit when there are still other options available. They want additive not dilutive. Pitt’s a great school but I think they are pretty far down the list and if they wind up in the Big Ten is because a lot of other things fell through.
LikeLike
the point is that nebraska and notre dame are academically dilutive.
this is brand/market driven expansion, but adding Pitt in addition to that group would make the less savory academics of those schools more palatable to CIC university presidents.
LikeLike
I think to maximize research $$$, new states need to be added bringing in more Senators and Congressmen to steer money to the CIC
LikeLike
I see Pitt as a possibility only if The Big Ten adds 4 other flag-ship schools, and they need the Brand Name.
Nebraska and Notre Dame add a national name, but don’t necessarily add households to the BTN footprint (unless ND gets NYC, which I think we’re assuming it doesn’t). If you added Pitt, that would be three schools that don’t expand the BTN footprint, which I don’t see happening.
LikeLike
add
LikeLike
Pittgers ? Ha ! You shoud have picked a worse school to combine with Rutgers then – it would be way funnier. Rutgers can only aspire to Pitt’s history of Marino, Dorsett, Ditka, Revis etc. Pitt brings that football history, “do you like apples?” goodwill hunting-style academics and has been owning Big East hoops. Rutgers brings, er, Jersey Couture, Real Housewives, Jersey Shore, etc etc etc etc. Not to mention the school is a financial catastrophe, their football team hasn’t won a game since Pottsville was in the NFL and their basketball coach just got them some national attention (uh-oh) for heckling players at a baseball game. Just the image the Big Ten is looking to associate with – can’t imagine why the invite hasn’t arrived yet. So whether it’s Pittgers or Rutcuse or Rutconn or whatever, no other school being mentioned “distinguishes” itself like Univ of NJ and shouldn’t even be mentioned in the same sentence …
LikeLike
Bringing up Jersey stereotypes and television shows does nothing but undermine any point you want to make, and some of the points you *do* make (ie. “financial catastrophe”) have already been debunked in previous threads.
The Big Ten will avoid Rutgers because their basketball coach heckled players at a baseball game? You seriously think that’s going to factor into things, or that it even should? I find it funny that your entire purpose on this blog so far has been to troll the idea of Rutgers joining the Big Ten.
LikeLike
You mad?
LikeLike
In the last 5 years Pitt’s Illustrous History has a record of 1-4 against Rutgers in football.
LikeLike
Is there any Rutgers stat that includes a period dating back more than five years?
Kansas St. had a nice five year run too, right?
Not saying Rutgers can’t become a factor… and not saying that you are responding to what can only be characterized as an absurd post… but the reality is that Rutgers has a 5-year period of success and that is it.
The interesting thing is that Rutgers and Syracuse seem to be up and down at different times. It may be that there is only enough talent left over for them for there to be 12-15 wins between them. If Rutgers gets 10, Syracuse gets 3, if Syracuse gets 9, Rutgers gets 4.
Not sure how splitting them up would impact the dynamics.
LikeLike
Rutgers has only been playing “big time football” for about 30 years. Before then they had some success but it was against the likes of Princeton and Colgate.
RU fans only give stats of the Schiano era because the coach before him was abysmal and only recent stats look halfway decent.
The difference between RU and Kansas St was that KSU is not in a fertile recruiting area and had their success with good JUCO recruiting, while there are a LOT of good football players that come from a 100 mile radius from Rutgers and their success looks more sustainable.
You are not wrong about the Syracuse comment. The problem for the Orangemen is that they were the team that most took advantage of Rutger’s “sleeping giant” status in recruiting New Jersey, and now that RU has built their program there is no compelling reason to think Syracuse will ever again get NJ high schoolers to ignore RU and leave en masse for upstate NY like they used to.
LikeLike
PSU already has the state of PA locked down – for TV sets and for recruiting. Pitt is not coming to the big10. Not happening in Joe’s lifetime, not after Pitt voted against PSU coming into the bigLeast.
Also, basketball means nothing in this conference expansion; its all about football, which is a sport that Pitt consistently CANNOT sell out; and you don’t even have your own football stadium. Chumps.
LikeLike
PSU – please bring me a beer from the kitchen when you are done making my sandwich. Thanks.
Iowa
LikeLike
these displays of ignorance and myopic bravado don’t reflect well on Old State.
LikeLike
Hellooooooooooo Maize-n-Brew! Please do a Rutcuseburgh Orange and Scarlet Panther! Place the university in……………….South Bend!
(I’ve got to get a fricken life!)
LikeLike
Frank, I’m curious after all these months since your first index. If you went back, would you redo how you allocated your points any? I’m sure you would. I know you gave football a lot more points than basketball, but maybe bball was overvalued. And cultural fit undervalued. Probably a useless exercise, but you have Syracuse above Neb and Miss.
LikeLike
Considering Kansas’ predicament, I’d say basketball is worth nothing in this equation.
And that we all severely undervalued Nebraska originally.
LikeLike
And underestimating the extent to which Texas is the root of all that is evil in the world.
LikeLike
I’d agree w/ that. =)
LikeLike
You are all going to be disappointed when we get Rutgers, Pitt and Syracuse instead of ND and Texas.
We have no shot at Texas. Its done. They are going to the PAC 10.
ND is a long shot, but possible. If they join the conference, it will be the Big 10. I doubt it will happen.
LikeLike
It’s going to be Nebraska or Nebraska/Missouri/Rutgers.
No one is crying about the Big Ten with 12 or 14 in those scenarios.
LikeLike
ND is a long shot, but possible. If they join the conference, it will be the Big 10.
Is it because this is a Big Ten blog that this is assumed?
LikeLike
Why not make a move for Colorado? 17th largest TV market in America (as opposed to Kansas City, 31st). They fit academically, have a better football program historically than Mizzou, and a good rivalry with Nebraska.
LikeLike
if Texas is out of play and Baylor goes with them to the PAC10, CU might be in play. Really depends on who is on the table.
CU’s biggest problem is their AD is broke. They have very few programs realitive to a Big10 school and they have very limited success. Denver is a big market, but is it a CU market? Then again, Missouri might be going so TV sets do matter, to an extent.
LikeLike
Good points, but I think Denver is like a lot of big cities, it becomes a “CU market” when the Buffs are winning. I grew up in Illinois and I’d say the same thing about Chicago being an “Illinois” market. The potential is there, it just needs to be tapped.
I just feel like, other than geographically, CU is a better fit than Mizzou. Better market, better tradition, better national brand. And one could argue that travel costs would actually be cheaper because Boulder is easier to get to than Colombia.
LikeLike
…and if we’re going to play the same card Baylor’s making noises about we have 3 times as many Big 12 championships as Mizzou, lol. If your rightly don’t care about non-revenue sports then we also have 3 North titles this decade…and a BCS game appearance (sore subject for Mizzou fans I know). We also have considerably better academics, particularly from a research perspective.
LikeLike
CU is a great fit academically. Culturally and athletically it belongs in the Pac 10. That’s where it wants to go, and it should be way down on the Big Ten priority list.
LikeLike
I think there are also a lot of midwesterners that have moved to Denver, too. So like NYC and DC, I think that Denver would become a Big Ten town, even if it wasn’t fully a CU town.
LikeLike
@CN
A lot of midwesterners have moved there, but a lot more Californians have bought ski lodges there. It’s definitely more California than it is Chicago.
LikeLike
@zeek:
You might like this: I’m encouraging BON to play in some game theory to solve the problem about how to get Texas into the Big 10:
http://www.burntorangenation.com/2010/6/7/1505152/realignment-chronicles-larry-scott#39282550
LikeLike
That’s quite a conundrum.
Hopkins Horn, there’s one or two possible solutions that I see. Dodds pulls back on the Pac-16 talk and is willing to be in a Big 12 without Nebraska only. i.e. Big Ten only gets Nebraska to go to 12 this time.
Pac-10 settles for nothing or Colorado/Utah, either way Texas cares a bit less. I’d argue that the ordering of importance for the Big 12 is Nebraska > Missouri > Colorado. Perhaps, the Big 12 can survive with Missouri and Colorado but without Nebraska, but that’s up to Dodds to decide.
This opens Texas up later on to the Big Ten. The Big Ten having already signed Nebraska has a much easier road to Notre Dame and Texas than when multiple chips are in play because the Big Ten will only have to aim at Texas/A&M without having to get Nebraska as well out of the Big 12 (which set off this domino storm).
If you think Texas leaving is fait accompli, then the only solution I see is for the SEC to blow up the Pac-16 invites by launching a bid for A&M/OU.
Even if Texas declines, there’s a chance that somehow Tech could be forced onto the SEC with A&M/OU/OSU. Yes that’s a very small chance, but perhaps it could happen. I think Tech knows that being latched onto UT is the better long term play, so that’s what they’ll do.
Either way, blowing a big hole in the Pac-16 scenario is the best way to do it. Then Texas/Tech/Colorado is all that’s left of the invite (for that sake, you’d better hope Baylor gets the spot instead if you really want that to play out).
I think if A&M/OU/OSU get SEC invites, then Texas can leave behind Tech for the Big Ten. I really do believe that is a viable course of action because going to the Pac-10 with Tech/Baylor/Colorado seems worthless. Even putting Utah in isn’t going to excite Texas.
The question is, how badly does UT want the Pac-16 invite blown up. Putting Baylor in and letting A&M solicit the SEC may be the best option. Of course you don’t want to have a Pac-16 with Baylor…
What has to happen though is that the SEC determines it wants OU and A&M badly. Then it jumps in with its OU/OSU/A&M bid. The Big Ten has to get Nebraska/Missouri/Rutgers invites if this does go down with the SEC jumping in… Then the Big Ten has to get Texas/ND to the table and willing to talk about joining as the 15th and 16th invites.
LikeLike
Anyways Hopkins Horn.
I don’t think your premise that “Tech has to land on its feet” is valid.
Why? Only the Pac-10 has played its hand.
The SEC hasn’t and the Big Ten hasn’t.
The Big Ten must wait for the SEC to make a move on OU/OSU and possibly A&M before the Big Ten can make a move on Texas (maybe A&M if SEC doesn’t).
That’s what this is all contingent on; essentially the Pac-10 invite getting blown up by Stanford or the SEC.
Why? Because the Big Ten cannot blow it up on its own since it only wants Texas/A&M.
Mike Slive and how badly he wants OU/OSU/A&M are going to determine whether Texas/A&M go to the Pac-10 or whether they both go to the Big Ten or Texas goes to the Big Ten and A&M goes to the SEC.
That guy who posts on BON; learned hand is right that we’ve only seen one hand played.
The SEC must go before the Big Ten in the game of Texas Hold ‘Em.
If the SEC folds, then the Big Ten will lose Texas in my mind unless Texas somehow can stay in the Big 12.
LikeLike
Hopkins,
Didn’t post this on BON but,
If Texas politicians are controlling who gets invited when do backers of TCU, Houston, et all get involved. What if they turn the PAC-10 invite into 6 teams from Texas. Drop Ok, OKst, & Colorado.
The idea is to increase the demands Texas makes for them to be invited. At some point the PAC 10 would have to say No way.
Although, the push for these “extras” needs to come from someone other than Texas or A&M.
Personally, I’d love to have the Horns in the BigTen, but don’t think it will happen.
LikeLike
Random question: do y’all prefer “Big 10” or “Big Ten”?
LikeLike
Big Ten is the brand name. Big 10 is ‘can’t you guys count?’
LikeLike
Only one way to get the 11 in there.
LikeLike
Big Ten
LikeLike
I always say BigTen since the conference spells it out. BigTen, Pac10, Big12.
LikeLike
“Big XII”, actually
LikeLike
Officially, the moniker for the Big 12 is “Big 12” despite the XII on the logo. I wish I had a link to the style guide where I read that.
LikeLike
Nope.
The Big 12 Conference – Outstanding Success:
BIG 12 … AS EASY AS 1 – 2
When referring to the Big 12 Conference, please remember the conference name (which is a registered trademark) should be listed as follows:
Big 12 Conference
The following should NOT be used in text when referencing the Big 12:
Big XII
Big Twelve
LikeLike
I had no idea…
LikeLike
And yet the logo in the upper left on that page is “XII”…
LikeLike
@M Yes, the logo is odd.
Also, the Big 12 Conference says to use “Big 12 Conference” “when referring to the Big 12 Conference”. But, in the next sentence, they themselves abbreviate this to “Big 12”.
LikeLike
@M:
Hence the confusion.
LikeLike
P10, B10, B12
Keep it simple.
LikeLike
Big Ten, Pac-10, Big XII
LikeLike
I believe the official names of the FBS conferences are:
Atlantic Coast Conference
Big East Conference
Big Ten Conference
Big 12 Conference
Conference USA
Mid-American Conference
Mountain West Conference
Pacific-10 Conference
Southeastern Conference
Sun Belt Conference
Western Athletic Conference
LikeLike
Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-10
LikeLike
One thing that will be fun: If ND actually joins the Big Ten, its many fans will howl with discontent and disgust for the Big Ten schools. This will bring the level of Notre Dame “hatred” within the old-Big Ten schools to an all time high. I expect to see some VERY intense rivalries develop. And I look forward to seeing the Buckeyes (not my school) put one of those 38-0 beat downs onto the Irish.
LikeLike
I think that’s kind of a good thing, to be honest. I imagine ND fans will hate other schools fans and vice versa. So long as it stays in the stands and off the field (for the most part) I’m fine with it. But passion is how you develop ties, so I’m fine with it. I mean, wouldn’t PSU feel more of an outlier if they hadn’t developed a nice rivalry with OSU and Iowa? If all they had was the manufactured rivalry with MSU?
LikeLike
I can’t imagine that NU would be happy after doing everything it could to escape UT only to have the Longhorns follow them to another conference.
I see absolutely no way what Frank is saying here comes to pass. Unless, this was never really about Nebraska’s disagreements with Texas to begin with and the whole topic is really overblown.
In fact, I find the idea of a Big 10 with NU & UT to be a true nightmare scenario. Of course, UT will not hold the same sway in the Big 10 that they do in the Big XII. It won’t be the same type of singular driving force, but imagine existing as NU in a conference with the combined egos of UT, Michigan, Notre Dame, & Ohio St.
To make matters worse, a scenario where the Big 10 adds NU, MU, UT, & AM inevitably splits them to 4 divisions. Who do you think will be in the same division now with NU rather than just the same conference. It would be those 4 in a hybrid mini-Big XII within the Big 10. They won’t split up the existing Big 10 teams. NO THANK YOU!
I’d rather be in the Mountain west at that point.
LikeLike
@fivetitles – Chip Brown noted today (and he’s been poking Nebraska fans more than anyone over the last week) that there is a HUGE difference between how Tom Osborne and NU president Harvey Perlman perceive Texas. His understanding is that Perlman and UT president Bill Powers actually have the closest relationship out of any 2 university presidents in the entire Big XII. Remember that those are the guys that are going to make the decisions (not the ADs).
LikeLike
So says Texas.
LikeLike
very true. I have heard many of those notions that the perceived rift between NU & UT are mostly overblown. That’s why I mentioned it and it seems like many of those rifts are made worse by the Basketball schools in the North (ISU, KSU, KU, & MU) being unwilling to challenge UT on anything football and pretty much always voting with them if it ensures that they get the basketball tourney up north.
Still, what do you think about the notion of 4 divisions and NU being relegated to a division with UT, A&M, & MU. I know most NU fans are excited about a rivalry with Iowa and maybe even Minnesota. To be placed in a mini Big XII has the potential to create a rift between the Big 10 old timers & the new schools.
LikeLike
I think if these four teams were added to the conference it would be better to have no more than 2 of them in the same division. Otherwise it will seem like the Big ten and the BiG 12 refugee league.
Would rather see Nebraska and Iowa in the same division along with either IL or NW.
LikeLike
I say no divisions. Maybe Pods, but we really have to come up with a better name for it. I guess divisions is all that will work. How about this I say no title game. Really, you just must maximize your assets by creating as many must-see games as you can – realizing you have to have competitive balance. But all things being equal don’t you want Nebraska playing PSU, OSU, Mich, ND, and UT every year. Those are all ratings winners.
LikeLike
if they add nu, mizzou, rutgers, syracuse, & ND they could have the following divisions.
a: nu, mizzou, iowa, minnesota
b: Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Indiana
c: Michigan, Michigan St. Purdue, Notre Dame
d: Ohio St., Penn St., Rutgers, Syracuse.
that’s a better set of divisions if you ask me and as long as you ensure the rivalry games still get played, no one would care.
LikeLike
Not really. I don’t need to see those games setup each year. else why not have a conference of the 5 or 6 of them. This is what happens when you make a conference so big. You get scheduling problems. There are enough weighted programs in such a league that you might see a game like that every 3 weeks. Which would be fine with me. Else the Minnesotans don’t get a chance at the upset. Which for Minnesotans would be an even better game than the games you promoted.
LikeLike
well, you’d play the 3 teams in your pod every year & maybe have one other guaranteed rivalry game. Other than that, you’d have to rotate between 5 other matchups every year to get to 9 conference games. It isn’t perfect, but I don’t think any scheduling is going to be perfect each year. also, the 4 division setup requires 2 rounds of playoffs. that probably predcludes it anyway.
LikeLike
I don’t know all the factors involved…
but my best analysis has a pod of Nebraska with Iowa, Wiscy, and Minnesota. Nebraska fits best geographical and culturally into this group.
Then, you’re left with a pod of aTm, UT, Illinois, and Northwestern. This way you’re integrating the Big 12 schools into the league better. Plus, if there’s a place where more UT/aTm grads are most congregated in the Big 10 right now, it’s the Chicago area. It’s geographically very close to Texas too (only Iowa is closer!)
(Sorry I don’t think Mizzou is getting in)
LikeLike
Its a point worth remembering – you have to worry about all the big egos. However, the B10 is perfect for this because there are already a lot of big egos. Mich and OSU aren’t going to let UT throw its big ego around.
LikeLike
Wait a minute — schools other than Texas have oversized egos?!? That’s not what I’ve been reading on here.
LikeLike
You betcha you don’t want to double cross Minnesota.
LikeLike
just a bit.
I’m a Michigan guy. Some of the factions, egos and politics make me want to throttle people.
LikeLike
Are the politics really that bad in the Big Ten, though?
I can’t think of any school dissing another school or having loyalty issues anywhere close to the Big 12 or Big East. If the reports are true, the Big 12 has set a deadline for two of its schools and seven others are interested in jumping ship, and Baylor’s regent referred to Nebraska as “a bunch of corn shuckers” not in the core of the Big 12. The Big East has a better time of it, but four of its members (UConn, Rutgers, Pitt, Syracuse) have been under serious consideration by the Big Ten, and everybody save South Florida and Syracuse would accept in a heartbeat. Also, Paul Tagliabue’s statements to discourage the Big Ten from taking Rutgers slighted the school’s stature, IIRC.
We haven’t had that problem in the Big Ten. Can you think of any school or conference officials taking potshots at the conference/another school in the last several years, outside of Joe Tiller’s comments about Rich Rodriguez? We’ve got it lucky, though if Notre Dame joins we’ll never have an end to the complaining.
LikeLike
James,
I was referring to internal issues and politics but yes there are politics in the Big Ten. Probably not as much as elsewhere but they are still there. And there are still many Wolverines, of a certain age, who fume over the conference vote after the 1973 season to send Ohio State to the Rose Bowl.
LikeLike
Back in the 80’s when there were random calls to kick Northwestern out of the Big Ten because their athletics were losing record numbers of games, there was a ‘protect the little brother’ mentality and a whole lot of respect for NU academically.
I think that mentality has always existed of protecting the conference.
Plus, The Big Ten seems to have a lot of Traditionalists who loathe change, so that goes in hand with sticking by your colleagues.
LikeLike
@James
Of course you don’t — because you’re fat and happy. There wasn’t this sort of public in-fighting until it became clear that teams were not getting what they were worth in the Big XII and started looking elsewhere.
If Michigan were taking a disproportionate share of already paltry earnings and saying everything in the conference had to run through Detroit, there would be issues in the Big Ten, as well.
LikeLike
but you guys have cowboy hats to go along with those egos. big difference
LikeLike
Hopkins Horn, look at any article about the Big Ten inviting Penn State.
That was a gigantic fiasco. The Big Ten has a lot of oversized egos, but it generally works.
LikeLike
Mizzou fans have over-sized egos, and they don’t even have a reason to.
LikeLike
This is all about the new revenue stream in college athletics (network subscription and advertising revenue) that Texas has no interest in sharing with the little sisters of the Big 12. Unfortunately, Nebraska doesn’t have a large enough market to start a Cornhusker network like Texas does, so the Huskers can either stand by in the Big 12 and fall behind or join the Big Ten and its network. The only way the Huskers will stay (with a Big Ten invite)is if Texas agrees to join/start a Big 12 network.
LikeLike
agree. the CIC alone is worth jumping conferences.
LikeLike
As a Husker fan, let me make a distinction here. Husker fans aren’t happy with the B12 because of how the teams bend over backwards for UT – not necessarily with UT outside of the politics of the B12. Personally I’m much more irritated with our old B8 “allies” who have pandered to UT than with UT getting everything out the situation they can. The recent 11-1 vote over keeping the CCG in Dallas is a perfect example. NU wants the CCG to continue rotating between the north and south, but the other B8 schools don’t want to aggravate UT and need the recruiting help by having more games in Texas.
Both NU and UT in the B10 would work fine because the rest of the conference isn’t so dependent on pleasing UT. UT wouldn’t always get its way and neither would NU. In fact I’d bet UT and NU would vote together more often than not. OSU, UM, PSU, etc. are NOT going to want a CCG played every year in UT’s backyard because of the competitive disadvantage. But most would probably want the CCG to be in Dallas as part of a rotation – including NU.
LikeLike
@RedDenver – You are right, the fans are not happy with UT (losing football games will do that). The 11-1 votes are not a big deal (both Osborne and Pelini have said so) to the Administration. NU and UT have more in common than the average Husker thinks, most of the time what is good for Texas is good for NU. What you don’t hear about is all the votes (i.e. revenue sharing) that NU and UT see eye to eye on.
LikeLike
I’d have no problem being in the Big Ten with Texas. It’s an outstanding school and an outstanding athletic program.
LikeLike
Personally I’m much more irritated with our old B8 “allies” who have pandered to UT than with UT getting everything out the situation they can. The recent 11-1 vote over keeping the CCG in Dallas is a perfect example.
So, you’re pissed that the “11” vote as though they’re members of the Big 12 Conference rather than as members of the Big 8?
LikeLike
No, I expect the universities to vote as they see fit. However, I don’t naively think they vote in a vacuum without regard to conference politics. What I’m referring to is the idea that the B12 is controlled from the state of Texas, which I find to be more true than not. Ask around the B12 fans outside of Texas and I’m guessing they’ll mostly agree that Texas has gained an unhealthy control over the conference. But I do not blame UT for this situation and NU could co-exist with UT in a different political environment. The problem lies in how easily UT and the old SWC group can influence the voting of the old B8 members.
And now schools are encouraging (and pleading) with NU not to leave the conference. And writers in Texas are making it out as if NU leaving is the death blow to the conference. Aren’t there 11 other teams? Why do they suddenly need a single team they’ve been voting against for so long? And who upholds the dreaded uneven revenue split?
LikeLike
The difference between UT in the Big Ten and UT in the Big12 is that Texas would not be a threat to destroy the conference at any time. The Big12 lets UT have its way because they know that if UT picks up its ball and goes home, the conference is all over. I know UT is trying to put this on UNL, but it’s not true. The B12 conference would survive without the Huskers, it just is no longer a conference that Texas wants to be in, so they’re threatening to destroy it.
Texas would never be a threat to destroy the Big Ten. If they threatened to leave, we’d ask them to stay, but the conference would go on and be strong.
LikeLike
MW is a death sentence. Any neb fan who thinks that is using emotion over logic.
Texas in the big10 would not have the same power they have in the big12. It is the power that is the problem. The 2 AD departments actually got along until just recently.
I’m not saying I’d want it, but the problems neb has with UT would be muted in the big10.
LikeLike
Personally, as a Nebraska fan I’ve always found the TX angst a bit overblown. And it wouldn’t bother me a bit to continue in the same conference with them, whether its the Big 12 or the Big Ten (hey I read the previous posts on proper names).
LikeLike
@fivetitles,
If the BT does sub-divisions, then I think it would be…
* Iowa, MN, UW & NU
The season-ending games being… Iowa vs. NU & UW vs. MN.
I think NU vs. that triumverite would be compelling.
LikeLike
As a Nebraska fan, I think going to the Big 10 with Texas (and aTm, Mizzou and Notre Dame) is the best case scenario. Nebraska gets to keep its recruiting ties to Texas, the revenue per school would be absolutely sick, and you get the top 6 winningest programs in the history of college football in the conference, and you get to play at least 2 games a year against these giants.
I don’t think Nebraska wants to get away from Texas, they want to get away from Texas running the conference. No way Texas could dominate the Big 10 in this scenario. Sign me up!
LikeLike
Some of the posters here ought to be in the press shops of their alma maters. If Pitt, MO, etc doesn’t get into the Big10, the world wont stop turning.
Pitt may be a great research school, but it simply doesn’t measure up to the benefits of a TX, MD, UVA, ND. They wont be invited, there are too many good reasons to invite other schools. Pitt suffers from all the problems of a rust-belt state w/out having the courtesy to provide an expanded BTN footprint.
LikeLike
I think that is somewhat true. Just for sake of argument, let’s say you get UT/ND and just those two. And now there is a 3rd slot open. At that point, the Presidents may covet Pitt’s research over any other benefits the other schools may bring. Also Pitt would join in a heartbeat. I’m not saying Pitt is likely, but there are scnearious where taking Pitt would be more amendable than others.
LikeLike
Problem for Pitt is I believe that Texas comes with at lest one. (A&M). Somee times a college takes the twin brother of a prize recruit but the the cousin?
LikeLike
MD and UVA are not relevant. They are not available.
LikeLike
I guess you are incapable of posting anything other than XXXX won’t come to the Big Ten.
LikeLike
Trying to be an adult here Mike–and who the hell are you?
LikeLike
I don’t think it’s “adult” to simply repeat that so-and-so is not coming or is not available, without stating your reasons.
Really, what do you think you’re adding to the discussion?
LikeLike
he has. mushroom had been around here for months.
You’re the one who is arriving late to this party, howard. Search more, read more, post less.
LikeLike
God has been an articulate poster since Frank’s first Expansion Index. Some of the points and observations posted lately have been discussed at length prior to many of the current posters. It might be helpful to read some of Frank’s earlier articles and the over 10,000 posts prior to now. Most of this ground aside from the “Southern Strategy” and the “Pac Ten Texas Package” has been analyzed to death already.
LikeLike
That’s not true; I’m sure Iowa State, Louisville and Cincinnati are viable options in their minds.
LikeLike
I think mushroompud is a macro.
LikeLike
For all the people who think there will be congressional intervention in whatever BCS system arises from any scenario, I did some analysis. I divided states into 3 categories. The first is states that under almost any remotely sane scenario will have at least 1 BCS school. Basically, any state with a Pac-10, Big Ten, ACC, or SEC school, as well as Texas for obvious reasons. The next group is other states with current BCS schools in unstable conferences (rest of Big XII, Big East). The third group is states that currently do not have a BCS school, but do have an FBS school. (I suppose the 4th implicit category is all other states, but I’ve left them out).
In the safe category, there are 26 states:
California
Texas
Florida
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Michigan
Georgia
North Carolina
Virginia
Washington
Arizona
Massachusetts
Indiana
Tennessee
Maryland
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Alabama
South Carolina
Louisiana
Kentucky
Oregon
Iowa
Mississippi
Arkansas
Combined, these states have 52 Senators, 234,346,659
people, and 331 congressmen.
In the second group (states that could theoretically go from having a BCS school to not having one) are 9 states:
New York (probably wouldn’t care)
New Jersey
Missouri
Colorado
Oklahoma (almost certainly will be in a BCS conference)
Connecticut
Kansas
West Virginia
Nebraska (Fun fact: Nebraska has the smallest population of any state with a BCS school)
These states have 18 Senators, 52,902,001 people (19,541,453 from New York) and 78 congressmen (29 from New York).
There are also 6 states that currently have FBS schools but no BCS schools:
Utah
Nevada
New Mexico
Idaho
Hawaii
Wyoming
These states have 12 Senators, 10,822,577 people and 14 congressmen.
In summary, BCS states have 52 Senators to 30 from the outsiders, 331 to 92 congressmen, and ~234 million to ~64 million people. These numbers get even worse with some very simple assumptions (New York wouldn’t care, Rutgers, Nebraska, and Oklahoma will likely still be in a BCS conference) Unless many elected officials are willing to support something that would harm his constituent BCS school (or at least a school in their state), no Hatch-like action will be successful.
LikeLike
If Pac 16 crumbles, you run the risk of freeing up a lot of representatives from CA/TX.
I just operate under the assumption that eventually Congress will get around to holding hearings on any industry. In fact, they have already grumbled about the BCS. For this purpose, Utah being in the P16 would be much better than Baylor.
LikeLike
yes but if they don’t have the votes it will just be Orrin Hatch wagging his finger and being upset.
LikeLike
@M,
Uh, dude….What do you do for a living and does your boss know how much time your spending on Frank’s website?
LikeLike
Lol that took like 5 mins. Wikipedia+spreadsheet skillz=win.
LikeLike
If the Big 12 crumbles, under current rules the MWC would become a BCS conference because the rules say that any conference that is among the Top 6 in various categories gets a automatic BCS bid. Since the MWC is at least 7th in all of them, then if one of the conferences ahead of them crumbled, they’d move up to #6. That was a big issue in the BSU non-invite yesterday. They realized they might not need BSU to get BCS status.
Now it’s possible they change the rules to keep the MWC out, but then you really get Orrin Hatch on your ass. But since Hatch really only cares about UU and BYU, if those schools get in, he drops his campaign.
LikeLike
I’m continuing to get a number of tidbits about both Nebraska and Missouri getting invited to the Big Ten. I’ll update here and on Twitter accordingly.
LikeLike
Any new news about ND?
LikeLike
Thanks for the update Frank!
LikeLike
There are multiple people “in the know” on a few different Husker boards that are citing Nebraska to the Big10 as a done deal with an announcement coming anywhere from tomorrow until Monday.
LikeLike
Frank, I love your blog, but really – after all the research I know you’ve done on Notre Dame, do your really believe the Irish want to join a Big Ten with Missouri in it, especially since if they were truly “on-board” with joining, they get a say as to who else, if anyone else, gets in?
Do you think the Irish have any interest whatsoever in playing in Columbia, MO or even St. Louis for that matter?
How do you think Notre Dame views Missouri’s academic standing?
Do you think the Irish would perceive the addition of the Tigers has making the Big Ten conference more national in scope or simply make the Big Ten even more of a “mid-western” conference?
If ND were truly “on-board’ with joining the Big Ten, do you truly believe the Tigers are ahead of the likes of any of these other candidates that have been mentioned over time: (listed alpha) Boston College, Maryland, Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse, UConn, or Virginia?
Personally, I think you are listening to Big Ten people who don’t have a clue about the Irish.
LikeLike
I don’t believe anyone has suggested ND wants to join a Big Ten with Missouri. What they have suggested is they would join a Big Tne with Texas. And the thinking is Missouri is an acceptable to the Big Ten school that would be helpful in attracting Texas because of some of Texas’ geographical wishes. So Missouri helps with Texas and thus with Notre Dame.
LikeLike
The thing this article doesn’t take account of is the fact that Missouri is at the center of destroying the Longhorn’s beloved B12 and has basically shown its disdain for Texas’ control of the B12 for a long time now. This doesn’t seem the basis for the type of relationship proposed by Frank.
LikeLike
@Omni–
It’s been posited throughout that ND would want UT in the BigTen/massive conference realignment if it were to join. And step one in that process, as Zeek has pointed out, is to ensure the Big12’s demise. Maybe Nebraska alone does that, but Nebraska coupled with Missouri most definitely does.
ND joining the BigTen is several moves down the line. Delaney has to setup the playing field first.
LikeLike
We’re playing chess. As you correctly point out, the Big Ten/Delany are thinking about where the pieces are now and where the pieces are several moves later.
Thinking about the pieces individually as a lot of the speculation that we see in the news reports do completely misses the goal of all of this.
LikeLike
If the Big 10 wants Mizzou, fine.
I remain entirely, thoroughly, completely perplexed by the suggestion that Missouri is somehow a draw for Texas. Not a single compelling reason has been offered.
If Texas comes to the Big 10, it is because Nebraska started the dominoes rolling AND Texas wants to. If anything, Texas and Notre Dame come despite Mizzou.
LikeLike
Yes they come despite Mizzou.
The only thing Mizzou offers to Texas is a Texas/A&M/ND/Mizzou pod where the travel to Mizzou makes it slightly less burdensome on Texas/A&M who have made indications that they care about not being geographic outliers.
LikeLike
Zeek, Since you keep harping on this pod thing, here’s my pod set up.
TX, aTm, Illini, NW
Neb, Minny, Wiscy, Iowa
ND, MSU, Purdue, UM
OSU, PSU, Rutgers, Indiana
Each team gets one fixed Out of Pod opponent (ND/Texas. UM/OSU, PU/IN. PSU/MSU. etc.) whom they play every year.
It works for ND…and it works for the Big 10.
No need for Missouri in any case. Nebraska alone will destabilize the BIg 12 enough.
LikeLike
Texas/A&M want to be in a pod with ND most likely; the whole focus of the NW Rivals rumor, etc. was that. Texas/A&M also don’t want to travel as much if they don’t have to; hence Missouri. Notre Dame guarantees itself a game inside the state of Texas every year (home/away with Texas/A&M).
Texas/A&M/Missouri/ND
Nebraska/Wisconsin/Iowa/Minnesota
The other two I’m not certain about…
Michigan/MSU/Northwestern/Illinois
Ohio State/Penn State/Indiana/Purdue.
ND-Michigan would have to be a rivalry, but I don’t know hot to fix it with Ohio State-Michigan…
Regardless, I think the Texas pod is going to be set based the notion that Texas/A&M/ND are joining for each other and ND will want to play a game in Texas every year…
LikeLike
Your pods aren’t bad.
On travel distances, I think having a ton more money would be more important to Texas/ATM than having to travel a wee bit farther for a few games. Rutgers, I believe, would offer TONS more cash than Missouri. NJ has 9 million people…MO has 6 million. Rutgers sports might not have the allegiance that Mizzou sports does, but when you factor all the good teams that would come with Rutgers on the BTN, I think it woud sell. (Oh, and did I mention that Rutgers is on the doorstep of NYC and its 9 million people?)
Mizzou might end up in the Big 10, but I don’t think they are part of Plan A.
LikeLike
Believe me, we all know a whole lot more about the Irish than we want to know.
LikeLike
@omnicarrier – ND doesn’t care about Mizzou at all. It cares a whole lot, though, about the chance on being in the same conference as Texas. Nebraska or Missouri leaving alone probably keeps the Big XII intact, but both of them leaving means that Texas is truly a free agent. If going after Texas fails, then it works for the Irish to add on 2 Big East schools (likely Rutgers and Syracuse).
IF ND is going to join (and I won’t believe it until it’s announced because they’ve left the Big Ten at the alter before), then they have come to the conclusion that they’re going to have to join a conference no matter what. Whether the Big Ten acts first or the Pac-10, it’s going to happen if 16-school conferences come to fruition. So, if they know that they’re going to have to join a conference no matter what (and mind you, they can’t ever say this to their alums), then the Irish will want to be at the front of the line forming it rather than having to be plugged into a place with no say or without a chance for even greater things (i.e. a Big Ten with both ND and Texas together). It’s kind of the same public posturing that Texas has set forth – in public, they’re supposedly “waiting” to see how the landscape changes, but in private, they’re being very proactive in securing the best possible place. DeLoss Dodds has had several months of bland comments about how much they aren’t going to do anything, yet in the past week we’ve already seen what Texas has gotten from the Pac-10 and Gordon Gee’s emails show that they’ve been talking with the Big Ten for awhile, too.
LikeLike
@Frank
Are you saying that the Big 12’s ultimatum (if Nebraska or Missouri are out, the conference is through!) is just a bluff? I’ve seen it reported numerous times as such. I was supposing that the overall financial punch of the conference would have been SOOOO dinged by replacing Nebraska with anyone else, that the presidents would fold up their tents if Nebraska ALONE left. Not your take?
PS I’d love to make Jim Delany’s voice saying “Delany out” my ring tone for the next few months.
LikeLike
There is just no logical explanation for Missouri, other than the Big 10 just likes them. There are ample reasons to consider Missouri a safe and reasonable add. That’s fine.
But Missouri does not “lead” to anything else. It does not lead to Notre Dame. It does not lead to Texas. It does not help pods develop. Nothing.
LikeLike
Exactly. And there is nothing wrong with a midwestern conference wanting another midwestern team in their conference.
But this notion that somehow Mizzou is the lynchpin to getting both Texas and ND is a poor strategy.
And personally, I think Scott has one-upped Delany and Delany is not handling the pressure well at all.
Of course, when its all said and done, it may turn out that both the Big Ten and the Pac-10 were working together all along. LOL
LikeLike
As I stated before, if they are selected, I hope it is because they like them and not because of some grand strategy. Now if they offer strategic value in inducing other schools to join down the line so be it. But if they are going to take Mizzou, it really ought to be because on its own they offer some strategic value. A “you were only taken to get X” reasoning poisons it from the start – even if Mizzou is basically standing there with a “Pick Me” sign.
LikeLike
I agree that Missouri is not a lead to either Texas or ND. The Nebraska invite should be enough to move the needle on Texas either way. I also cannot buy Delany passing on NY market. Too much money at stake. Passing on any combination of SU, RU, UConn, or Pitt is a major miscalculation. I also don’t see ND coming aboard without a guarantee of Texas already in hand.
@omni: I think you are right that Scott has either one-upped Delany or they are working together.
LikeLike
I believe Missouri was the “lead” to get to Neb, who then gets to TX or ND. Big10 rumors involving Missouri stirs the pot in Lincoln, because it opens all the old wounds of Big12 N v S battles that Neb has lost – “why should we let Missouri leave and get that big10 $$, and leave us with the big12 still run by TX???!!!”. Then rumors of Nebraska in play stirs the pot in Austin or South Bend, because Neb moving to another conference causes their head to turn, but Missouri doesn’t. Missouri was a means to get Nebraska’s attention, which then leads to the other desired possibilities.
LikeLike
Re ND and plan B (Frank)
In your main post you say if ND is in and Texas is out, then Pittgers is likely in (Pitt and RU?). SU is not needed since ND is sufficient.
Yet here you say if ND is in and Texas is out, then RU and SU are likely.
Sorry, in the same blog you seem to be saying both that ND, RU, Pitt is likely
without Texas AND that ND, RU and SU is likely without Texas.
You sound as confused as the rest of us!
LikeLike
Even assuming the since we want Texas so bad we’ll settle for Mizzou getting in strategy is correct (and I don’t buy it for one minute myself), why in the world would ND say yes knowing that Texas will most likely be forced by its state government to accept the Pac-16 offer that saves Tech as well?
And yes, I realize Baylor may be a “poison pill” for the Pac-16, but if the state government is stupid enough to sacrifice a safety net that involves Tech for Baylor, then we all know what happens when all 3 – UT, A&M, and TTU become “free agents”.
And it won’t be A&M to the Big Ten.
LikeLike
Frank,
Why is the BT so interested in ND? Been turned down before by ND admin, lots of anti BT among fans/alums, many non-fits institutionally, and other money making options for the BT. Seems like a lot of negatives.
I’ve asked this before on this blog, and no one’s given an answer so I assume I’m not the only one who’s confused.
LikeLike
@ChicagoRed – … “other than money making options…” – That’s what matters the most. It’s arguably the nation’s most preeminent sports program that’s right in the middle of Big Ten territory. The normal rules don’t apply to ND and that’s really going to be stance of any conference.
LikeLike
Money I get, but still seems like mega-negatives especially all the anti BT sentiment at ND–and not just with the fans. Awfully “un-Big-10ish”.
Mind you, I’d love to see NE & ND together in the BT. I was part of the Sea of Red when the Huskers visited South Bend (as a bonus, I paid face value for my ticket at the last minute even though I was perfectly happy making the drive from Chicago just to soak in the atmosphere and watch the game from a nearby bar).
LikeLike
@FtT
Here’s what I don’t understand. Why would the Big Ten want to blow up the Big XII at this point in order to get UT?
It’s already been well established that UT has a “Tech” problem and possibly a “Baylor” problem to boot. Those are political issues. They will only be resolved in time. They will only be resolved when they’ve been given opportunities to be shopped around and either find a spot in a decent conference or realize that they never had any hope of being in a major conference. And it doesn’t appear they’ve been resolved yet, given the reaction from the likes of Baylor.
UT’s only hope for going to the prom is to find dates for all its ugly stepsisters. Otherwise, those sisters tell daddy and make sure UT doesn’t get to go.
So if the Big Ten really covets UT, why would they blow things up before UT has been able to find available suitors? Given an extra year they might be able to work things out. At this point, they might not have time. And the Big Ten may just be forcing UT along with all the other Texas schools into the Pac 10s arms.
(And yes, there are some weird incestual, polygamous relationships happening in this analogy.)
LikeLike
@Will (NU) – I don’t know if more time would change that political situation. I think that IF Texas decides that the Big Ten is its best potential home, then its selling point to the legislature is that it’s being forced to turn down a shit-ton massive amount of money on the athletic side and huge opportunities on the academic side. This isn’t just a matter of a couple of million extra dollars – for UT to turn down the Big Ten, that institution might be missing out on $200 million or more over the course of a decade. Add in Texas A&M and the two of them are giving up $400 million more money over 10 years in order to placate the interests in Lubbock and Waco. Now, politicians obviously aren’t rational beings. These people may very well care about a couple of extra football games at Texas Tech and Baylor compared to $400 million more over the course of a decade for its two top public universities. However, no one is really framing the discussion in that manner. The political conversation right now is that Texas Tech and Baylor are getting screwed. Instead, the political conversation would need to change to Texas Tech and Baylor are holding $400 million over the next decade from Texas and Texas A&M.
LikeLike
Agreed. And I assume UT/aTm are vociferously making that point. Still, I don’t think it matters what amount of money they are leaving on the table, Tech will likely screw them out of it if there is even a hint of an alternative where it could end up in a major conference.
I was under the impression that aTm and UT ran the legislature, which ensured those two would both be taken care of, but I’ve since been told that Tech is not as politically impotent as they might seem. If so, UT’s options are severely limited in the short term.
LikeLike
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/ann_killion/06/08/pac-10-expansion/index.html?eref=sihp
I just read this article on Si.com from Ann Killion and it just reminds me of how idealistic writers want to appear to be.
Here is the passage the got me laughing:
“The dollar signs have changed prevailing notions about academics and tradition, about putting the student-athlete first. The Pac-10 presidents suddenly don’t mind changing travel schedules, ditching tradition and making a geographic mud pie out of their conference as long as it means they all get more money. Lots more money.”
I mean how late to the party is she. News flash, conferences care about $$$ and schools use their athletic program as a way to generate more $$$.
LikeLike
added
LikeLike
While I maintain ND is nowhere near being interested in joining a conference at this point in the process, I wonder why the Big 10 would really want to invite them to begin with. Sure the quick answer = $$, but I see that the Big 10 can have it’s cake and eat it too. This may sound like ND bashing, but it’s really just an observation from the outside based on actual results as at least 1 person sees it.
Right now, ND has self-selected itself out of being relevant from the standpoint of competing for National Championships, or even top 10 status as a football powerhouse. They’ve done so by staying out of a conference and being less than desirable to most top recruits who want conference rivalries, championship games (something the Big 10 is also struggling to resolve, whether they admit it or not), Sat. night games on ESPN, etc. Now they seem like they recruit ok because anyone recruited by ND generally gets an extra * by their name, and when they win 9 games they get a high ranking, but can you tell me the last time they were legit as a National Title condender? I can tell you nobody in High School right now has ever seen it. Rivalries, kids love them. Notre Dame thinks they have some good ones, and they are OK. But when Notre Dame gets psyched for the big game against USC, the USC players have it around #3 on the list of important games, at best. #1 is UCLA and #2 is anyone else in the Pac-10 competing for the league title against USC. Maybe I don’t know, but is there 1 converence school that considers Notre Dame it’s true #1 rival?
But, ND does still have Brand (at least to the alumns and NBC folks), and they still sell seats where they play. Thing is, Big 10 teams already play Notre Dame. They already reap the benefits that come with playing Notre Dame every season. Why not get the benefit of playing Notre Dame without the threat of them beating you?(Yes, I know they win sometimes, but I mean they are no powerhouse right now). Why give them the platform to correct all the problems that they are self-selecting to maintain with their independence? If they are in the Big 10, how many recruits that go to Wisconsin are going to be lost to Notre Dame? Do they then become the National Power they think they are, but actually just once were? Does a conference really want to wake that sleeping Giant up? Maybe if Notre Dame decided to end their Big 10 schedule of games, but short of that, why do it?
LikeLike
Because they’re Notre Dame.
They’re actually immune to regional population demographics in the sense that they’re not tied to any state or region in terms of their fanbase.
But they have a huge advantage in that the Catholic population generally recognizes them and that they have a massive bandwagon fanbase outside of their alumni grouping.
Combine that with Latino/Catholic demographics trends, and Notre Dame is an incredibly valuable football brand.
LikeLike
42% of the student population of Notre Dame comes from the Midwest. That makes them more of a regional school than either NW or Duke (41% Midwest and 38% Southeast, respectively).
LikeLike
I do, however, understand the bandwagon fanbase issue.
LikeLike
For the Big ten ND is unfinished business. I think it must be an itch they MUST scratch as they are nestled deep in Big ten country and are not a part of the league. The do have a national following. People love to love them or love to hate them and they tune in to see that. I personally love to see them love the 2 – 1 in their annual Big ten 3 pack but root for them playing other teams. They can and will be more relevant nationally when they join the conference. One thing about a conference is that “you know what they got and you know what you got.” Playing the same teams 3 out of 4 or 5 years will be an advantage for a national recruiter like ND.
LikeLike
I agree with both posts, but doesn’t the Big 10 already get the benefit of playing Notre Dame without giving ND that national recruiting advantage?
LikeLike
I’m sorry, maybe I’m too old, but I never dreamed of winning conference titles.
LikeLike
Gene Smith disagrees with you. 🙂
LikeLike
Gene Smith was ordered to. It’s very sad.
LikeLike
LOL. I have no doubt he’s doing his job, which probably means pimping ND-to-BigTen in this case, but I’m not sure I buy being “ordered to”. 🙂
LikeLike
I don’t think Notre Dame has self selected itself out of rivalries. even big rivalries. they are just not in conference. They have very high profile rivalry games with USC, Michigan and Michigan State. in that order of importance.
LikeLike
I agree they have rivalries, just nothing like Texas-OU, Mich-Ohio St, USC-UCLA, Auburn-‘Bama, etc. And that hurts them in recruiting.
LikeLike
ND has two rivals — USC (respect) and Michigan (hatred).
If you spend a few minutes on NDNation, you will see they rejoice at any troubles of SC and Michigan. If a Navy, Purdue or MSU football player gets in trouble off the field, you’ll be lucky to find one post on it. If a Michigan or SC player gets in trouble, its all over the board.
LikeLike
Funny, right now it seems like the school the NDNation board hates the most is BC.
LikeLike
As I noted to Hopkins Horn above in his problem of determining how Texas might get to the Big Ten, a lot of this depends on whether Slive or Stanford or someone breaks up the Pac-10 invite other than the Big Ten.
The Big Ten won’t do it because we don’t want Tech. Thus, there’s not going to be a Texas/A&M/Tech/Nebraska/Notre Dame or whatever offer. That’s no the Big Ten’s ultimate offer.
Alan or any of the other SEC commentators; just how much does Slive and the SEC value OU/OSU and A&M. Would they jump into this and disrupt the bid in an attempt to grab the two Oklahoma schools and A&M?
I know Texas would fight back to keep A&M with it, but if even just Oklahoma/OSU leave the bid, that makes it a lot easier for the Big Ten to swoop down and make an offer to Texas/A&M because the regionality part of the Pac-10 bid loses a bit of luster.
Perhaps not enough to entirely sink the bid, but Colorado/Texas/A&M/Tech is a wash versus Nebraska/Missouri/Texas/A&M. Yes the Tech problem is still there, but the geographical benefits are somewhat gone. More crossover games on West coast, etc.
If A&M actually gets an invite along with Oklahoma/OSU, I think the Pac-10 invite is totally busted without possibility of repair.
Texas will have to weigh an invite to the Big Ten more heavily and may be able to get A&M to go along for the academic benefits of the CIC if A&M gets an invite to the SEC.
Thus, Texas would be able to argue to the legislature that rather than splitting up the schools at least Texas and A&M ended up together…
Regardless, A&M going to the SEC or getting an invite from the SEC, seems to be the best possibly chance that the Big Ten would have of grabbing Texas (and possibly A&M).
LikeLike
perhaps the failure of moving the entire state of texas to the pac10 would be the evidence texas needs to say enough is enough. Then, they and the aggie force the issue. Long shot, I know.
LikeLike
Ah, but doesn’t OK have a State problem akin to UT’s Tech problem. Why would SEC want Ok St. You get A&M for Texas and Ok for the brand. Plus it is even # expansion. Tech and Ok St needs to pull for the Pac 16 option. Kansas is saddled with its own State problem, but it is also finding out how much football trumps bball. This is what makes OK a valuable asset, but if you have to take Ok St, don’t you significantly diminish its value.
What about these steps (apologies if I am just repeating from previous bloggers, I’ve read so many posts)
1. You need to destabilize the BXII – and taking Neb may not by itself do it.
2. Stanford must say no to Tech and Ok St.
3. SEC offer A&M and OK.
By this point, the Texas and OK state politicians must realize that Tech and State are holding back their flagship universities. So either they let those institutions fight for themselves, or we’ll see a modified version of the BXII. Maybe BXII adds Utah and BYU. Who knows. As I’m writing this, I’m wondering could the BXII survive if Neb and Mizzou leave – due to the TX and OK politicians?
LikeLike
Hopkins & Zeek – as far game theory goes, I think the best option is to take Neb and Mizzou and then publicly invite A&M.
I see this as the only move that would really push the other actors to act – SEC, P10, TX Politicians, A&M.
LikeLike
Yeah I’m a big fan of the A&M approach.
But it might be unrealistic, no one knows whether they view the Big Ten as distant and would want to even consider publicly the option of being an outlier.
It’s much easier to have the SEC jump in and break up the bid and then have the Big Ten swoop down.
You are right though that if the SEC does nothing, then the Big Ten should go after A&M to outflank the Pac-10 as it were.
LikeLike
I’m pretty sure I was cribbing from you re A&M when I posted my own solution over at BON.
LikeLike
SEC can go to 16 with Oklahoma/OSU/A&M/FSU or something along those lines.
There are a lot of universities that they can take as the 4th.
SEC wouldn’t want to create a “state problem” at OSU if it is trying to disrupt the Pac-10 invite.
Thus, they would invite OU and OSU as a way of cleanly removing them from the Pac-10 invitation and blowing this thing sky high.
Inviting just Oklahoma makes it easy for Oklahoma to turn it down and claim that it has a “state problem.”
LikeLike
Lots of unknowns. This is what makes this such a great game theory case study. With respect to A&M, I don’t think it matters if they want to join or now. My reasoning is this. It forces them to do one of the following: (1) flat out reject by saying no thanks – I think this will then make it tough for them to go to SEC if they give an invite, (2) say we will think about it – now it will be discussed by the public at large, and UT will have to consider the possibility they will be stuck with Tech, (3) reach out to SEC to get an SEC invite – which gets you back to #2, (4) say we will go but only with Texas, or (5) say we will stick with the Texas 3 – which means you at least no where you stand.
Anyway, this is all way too much game theory for me. I just think the discussion needs to be made public. The tech people need to defend their stance. They may win, but I don’t think the B10 loses any face over it.
LikeLike
I agree with you on all points.
I think the premise of my argument is more that the Big Ten doesn’t have very many angles from which to blow up the Pac-10 invite.
You and others (and I) have pointed out that inviting A&M is a good strategy to attempt to break it up.
But the best possible break up of the Pac-10 invite comes from within (Stanford/Cal rejection) or without (SEC invites OU/OSU cleanly and possibly A&M).
That’s all I’m really saying.
LikeLike
I think the situation in Texas isn’t really that Tech and Baylor must be attached to UT, but rather that if UT moves, there needs to be a safe landing place for the little brothers. Theoretically, if you could find a suitable conference for Tech and Baylor (rebuilt B12, P10, maybe even the MWC), UT could go Big10, and TAM to the SEC without a big fuss.
LikeLike
If the SEC were to expand, it would value aTm and OK at the top of their wish list (since we all know that UT isn’t coming). The problem is that the SEC really (and I mean really) doesn’t want to expand. I wish they would go ahead and jump on aTm and OK, but something tells me they are content with sitting back and seeing what happens over the next week or two. With that said, I’m guessing that the SEC has already had some informal talks with both aTm and OK. I really would have to assume though that aTm and OK are at the top of the SECwish list.
LikeLike
My AD source with knowledge of B10 says Nebraska still better positioned for a bid from B10 than Mizzou if Notre Dame stays put. less than a minute ago via TweetDeck
LikeLike
ND and the B10 are linked now – maybe not formally, but in terms of geography, traditions, rivalries, etc. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think when most people think B10 football, ND is on the back of their mind, and vice versa. Sure they also think USC and Navy as well. It is to both institution’s advantage to maintain this connection. Do you do this formally within the confines of the B10 umbrella, or under the status quo – playing Big 10 teams. Or even one better, by using the BTN as the platform for distributing ND content (i.e., televising its football games).
LikeLike
No thanks to “distributing ND content”. ND always wants to have it both ways…
LikeLike
I agree. I have a reflexive feeling against any of this special treatment that is often brought up to woo TX or Notre Dame. It’s not like becoming a conference member is such a terrible thing in itself. Otherwise there would not be such a robust discussion since December. And the BT has gotten where it has without such internal pot sweeteners.
LikeLike
At some point BTN may be in a better position than NBC to offer he best bid to televise ND football games. I think there is a future for BTN as a rights buyer.
LikeLike
This was at the bottom of the last blog..
so I am reposting it here.. I am still not sold that the SEC will not be VERY aggressive if they feel they will move from the top of the football world.
Theory on SEC moves….
a) UL – with much family in Louisville, 95% that is no go for SEC, If you think Cincinnati has a chance in the Big 10, you think Louisville has a chance in the SEC. Louisville has a BIG UK fanbase, and a decent IU fanbase (no new market, and small stadium by SEC standards).
b) UC – Cincinnati is like Louisville, as their biggest fan bases are UK in the SEC and tOSU in the Big 10 (yes Frank you have made me see the ways of my alma mater). UK has played HOME games in football and basketball in Cincinnati (Louisville as well in Freedom Hall – UL home court). When UK plays football in Cincinnati they play in Paul Brown (home of the Bengals – and the Bengal training camp is just outside of Lexington KY (UK’s home) in Georgetown KY. (UK and tOSU already own southern Ohio, and Nippert stadium would be a joke in the SEC).
c) WVA – Think of the SEC like the Big 10, in this blog we have gone over why WVA would not work in the Big 10. We are armchair quarterbacks, do you think if we can see this Slive can not (footprint, state population, and a stadium at 60,000 it would be one of the smaller in the SEC). I am not making the Big 10 argument here about academics, I am just saying look at the overall numbers. I know we keep talking about Arkansas to the SEC, but WVA does not have Wal Marts HQ right down the street. I have been to Fayetteville many times in the past 20 – 30 years and unless you have been there you can not appreciate what Wal Mart has meant to Arkansas. (and a reason I keep seeing OSU and Boone in a different light).
d) Miami – always listed as one of the first to the SEC, when everything tells me they would be the last. 1) Miami is full of Pro teams – more folks in Miami probably root for the Dolphins and the Heat (why I am still not sold on an expansion by the B 10 into the NYC market). 2) Miami is PRIVATE, and the SEC is PUBLIC. 3) Miami is not southern. Just because they are in the south, does not make them southern. FWIW they are not midwestern either, which is why I would not be happy to see them in the Big 10. 4) Miami does not own Miami much less the rest of the state (Think if I said Cincinnati and Xavier own southern Ohio if it helps). 5) Miami is new, the SEC is old (remember we are in the south where this matters). Howard Schnellenberger put Miami on the football map in the 1980′s (before he went to Louisville). 10 – 20 great years may seem like a big deal but the SEC is the old guard. Maybe I am wrong here, but the fact that Miami has been down is not lost on the SEC. If I were picking a home for Miami, It would be with the likes of ND and other PRIVATE schools.
e) FSU, Clemson, Ga Tech – In descending order.. All already are second fiddle to an SEC team in their home state. When the SEC expanded last time they went into NEW markets, to not think this would be their PRIMARY plan in this expansion would be folly. Football drives this expansion talk, and these three offer no new revenue stream. Heck, Tech can not even command the city it calls home.
Now if I was the SEC I would go back to my roots and consolidate control that way…. the SEC & ACC have common roots in the old SIAA, from that sprang the Southern Conference which composed of (Alabama, Auburn, Clemson, Georgia, Georgia Tech, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi State, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Tennessee, Virginia, Virginia Tech, W&L) later additions were (Florida, LSU, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tulane, Vandy) last to the party were (Swenee, VMI, Duke).
The SEC came from this group in 1932 and the ACC in 1953….
Now look at rivalries (rivals drive ratings)
Arkansas – Texas / Texas A & M
Florida – Miami / FSU
Georgia – Georgia Tech
Kentucky – Indiana (historic) / Louisville (modern)
LSU – Tulane
South Carolina – North Carolina / Clemson
The SEC already has their in state rivals covered, so expansion would be Texas or North Carolina to capture new markets. I keep hearing people pooh pooh academics in the SEC but think of the SEC in the same vein as the Pac 10….
If the Pac 10 goes to 16 we have the Pac 8 division (academic) and the Texas division (sports)
now overlay the SEC as east 8 and west 8.. pooh pooh if you will but UF, Vandy, and UGA have good academics..
SEC east (academic – UF, UGA Vandy + UNC + NC State + UVA + Maryland (leaving UK – with a current top 20 plan in place, UT, and USC – a natural rival for the North Carolina schools)
I guess if people can see a Pac 16 with split academics, why can folks not see this in the SEC east…
If I am silve, my expansion plans would go through Texas and North Carolina FIRST! (the states).
I know academically Stanford is tops, but the bottom of the Pac 10 are no Stanford..
I am not saying this will happen, I am trying to see this from a non Big 10 view (just because we may want WVA to the SEC does not mean Silve does). I just think the long history of the SEC and ACC with common roots might not be reflected here (if i am in my 30′s it may be no big deal, but if I am in my 60′s or 70′s or older (see also decision makers and BIG donors) I can remember a different history of the SEC and ACC.
just some points to think about….
FWIW Ga Tech, Clemson, and FSU already play UGA, USC, and UF so how does adding them to the conference help.. the SEC already has the rival game as things exist right now….
Right now the 800 lb gorilla is Silve, and it concerns me just how little he and the rest of the SEC have said. The quiet from a conference not know for being quiet.. makes me think something we may not see at all is already on the table.. We keep talking about the power of ND and Texas and forget the REAL power is Delaney and Silve! If there is a conference that has benefitted from the last expansion, it is the SEC. The Big 12 may be falling apart, but the SEC is not..
MY guess is to decipher what Silve will actually do and figure out how Delaney will against it. My friends this is the real chess match in all of this.. at least this is how I am looking at it..
Say the SEC lands Tx, A&M, TT, and OU.. we keep saying it can never happen.. but what if it does?
Say the SEC bags Tx, A&M, UNC, UVA.. we keep saying it can never happen.. but what if it does?
If delaney and silve are the folks playing the game of chess? which strategy allows their side to win.. this is where the game will be won or lost.. ND and UT are just the pieces on the board.
LikeLike
ps.. i added some new thoughts at the end
LikeLike
Thanks Duffman. Way too much SEC talk for me though. About the SEC. Thinking purely from a football standpoint. I think they are the one league best set to sit pat. I mean they have the quadrant of the country with the most athletes per capita than any other.
Another thing in their favor is they are not shackled by Collegiate concerns. I really don’t know of a lot of those athletes they recruit that get turned away because of academics. The very best of them never leave school either,r though they do have some of the worst graduation rates in the SEC. Funny how that works?
Going to sixteen in my mind would be a running scared reaction. However getting Texas or A&M or both would be a great strategic move that would open a new market. Unlike raiding their ACC brethren would only be trolling familiar territory..
LikeLike
StvInILL,
thanks, it just keeps bothering me from the last expansion as everybody said the same thing about the SEC back then and history looks like they were the big winner..
a) the Big 10 and Pac 10 never got to 12
b) Miami and FSU have faded not maintained
c) The SEC has dominated the NC in football the same way the ACC did in basketball after the ESPN deal in the late 70’s (Duke and Uconn should send ESPN a portion of their checks).
d) The Big East is still not a football threat
e) The ACC is still well behind the Big 3 in football
FWIW c) is not to imply the Big 10 or SEC is better. It is to point out like the NCAA Tourney, the masses just remember the winner, before everybody gets bent out of shape.
2 points to put in the back of your mind
1) the Fiesta Bowl upstaged the Cotton Bowl by going non conference and getting the independent teams.
2) the Rose Bowl has a diminished value when it is not for the NC game.
LikeLike
From someone who’s been immersed in Texas football and politics for 40 adult years.
I’ll make it simple for you – Texas is not going to join the Big10 under any circumstance whatsoever – with ATM, without ATM, with ND, without ND. Whatever scenario you want to cook up – it’s not going to happen.
It’s not that we don’t like the Big10; it’s a simple matter of logistics, compatibility, and money.
Logistics – would be expensive and an inconvenience to every member of the proposed conference.
Compatibility – Big10/Rust Belt/Yankee mentality, whatever you want to call it, would be alien to our somewhat regionalized sensibilities.
Money – without a Big10 tv contract, we’re near perennially both the highest grossing and netting college athletic program.
Maybe if we were 500 miles closer…
LikeLike
RFB,
glad to know I am not the only older voice on this blog.
LikeLike
FYI..
agree on the age thing, not the full post
I pegged Tx early on for the Pac, still feel that way
LikeLike
Well, there you go. It’s been nice chatting with everybody!
LikeLike
Time to roll this blog in Frank, RadioFreeBevo has called it.
LikeLike
Anytime someone says there is no f*ing way it will happen, I’m convinced it will. Of course, if it doesn’t happen, it is easy to gloat. But if you are telling me that if the B10 offered, A&M, UT, and Tech invitations, they would all turn them down, then I think you are nuts. And the reason is the final one you gave – Money. Why wouldn’t you want to add another $30 MM to the coffers (or whatever it would be)?
Are you so sure UT won’t join the Pac 10, because it creates the exact same problems.
No the reason UT won’t join the B10 is not Logistics, Compatibility, and Money – it is Tech.
LikeLike
It’s not “another $30million”, it would be about another $12million.
And for what it’s worth – Texas is serious about it’s own network. Doing that or joing the Pac10+whoever, then there’s really a net gain without the Big10.
Understand, I have nothing against the Big10. But, thinking it through, it’s not the right thing for them or for Texas.
LikeLike
The Pac-10 has already stated that its network will be an “all rights in” network.
LikeLike
Ok, well there are some arguments. I don’t actually know the numbers. I feel safe in saying, that UT would make more from TV in the B10 than any other conference. Whether the additional $X is worth it – that is a business decision. Worth noting they could be leaving research money on the table. The UT network is a highly risky (but potentially highly) profitable venture. They may go that route. But what i hear you saying now is that UT has better reasons for not joining the B10. I may disagree with you, but really I don’t know (and I doubt you know either) the exact business/dollar amounts behind a decision. It is simply better to make that argument than flat out say UT will never join those damn Yanks in the B10. No way, never, not going to happen.
LikeLike
where would Texas make more tv money: in the Big10 or in a conference/region with a far larger population and 7 of the top 10 tv markets?
LikeLike
In the Big Ten.
It’s not even close.
“Intensity” in the Pac-10 footprint outside of Southern California is nothing like in the Big 12 or Big Ten.
The Big Ten Network is already up and running across the footprint, whereas a Pac-10 Network may find it harder to get on better tiers across the Pac-10 footprint.
The Pac-16 is estimated to pay out $20M per team. The Big Ten already does that. With Texas, the Big Ten would be looking at $30M+ per team easily within the next few years.
LikeLike
Uh, here’s the DMA market ranks from Nielson for 09-10:
Click to access misc.Par.39091.File.pdf
1 New York 7,493,530
2 Los Angeles 5,659,170
3 Chicago 3,501,010
4 Philadelphia 2,955,190
5 Dallas-Ft. Worth 2,544,410
6 San Francisco-Oak-San Jose 2,503,400
7 Boston (Manchester) 2,410,180
8 Atlanta 2,387,520
9 Washington, DC (Hagrstwn) 2,335,040
10 Houston 2,123,460
Texas already controls 3 of them, so that’s likely a wash in either scenario.
Going to the Pac10 adds LA and SanFran, totaling 5.
Going to the BigTen adds Chicago and Philly, although I think Philly is debatable. Going with ND, however, could affect New York, Boston, Philly, and possibly DC (to what degree, I don’t know).
Note, extending the top 10 out to 15 does nothing — both regions have 2 in 11-15. 16-20 gives 2-1 for the Pac10 only if you count Denver.
Additionally, I do agree with Zeek that market “intensity” would have to be a factor here. I don’t see LA or SanFran caring as much as Chicago or even Detroit (#11). But that’s opinion.
LikeLike
“where would Texas make more tv money: in the Big10 or in a conference/region with a far larger population and 7 of the top 10 tv markets?”
The Big 10 has a far larger population than the Pac 10; even in 2030 the projections are they would be even. In addition they do follow their colleges more fanatically.
So Texas + the Big 10 will be more profitable now, and more profitable in 20 years than Texas + Pac 10, even without considering adding markets like New Jersey or Missouri to the Big 10.
Of course, Texas will do well in the Pac 10, just not as well as it could have done.
LikeLike
Y’all be gentle with RFB. He edges into senility occasionally. 😉
LikeLike
Thanks for your comments on this RFB. I’m sure those thoughts have some merit but probably not to people who matter in making the decision. First off the biggest impediment to this issue is another school/politics . Otherwise it’s a done deal. The seconded The university of Texas is not moving from the central time zone any time soon. Neither is half of the big ten not including NE or Mizzou . You move to the Pac ten then that becomes a problem. Back to you. The people making the decision will have academics, money and the future trajectory of the university. I would bet that your provincial concerns will be one but it will be the least of their concerns
LikeLike
“Politics” favors Texas going to the Pac10
Airline tickets and moving equipment via semi is done based on mileage, not “time zones”.
“Academics, money and furture ‘u’ trajectory” would also favor moving west. Two outstaning academic U’s in both conferences; 2,3 or 4 below that, the rest below that. Texas would fit in either conference.
My “provencial concerns” are best sated by stayin in the Southwest.
LikeLike
So, who is the Big Ten equivalent of Arizona State?
LikeLike
Do you mean academically? or by sports?
roughly academics shapes up like this.
1. Northwestern
Gap here
2. Michigan
3. Illinois/Wisconsin
5. Purdue
6. Indiana
7. Penn State
8. Iowa/OSU/MSU/Minnesota
The last one her might be rated 70th in the nation
LikeLike
@loki
The answer to your question is Iowa. It’s ASU but with fat drunk guys instead of attractive women.
LikeLike
AWRU rankings:
8 Chicago
15 Wisconsin
18 Michigan
19 Illinois
20 Minnesota
22 Northwestern
32 PSU
41 OSU
42 Purdue
48 MSU
52 Indiana
56-70 Iowa
LikeLike
If you want fat people, you gotta go SEC.
State top 10:
Mississippi
West Virginia
Alabama
Louisiana
South Carolina
Tennessee
Kentucky
Oklahoma
Arkansas
Michigan
Iowa is 19th.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obesity_in_the_United_States
LikeLike
StvInILL,
You’re way off with your academic rankings. PSU is definitely not 7th in the league, and Minnesota is not even close to battling for the bottom.
LikeLike
RFB, The move to the Pac ten hinges on that blockbuster deal. It was never thus for going to the big ten .I think Texas will have done fine in either case. The problem with the deal is the compactions forced upon it by the state legislature. Otherwise, I reiterate. It was a done deal.
By the way RFB, I often thought what it would have been like for a Texan to see Texas vs A&M in the Rose bowl with Texas representing the Big ten and A&M representing the Pac ten. To me that would have been a safer deal between the two conference.
LikeLike
“Manifesto (OhioSt.) said:
Uh, here’s the DMA market ranks from Nielson for 09-10:
Click to access misc.Par.39091.File.pdf
1 New York 7,493,530
2 Los Angeles 5,659,170
3 Chicago 3,501,010
4 Philadelphia 2,955,190
5 Dallas-Ft. Worth 2,544,410
6 San Francisco-Oak-San Jose 2,503,400
7 Boston (Manchester) 2,410,180
8 Atlanta 2,387,520
9 Washington, DC (Hagrstwn) 2,335,040
10 Houston 2,123,460
Texas already controls 3 of them, so that’s likely a wash in either scenario.
Going to the Pac10 adds LA and SanFran, totaling 5.”
OK–I’ll ask–where’s the third one under TX control? I don’t see San Antonio on that list.
LikeLike
Hah, whoops. Sorry, I wrote that kind of quickly and must’ve double-read SanFran as San Antonio.
LikeLike
Maybe I’m lost here, but why are we talking about moving equipment via semis?
Is it your plan to physically move the University of Texas to Chicago or Los Angeles?
LikeLike
Apparently Bevo doesn’t realize that the Pac-10 and Pac-16 are further from Austin than the Big Ten and a Big Ten with UT, A&M, NU, MO and ND.
Pac-10 1,646.3 miles (avg)
Pac-16 1,192.1 miles (avg)
Big Ten 1,208.8 miles (avg)
New Big Ten 1,075.5 miles (avg)
LikeLike
Yet the hippie west coast and the evolution destroying Texas legislature is such a perfect fit.
Yeah I can see Dick Armey and Nancy Pelosi enjoying the Tex v. Cal game together.
If it was up to melding a Texas mentality with another region, I would consider making a league called the Tex12. Maybe Perry can lead another secession
LikeLike
We had that. It blew up c.1996.
LikeLike
@RadioFreeBevo
I am beginning to agree with you, though I would argue that all of those issues are even greater when joining the Pac-10: it’s farther away, it’s run by hippies (like Texas the school maybe, but not Texas the state), and it’s less money. The key issue seems to be the schools Texas wants to bring along, not the ones you list.
LikeLike
“it’s run by hippies”?
“Austin is a little blue dot in a sea of red.” – Molly Ivins
Bringing 6 schools along and adding UA and ASU to a western division is what makes the deal work for everybody concerned.
LikeLike
RFB-
Not disagreeing with your no way/no how assessment, but…you mention logistics and 500 miles closer. Austin is 200-400 air miles closer to to the farthest Big 10 school (State College) than it is to Seattle, Pullman, Eugene and Corvallis.
The closest current PAC 10 schools to Austin in AZ are about as close as Iowa City is. Most of the rest of the Big 10 are closer than LA or definitely closer than the Bay Area (AUS-SFO is 1500 air miles.)
Austin is in the same time zone as about half of the current Big 10–more if Nebraska or Missouri join.
If you’re going to dismiss a potential conference affiliation out of hand due in part to logistics issues, shouldn’t you *start* with the PAC 10?
LikeLike
One more thought on ND, seems they are still at least talking to the Big 10, which is causing people to speculate they may be interested in joining. However, ND’s worst case scenario is “Super Death Star Conferences” where they are forced into joining a conference. The longer they keep the Big 10 “on hold”, the odds of massive expansion goes down. Especially if they can stall this process for the equivalent of 1 football season, then say they may be interested in the future….thus holding things back for many future years as well. I admit I’m purely guessing this may be whats going on, but it seems possible if not likely.
LikeLike
Disagree. ND can’t put a hold on expansion w/ this many players this invested with PAC10 TV contracts coming up. ND has to know that *something* will happen, then can help shape that something or they can enjoy leverage somewhere on par with Teldar Paper.
LikeLike
Blue horseshoe loves Anacott Steel.
LikeLike
Best post of the day.
LikeLike
Or…Notre Dame realizes that Texas is going somewhere. Period. Expansion is happening. Period. In light of those realities, Notre Dame wants to not just be sucked into a conference against its will…but it wants to be in the best conference in the nation.
I’m not saying this will happen…
But Notre Dame doesn’t want to see Syracuse and Missouri and Rutgers and Pittsburgh be added…and THEN be forced to join because of no better options. They want to see Texas, aTm, Nebraska be on the roster…and THEN be “forced” to join.
LikeLike
guido,
if this is the case.. then the best option would be for the B 10 to invite Nebraska ASAP!
a) it shows the Nebraska Nation that this will happen (not just a back room promise between big shots).
b) it starts the Big 12 implosion (as Frank said early on it offers cover for Texas to jump).
c) it verifies that 16 is the “new” 12 and puts ND on notice
d) it makes a BOLD statement from the Big 10, not some “watered” down wishy washy public action.
e) turns eyes and heads back to the Big 10 after the Pac 10 volley
LikeLike
It seems fairly obvious ND will not be the first domino to fall.
The play must be to add Neb. Dodds er Big 12 probably wont even ask Mizzou their answer.
Neb. needs to be added soon.
LikeLike
Pingback: FRANK THE TANK- Double Chess for a Super Death Star Conference (Mizzou, ND, Nebraska to get invites)
I stand corrected
LikeLike
Re ND – Texas – Missouri (Frank)
First your post will be judged not by your logic but your prediction.
If Missouri and ND and Nebraska are invited in near future perhaps by tomorrow, you have good sources.
However from a logic perspective if ND wants in not for Missouri as you state but for Texas but Texas is no lock, then why would the Big 10 offer Missouri and why would ND committ to the Big 10?
Texas was deeply involved in the Pac 10 Texas 6 offer. It gives them regional competition and a lot more. They chose their partners. Not exactly passive.
They could easily have agreed to an announcement that Texas and ND and A&M and 2 schools of mutual choice (perhaps Nebraska and Pitt or whoever) were going to be invited as a package.
That would allow Texas to resolve the Tech issue and allow ND not be locked in to a Nebraska, Missouri expansion and allow the Big 10 flexibility as to plan B.
So the logic of this seems to be the Big 10 either considers Missouri a KEY target school or ND and the Big 10 are gambling that Missouri is key to attracting Texas to the Big 10 despite the fact Texas is about to move to a PAC 16 with selected partner schools.
Or it seems to imply the Big 10 believes probably rightly that scenerios of Maryland and so on are not worth pursuing and Missouri stands equal to Nebraska and any other likely target school.
So for fun without any inside sources I’ll predict Texas is not coming and is Pac 16 bound.
If as you say ND is interested because of Texas, then using that logic my guess is ND either doesn’t join or at best joins at the last minute as team 16.
Interesting that recent twitter by Joe Schad and Thamel say ND not likely.
Note this prediction is subject to change based on the next rumor.
“One source close to Big Ten cautions me that ND is “not budging.” Joe Schad Twitter
——————–
Pete Thamel article
Swarbrick, however, said he had not been engaged in any discussions with the Big Ten.
“First of all, there haven’t been any sort of deliberations,” he said. “Internally, we talk about this stuff all the time. We have not entered into discussions with anyone.
“The only thing we’ve done externally is try and work as closely as we can with the Big East and try and help them.”
LikeLike
OT: For those that have been on this blog for more than the last 30 days or so, whatever happened to Richard? From the days of Frank’s first Expansion Index blog and 10,000 or more posts later, Richard always had the most frequent and insightful views. He has virtually vanished, only to be replaced by Zeek in frequency and indepth analysis. Richard, if you are out there, what do you think about this whole mess these days and this chess match unfolding? Hmmmm
LikeLike
Rick,
a) maybe Richard and zeek are one in the same
b) the chess match is Delaney and Silve, not ND and TX
if you want to win, know your enemy
LikeLike
I suspected that about Richard.
LikeLike
Sub Virginia Tech and N.C. State for UNC and UVa (neither of which have any interest whatsoever in the SEC) and you might have a realistic Slive-Delany chess scenario.
LikeLike
vincent,
I will meet you half way..
maybe silve offers UNC and UVA, maybe he gets V tech and NCST.
still leaves maryland open to big 10.
LikeLike
vodka
LikeLike
Monday, June 7, 2010
Realignment blues
posted by paulburka at 5:12 PM
The latest twist on the Big Twelve realignment is that Oklahoma and Texas A&M might depart for the SEC. This from an Aggieland source. UT doesn’t have to worry about finding a place to land, but it has never been interested in the SEC, mainly for academic reasons. Only two SEC teams are members of the prestigious American Association of Universities (Florida and Vanderbilt), though other SEC schools are said to be in line (Georgia, for one). The UT academic hierarchy prefers the PAC-10, but UT does not want to be stranded without its two longtime rivals.
Most readers know by now about the ultimatum the Big Twelve gave to Missouri and Nebraska at recent meetings, setting a deadline for whether the two schools that are reportedly being courted by the Big Ten will commit to staying in the Big Twelve. The ultimatum is somewhat silly since Missouri and Nebraska are the schools that hold all the cards; it’s a little like saying, “Either make up your mind or kill us.”
LikeLike
This would actually solve a problem if one of the goals is 4×64, because it is politically impossible to get there without a huge congressional fight if at least one of Utah and BYU isn’t taken.
LikeLike
Wow. This means Slive may give the Big Ten the shot it needs at Texas.
LikeLike
Bingo.
LikeLike
BTW, I wouldn’t assume this would put TX in the B10+. Just as likely they’d stay P16 with an add of TX-TT-Bay-CO-Utah (tradeoff for Baylor) and either TCU or KS.
They could horse trade TT off to the SEC as part of the political settlement with aTm, or might have aTm reach an agreement with the SEC that OU would not be offered. Lots of way for this to play out.
LikeLike
I doubt Kansas goes anywhere without K-State. Not just politicians, but the schools are part of the same academic hierarchy (I believe they share the same board of regents)
LikeLike
I dunno, if I were Kansas and faced with the Sophie’s choice of no BCS school or leaving KSU behind. I choose KU to the PAC every time. Even if the PAC gets screwed a bit on money this might be the best thing overall for college athletics to make sure Utah and KU end up in a BCS conference NOT called the MWC.
LikeLike
Again, I don’t believe for a minute they’re going to the P16 without the Aggies and Sooners.
LikeLike
Oklahoma and Texas A&M aren’t filler material. They are valuable brands. If they are removed from the equation, I’m not sure the PAC 10 or Texas are interested in a six team expansion.
After all, Texas would then have to worry about playing OU and A&M out of conference.
LikeLike
So Okie State would also go to the SEC, then? Then the whole Pac 16 falls apart and Texas has no choice but to become the southern outpost of the Big 16?
LikeLike
If A&M/OU/OSU end up in the SEC, that means the Big Ten can make a much stronger counteroffer to the Pac-10.
It would look something like Nebraska/Missouri and possibly Kansas although the K-State problem may be daunting…
We don’t know the turns that this tale will take.
The only thing that should be reasonably certain is that the Big Ten is hoping for an SEC strike on the Pac-10 deal if it really wants a shot at Texas at this point.
LikeLike
Or go to the SEC………
LikeLike
Nope.
LikeLike
If A&M, OK., and OK ST. are serious about going to the SEC, I think they drag TX in with them…….losing your wife and biggest rival to join a conference only 9% of the fans want?? Don’t see it….
LikeLike
Would add….going to PAC 10 with no A&M or OK. but with Tech and Baylor?? Don’t see that either…
LikeLike
Texas has another option with a potential rival… Nebraska.
Texas considers 3 schools to be on the same level with it in terms of athletics.
A&M, OU, Nebraska.
Right now A&M, OU are going with it to the Pac-10 in a new SWC. That’s all good and well and Texas likes that offer as it should.
But if the SEC grabs OU and A&M. Then Texas is joining the Pac-10 with no marquee schools in terms of athletics.
It may consider much more heavily going north with Nebraska.
Until the SEC plays its hand, no one should prejudge Texas’ final decision.
LikeLike
If A&M, OK., and OK ST. are serious about going to the SEC, I think they drag TX in with them
Texas will not be dragged by A&M and OU to the SEC. Are you drunk?
LikeLike
shroom,
going by the ESPN vote just in Texas.. the SEC was the leader behind the Big 12, the last thing you want is the state voters to get involved because the academics go out the window and the political guys will send texas to the SEC wether UT wants it or not.
LikeLike
Hopkins—As Duff mentions, SEC is more popular option in the public mind than Big 10 or even Pac 10. Throw in A&M and OK to the SEC, and you’d have a lot of momentum in that direction. I remember Powers’ comment to the effect that he wasn’t gonna send the women’s softball team to the frozen tundra…I think he meant it.
LikeLike
does mushroom have a swastika in his little doily?
LikeLike
Why is A&M free to do whatever they please, but Texas is weighed down by the Tech Problem and Baylor Problem?
LikeLike
Because Tech and Baylor are smart enough to know that as long as they stick with UT their bread will be buttered.
Texas is the one that will always land on its feet no matter what happens. Tech and Baylor are going to attach themselves to the most powerful host with the most options.
LikeLike
Tech and Baylor are like those little fish (pilot fish) that try to tag along with a shark (Texas). They’re not big enough on their own, but if they’ll do fine if they can just stick to the shark.
Or, if you’re old enough to recall the SNL routine, they’re like Steve and Eydie Gorme following Frank Sinatra around. “Whatever you say, Frank…”
LikeLike
@djinndjinn – SI-NADE O’CONNOR!
LikeLike
RIP, Phil Hartman, BTW.
LikeLike
why does the oldest child in the family gets more responsibility to look out for the younger siblings while the next oldest gets more leeway? it’s just the way things work out.
LikeLike
The perils of being the top dog. But UT knows this, A&M has an indirect Tech problem – meaning UT won’t allow them to just go leaving Tech to UT. Better to spread the Tech problem around – unless UT is fine going to Pac 10 without A&M.
LikeLike
They’re not going without aTm AND Oklahoma.
LikeLike
LMAO – Texas would be more than happy to go to the Pac10 without ATM
LikeLike
Yes, but I meant they would be going dragging Tech and Baylor along. That may not be as desirable. Basically, they are acknowledging that Tech and Baylor are anchor’s attached the Texas yacht.
LikeLike
Tex A&M is seen as a more acceptable throw in if you can get a Texas out of it. Tech is a deal breaker. That’s about as clear as I can state it.
LikeLike
OU can play UT in OOC game and still have no bearing for conference championship, not unlike old Big8/SWC setup. For A&M, they can still lose conference and win against UT for bragging rights. (actually no different than present). If I’m OU, I’m going east and taking UT with me to the Dallas dance each year. Could be that UT ends up with no one except Baylor and TT.
LikeLike
Garlic Naan.
LikeLike
Does anyone really have any idea what’s going to happen to Kansas in this mess? I mean, REALLY have an idea where they’re headed?
I find it hard to believe that one of the five greatest basketball programs of all time is going to be relegated to the Mountain West. I know these super conferences are about money, TV sets and football for the most part. But still. I just have trouble wrapping my head around the concept of Kansas playing Wyoming, Air Force and Colorado State every year.
Surely they’ll have a better option than that, even if it’s in a somewhat retooled Big East, right?
LikeLike
Check Frank’s older posts, but I thought he had Kansas possibly ending up as part of the ACC or in a beefed up Conference USA in a future scenario? I know I had questions about Kansas and several others if the Big 12 were to fold. There would be additional fall out as the Pac 10 will grab some crumbs and possibly others (Utah and BYU – big if, too… Yes, it will be a mess for some otherwise great institutions.
LikeLike
I imagine in we hit four 16-team conferences, there’s no way Kansas is left out of that. Surely they’ll wind up in the ACC-based conference at that point. I checked and there are only 65 teams in the six BCS conferences right now. So unless the BCS conferences start pulling a bunch of outsiders from other conferences like the Mountain West or CSU, there’s no way Kansas is left out at that point. But I also imagine that four superconferences may be several years down the road and they may have to take a temporary home elsewhere for the time being like the MWC or Big East.
LikeLike
Sorry, that should read CSUA, not CSU.
LikeLike
Gosh dangit, I meant CUSA. I’m a moron.
LikeLike
I assumed you meant Confederate States of America…
LikeLike
Kansas’ nickname is the ‘Free State’. It probably wouldn’t go over well.
LikeLike
Yes, but if you’re a Kansas fan who wants the best possible landing spot, you should be hoping that the SEC blows up the Pac-10 deal or that Stanford does. Unlikely that the Big Ten can blow it up on its own.
However, if the SEC moves in on OU/OSU/A&M, then the Big Ten might be able to offer Texas a spot in a Nebraska/Missouri and possibly Kansas grouping.
The Pac-10 may also try to replace lost Big 12 teams in the deal with Kansas/KState. So the best thing Kansas can hope for is to blow up the Pac-10 deal.
Kansas should land in an AQ conference, probably the Big East or something like that…
LikeLike
Problem is in Kansases case , the Big ten needs to turn their eyes east after this if ND is not in the Mix. I also believe that Missouri’s slot is on the bubble if texas coems in with its wife, Texas A&M
LikeLike
True but the Big Ten is only going to keep its eyes on Texas and Notre Dame until there’s clarity in terms of their direction.
Right now, everyone’s waiting for the next piece of news (i.e. Stanford rejection or the SEC pounces or the Big Ten does something).
It’s all a holding pattern until we get a blitz of movement and then deals will start to collapse and have to be remade.
The Pac-10 deal looks certain right now, but the Pac-10 went all in. They have no alternative hand to play.
Thus, the SEC and Big Ten are on the board. There’s no way they let time expire while they have hands to play.
I don’t think Missouri is on the bubble. Missouri makes sense to finish off the Big 12 if the Big Ten really believes that Texas wants to move and that A&M/OU/OSU will bold.
Why? The Big Ten will be waiting to make a deal with Texas after that.
Texas will lose A&M/OU and then choose to go to the Pac-10 with who? Tech/Baylor/Colorado/Kansas/Kstate? Or will they come to the Big Ten with Nebraska/Missouri and possibly Notre Dame and even Kansas…
LikeLike
I agree with most of what you said but I really do think that Missouri is on the bubble. A very favorable one. Nebraska is in and the big ten is holding out to get both ND and Texas. As you know Texas comes with baggage. I think they are really only looking to go to 14 and not directly to 16. Historically they have been a very conservative in membership. If the best case comes to fruition and they add NE, ND,TX Ta&m we have 14. If they are serious about 16 then they have to look east for somebody from the old neighborhood to make Joepa more comfortable. Rutgers, Maryland, Pitt, Syracuse? So then its one of these and Mizzu or two of these and NO Mizzu. I can see this happening.
LikeLike
When all is said and done, Missouri may end up being the lucky one in terms of its location instead of Rutgers. That’s a fascinating thought.
I’m one of those who believes we’re more in line with a Nebraska/Missouri/Rutgers line of expansion.
But the Big Ten may invite Nebraska/Missouri and then wait to see what the SEC does if it gets an inkling that the SEC is about to make a move on OU/OSU and disrupt the Pac-16.
LikeLike
“If the best case comes to fruition and they add NE, ND,TX Ta&m we have 14.”
There are 11 schools in the Big Ten; adding 4 schools gets you to 15.
LikeLike
Yeah Zeek, I think missouri can do nothing but win a slot when you lose a texas or a ND or for sure both. Then the focus turns to an eastern expansion. ot that there is anything really wrong with Mizzu, just the big dominoes in the way. but at least they are not kansas. KU would fall further down the line.
LikeLike
Yeah it’s tough to see how Kansas gets a spot in the dance unless A&M accepts an SEC invite, and the Big Ten and Pac-10 have to scramble to fix their offers…
LikeLike
M(AG)I caught that after the fact. That’s just me forgetting adding Texas = 2 additions and not 1. Any way that leaves one slot and not two. its more critical then for #16.
LikeLike
When all the dust clears, there could be three super-conferences (Big Ten, Pac-16, and SEC). Big Ten has Neb, Mo, ND, Rut, and Syr. Pac 16 has Big XII South with Colorado instead of Baylor. SEC will want to keep pace and so will grab four southern football schools from the ACC.
That will leave 8 ACC teams, 6 Big East teams and one opening for the fourth super conference. The most logical thing to do in that case would be to have the 6 Big East teams plus Kansas and Kansas State merge into the ACC.
ACC North: Boston College, U-Conn, Pitt, West Virginia, Cincinnati, Louisville, Kansas, Kansas State.
ACC South: Maryland, Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, North Carolina State, Duke, Wake Forest, South Florida.
That would be an amazing basketball conference and an OK football conference.
LikeLike
Also hearing supposed “inside” info that ND, Neb, Mizzou, Rutgers & Syracuse are headed to Big 10 as early as this week.
LikeLike
There is no way the BT is closing the door on Texas yet with those five.
LikeLike
Agreed. Just passing along rumors. Maybe Texas has closed the door though? It’s not like it’s going to be publicly announced.
LikeLike
link??
LikeLike
Very doubful….if ND was going to join, which is very unlikely, they would probably want long-time rival Pitt over Syracuse.
LikeLike
@mushroomgod said – “Very doubful….if ND was going to join, which is very unlikely, they would probably want long-time rival Pitt over Syracuse.”
Agreed. Assuming ND even wants in, ND would want Pitt way more than SU, but they’d want SU over Rutgers and they would want Rutgers over Mizzou.
The chain doesn’t stop there at simply Pitt or SU. Which is why an invite to Mizzou tells me ND is not on-board yet.
LikeLike
Look.
Only one hand has been played. The Pac-10 went all in and offered to create a new SWC for Texas.
The SEC and Big Ten have not yet played their hands.
Until the SEC declares that it does not want OU/OSU/A&M, we cannot make any assumptions about what will happen.
Perhaps the Pac-10 deal goes off without a hitch. Then the Big Ten will have to start thinking differently. But that would require the SEC to entirely forgo the option of Texas/Oklahoma markets
LikeLike
Oklahoma alum here. A viable Pac16 option with Texas involved seems better for OU than going to the SEC without Texas. A hypothetical SEC schedule plus Texas OOC every year would be pretty brutal, while the Pac16 would leave OU with mostly familiar foes. The demographics of the Pac16 are good enough that adequate $ should be there.
OTOH, if Texas heads north or Pac16 appears non-viable for some other reason, the SEC would be very attractive to OU and probably vice-versa. Cumulative numbers of Oklahoma, Arkansas and LSU-affiliated folks in Texas’ big markets would mean that any SEC network would get traction in D/FW, Houston, San Antonio and maybe Austin.
Any thoughts why SEC would be more attractive to OU than Pac16?
LikeLike
“Any thoughts why SEC would be more attractive to OU than Pac16?”
Because OU views the NCAA as a menace rather than a guide? 😛
LikeLike
Our problems are chiefly in hoops now. And since Indiana hired Sampson from us AFTER he was caught and UM is having a few problems, maybe we’ll send our compliance team to the next Big Televen conference to give y’all some pointers on how to clean up. 😉
LikeLike
I meant “conference meeting”
LikeLike
Doogie predicts:
Mizzou/Neb/ND to Big 10
Big 12 stays intact (Texas likes itself better than anyone else) and Big 12 stays alive by raiding the Pac 10, asking AZ and AZ state to join.
Pac 10 gets the shaft and adds BYU and Utah.
Case closed. Let’s go play football.
LikeLike
more proof ND is not going anywhere
http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/college/football/view/20100608bc_notre_dame_agree_to_extend_football_rivalry/srvc=home&position=also
LikeLike
Extending the Boston College series probably minimizes Notre Dame’s desire to join the Big Ten — especially since the Big Ten has no interest in taking in BC and this would probably let Notre Dame make more scheduling demands on Big Ten officials (number of conference games, etc.), conditions the one-for-all Big Ten won’t accept.
Right now, I sense the Big Ten is trying to keep the door open with Notre Dame to satisfy Texas, not the other way around. Eventually UT will call the Big Ten’s bluff and the conference will have to go in another direction, finding four partners to complement Nebraska (the only sure thing in expansion as of this time).
LikeLike
NDman and Vincent,
I see something else..
I see it as ND moving to a God & Country Conference
6 years is a commitment and BC is catholic
LikeLike
Don’t see the connection.
LikeLike
ACC = Keyser Soze
LikeLike
Gee, for all the talk of money, athletics and such nobody has raise the issue of style. For some people the outfits those college boys wear are important. Of the possible schools, who have the cutest outfits? I really like the Texas band outfits, Village People anyone! Perhaps Hawaii should be considered. Are they still the rainbows?
LikeLike
the cheerleaders.. the south has an edge there (I know the SONG girls get the play) but the south has the hottest cheerleaders!
LikeLike
I really like those Georgia Tech fellows
LikeLike
And the dumbest, along with their players.
LikeLike
I heard Nebraska got their official invite last night from the Big Ten.
LikeLike
Hoffa,
I hope you are right! I would sleep easier.
LikeLike
Will all new members of the Big10 automatically become a member of the CIC? If they do, then I assume that each one would have to meet the charter requirements of the CIC. I don’t think Notre Dame does.
LikeLike
What requirement do they lack?
LikeLike
Do they have a medical school?
LikeLike
No. Is that a requirement?
LikeLike
I really dont think its an Auto. They are some hundrid year old insstitutions. They have time to work on it and an inside track.
So you can play some football eh son? yes sir. well you want to join this here CIC along with Northwestern, University of Chicago, Michigan, Wisconsin amd Illinois? Hmmm????
LikeLike
It’s my understanding that the CIC charter requires that a member have a medical school. I have not verified that yet from a second source.
LikeLike
Some googling around has not uncovered a copy of the charter. And wouldn’t his have been covered last time ND was invited?
LikeLike
ND does not have its own medical school. It does however house a campus of IU’s med school staffed to some degree by ND faculty. This is part of an agreement IU has with several state universities, including Purdue who also does not have their own medical school. That’s why I doubt a lack of a med school would be a serious obstacle.
LikeLike
I’d love to know whether U of Chicago has any sway over who gets into CIC. Is there any reason they would feel slighted by allowing Nebraska, Missouri, et al into the CIC?
LikeLike
I don’t believe they do. I believe it’s more that they implicitly trust that the Big Ten presidents will not do anything to harm the prestige of the Big Ten or CIC.
Thus, Tech is not getting an invite.
Nebraska and Missouri won’t reduce the prestige of the CIC.
LikeLike
First, the CIC is a membership open to Big Ten members. If anyone objects to a new school, it would be in joining the Big Ten. Once you get into the Big Ten, it’s mostly a formaality to join the CIC.
Second, as much as people on this board criticize Nebraska or Missouri’s research levels as being inferior, it’s in comparison to what?
Yes, the bigger research schools in the Big Ten do more than Nebraska and Missouri combined, but neither Nebraska nor Missouri is exactly weak in research. In fact, the U of C and Nebraska’s level of research in dollars (about $350 million) are almost identical. Nebraska did more than the U of C (in dollars) in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. U of C was just above Nebraska in 2008.
Missouri is further behnd, but still, we’re talking a quarter billion dollars per year. It’s not Johns Hopkins or Duke money, but that’s still a lot of money. It would take Frank nearly two years to bill his clients that much.
The only candidate schools way, way behind in research compared to the other candidate schools are Notre Dame, Syracuse and Boston College.
LikeLike
DD,
I am already on the Nebraska and Missouri bus.
LikeLike
Personally, I’m on Nebraska’s bus, simply because the BTN needs football product to show. On the athletic level, Missouri is just “okay”.
Academically, these schools are again, “okay” to me. Not Texas Tech, but not exactly at a Texas, UNC, Virginia sort of level. They don’t elevate the Big Ten in this regard.
And while I used to do research in my younger days and am a big advocate for research schools, I have no objection to their research levels. To me, they’re completely respectable.
So I’d be excited about Nebraska football joining. Looking at the rest of the package, it’s just a so-so addition to me.
Overall, I’d concentrate on being pleased to see the Badgers play the Huskers.
LikeLike
I’m not sure the broader ND community wants in to the CIC. The 1999 experience shows that the faculty of ND deeply want this, and possibly the administration is interested in repositioning ND as a research heavyweight, but students and alums are notceably cool to this. Plus, I’d ask knowledgeable ND commenters like FLP and Rich2 whether ND folk are concerned that CIC would need to accomodate ND’s religious/conscience reservations to some forms of research performed at CIC institutions.
LikeLike
Naw. FLP_NDRox has already alluded to the fact that pretty much everyone cited the CIC as a bonus for ND research, even the people who were opposed to football joining the Big Ten.
The CIC in its mission statement and by-laws is entirely a voluntary system of collaboration, so ND has nothing to worry about in terms of any research it would not want to take part in. Member universities propose projects and participate in the ones they want to, and the CIC-wide (meaning all 11) member projects are the most non-controversial, i.e. students going to other universities for a period of time or sharing libraries or a computing system, etc.
LikeLike
Er, 12, had a brain lapse on UChicago being a member…
LikeLike
Do you honestly think Notre Dame could dictate who in the Big Ten is doing what research? Wisconsin is arguably the leader in the US in stem cell research. The work already done there may result in a Nobel Prize. There is no way on earth they would care what priests at Notre Dame think about their research.
Besides, the CIC doesn’t control who does what research. The only thing it does is facilitate cooperation. Shared facilities, communal buying (for cheaper equipment), etc. You don’t want to cooperate? You don’t want access to one school’s specialized facilities? You don’t want cheaper equipment? You don’t want your students to be able to go to, say, Borneo to study orangutans with a specialist from Minnesota? Then don’t participate with the CIC. But it’s not like it’s dictating who does what.
LikeLike
I agree. Nebraska and Missouri fit in perfectly in the CIC.
Plus, they have the advantage of being like Wisconsin etc. in not having double state schools…
LikeLike
If ND sends its priests to study orangutans, maybe that will mean altar boys can walk that streets safe at night. Win-win for everybody.
Yeah- low blow. Whatcha gonna do about it?
LikeLike
I don’t have a copy of the CIC’s charter in this pair of pants, but I don’t believe having a medical school is a requirement to join the CIC.
LikeLike
If I am Slive my board might look something like this..
round 1
TX, A&M, OU, Nebraska (3 new states – football value)
round 2
A&M, OU, UNC, UVA (4 new states – nails down east and west)
round 3
A&M, OU, NC State, Va Tech (4 new states – nails down east and west)
this could go on, but goes back to my earlier conversation.. about in state rivals not in the same conference.. with NC state and Va Tech or A&M and OU.. you are actually long term adding strength to the SEC. Texas and UNC will over time strengthen bonds with the SEC via their in state rivals not weaken them. just an observation if things go to 20 or 24 in a decade or two.
I keep looking at the SEC OOC, and see these pairs as strength in TV viewing not a weakness..
If Michigan plays Central Michigan OOC where are the national viewers, but if Florida plays FSU OOC there is a national audience. It may be the secret of the SEC as they play these games at the end of the season when the votes are most crucial. Just an observation.
LikeLike
I’m still skeptical of the notion that Slive will ignore Oklahoma’s “state problem” and just go after Oklahoma.
The Pac-10 move was noted for its boldness in eliminating any political pressures by offering slots to OSU/Tech (and even the Baylor v. Colorado tussle for the last slot). I don’t see why the SEC wouldn’t make the same calculation and cleanly attempt to take OU and OSU away together.
Taking just OU actually enables OU to reject the SEC if OSU/Oklahoma legislators get on the bandwagon.
I don’t see Slive making that kind of move unless he really believes that OU and OSU aren’t tied together, which is debatable when you look at the Pac-10 move.
LikeLike
I haven’t live in OK for a while, but suspect that state politics would make it tough for OU to go anywhere without OSU (or without OSU having its own good option, which seems less likely).
LikeLike
Why would the SEC want Nebraska?
LikeLike
FLP..
a) Football Brand
b) Chess Move – blocks Big 10
c) Single State school
d) AAU
why not, if Nebraska looks good to the Big 10, why not the SEC? It is why I worry the longer Nebraska is not in the Big 10 family. We keep assuming they will be Big 10, but no formal invitation has been extended. A woman wants to be wanted, the longer the Big 10 waits the more Nebraska is a wallflower.
LikeLike
Nebraska will not end up in the SEC. Not gonna happen.
LikeLike
Yeah, but which SEC team is going to play there in November?
LikeLike
I don’t think there is any doubt here in big ten country that when the dust clears ,Nebraska will be in the BT. However Delany might be waiting on Stanford to Nix the Pac Ten deal, When that happens there are more slots for Texas if he really feels he has to take tech. But then the same applies here. Does NW, WI, IL, Mich all approve tech? Do any of the others? Its 8 out of 11 to pass. My sense is that Nebraska gets their 8 votes when the time comes
LikeLike
“Yeah, but which SEC team is going to play there in November?”
Well, if they come in as a pair, Oklahoma would be the natural option.
LikeLike
The SEC isn’t going to go after a school it can’t get.
It’s obvious that Nebraska and the Big Ten were going to get together.
Why would the Pac-10 or SEC embarass themselves trying to pry Nebraska away…?
LikeLike
Patrick,
are you still out there?
if so what is the value of Texas resell if it is in the SEC?
I think our friend in Baton Rouge said it adds 10 Million to Florida’s bottom line? I this is true then Texas would have a form of the Longhorn Network under the SEC umbrella.
I am still not sure how the SEC works this but 17 Million + 10 Million for texas sounds like a better deal than 22 Million from BTN?
Sorry, Scott van Pelt was suggesting Texas to the SEC when everybody here has said no way. I am trying to see what sweetener the SEC brings to the pot that Silve has not disclosed.
Maybe it is how secondary money get passed through the SEC?
LikeLike
Oh, if Scott van Pelt was saying that Texas would go to the SEC, that changes everything.
LikeLike
nice sarcasm HH, my point is as it was addressed to PATRICK was about the side money. If they can get and additional 10+ million annually out of being in the SEC like Florida then it is a money decision.
If Florida gets an extra 10 million, maybe Texas can get 12 – 16 Million more a year in the SEC and that is REAL $$. early on I thought it was straight splits like the Big 10, but a later post said it was splits + side money.
it was a serious question, my point is SVP works for ESPN and I would hazzard a guess the folks at ESPN understand the contracts better than you are I.
LikeLike
Duffman, I haven’t run anything for the SEC or looked at the contracts, but they DON’T have their own network, so adding teams to add content is a lost arguement unless they develop one. I am sure that Texas would add value to the league but I have no idea how much. To increase the value for every team in the SEC that much ($10 million) an addition of Texas & Texas A&M to get to 14 teams would have to convince ESPN / CBS to up the value of their contracts by $140 million per year. Possible I guess but unlikely. Probably more money available bu developing a PAC 16 network since the business model is established.
Overall though, I am not sure. Haven’t calculated that, and don’t have any inside info with respect to SEC teams.
LikeLike
A BTN, an SEC network, a P10 Network. Does anyone else hope that this leads to a weakened ESPN – or an ESPN with some competition. Their monopoly on sports while it has been beneficial is starting to grate on me – and GameDay is probably my favorite ESPN show (outside PTI). Just another added benefit that I see in the long term.
LikeLike
Patrick,
I was not talking about the SEC with a BTN type system. It was more of a secondary individual to each school. I though I read back awhile ago that it was additive to each SEC school but not on an equal basis so Florida got 10 million last year and LSU got 5 or 6. It would make sense for UK with their basketball because it would help defray a basketball salary that rivals top college football salaries.
This secondary revenue source (unlike the BTN) passes through to individual schools which might be big for Texas as they are more like Florida than LSU. Which is my the 17 Million (sec) might skew better than 20 Million (btn) we keep seeing in some of these blogs..
thanks
LikeLike
Remember, ESPN has its own network called ESPNU that has a lot of SEC programming on it. Any school it loses to a Pac 10 network or the Big 10 network gives it more competition and less programming. It has a lot of interest in paying for good, large market programs.
LikeLike
@Duffman
Outside of academic issues with a UT to SEC there are 2 things.
A) UT I don’t think wants anything to do with running the perceived gauntlet that is the SEC schedule.
B) UT doesn’t want additional recruiting competition that would surely come with an SEC move.
LikeLike
The SEC perception of ‘gauntlet’ and recruiting woes needs to end. The SEC ego makes Texas look like a wallflower. Texas has no reason to fear either issue.
LikeLike
TX won’t go to the SEC for academic reasons, and specifically the academic requirements for athletes. Nebraska was pissed at the Big 12’s stance on partial qualifiers, which was mostly at TX’s insistence. Do you think TX will drop associate itself with a conference with lower academic standards for athletes than even the Big 12? No chance.
LikeLike
Same sweetener as with their athletes’. “We’ll take anybody that’s good. No strings attached.” Standing order. the SEC would not be adding the benefit of the academic afilliation with the Big Ten schools. So money being equal for texas, I say they say thanks but no thanks. Now A&M???
LikeLike
Doesn’t The SEC let their teams work out a local TV contract? Maybe the SEC would let TEX go forward with their channel.
LikeLike
William, you know, if I was the head of the SEC, I would have to nix that. Why? Because its not a tier three conference. Texas does not automatically become head over shoulder the star of the conference. If I’m looking out for the conference, they take the conference network deal or the conference members share equally with Texas in (Texas) their LSN. Otherwise we are setting up fault lines again with teams that have been in that conference since it started.
LikeLike
williarm1,
that is where I was heading before HH got smarmy. I was asking for a ruling from someone who knows and understands how the SEC contracts work..
maybe Texas does not get its LSN, but the SEC might work a deal via this secondary money which is not what Texas wants, but offers a REAL solution that might not be available in the Big 10 or Pac 10.
LikeLike
To answer your question- yes. The SEC allows individual schools to have their own TV contracts outside of the conference deal. Florida already gets about $10M from their regional deal
LikeLike
Dear Nebraska,
Baylor lobbyist Buddy Jones loves you.
Sincerely,
Texas
LikeLike
We love him too. He’s great on Friday Night Lights.
LikeLike
Dear Texas,
Who’s Baylor again?
Sincerely,
Nebraska
LikeLike
Well played.
LikeLike
Kansas City TV affiliate apparently caught up with Beebe — check out some of his quotes:
LikeLike
Funny man, Funny! It appears that a few other conferences are running past Mr. Beebe as well.
LikeLike
thanks.. sometime we get heated here and humor is a good release….
LikeLike
Some interesting message board fodder, FWIW:
“To the Big 10 is a done deal for NU….
Expect an announcement as soon as the next couple days, NU is waiting for the right time to announce. Deals have been made and it has been voted on. The wait might have to do with ND and MU.
This is from a worker within the Athletic Department, one degree of separation from me.”
LikeLike
Very very good stuff.
Nice to see it all moving along. Even if Delany doesn’t get his preferred strategy, the SEC or Stanford or someone (Big Ten going after A&M) may play right into the Big Ten’s hands.
Grabbing Nebraska and Missouri off the board is the perfect move to force the issue.
Even if the Pac-16 does end up coming to fruition, the Big Ten will have solid choices in the east (Rutgers and others) to focus on after figuring out the Texas question.
My guess is that the Big Ten will stay at 13 for a little while to figure out what to do next.
There’s no real reason to destabilize the Big East until we know whether A&M or Texas is off the board and we can close another slot (guaranteeing the 16th slot for ND of course).
LikeLike
Agreed. They have been at 11 for what 17 years. They could stay at 13 for a while. They can always make moves 5-10 years down the line. If you are making moves for the next 50 years, you only make a final move now if it sows that up. Otherwise you wait until the situation presents itself.
LikeLike
Could the issue be forced minus Mizzou?
Isn’t Neb enough to start the movement?
LikeLike
Yes. Nebraska should be enough to force Texas to make a choice between the Big 12 and Pac-10 invites.
It should also be enough to get the SEC to move to disrupt the Pac-10 invites if it really wants OU/OSU/A&M.
Thus, everything should be set into motion.
Hence the Arkansas analogy.
LikeLike
I just think Neb first, leaves room to stay at 12, if things calm.
Not that I think they will.
LikeLike
Yeah, if we’re doing it in waves, then Nebraska is a good way to set things in motion, and figure out where things fall.
LikeLike
Interesting to see that Missouri-ND situation.
We had guessed that Nebraska would be #12 or #13 based on what Notre Dame does. Perhaps Delany wants to wait anyways on Missouri if he thinks Nebraska is destabilizing enough.
I guess it’ll all become clear soon enough.
LikeLike
As stated earlier, I think Missouri only gets in as part of a final group enlarging to 16. Big Ten presidents want to exhaust their other options before giving Mizzou the greenlight.
If #16 came down to either Missouri or Pittsburgh, which one gets the nod?
LikeLike
I’d say Missouri, mainly based on geography…
LikeLike
And if ND gets cold feet…Texas keeps the Big 12 together…
The Big 10 will still come out ahead of the game. Nebraska is a GREAT first addition in this game of chess (not that I expect the Big 10 to make any bad additions)…it’s just a well-played first move.
LikeLike
Yeah, I think Delany’s going to show he’s not going to wait for ND to make up its mind for the next 12 months while the Pac-10 prepares to launch a Pac-16 bid.
All around the opening shot everyone expected.
LikeLike
I dunno. When we first started talking about this back in December, I don’t think anyone realistically considered Nebraska. I remember most chatter about the usual suspects (ND, Pitt, maybe Missouri), then Rutgers came into play and it kind of snowballed from there.
I think Nebraska is an awesome addition to the conference, as part of 12 or 14 or 16, and I think Delany pulled out a mini-coup getting them.
LikeLike
I think that has to do with it being a public process.
At the beginning the obvious suspects as you point out were in the Big East and ND and possibly Missouri.
Then we all started to look at it and Nebraska suddenly flew up the ranks to #3 after Texas was added at #1.
Delany deserves a lot of credit if Nebraska is added in the next week for making Nebraska -> Big Ten common knowledge like that.
LikeLike
Haven’t played you guys since the 50’s…..only 2 games all-time. Only BT team we’ve played less is Purdue.
What’s the buzz by your fanbase regarding playing Nebraska? Lots of interest on our end.
LikeLike
Wait, who’s “you guys” Red?
LikeLike
Manifesto (OhioSt.)
Q:
“Wait, who’s “you guys” Red?”
A:
THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY you guys
LikeLike
Well you replied to Zeek initially so I wasn’t sure. 😛
I’ve kind of cooled on hitting the Bucknuts/Scout/Rivals crowd lately, but most of the discussion I’ve seen centered on if Rutgers is a bad choice or if Texas is just too far away. Some informed opinions, most uninformed — about what you’d expect.
Most seem to be happy to play Nebraska, to be honest. They seem to have the least controversy anyway. I think the important thing here is that Nebraska clearly enhances the BigTen’s profile, and therefore few are going to argue about it. Unlike Rutgers or Missouri, which divides this place almost as much as the typical fan board.
I’m looking forward to it, although if Nebraska joins it means we’ll probably never lure Pelini away when Tressel retires.
LikeLike
Man,
I think Nebraska was out there, but got traction when Patrick added the TV numbers….
LikeLike
nebraska’s rivals site really is the lowest common denominator of neb fans. Not saying it is wrong, but there seems to be a lot of BS on that site.
LikeLike
Agree. Famous for poseurs and sycophants.
LikeLike
Question for B12/TX fans out there. I have stated multiple times throughout the year that I think the Pac is looking to be agressive (refreshing change from the Hansen era) due to Scott’s track record along with his staff that he has assembled – which includes Kevin Weiberg (who would be instrumental (me thinks) in a PTN and his relationship with B12 teams).
That is where my question comes in, I know Weiberg’s history (on paper) of creating the BTN w/ Delaney and as a former B12 commissioner, but what I don’t know was how his relationship with the B12 ended and how he would be thought of by each of the current B12 (specifically those targeted in a P16) members. Any thoughts?
Put it another way – how much a role could Weiberg have in convincing B12 teams to come west?
LikeLike
Huskers’ Move to Big Ten Not About Texas
Posted on June 8, 2010 by bigredfred
The news out of Austin these days would have you believe that Nebraska’s imminent move to the Big Ten conference is all about a longstanding grudge dating back to the formation of the Big 12.
While it’s certainly true that there’s a feeling both inside the Husker program and among fans that the Conference has moved increasingly more in the direction of catering to the Longhorns and other southern division teams, Nebraska’s jump to the Big Ten is about far more than perceived grudges, Prop-48, seconds being added to stadium clocks or the location of the Conference championship game.
The great George Washington once said of the geopolitical landscape that “no nation is to be trusted further than it is bound by its interest.” He may as well have been talking about the Big 12, which, through an awkward union 14 years ago, has always fostered an “every man for himself” environment.
Far from being a united group of members working together toward a common goal, the Big 12 is instead a loose confederation of individuals all pursuing their own agendas—or pursuing Texas’ agendas. The Huskers do not deem such an environment to be conducive to their long-term success and viability as a program, either financially or athletically.
Nebraska’s departure from this toxic environment is, if anything, fully consistent with the atmosphere that has prevailed in the Conference since its inception. The Huskers are merely looking out for #1—a notion with which DeLoss Dodds and the Longhorn faithful should be well accustomed by now.
Texas wants to characterize the Huskers’ departure from their little sandbox as being all about Texas, when, in fact, it’s really about protecting Nebraska’s own long-term interests. That the Longhorns would believe the move to be all about them is not surprising, coming from a program and fan base so shamelessly narcissistic that they make Husker fans appear downright self loathing in comparison.
Texas had it all in that little sandbox. It was a world they worked hard for 14 years to mold around their own interests, with the league office in Dallas, the championship game in Dallas, and most road games within a short distance of Austin.
That Nebraska’s departure will effectively be tantamount to tossing a pound of fresh cat turds right into that sandbox is only the icing on the cake of Big Ten expansion, but certainly not the cake itself.
The cake, for Nebraska, is admission into a far more stable and harmonious conference environment—a conference that will greatly enhance the financial, academic and athletic interests of the Husker program for perhaps the next 100 years or more—a conference that will greatly enhance research funding, create jobs and generally be a tremendous boon, not only to the University, but also to the state as a whole.
The Huskers will soon jettison the Big Ten escape pod and leave Texas to clean up the mess, beginning with the process of finding a new home for itself and the 2-3 welfare children it carries around like duct-taped, tobacco-stained plaid luggage.
After figuring out how to solve that political hornet’s nest, the Longhorns can turn their attention to the logistics of how to get their women’s rowing team to Seattle and back in the most expedient fashion.
And what about the Huskers’ poor north division brethren? Despite pleas from coaches and administrators at Kansas, Kansas State and Iowa State, Nebraska will turn a deaf ear to these programs, which only recently and out of necessity, have come to realize how much they truly depend on the University of Nebraska.
Of course, these same programs didn’t shown much solidarity with the Huskers when the time came to vote on Conference issues that impacted the north division, yet they now expect the only team that fought for north division interests over the past 14 years to dance like Mr. Bojangles at their command and subjugate its own interests for those of its less-fortunate and wholly ungrateful cohorts? That, folks, is not going to happen.
In moving to the Big Ten conference, Tom Osborne and Harvey Perlman will secure the long-term future viability of the University of Nebraska on a great many fronts, and for decades to come. Nebraska may be long on tradition and national championships, but it’s short on population and desperately needs a safe and secure port in which to moor itself. The Big 12 simply failed to provide the Husker program with a comparable degree of long-term security and prosperity, and that is why Nebraska decided to cut ties.
Those who believe this is all about Texas are either self-absorbed Longhorn fans or individuals who are thinking far too short term. Fortunately, Nebraska’s administrative leadership is more focused on the program’s long-term interests. They’re envisioning a Nebraska poised to thrive long after DeLoss Dodds and 10 generations of Bevo mascots have since turned to dust.
What they’re not envisioning is a father in Omaha 50 years from now regretfully explaining to his son that Nebraska is in the Mountain West conference because the Big 12 eventually blew up as a result of its lack of unity, and the Huskers were forced into a bad situation because they passed on Big Ten membership.
Nebraska will soon be movin’ on up like George and Weezie to that deluxe apartment in the sky, and it feels damned good to this particular “corn chucker.”
LikeLike
This ESPN/Twitter (I’m looking at you Chip Brown)/junk sports writer notion that Nebraska’s move is all about a grudge with Texas is pretty laughable on its face value. That was a good read.
LikeLike
I’m fed up with sport writers as a whole. They just don’t like B10 expansion. I’m sick of their holier than thou attitude that it will ruin college athletics. Maybe it will make it better. Who knows? Maybe college athletics would be better if the Iowa States of the world just died. Maybe stable conferences are better than unstable one. Maybe more money for programs is better, maybe the non-revenue sports rely on that money. What do I know though. UT to the B10 just isn’t right. College athletics would be ruined forever if that happened.
LikeLike
The funny thing was that all of them were focused on how Delany/Big Ten were going to destroy college athletics by going to 16.
Then the Pac-10 unleashed their 16 team gambit, and surprise surprise, we didn’t hear a single complaint.
LikeLike
True. I don’t remember the media (well outside of Texas) lamenting the demise of the SWC. So the B12 folds up shop. Its like the AOL – Time Warner merger. It didn’t work out. Undo it quickly and move on. Mergers don’t work. Strategic buys do. This is why I’m skeptical of a P16 merger. I just hope the B10 can survive.
LikeLike
The Big Ten will be fine.
We’re academically and athletically integrated. That’s the difference between the Big Ten and any other conference (except perhaps the Ivy League which is just as tight a group in many ways, i.e. geography, private/status, etc.).
No one will ever leave the Big Ten unless it’s to close their sports program.
But Delany plans to make the Big Ten so rich (i.e. get rid of competitors and then create a playoff $ bonanza) that even Northwestern will be able to easily fund its athletic department.
LikeLike
The reason why it might actually be better is that the Big10 does actually tend to do things more right than wrong.
Check out conference graduation rates, over signing numbers, academic requirements, etc.
I’m not taking a “holier…” attittude, we have our issue too, but just because we aren’t perfect doesn’t mean we aren’t better (at least in some respectS).
LikeLike
Most important consideration: the strong don’t eat each other, so the B10 and SEC are working together on this and the PAC10 is facilitating
ND knows they would benefit from joining B10, but can’t have an alumni riot.
B10 invites Neb and Mizzou – 13 teams, clearly showing they want to add at least 1 more (ND) if not more. PAC10 then withdraws that 6 school offer, Stanford/Cal veto. SEC moves on Oklahoma, OKState, Texas A&M, and Texas Tech. At the same time, Texas is now free from the other schools and joins the Big10.
PAC10 adds Utah and Colorado, stays at 12.
Big10 has 2 spots left – ND and Pitt/Rutgers/Syracuse
Think about it, SEC and BTN can BOTH have a network covering Texas this way. They don’t have to eat each other. But Nebraska needs to looked like they were forced to break up the Big12. Enter Pac10 crazy shit offer and subsequent even more batshit BigXII ultimatum.
SEC and B10 then handle the Texas issue by splitting them. Notre Dame has literally no choice but to join a conference with Texas, Nebraska, Michigan, and OSU.
Remember, at the decision making levels everyone knows each other. It’s not kryptic, Delany probably has discussed plans with Slive. Predators don’t eat other predators unless all the prey is gone.
LikeLike
Hmmm, does OK and state of Texas (minus is most valuable asset) work for SEC. I don’t know – I doubt it. But it is an intriguing thought. And I do think there is some merit to B10, P10 and SEC working together. If you are doing that, you better lock up Utah so Senator Hatch doesn’t go waiving his figure again. With all these actors, I hope there isn’t much paper trail. The public does not like collusion.
LikeLike
The SEC can’t offer Texas anything outside of football dollars, which Texas can get elsewhere easily. The SEC gets #2 and #3 Texas schools, which is enough to follow the BTN and get their network on all the Texas cable systems, and the OK schools are solid athletically and one has T. Boone shelling out for it.
Remember, in the 90s Texas was going to Pac10 and A&M to the SEC.
What else is out there for the SEC, and why are they being so quiet?
LikeLike
ShockFX..
This has been my point for awhile..
the SEC IS so quiet right now..
LikeLike
CIC does not require a medical school, cause Purdue does not have never will. However Purdue may have been grandfathered in.
LikeLike
I don’t think CIC membership requires anything.
You bring your library, etc. in terms of collobration and then work with other universities on projects…
All of the CIC membership wide projects are basic in nature (shared purchasing, libraries, computing, student exchanges) and don’t require specialized facilities for the most part.
LikeLike
Thanks for the info.
LikeLike
Another option. Kick out Michigan State. The whole state is drowning in a rising sea of economic morass. The auto industry doesn’t command near the respect it once did. This is the time for the B10 to shed its dead weight. To raise money, MSU could auction off Tom Izzo.
LikeLike
You must be a Wolverine. Enjoy probation.
LikeLike
Ah, I was just kidding. I have no affiliation to either school. I think they will enjoy probation.
LikeLike
Yeah, right. Kick the only basketball power out of the conference. Do they still play basketball in Indiana? I know they don’t in Iowa, Minn, Penn, Ohio, Ill or Whisky.
LikeLike
Kick them out and pick up Kansas. Call it a wash.
LikeLike
FWIW
IU or MSU get kicked out of the B 10 and I am gonna follow whatever conference they go to. I am happy watching the gophers and the illini as well in basketball so there are people that follow Big 10 basketball. Be nice.
LikeLike
So…in summary….the University of Texas is joining every single conference, including the MAC, the Sun Belt, the Patriot, the Big Sky…..did I leave any out?
UT can only join one conference. (as far as I know) The other conferences will have to deal with plan B.
LikeLike
UT can only join one conference.
You don’t get the end game, do you? Our ego knows no bounds . . .
LikeLike
the end game? I don’t tell me it’s to turn all universities into the University of Texas is it? or am I still thinking too small?
LikeLike
Puny mortals thinking only of their home planet…
LikeLike
You think in such three-dimensional terms. How small you’ve become.
LikeLike
actually I was thinking how I really don’t like burnt orange, and hope that I don’t have to wear it
yeah…thinking too small
LikeLike
Long-time reader, first-time poster. This expansion stuff is fascinating – so many moving parts. The Big Ten has been defined for years (in football) by the OSU-Michigan rivalry. Assuming that continues, do you guys think that Texas or Notre Dame would have a “status” issue with not being involved in the conference’s biggest game, or are the dollars involved enough to trump any concern like that? Or does the CCG become the biggest game in the conference?
Like many posters have said, I would welcome ND with open arms if they chose to come, but if they don’t, I don’t really care. The mere fact that a lot of Domers seem to be chiming in now tells me that the possibility of the Irish joining a conference is realistic and has struck fear into them. Otherwise, if it was not possible, I cannot imagine they would care too much about all of this.
LikeLike
Call me crazy, but I do not see the B10 rushing to a conference title game. Only the SEC has made it work. Now I think the B10 could make it work as well, meaning you wouldn’t have CCGs with only 40,000 people, and people would actually watch. I’m just not sure it would bring in the value to make it work. Instead of two teams having a potential 12/13th game, why would you have all teams have a 12/13th game. I also think that championship games hurt you when it comes to BCS bids. This is true of the B12 (ah hm), though less true of the SEC. But the B10 is positioning itself to potentially receive 3 bids on an annual basis. Why knock a team out because of championship game that only brought in an extra few million. Now maybe, the B10 goes that route, but I think they will do something innovative. The pod idea has been discussed. I do not see them going to a 2-division set up with a CCG even if there are 12 or 14 teams. And I actually hope they don’t. Feel free to disagree.
LikeLike
I disagree.
There’s way too much on the table for a CCG in this world. Frank and other have alluded to it, but the Big Ten will have a CCG once it hits 12 members. You can take that to the bank.
A sponsored CCG (probably Lucas Oil Stadium centered/Indianapolis-Dome) would bring in $15M or so. There’s just too much on the table nowadays to not have it. The SEC has shown that, and the Big Ten can easily make it work just as well. The Big Ten’s will be even more centrally located in fact…
LikeLike
I’m not sure. I’m not sure the money is as great as it appears, especially if it causes you to lose out on some BCS money. But honestly, I don’t really know. I just think the B10 would look to be a little more innovative. And maybe it is merely in deciding who makes it to the game or in how divisions/pods are constructed. Obviously, if any conference can pull of the CCG like the SEC it is the B10. I just think they will be more innovative. I think the lack of a CCG has served them well for all these years. So immediately starting one would really be to cave in to fan pressure – unless the $$ were that good, then by all means do it. But isn’t the B10 traditionally against a playoff. Is it harder for them to make that argument if they themselves have a mini-playoff? That is a legitimate question – there is a perception issue.
LikeLike
A CCG is a trap for a team that’s undefeated or ranked #1. On the plus side, its an extra game. The Big ten which has traditionally found it champion my Thanks Giving and have a long lay off without spirited composition has been hurt by not playing much after thanks giving day. Its like when the Big East and other conferences went to a league tournament and for years the BT did not. These teams lasted longer in the NCAA because they were tested later by this worm-up tournament. This is really the only good reason besides money to have a CCG.
LikeLike
But it won’t cause you to lose out on BCS bids.
Because soon we’ll be going for 3 probably.
Think about it, winner/loser and next highest ranked. When you have as many premium brands in a conference as the Big Ten plans to 4-5, it’ll be fine.
LikeLike
You may be right. Let me try this on for size. Obviously, Indy, Chicago, Detroit are good locations for a CCG because of their central locations – Indy and Detroit better because of domes. But what about every once in the while holding the CCG in NY, Boston, or DC? Does B10 have enough alumni in those locations to pull that off. I feel better if you get Neb, UT, and ND. Of course then you could add Dallas/Jerry World to the mix. All those places would really make the CCG an event unlike what the SEC can offer. Just thinking outside the box.
LikeLike
Sure we could move it around; open air is more of a question mark because of weather but I’m sure it would rotate.
If Rutgers is added, I could see it more likely to be held in NYC, etc. Either way a Big Ten championship is going to be almost as big a deal as the SEC championship depending on how well the teams are.
LikeLike
Just want to point out that the loser of a conference championship game doesn’t always get into the BCS. Often there’s a 11-1 team or a 10-2 team that finished 2nd in its division that gets the nod.
Oklahoma and Texas each have gotten BCS bids in the same year, and it’s happened often in the SEC as well.
LikeLike
I would tend to think the opposite in terms of a CCG for the Big Ten, particularly if that dream scenario of Nebraska, Texas, and Notre Dame were all in the conference. With a conference that strong, we may receive treatment more akin to the SEC, whose CCG loser is pretty much guaranteed a BCS spot. Of course, the Big Ten has pretty much gotten two in every year anyway, so the only real attraction of a CCG, aside from more dollars, would be to help an undefeated Big Ten team get into the NCG where two other conferences also have undefeated champs.
LikeLike
The regional base of this confrence is in the Midwest. The CCG has to be in the Midwest. The travel is better for all concerned. I see the lucas Oil building just for the comfort of the fans. otherwise Soldiers Field Chicago.
even with rutgers, I think moveing that game to NY?NJ is s slap in the face to the base. This would change if we has 3 easren teams then I say we could rotate.
LikeLike
To be frank, the OSU-Michigan game has been so big for the Big Ten because it’s determined the Big Ten like 80% of the time (percentage pulled directly from ass).
If ND and/or Texas join, all they have to do is win the Big Ten consistently. That’s all there is to it. Consistently playing against 1-2 specific opponents to determine it as well, be it OSU, Michigan, ND, whomever, will create new rivalries and statuses.
Kind of like how even though Michigan is (and always will be) our main rival, we have a nice healthy rivalry with PSU. I’m sure Texas and ND could form an awesome rivalry over time, especially if they consistently meet when the two teams are at the top of their game.
LikeLike
Exactly regarding stature of OSU-Michigan game. I am sure, given your handle, that it at least saddens you to think that that rivalry could be diluted somewhat by adding more perennial biggies to the league. It does indeed get the juices flowing, though, to think of yearly or every other yearly tilts with the likes of ND, Nebraska, and Texas.
Particularly so for games against the Irish 😉
LikeLike
It does to an extent. I’m a little torn on the CCG, for example, because I love the OSU-Michigan game being the final game of the year for OSU. But it makes sense for the conference imo, so I’ll survive.
But I’m not worried about the rivalry being diluted just by the presence of other big-name teams. Even if Texas, A&M, ND, and Nebraska all joined I would believe there’s going to be some years where the conference is partially defined by the rivalry. Those teams won’t supplant either OSU or Michigan as top dog any more than PSU did — just like PSU they’ll join us at the top of the conference. Some years one of them will dominate, and some years one of us will, or Wisconsin/Iowa in those strange years where the planets align.
I really enjoyed the Texas-OSU games this last decade — that could be great as a regular thing. And who doesn’t want frequent replays of the OSU-ND Fiesta Bowl? 😉
LikeLike
To further clarify, the rivalry will always be an issue because, even if both aren’t at the top in a given year, so long as one team is in contention for the championship the other has the chance to play spoiler. Something I don’t see going away with these new teams. And that, my friend, is what has defined this rivalry more than anything else in the last half-century or so — crushing your rival’s dreams in the last week of the season.
LikeLike
I used to like the Arkansas OKlahoma games and the Oklahoma Texas Games but things change.
LikeLike
Do people outside Ohio and Michigan actually watch that game? Seriously. Lived whole life in midwest, never sat thru it.
LikeLike
Troll post is troll.
LikeLike
Maybe troll, maybe not. Either way, I never watched it. No one I knew in IN ever did. Wondered if it was an Indiana basketball-is-king thing and perhaps the Non-UM and Non-OSU fans would contribute.
The troll line would be “three yards and a puff of dust”. 🙂
LikeLike
This is precisely the reason that many Notre Dame fans are viewed as a bunch of arrogant elitists almost completely detached from reality. But oh well, you still have your independence.
LikeLike
If you only care about your team, or only watch your team, likely you don’t watch it. If you watch college football, then you watch it. Unless you’re an ND fan, in which case every game pales in comparison to whatever mid-tier chump ND rolled into their stadium that week. 😉
The 2006 #1v#2 was the most watched regular season college football game since 1993 for ABC (21.8mil). But the stakes were at their highest obviously. BTW, the 1993 game they didn’t beat was ND-FSU (22mil). (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/television/news/e3ib621c0f3d9ad3eeefaf742844df20e00)
At the turn of the century ESPN voted it the greatest rivalry in all sports (http://espn.go.com/endofcentury/s/other/bestrivalries.html), and that was with Cooper only beating Michigan twice in the previous 10 years.
Typical fans from other regions obviously disparage other regions’ rivalries — that’s just kind of par for the course. That said, I’m both surprised and not surprised to hear a ND fan say that. No offense.
LikeLike
@Manifesto
Your data only shows that people will watch a regional game when it has implications for the national championship.
If the BCS ended there would be a lot of regional games with national championship implications. Which would drive ratings. Which would drive TV money. This is why the BCS structure as we know it is all but dead.
LikeLike
Unfortunately a quick search didn’t turn up numbers over the years. Because it was a big game the numbers were readily available.
I’m not saying it’s a national rivalry. I’m just trying to defend what read like a flippant response. Every rivalry is only in the national conscience when there are national implications, otherwise other regions don’t really care. No one would care about the Yankees-Red Sox if they were the Royals-Devil Rays — it matters because both teams win, a lot.
Either way, as I originally stated to GoBucks’ question, nobody that comes into the BigTen is going to care about our rivalry game except in the event where it affects them. They’ll form their own rivalries.
LikeLike
Hmmm. Now this is an interesting quote:
“We’ve basically been invited to any conference we want to go,” [Mack] Brown said.
LikeLike
Is it really that interesting? Not being a smart-ass. Don’t we already know UT could go wherever they wanted to go? Or do you find it interesting because it is basically saying that both B10 and SEC have contacted us? Does Mack Brown really know? Or is this a quote for recruiting. Hey look, everyone wants us, don’t you want to come here. Just asking.
LikeLike
No, I think it is one of those off-the-cuff remarks that reveal more than intended. We know that Texas could go wherever Texas wants, but, to me, this reveals that there have been conversations, with implied invites, from someone beyond the Pac 10. It goes to the Gee emails: there’s been more going on behind the scenes than most are aware.
LikeLike
I guess, but I think everyone knows that behind the scene talks have taken place. To think otherwise would be naive. But I’m not sure it really tells us anything new. I’m just waiting for that announcement that School(s) X are joining Conference Y. Heck, I’d even settle for the MWC talking BSU – nah, that won’t do.
LikeLike
it is a way for texas to tell their fans they are very important and the attention at others isn’t as deserved..
LikeLike
Yeah, I’m sure Brown us just helping us work through those self-esteem issues for which we’re well known.
LikeLike
He really is a great guy. =)
LikeLike
Just have to solve that Tech problem…
LikeLike
The Tech problem is more of a construct built around the current conditions of Texas/A&M/Tech/OU/OSU unity. Once that breaks apart (i.e. SEC rolls out invites or Big Ten goes after A&M), I don’t think the Tech problem becomes as important.
If Texas and A&M go their own ways because the Pac-10 invite blows up, the legislature won’t be able to force Tech on the Big Ten or SEC. Bet on that.
LikeLike
Pretty much. Every conference has fielded some kind of private offer to Texas. The Pac-10’s public offer is clearly the most superior as of now.
LikeLike
adding
LikeLike
Ok so I have a dinner party with the “fun governor” tonight.
I’m showering and I ask my wife if we lived in NY and ND v. Indiana was on the BTN and Rutgers v. Indiana was on the BTN the next week which game would make us call our cable provider to complain about not having the BTN on basic.
The “governor” said no brainer….ND.
If the B10 lands ND do we need Rutgers? I mean 58-62 in last ten years and this is the hey day of Rutgers football?
I’ll take Pitt or Syracuse.
Someone help me understand?
LikeLike
No. Notre Dame grabs all of the northeast (with Penn State of course). You aren’t “required” to add anyone to supplement Notre Dame.
However, adding Rutgers would be a prudent move in any expansion because Notre Dame-Rutgers, Michigan-Rutgers, Ohio State-Rutgers, Penn State-Rutgers, Nebraska-Rutgers, would all be a big deal when they’re that close to NYC and all the Big Ten alumni in that area.
Big Ten alumni in the NYC/NJ region are among the most plentiful, so bringing those games to town will be huge. Obviously only 1-2 of them happen every year, that goes without saying, but those can be moved to Meadowlands, etc.
You don’t need any of those teams though, in terms of TV ratings, Notre Dame and Penn State have a lock on the northeast.
It depends on what expansion looks like as with all of these questions.
Is Texas in play? Is A&M in play? etc. If those two are in play then I don’t think any northeast teams are added (i.e. Nebraska/Mizz/ND/Texas/A&M), but if they aren’t in play, then Rutgers + Maryland or someone is likely…
LikeLike
So Rutgers is the big winner, just because Big Ten guy is living in the big city. makes sense. Man they will be hitting the lotto.
What about Syracuse down in the city? MSG is orange as hell during the tourney.
I’m sure they would travel?
LikeLike
Syracuse is more central NY. Rutgers is like 25 miles away from Manhattan or something like that.
Rutgers just has a location advantage over any other university that doesn’t have a marquee football program other than Mizzou in a lot of these scenarios.
LikeLike
Let’s not get too carried away. Indiana at Rutgers isn’t likely to draw much of a crowd. Certainly not Minn at Rutgers. I’m not even certain Neb at Rutgers would. Are there a lot of Neb fans in NJ? Rutgers would not always get ND, Mich, Penn St, OSU. Better to rely on a school that consistently draws well at home on their own merits – if that is what we are looking at.
LikeLike
Understood, I lived in Syracuse for a stint, Pascoloni (sp) and the hey day. Man I bet they regret chasing him out of town.
But the fan base was strong, and would love a couple big trips to the city imo.
something tells me the city might be more receptive to them for some reason. Of course they would have to win.
Man a couple b-ball runs had the city pretty fired up.
I also would love to see Syracuse B-ball in the Big Ten.
probably wishful thinking.
LikeLike
My point though is that Rutgers has the unique advantage of staging for big opponents in a way that others don’t.
There’s only 3 huge brands on the table. Then you get solid top notch market brands that are hard to get like Maryland/UVA/UNC, etc.
So when you’re looking at adding non-marquee brands as any expansion would, that’s what you want.
Plus, Rutgers has potential in terms of its huge alumni base and NJ growth. If added to the Big Ten, Delany would be betting that it would have an 70000 seat stadium within 20 years, etc.
Rutgers has the most potential of perhaps any school that’s not a big brand. That’s not to be underestimated.
If Rutgers is added, Delany is betting that being a part of the Big Ten will help them eventually become on par with the Iowas/Wisconsins of the world. Will that be easy? No. But few schools out there have that kind of potential. Syracuse does not. Heck plenty of the Big Ten teams don’t have that kind of potential…
LikeLike
Zeek, what growth are you talking about. I thought Rutgers was losing people. I know the state is in bad shape along with Mich and CA – we’ll see if Christie can turn it around. I guess for me that may be the biggest benefit of ND, it may stop a bid to Rutgers. I just don’t like them. I think Syracuse is a much better pickup. Just a visceral reaction really.
LikeLike
Population and that Rutgers is as big a state school as the biggest in the Big Ten (50k students).
LikeLike
Rutgers continues to grow. A new buildout on one of the New Brunswick campuses has been announced.
Don’t lose sight of the fact that depending on who else is in an expansion, Rutgers could be the best academic school added. It would be in the middle of the current Big Ten. For the usual suspects the academic rankings go:
Texas, MD, (Rutgers, Pitt), TAMU, significant gap, MO, NE, ND
So Rutgers’ location is one point, but it has merits independently of that. If the Big Ten goes east with NE, ND, MO, enhancing the academic balance in expansion is likely to be a strong consideration.
Any two of Pitt, RU and MD would be a strong move strictly on academic grounds. RU, MD bring with them the kicker of an extended population footprint and access to particularly desirable markets (NYC ==media +people), (DC= people +gov).
LikeLike
Add Nebraska and Notre Dame to the Big Ten mix, and Maryland rapidly ditches any ambivalence it has about the Big Ten (and as stated earlier, the Big Ten has a comparable percentage of alumni in metro D.C. as it does in metro NYC). Neb/ND/Rut/UMd is the perfect blend of football power (all-around athletics, too), academics, television viewership and big, influential markets (getting D.C. is key for research lobbying). The question then is who gets #16 — Missouri? Vanderbilt (as a favor to Gordon Gee)? Virginia?
LikeLike
The thing is, when you talk about ordering, I think Missouri would get it.
If Notre Dame isn’t coming then we’re likely looking at Nebraska as #12 and then perhaps waiting to see what Texas does. Maybe we take Missouri as #13, but that’s hard to read as to whether that will happen. Delany will want maximum flexibility with spots 13-16, that much is certain, so he might be trying to get Notre Dame to come along…
Getting Maryland and Virginia later on as a pair would be great. But it would require the SEC to pass on OU/OSU/A&M, which looks unlikely.
Maryland and Virginia are likely to go anywhere as a pair though if they do end up feeling that the ACC is unstable… particularly if VA Tech gets poached…
LikeLike
SH, please have no doubts that Neb would be able to fill the meadowlands. They travel as well as anyone in the country, with the possible exception of Clemson. I personally know a lot of former Nebraskans in the Garden State; most of them would spend top dollar to see their team play on the east coast, let alone just up the road in NJ.
LikeLike
Ok, I believe you. Would they really travel to NJ for a regular season game? You are probably right, I don’t doubt their ability to fill their own stadium or a bowl game.
LikeLike
Look at that picture of the Huskers in ND. Yes that was ND but still, they turned South Bend red…
Husker Nation across the Big Ten footprint is severely underrated because they don’t play there. When they will in the coming years, don’t be shocked to see the stadiums as full as when the other big 3 come to town…
LikeLike
One of the big misnomers about the famous travelling Huskers fans is that they come from Nebraska. Actually, there are Huskers fans all over the country, so when we fill the Meadowlands only a fraction of that crowd made the trip from the state of Nebraska. I read an article once that said the misnomer started when NU visited Hawaii in the late 70’s and a large fan contingent traveled there. The media reported on how well the Husker fans had traveled, but most of those fans actually lived in California.
LikeLike
What is better, Notre Dame?
The devil you know, or the devil you don’t know?
LikeLike
Vanquishing the Devil.
LikeLike
At least it appears there’s some good news for the Big 12 leftovers. According to OB.com, there’s a $10 million buyout for teams and it would take nine votes to absolve the conference and avoid penalties. That’s obviously not happening with four teams on the outside looking in.
So it looks like KU, KSU, Iowa State and Baylor are primed to split $80 million. Guess if you get left out in the cold, a $20 million payout helps ease the pain a bit.
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1092201
LikeLike
For the love of god let this speculation be correct. We all knew about the “secret” meeting tonight because it was in the Daily Camera because of Colorado disclosure laws.
If its true that NU has an invite and the non-TX scenario invite list is accurate, why wouldn’t the Big 10 let the PAC 10 know? Neither team league wants to see Texas in the SEC and the PAC 10 would be the only league that can solve the “Tech” problem. Would the PAC be willing to invite CU now to put additional pressure on Texas and circumvent the Baylor issue?
LikeLike
It actually makes perfect sense.
Colorado works in either a Colorado/Utah or Colorado/Texas/A&M/Tech/Oklahoma/OSU grouping.
The Pac-10 is hoping that if it strikes on Colorado that the Big Ten follows up on Nebraska and sets the dominoes moving.
So the Pac-10 keeps its flexibility to fall back and just invite Utah as a 2nd if it has to…
LikeLike
Oh, also, there is that issue of Texas/A&M/Oklahoma needing to accept for the Pac-10 to add Tech/OSU.
That’s my guess anyways.
No chance in the world that Tech or OSU will be able to accept invites and then have Texas/A&M/Oklahoma ditch for other places.
LikeLike
Adding Colorado takes the Baylor gambit out of Texas’ hands — though given the state legislature’s schedule and Baylor’s relatively meager influence on legislators, I never sensed that threat was viable to begin with.
But would Texas, which likes being in control of these things, then tell the Pac-10 “no go”? I’m not sure it has that option.
LikeLike
I tend to think that Texas would send a bouquet of beautiful Texas yellow roses if the Pac 10 proactively took care of the Baylor problem for it.
LikeLike
SuperD,
If nobody wants to see the SEC with Texas, but the SEC could take TX, A&M, TT, and Baylor and call it a day. If the Pac 10 takes CO, the texas state house moves the texas block to the SEC all this blows up in Delaneys lap.
LikeLike
The SEC is not taking Baylor. I don’t really think that’s up for discussion.
LikeLike
Zeek – I would certainly be against Baylor getting an invite from the SEC, but I don’t have a vote. However, I would not dismiss UTx, A&M, TTech and Baylor to the SEC as a possibility. While the SEC is currently composed of all secular schools, a Baptist school in the SEC would not be nearly the shock to the senses that Baylor in the Pac 10 would be.
Sometimes work gets in the way of this blog. I’ll try to chime in tomorrow afternoon on all these SEC scenarios, and update the newbies on the SEC TV contracts. I’ll also have a few words about this fiction that the SEC is overrun with an illiterate bunch of criminals.
LikeLike
Hopkins – is the Baylor card really going to get played? What if P10 says no? Does UT stay in modified BXII. If Mizzou is gone is that realistic? I just think the Baylor option cannot be realistic over Colorado. No way the politicians sink the Texas 3 over Baylor? Of course if A&M ends up in B10, I guess it is back on the table. Unbelievable to think Baylor could hold that much influence over UT.
LikeLike
So it would be a lesser conference but I would like to see these guys stay put and recreate the Big 8.
Kansas,
Kansas St
Iowa State
Baylor
So who are the best fit schools to add to the mix?
LikeLike
There are no good schools to make that a watchable conference. I would start with Kansas, Louisville, Cincinnati, TCU, SMU, Houston and work from there. Maybe Boise St. and South or Central Florida – a revamped CUSA or Great America Conference. Make everyone run the spread and hope that scores of 65-56 bring in enough viewers. Could be decent basketball too.
LikeLike
Honestly probably the MWC though the Kansas schools may be in play for the Big East or ACC. Baylor would be a nice travel partner for TCU, and geographically it works. Though Kansas would hate it the MWC is an underrated Basketball league, particularly last year. Not sure they’d take ISU though, they might actually prefer Boise, though ISU is a much much better academic option. Academics was one of the issues in the MWC schools original jailbreak from the WAC.
LikeLike
I’m going to go on the assumption that the Big 10 finishes with Nebraska, Missouri, Syracuse, Rutgers and Pitt (I could be way off). If that’s the case, this could be a pretty solid 12-team conference:
Kansas
KSU
Iowa State
Baylor
West Virginia
UConn
Louisville
Cincy
TCU
Utah
BYU
Houston? Memphis? Boise?
LikeLike
wow that conference is a real dog’s dinner. BYU and UConn in the same conference? their all over the place.
fwiw I live in Ct and I don’t see how UConn would be remotely interested. they fit fine in the Big East and would be a natural if the ACC needed replacement schools with a basketball emphasis.
LikeLike
Hank, if the Big 10 takes two or three Big East schools, there’s not going to be enough teams left in the Big East for UConn to play football. So either the Big East needs to expand or those Big East football schools need to go elsewhere.
I’m basically throwing together a conference with the best of the Big East, Big 12, MWC leftovers.
I have no idea if it’s feasible or not. Just throwing stuff out there.
LikeLike
I understand that Robert. I may have come off harsher than I meant. There are East coast options for a basketball oriented Big East that might satisfy the needs of UConn. Also if the ACC eventually gets raided by the SEC UConn and Syracuse would probably top the list of replacements. Pitt as well.
LikeLike
I agree with you entirely that UConn is a great ACC fit if they expand. And I think at some point in the future the ACC will go to 16.
But I’m not sure that happens right away, and this type of conference could be a temporary home for the Big 12 and Big East teams that are left out in the cold.
You do raise a good point about the logistics of travel though. I’m not sure it’s feasible to have a conference with both East coast teams and BYU/Utah.
Maybe this type of conference is better off stopping at 10 without the Utah schools. Or going to 12 with some of the CUSA schools.
LikeLike
Robert, I like this but UConn would be a real outlier. Even so the conference really stretches across the country. maybe too much but the schools/teams would be a competitive league.
LikeLike
If you want to stay west of the Mississippi:
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State
Baylor
TCU
Houston
BYU
Utah
Fresno State
UNLV
New Mexico
San Diego State
3 teams in Texas and 2 in California get you some visibility in those states. The biggest schools in Nevada, Kansas, Utah, and New Mexico helps with the ratings.
I’d imagine this would get the Big 12’s automatic qualifying spot for political purposes (even if they weren’t required to give it), and it would make a bit more than whatever the MWC currently makes.
If they kept together over time, this could become a bigger player as populations rise out west over time.
LikeLike
Schools like Iowa State, Syracuse, and K-State should see the dissolution of the B12 and Big East and the inevitable formation of the four 16-team super conferences as an opportunity to gracefully exit the big time football arms race. Other than a few fluke seasons over the past few decades, they never were relevant on the national stage and in the post-realignment era, they never will be again. Drop down to FCS or DII and just emphasis their basketball programs. And yes I know I-State’s been pretty moribund there too lately. Be like Northern Iowa, Butler, and Gonzaga: focus on the one sport where it’s possible to remain relevant in the sporting arena and create positive pr about your university without having to maintain a 9 figure athletic dept budget. Continuing the charade of being a major player in football and being a perpetual also-ran just contributes to negative name associations. Not that alumni and administrative egos will ever allow this to happen but still …
LikeLike
BTW
anybody watch CFL on ESPN yesterday?
here we are right in the middle of a possible major shift in CFB, and they did a wooden show instead. Not to slight Wooden (he was an Indiana product after all) but conference realignment it probably the bigger story.
LikeLike
ESPN won’t do anything on conference realignment because they have no real inside information. All they could say is “I talked to this AD and he said this.” Honestly, Frank could break the story that Neb and B10 will make an announcement at noon on Fri. ESPN would wait until 12:01 and finally say “ESPN sources confirm that NE is joining the B10.” Heaven forbid they give credit to someone outside the mother ship.
LikeLike
Yea, unfounded speculation should trump the greatest coach in sports history
LikeLike
At ESPN, unfounded speculation usually trumps all.
LikeLike
I think it is important to distill precisely why ND is hesitant to join. In my mind, it does not have anything to do with dollars, like it did before, as a Big Ten with ND will bring exponentially more to the Irish than an ND independent. When they rejected the Big Ten before, they could rely on that reason, even if they didn’t say it publicly. By the same token, it is not as if they won’t survive if they do not join.
Likewise, I do not think that the “joining a conference regionalizes us” argument carries much weight, either. If we assume the Big Ten adds ND, Texas, and Nebraska alone, two divisions of seven would likely emerge. Six divisional games plus two cross-divisonal games leaves, at a minimum, four out of conference games. Let’s say the divisions play out like this:
EAST
Penn State
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Purdue
Indiana
Notre Dame
WEST
Texas
Nebraska
Iowa
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Northwestern
Illinois.
Notre Dame would keep yearly games with MSU, Michigan, and Purdue, and add big yearly games against OSU and PSU. Throw in a guaranteed cross-divisonal game against Texas, and ND’s annual games with USC and Navy, their schedule could look like something like this:
Purdue
Penn State (EAST/NATL GAME)
Michigan State
Michigan (NATL GAME)
Navy (played in NYC?)
Texas (TX/SOUTH/NATL GAME)
Indiana
G.Tech (SOUTHEAST) or BC (EAST COAST)
Ohio State (NATL GAME)
Washington (NORTHWEST)
Nebraska/Iowa/Wisconsin
USC (WEST)
Difficult to see how this would “regionalize” them, playing in at least five huge games every year (TX, OSU, PSU, Mich, and USC), and allowing them access to all sections of the country. Plus, with as fervent a fan base as ND claims, it isn’t as if these long-time supporters are suddenly going to lose interest in the school just because it joins the above conference. If anything, given those big games, it could even elevate their profile. So I do not buy this whole “regionalization” argument.
While that kind of schedule, plus the television coverage and ESPN that exists today that did not exist in ND’s “barnstormiing” days, would not “regionalize” ND, it may actually “marginalize” them. The real reason they might be hesitant to join the Big Ten is not because of some abstract, completely unclear and undefined notion of “independence,” but, rather, a fear of consistently being in the lower portion of the top tier of the conference. In other words, competing against these schools (in football) might cause them to marginalize themselves by failing to win the conference on a consistent basis.
I could be off, and maybe my failure to attend ND renders me spiritually ill-equipped to understand the mystique that is the “independence is our roots” argument, but that’s just my take.
LikeLike
FLP has made some reasonable cases before, but I think it kind of boils down to this:
ND is the last major independent in football, it’s part of what makes them fancy, and they want to stay fancy as long as possible.
There’s some sound logic for recruiting, academic profile, etc. but I think really above is pretty much it.
LikeLike
Fancy!
LikeLike
That’s what I mean, though. Everyone points to this “independence” thing, but no one can really define it beyond some abstract/lofty rhetoric. And this is convenient given that it is the only really compelling reason for not joining a conference.
LikeLike
Being independent is what gives ND its soul. It is football at its purest and most idealized form. And if all the other sports have to suffer by playing in an inferior conference so be it.
That was probably too cynical. I don’t really think that is it though @GoBucks. I do think being independent is one thing that really sets ND apart. I get why the alumni fear losing that. I just think the positives of joining the B10 outweigh the negatives of losing that status. Especially with the changing landscape and the money the B10 brings. I just wish Domers weren’t so uppity about it. I guess they are just tired of having to go through this every 10 years. But really, don’t blame the B10 – blame the administration who clearly covets the attention.
LikeLike
Haha on that first paragraph.
Me squeezing my balls til I faint every day is a FACT that sets me apart from everyone else. But it doesn’t mean I should keep doing it.
LikeLike
No I wouldn’t recommend it.
LikeLike
But, it feels sooooo good when you stop, right? Just kidding.
LikeLike
Y’know what, I’ve had a long crappy day, so I’ll be brief.
As far as the Big Ten is concerned it doesn’t matter why ND won’t join.
Seriously. You have no interest in changing for ND. We have no interest in you telling us why we’re wrong despite the fact we’ve put in waaay more time pondering it than you have.
All we want is for you to say, “OK”, and be done with it.
maybe my failure to attend ND renders me spiritually ill-equipped to understand the mystique that is the “independence is our roots” argument
At least you acknowledge your ignorance. That’s the first step.
LikeLike
“Y’know what, I’ve had a long crappy day, so I’ll be brief.
As far as the Big Ten is concerned it doesn’t matter why ND won’t join.
Seriously. You have no interest in changing for ND. We have no interest in you telling us why we’re wrong despite the fact we’ve put in waaay more time pondering it than you have.
All we want is for you to say, “OK”, and be done with it.
“maybe my failure to attend ND renders me spiritually ill-equipped to understand the mystique that is the “independence is our roots” argument”
At least you acknowledge your ignorance. That’s the first step.”
I can see why ND attracts so many non-alumni fans. It’s the congenial, welcoming attitude of those blessed with having gone there.
LikeLike
*shrug* I’m sick of d-bag buckeye fans trying to set up “you’re opinion is wrong and stupid” discussion. Just calling one of them on it.
As we occasionally say to non-Domers, “You don’t know, you weren’t there.” Nothing wrong with that. Not calling anyone stupid. He admitted he wasn’t there, and I informed him he was correct: he doesn’t get it. *shrug*
LikeLike
I have no interest in telling Domers that they are wrong, or in changing them if they were to join the conference. The only point I was making was that, aside from some mysterious “independence is our roots” argument, which no one (including you) has seen fit to define/explain, it would appear that ND’s resistance to the Big Ten is one of fear – fear that they won’t consistently win the conference, and that that fact, on its own, will marginalize their brand. If that is true, fine, i have no issue with that, and I would venture that many teams would fit that description (you can even sub in the SEC for the Big Ten).
Otherwise, what you are left with, each time someone asks the question, or someone writes an article that doesn’t proclaim that independence is the Holy Grail, is to simply blast the source as an ignorant d-bag.
in all seriousness, as a CFB traditionalist, I have a great deal of respect for ND, and loved it when they and the Buckeyes got to play in the 90s and in the FB. I hope they get to play even more in the coming years.
But without explanation of this independence thing, and without you responding to even a single substantive point i made, instead opting to latch onto the fact that I am not an alum, I hold fast to the position that ND fears losing too much in the Big Ten. I am fully open to being convinced otherwise.
LikeLike
OK, now I’m calling you stupid.
First you suggest a politically untenable schedule. Suuuure Texas will come in as team 12-14. Plus you and I both know that no Big Ten teams would dare make that schedule, much less attempt to play it. Just realized another stupid thing about your schedule. In your hypothetical, each team would rotate only one cross division game. That means each western division team will get a home game with UM or OSU every DOZEN YEARS. Eastern Division schools get Neb or Tex at home again ONLY ONCE EVERY DOZEN YEARS. At least have the decency to come up with a scheduling theory you can defend without embarrassing us all.
Then you disingenuously call PSU an “eastern team” despite the fact that since joining the B10 they’ve been considered nationally as another Midwestern team.
You then make a mistake that a “long time lurker” with brains wouldn’t by confusing getting the national ABC game with actually playing a national schedule. Hey, ‘Genius’, all our games are on national TV already, and on channels that everyone gets. Why should we forfeit that? Besides, a long time lurker would know from posts weeks ago that we like playing different teams from all over all the time.
You go on for paragraphs about an unrealistic hypothetical that fundamentally misunderstands ND concept of what “a National Schedule” is. Is ND supposed to be impressed by only playing four non-midwestern teams? Is ND supposed to be impressed with having 7 conference and 2 out of conference games that never change ever? Even this year’s garbage schedule is better than that.
You really have no clue what ND wants or what a national schedule looks like.
It kills me to admit this to an obvious Philistine, but people *might* stop watching us. We don’t have a lot of alumni. Our fans are fans, and who’s to say they will remain if we never played their local teams. Frankly, I would doubt it. Lord knows I would stop making ND games a priority if we joined the Big Ten, and I’m an alum, and you all would consider me a zealot.
FYI, all sports are local. Just like politics. Free wisdom for you right there.
But here’s the kicker, the thing that tells me that you aren’t just being misguided, but are a stupid douchebag:
The real reason they might be hesitant to join the Big Ten is not because of some abstract, completely unclear and undefined notion of “independence,” but, rather, a fear of consistently being in the lower portion of the top tier of the conference. In other words, competing against these schools (in football) might cause them to marginalize themselves by failing to win the conference on a consistent basis.
OK, you just called my Alma Mater chicken. Then you put this trolling right after:
I could be off, and maybe my failure to attend ND renders me spiritually ill-equipped to understand the mystique that is the “independence is our roots” argument, but that’s just my take.
Which, in case you failed Communications 100, is a sarcastic way to say you know you’re right.
I say all that because I’m not sure you caught the meaning of your own words. “But, FLP,” I hear you asking, “whatever gave you that impression?” Because after I tell you what’s what, you respond with:
what you are left with, each time someone asks the question, or someone writes an article that doesn’t proclaim that independence is the Holy Grail, is to simply blast the source as an ignorant d-bag.
No, you’re an ignorant D-bag because you think that insulting my beloved university and generally spouting nonsense will get a polite and thoughtful response. You claim to not know what “independence” means. Buy a dictionary. It means we do what we want, we play who we want where we want, we have the standards we can be proud of without having to listen to some other schools griping about it.
Independence isn’t in ND’s roots, it was something forced on them by UM and Chicago. But by carrying that cross we became who we are today: the only true large nationally followed by non-alumni college football team.
If you wanna know what ND fans really want, there’s a link in some of the first comments that goes to NDNation. But you don’t want to know.
Here’s a secret for you, a lot of times we say we’re pro-Independence is because it’s more polite than saying you have nothing to offer that we want (outside of the CIC, but frankly it’s not worth all the other BS).
—
And you never responded to my only point in my original response: Why do you care about why ND doesn’t want in since one of the things you seem to love about the Big Ten is that they don’t make any special considerations? If you’re not gonna change, why bother trying to understand? It’s not like the Big Ten has any intention of changing to address ND’s concerns.
You didn’t answer it because in your heart of hearts know the reason you don’t address my point is because you know you asked because you wanted the opportunity to argue and prove you’re right.
And that’s why you’re a D-bag.
And if you didn’t realize that’s why you were asking, you’re a stupid D-bag.
LikeLike
Hold on FLP. It isn’t just Ohio State fans that have questioned this, so don’t make it out like only OSU fans are trying to pick a fight here.
Fact of the matter is, I’ve seen fans of almost every school basically ask, “Why the hell isn’t ND in a conference?” Hell, how many times has that question come up on this board alone in the last seven months?
LikeLike
Where to even begin? In one single post, you called me “stupid,” “embarrassing,” “disingenous,” “a long time lurker with[out] brains,” “Genius [sarcastically],”an obvious Philistine,” “a stupid douchebag,” “an ignorant D-bag,” “a d-bag,” and “a stupid d-bag.” I won’t respond in kind.
I will say this. I do think it is important, in the expansion context, to understand why ND might be hesitant to join the Big Ten, just as we have evaluated the motives/goals of nearly all expansion candidates. The two most commonly offered reasons (nowadays) for maintaining that independence are fear of “regionalization” and the desire to maintain “independence,” both of which I tried to explore.
Regarding the hypothetical schedule I put forth, no, I did not spell out every single detail. It was supposed to be an illustration of what the schedule might look like, and if that kind of schedule would be palatable to ND fans. I am sure there are other mathematical/scheduling models out there that would make it spread more evenly if that was the concern.
Your post seems to indicate, though, that even a yearly schedule with PSU, OSU, Michigan, Texas, and USC would not be palatable to Notre Dame. ND already has yearly games against USC, Michigan (mostly?), MSU, Purdue, and Navy. I would think that adding yearly games against Texas, PSU, and Ohio State would be better than rotating among the teams that ND uses to fill the rest of its schedule the last 5 years or so. Per your post, though, it does not matter a single bit who the teams are – ND wants to be able to do as it wants, when it wants, as you say. I am unsure if that position can be maintained going forward given the current and coming landscape, which landscape, obviously, is an assumption underlying nearly every post and comment on this blog.
It seems, however, that I have massively misinterpreted what it means to have a national schedule. I was equating it with exposure each year to each section of the country, and I thought that yearly national-type games against OSU, TX, PSU, Mich, and USC, plus more regionalized games against others, would accommodate that quite nicely. If in the eyes of Notre Dame its current schedule trumps this without question, then I guess there really is nothing else to talk about.
I honestly feel sorry for Notre Dame fans, if the school joining a conference would cause its supporters to abandon it completely like you say you would. If this consequence were widespread, and the reasons for not joining a conference so clear, it is puzzling that the ND administration does not come out and say, unequivocally, “absolutely not. we will never join a conference.” It would seem to be that easy, no?
I do have a follow-up question: what changes would ND like to see in the Big Ten that would make it more amenable to joining? From the rest of your post, I would assume it does not matter what the Big Ten does, but you wrote it so I am asking.
Have a good day
LikeLike
Someone getting outclassed by a Buckeye fan? Now I’ve seen everything :P.
LikeLike
@ Mani
You’re right, it is a common question. I mentioned buckeye fans, because
1) that guy is one, and
2) I’ve been hearing the question disproportionally from Buckeye fans of late, and usually in an irritating way more recently. Probably because my sister’s at school in Ohio so I have more contact with tOSU fans, ND doesn’t play tOSU much, and the Bucks’ve been doing a lot better since the Cooper era.
I wasn’t going to start calling names. But then I realized I didn’t want to lump people making comments like GoBucks first couple in this thread with you and other tOSU fans/alumns on this board who have been fair, polite, and insightful. I hope you realize that I don’t lump y’all in with that kind of behavior. I am sorry if I left any doubt.
I realize now I went a little overboard. Sorry, everyone.
Y’all do a great job about keeping it congenial here, and I want to continue being a part of that.
—
@ GoBucks
Since you have made a polite, thoughtful respose, I too shall make a polite, hopefully thoughtful response, that I hope will at least hit the high points of some earlier discussions we’ve had on here.
I was a little unclear on who you meant by “we”. I thought you meant Delaney’s folks in Chicago. If you meant the commenters, you’re absolutely correct.
Allthatyoucantleavebehind and I went back and forth on potential ND Big Ten schedules a while back. He’d come up with some great ideas (ATYCLB, tell me you saw that, I bet you thought I was just shooting stuff down to be a typical Domer jerk), and I’d point out why that wouldn’t seem all that great to ND fans.
The problem is that the Big Ten contains a whole bunch of schools that don’t interest ND as a long term scheduling partner, i.e. teams that we wouldn’t mind seeing a home and home or home and neutral site every dozen years or so, but not schools we’d get psyched for playing 4 out of 6 years or more often.
I know, I know, in 1990 PSU fans would have said that about Iowa. Valid point.
ND fans have become rather accustomed to novelty in their schedules. We like seeing a wide cross-section of the AQ teams. You can’t use this year’s scheduling as an example…its just awful.
With a Big Ten schedule, we’d be locked into 2 hopefully permanent OOC games (USC and Navy), and playing 8 conference opponents every year. Only having two games free to schedule seems very limiting.
From what I can tell, this is very different from the typical Big Ten schedules. Outside of Michigan, MSU, and Purdue’s ND games, the CYHawk game, and the Arch Rivalry (man, I love that name) there are no major OOC rivalry games for Big Ten members. No current B10 school maintains two OOC rivals. By and large right now the B10 teams have similar scheduling freedom to what ND now enjoys. However, if ND were to take on Big Ten scheduling reponsibilities alongside our committments to Southern Cal and Navy, we would have practically no freedom to schedule non-Big Ten favored opponents and new schools to play. A lot of fans would be very unhappy by that.
If we end up in a Brave New World of 4 Superconferences, ND might have a problem maintaining a schedule late in the year. But, fortunately, that’s a big if. Don’t let the last few year’s schedules fool you. I believe someone [who’s now at Duke, or at least his/her boss is] was asleep at the switch, but that’s just me.
Also, you can’t discount seeing 9 or more of your teams 12 games on broadcast TV. Even the bad games are on the ESPN family. I don’t think the Big Ten can guarantee that all the games would be on ABC or ESPN/ESPN2. I know the goal of the BTN is to go nationwide, but it is still a long way from there. From a fairness standpoint, I can’t even say that the Big Ten should do that.
I think there are many in the current ND administration who don’t view the risks of joining a conference as being as dire as I do. I know IrishTexan doesn’t. Reasonable minds can differ. I may well be paranoid on this. I just think if it ain’t broke don’t fix it.
The current administration seems to be an improvement from the one there in 1999. I know NDN has little faith in them, but I do. I see no reason for TPTB to be rude, expecially to long-time neighbors. Plus, you never know what the future holds, and only a fool or a firebug burns bridges.
As to your follow-up question, it is an interesting one. I would imagine that every Domer would answer it differently. For me, and just off the top of my head, I would love to see a Big Ten scholastic independence agreement that would fully allow all schools to be run as its trustees see fit with no ability for any conference member to interfere with any others internal matters. If some of the schools could be moved to each section of the country (Cal, SW, NW, SE, FLA, NE, NY-DC corridor, etc.), that would be killer. If a portion of them could find Jesus, that wouldn’t hurt. 🙂 And while we thinking about it, if all the Big Ten schools could shrink their undergrad enrollment to Northwestern’s size while forcing all the professors to teach more than one <120 student undergrad classes, that would be great.
BTW, I'm not actually advocating they do that. This is kind of what I mean by lack of institutional fit. As Djinn and othes would rightly point out that's not the function or their goal of most Big Ten schools, and they are doing a great job fulfilling their valuable role of educating our citzenry and pushing back the frontiers of knowledge.
LikeLike
FLP:
I’m sure it gets old answering the same question over and over. (There’s an easy way to fix that. ;D)
As for the influx of Buckeyes lately, yeah that’s a little new. It probably is due to proximity, plus a boldness from the last decade of good fortune. Well, that and I’m sure OSU fans wished they played ND more often. I know I do. We often go against one another for recruits, and ND has been far more of thorn in OSU’s side in recruiting during the Tressel era than Michigan.
As for specifically calling out Ohio State fans, well, we’ve all got a crazy subset. I try not to bicker too much just because all major programs with large fanbases live in glass houses on that issue. Idiocy is an unfortunate byproduct.
I’m probably a little sensitive on it too because I’ve watched all the Texas-Nebraska bitching on this blog and want to avoid an OSU pissing contest. 😉
LikeLike
@ FLP:
[Upon being informed that odds are 1 in a million]: So you’re sayin’ there’s a chance! Haha. Given that the Big Ten obviously would not comply with those demands, it sounds as though I could have made my original post one question: are there ever a set of circumstances under which joining the Big Ten would be acceptable to Notre Dame fans? Your answer would have been “no,” and we could have ended it at that. I take issue with the wisdom of that position, and I find it difficult to believe that teams like Ohio State, Penn State, and Texas wouldn’t be desirable long-term scheduling partners, but I understand what you are saying, respect that that’s your position, and am content to leave it at that.
@ Manifesto’s comments:
I have been tuning into this blog for some time now, but only recently posted anything. Proximity and boldness (come on, you know Buckeye fans were just as vocal and passionate even before JT;) and (hopefully) idiocy had little to do with it. I never had designs on picking a fight with ND fans. If I was going to bicker or pick a fight, you and I both know it would have been directed at TSUN. In hindsight, I would not have written certain statements as they were posted, and for that I do offer apologies to Domers and for tarring the reputation of my fellow Buckeyes.
I echo your sentiments on playing teams like ND more often. Focusing just on a competitive aspect, the idea of adding TX, Neb, and ND to the conference would be fantastic. Seems that it is not to be.
LikeLike
GoBucks:
My comments regarding proximity and idiocy of OSU fans were directed to FLP’s statement that his “sister’s at school in Ohio so I have more contact with tOSU fans”, not necessarily at you.
OSU has a huge alumni base and a bigger fan base, especially within Ohio, and I think we both can agree that OSU’s Asshat Quotient is as healthy as any other major program. I wasn’t saying that you specifically were picking a fight, but I certainly can see other OSU fans picking fights with ND fans.
We’re located in the same region and we don’t play enough to settle it on the field. We’ve only met 5 times after all (games in 35, 36, 95, 96, 05: OSU is 3-2).
LikeLike
@ Manifesto – Agreed on Asshat Quotient, and love the term. Understood regarding remainder.
So many scenarios in the comments include an assumption of ND to the Big Ten. I’ve never believed it from the get-go and I still don’t believe it now. for me, I was never a huge fan of expansion to begin with (from a traditionalist/football standpoint only), but if we are going to, and ND isn’t involved (I have seriously soured on TX this past week), I say we invite Neb and call it a day.
Oh to be privy to JD’s phone conversations.
LikeLike
I’ve gone back and forth on expansion.
ND is a pipedream (or nightmare depending on your point of view). But, who knows… maybe it’ll happen. Doubtful.
I agree with you on Nebraska. If we can’t get Texas or ND as well, let’s get Nebraska and call it at 12.
LikeLike
http://www.texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1092201
Interesting development from DeLoss Dodds’ puppet.
It seems every effort is being made to paint everyone as the villian. Is this what they did to Arkansas to kill the SWC?
Anyway, in the article it says that Colorado is trying to QUIT the Big 12 and join another conference right now. They actually have a press conference tomorrow.
If you are the Pac 10, having Colorado join to become the Pac 11 (maybe Utah for a Pac 12) would limit the volume of Texas tag-alongs that are invited to the Pac 16. Say you get to 11 or 12, that only leaves room for Texas, A&M, Oklahoma, and OK ST, and maybe Texas Tech (if no Utah).
One of the proposals made by Pac-10 commissioner Larry Scott to league heads was to expand the league by two schools – Colorado and Utah.
Oh yeah, does anyone else wonder who Chip Brown’s “well placed Big 12 AD” is? LMFAO
Nebraska and Missouri go to the Big Ten, along with ND. Then the Pac 10 adds Utah and Colorado.
Now what does Texas do? Only 4 spots in the Pac 12, 2 spots in the Big 14. Texas / A&M to the Big 16. Texas / A&M / Oklahoma / Okla St to the Pac 16.
Or stay in a reworked Big 12 with Texas / A&M / OK / OSU / TT / Baylor / Kansas / Iowa State / K STate but adding a few schools.
LikeLike
I am personally in favor of an early CU announcement on its own. CU is a good fit for the Pac and if the Pac’s intentions are to expand (which may be obvious by now) regardless of the haul (2 to 6) – then CU should be a part of it anyway.
Lets get this thing moving!
LikeLike
If that really was true then what’s happened is the Tech/OSU academic rumblings we heard about came to pass somewhat and the Pac-10 is closing off slots just as Delany would want to in a final Big Ten offer to Texas/A&M.
I find that hard to believe though. Perhaps it will happen, but I think Colorado might be a one off kind of move. We’ll see I guess.
If that is true, then Chip Brown has clearly only been getting a part of the story or releasing a part of the story (i.e. to put more pressure on Nebraska) because that one would be a new wrinkle.
LikeLike
If they announce only CU now though – they are really only closing off the slot Baylor was trying to lobby into…technically the only way the TT or OSU slot is closed off is if Utah is invited.
Outside of Utah, the only schools worth expanding with from the Pac pov are B12 teams anyway. Inviting CU doesn’t hurt the number of slots.
LikeLike
I think he is getting the story that he is told.
Interesting though, my hope for tomorrow….
Colorado and Utah invited to the Pac 10 in the morning
Nebraska and Missouri to the Big Ten in the afternoon
Enjoying this blog tomorrow night, waiting to see what happens to Baylor.
LikeLike
Yesterday, didn’t you post that Neb, MU and ND would be offered? Since Frank has posted that a school would be offered only if the school has explicitly agreed to join the Big Ten if offered, you can understand my concern.
LikeLike
Yes, that is the rumblings still. I have heard Wednesday for a Nebraska, Missouri, ND invite.
I could see that going until Friday, or next Friday based on what I have been reading here, but the only things I have heard are NU, MU, ND to Big Ten.
Being in Big Ten country I have no connections to Texas or the Pac 10.
I actually have been hearing a nearly identical version to what Frank has posted. I have NO DOUBT that Nebraska and Missouri would accept. I have no idea on ND, but would be very worried about them staying independent the way the landscape is changing.
LikeLike
It’s funny at how much Texas is getting their “propaganda” out there is this whole expansion ordeal. It seems that the Chip is breaking a story or two a day and it isn’t hard to figure out how he is getting this info and why he is “leaking” it.
LikeLike
“The move would undercut an attempt by Baylor to sway the Texas Legislature into helping the Bears get an invite ahead of Colorado.”
How far has Colorado football fallen, where it has to take steps to undercut Baylor.
LikeLike
I never thought that CU was in danger of losing their slot to Baylor. What this does do, as zeek mentions, is really just tipping the 1st domino and making it real – or getting people to start making decisions.
LikeLike
Doesn’t have much to do with how far CU football has fallen, but more to do with the Texas legislature (as you indicating in your quote).
LikeLike
Adding credence to CU bolting to the Pac-10:
Denver Post: CU regents will hold closed-door meeting about possible switch to Pac-10
LikeLike
This article leads me to believe that nothing will actually be announced tomorrow
LikeLike
They’re probably meeting to discuss the Big 12 exit fee.
LikeLike
“Oh yeah, does anyone else wonder who Chip Brown’s “well placed Big 12 AD” is? LMFAO”
Well, the school that benefits the most from having this out there is Texas Tech, since it makes it hard for Texas to go to the Big 10 while claiming there wasn’t anything they could do for Tech. Oklahoma State might also want it out there for public consumption. Colorado’s AD might not care; he’s certainly been glib at times.
LikeLike
Agreed.
I’m not entirely sure that Texas would be spreading these kinds of things to Chip Brown.
Tech is the one school that has to get the Pac-16 to work to make sure it has a place to land. OSU/OU can probably land in the SEC.
Texas has made it clear it doesn’t want the SEC (although if the Pac-16 and Big Ten say no, what then? bolt separately to one of the two probably).
LikeLike
So this CU news means one of two things:
(1) CU’s offer is independant of the other Big 12 schools and if Texas and friends don’t join, then the Pac-10 simply adds Utah and goes to 12.
(2) CU’s invute is contingent upon the other Texas schools joining, but the Pac-10 has made it clear that CU is in over Baylor, and CU is simply meeting to try to raise the money to pay the Big 12’s exit fee?
Am I missing something?
LikeLike
I am of the opinion that CU was going to Pac regardless and independent of what other in the B12 were going to do. Maybe the Pac needs to do this to get the legislators off TX back about Baylor, but the Pac was never gonna take Baylor anyway (so its just helping TX take an issue off their plate to make a move to the Pac).
OR if this is a meeting on a premptive announcement to move conference before others are invited (or expressed their secret handshake double wink commitment)- the only thing I can think it effectively does is add an element of pressure to TX to make a decision. Pac sending a message to TX, that if they continue to take their time in giving a decsion, then we are comfortable taking Utah and removing one of your gang’s spots?
Not sure about that one.
LikeLike
re the Orangebloods article. Does anyone know if the $10 million exit fee regardless of the amount of notice or is that an early exit fee? If it is the standard exit fee regardless of notice that would be quite a barrier.
LikeLike
As I understand it – if wrong, someone correct me. The $10m is an estimated fee based off of the current payout structure from the conference.
If a 2 year notice is provided, the departing school only receives 50% of its conference payout (estimated $5m per), but if they leave with a 1 year notice the fee jumps to 90%.
Does anyone know what CU’s conference payout for the past year was reported at? I belive that is what the fee is based off of (so it may actually be less than $10m)
LikeLike
thanks
LikeLike
Per Lincoln Journal Star writer Steve Sipple the Huskers will likely get an offer from the Big 10 on Friday.
http://twitter.com/ssipplesports
LikeLike
Nice find. The question is whether Delany stops at 12 for a while or pulls the trigger on Mizzou as 13.
I would imagine he might just wait and see what happens with the Pac-10 and its invites of Texas.
The fact that Colorado seems to be bolting may change the angle on the Pac-16 situation so he wants to take one of the 3 whales off the table…
As of yet, no one knows what the Pac-10 presidents approved…
LikeLike
Don’t know if this has already been posted, but Baylor not invited has been out there since last night:
http://news8austin.com/content/sports/271636/baylor-president-responds-to-pac-10-expansion-effort
LikeLike
I said before that I thought Nebraska and Notre Dame would be the opening salvo by the Big 10. I take that back. Nebraska is the perfect opening shot.
Notre Dame can’t make the jump until Texas does. Nebraska though gets the Big 10 one step closer to its goal of getting Texas.
And even if I’m wrong and the Big 10 strikes out with all its other targets, Nebraska is a super addition to the league!
LikeLike
Also Tom Osborne is going to be on Sports Nightly Radio Show tonight at 7pm, you can listen to him talk, probably about big 10 expansion on Huskers.com
http://www.huskers.com/liveEvents/liveEvents.dbml?&DB_OEM_ID=100
LikeLike
I wouldn’t count on Osborne saying much at all.
LikeLike
And I’m wrong, Osborne basically said he can’t say much, but expects everything to be done in next couple of days.
LikeLike
Bob Davie on CFL saying no to ND in the Big 10….
Interesting point about Missouri, he said about 30 of the Tigers players are recruited out of Texas. If they move to the Big 10 they lose recruiting ground in Texas (course if the B 12 is no more, it is moot anyway). Any thoughts from the Missouri folks reading this blog?
LikeLike
Every domer is saying NO to the Big 10.
Not a suprise. Wish they would attach some logic to it or realize the jeapordy (or double jeapordy) that ND could be placed in.
Notre Dame falling off the planet of college football would be disappointing, but there are plenty of other strong teams around.
Minnesota used to be a BIG Power, Harvard, Yale, and Princeton also.
LikeLike
patrick, those are some very good exaples. You could have attached the Football Power then all back in the day. Might throw in University of Chicago back in the stone age.
LikeLike
Patrick,
I hear you, but in the conversation I kept thinking of Stanford if they had been independent all this time. I see what they were implying, like Stanford with sports (ie a bonus, but they have other focus and a hefty support system outside of research or sports).
Ironic that you mentioned Harvard & Yale (the powerhouses of college football before WWII) as they have continued to flourish without a football revenue stream. Just got me thinking.
LikeLike
“Every domer is saying NO to the Big 10.
Not a suprise. Wish they would attach some logic to it or realize the jeapordy (or double jeapordy) that ND could be placed in.
Notre Dame falling off the planet of college football would be disappointing, but there are plenty of other strong teams around.
Minnesota used to be a BIG Power, Harvard, Yale, and Princeton also.”
Holy Cross, Duquesne, St. Mary’s, Villanova, Santa Clara, Fordham, and Georgetown used to be powers too. They all have two things in common; one is that Notre Dame refused to play them. I’ll let the readers figure out the other one.
LikeLike
the catholics know how to play basketball?
LikeLike
ND has traditionally been at its best “when the breaks are beating the boys”
The Catholic school football programs fell off in an era that saw the football player’s tuition start being paid by scholarships and stop being paid by the G.I. Bill.
It was a money question. Sad that.
LikeLike
Of course it is logical, the ND viewpoint simply holds values that you do not share. Falling off the map in college football has not hurt Harvard, Yale, Princeton or Chicago.
LikeLike
Fair enough. I have no ties to ND, other than being a college football fan.
I would rather they stay a relevant college football team in addition to the university. But they will do as they see fit.
LikeLike
Bob Davie? A Domer?!?
BWAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! HAHAHAHAHAHA! HAHAHAHAHA!
Thanks, I needed that.
Why do you think we hate him? Davie has no love for ND. Love for YSU? Maybe. Love for TAMU. Absolutely. Dude stabbed both Joe Moore and Lou in the back.
For that matter, why watch his opinion on anything?
LikeLike
http://www.bedlamsports.net/2010/06/fox-sports-wants-to-marry-the-big-12/
…our insider source at Fox Sports is reporting that the national Fox Sports network (not just Fox Southwest or Fox Pacific, etc.) is making a serious run at being a de facto Big 12 channel of sorts.
Some of the rumor details:
* Fox has engaged the Big 12 AD’s with a plan for massive expansion on the current Big 12 television contract
* Fox has proposed extending the current TV contract for up to 20-30 years, possibly through 2050
* Fox has proposed a nationally televised ‘Big 12 Game of the Week’
* The Big 12 would have to stay intact for the contract to be valid, with Nebraska a must-have (no word on Mizzou)
* The deal would probably include some sort of alliance with the Pac-10 for ‘made for TV’ match-ups (think USC-OU every few years, Texas-Oregon, etc.)
* This would effectively narrow the revenue gap between the Big 12 and the Big 10/SEC, making a Big 12 member team’s move to another conference not as attractive…
LikeLike
Huh…that’s a new one. If they really have worked out a deal with the PAC then the vote for CU to the PAC may be happening now because they have an agreement with Big 12 to let us go free in clear as part of the deal and an expansion with Utah.
LikeLike
That seems like too little too late but it is a nice try. I think Fox realizes that if there’s less conferences that ESPN will take more than it already has particularly with its relationships with the SEC and ACC and the Big Ten as well (other than BTN).
And even if the athletic revenue equalizes, is Fox going to offer the Big 12 a billion dollars a year in research money for a consortium?
LikeLike
@ zeek – I agree, a little too late in the game (at least the speculated game) to try and save this. If even half of what has been portrayed in the media is correct, then the B12 is dying, not sure if it is fast or slow still – but still dying.
So, if true, why would the Pac try and create a partnership when they can just take the teams (allegedly) and keep it all?
LikeLike
I agree.
Either Stanford is balking at Tech/OSU or A&M is considering bolting for the SEC. There’s still some unknown out there which is causing these alternate scenarios to continue to be floated.
Like Chip Brown completely changing his story yesterday and sounding conciliatory…
LikeLike
they may be playing both sides. they are also an equity partner in the BTN and in good position to do the same with the Pac 10 network. If they do this deal with the the Big 12 they get to air those teams without givinh up equity. If not they still have a chance at a 49% equity stake in the network of whichever conference they go to.
LikeLike
At this point I’m perfectly happy with CU being willing to take the hit as the Big 12 “villain” if NU/MU haven’t taken offers yet or don’t announce first, particularly given the smear job that was coming out of Texas yesterday. Though the CU’s AD is broke thing is starting to get old. Our AD isn’t hurting any more than any of the other PAC 10 or Big 12 schools not called USC, Texas, OU, OSU, and Kansas. Washington just had to cut their swim team. The rep is mostly based on keeping Hawkins this year which was mostly a political decision. I’m not even sure the AD would take the hit. Rumors on some of the message boards is that the CU admins is (rightly) seriously concerned about the hit the schools ACADEMIC reputation would take by being relegated to the MWC or similar conference, so its possible this thing may be payed by the CU Foundation anyway, and the CU Foundation endowment has been growing at a significant clip relative to a lot of our peer institutions, think its pushing 900 million now. I also guarantee boosters would be willing to go to the well for this one if its seriously a decision between the PAC and the MWC.
LikeLike
At this point I’m perfectly happy with CU being willing to take the hit as the Big 12 “villain”
Exactly, nobody is going to ‘punish’ CO in a measurable way for leaving. They’d be foolish not to grab that invite ASAP.
OTOH, leaving immediately rather than in a year or two might be unwise, but we don’t yet know if that is really an option they’re considering.
If realignment results in a playoff, you guys will be heroes. “The Rosa South Parks of college football!”
LikeLike
I don’t think anyone is regarding Colorado as a villain. They haven’t been disparaging the other Big 12 conference members left and right!
LikeLike
In a sense, CU would be the perfect fall guy right now for all parties involved. No one would blame CU the same way NU and/or Texas would be blamed.
LikeLike
CU is interested in going to the P10 for connections with alumni. They won’t go for less $, but unlike everyone else, it really isn’t about the $.
LikeLike
I’ve read a lot of posts by Big Ten fans and supporters over the past several months about what they would expect from a new “partner-member” of their conference. I’ve also read comments from Tom Osborne and a wide variety of Nebraska fans and follows (including some here above). If the Big Ten wants to accept Nebraska, it needs to recognize what it’s getting.
For all Nebraska’s whining about Texas’ dominance, it has been Texas that has tried to keep The Big XII Conference together, which is the only way programs like Iowa State and Kansas State remain in a BCS conference. With changes imminent, it has been Texas that has tried to ensure that as many other conference members as possible land in good homes. It has been Texas that has looked out for the interests of Tech and A&M and Baylor. Nebraska has looked out for the interests of Nebraska.
In Big Ten country, there is much talk about what kind of partner Texas would make, given that it is used to “controlling” its conference. But they should really look at what kind of partner Nebraska will make, and what kind of partner Nebraska has made. From Day One of the Big XII Conference, Nebraska has tried to impose its will on the conference–whether it be its ridiculous position on partial qualifiers or its demands on the sites of championship games and offices.
That behavior continued at the beginning of the Big XII meetings last week when Tom Osborne commented on his way in that “I imagine we may have some discussion as to how you start or stop the clock on an incomplete pass.” Nebraska still thinks it should be able to issue diktats as though this were the Big 8.
Now, though, its position commonly loses by 11-1 votes. Yet it claims that the unanimous opposition to its demands is merely the result of superior Texan politicking. It’s all Texas’ fault Nebraska’s football program has declined to mediocrity; all Texas’ fault it hasn’t won a conference championship in eleven years.
And then we see what happens when Nebraska doesn’t get its way. It pouts. It blames others for its problems. And then it openly undermines the conference by publicly and shamelessly seeking an invitation to another.
Perfidious Nebraska.
Feckless Nebraska.
Treacherous Nebraska.
That is the “partner” that the Big Ten will get in Lincoln–a program as scoliotic as its athletic director. A program with a documented history of never looking out for the interests of its conference, but only for its own. A program so delusional about its past “greatness” and its future prospects as to make the Notre Dame leprachaun blush.
LikeLike
Now, now, there’s nothing wrong with Nebraska looking out for it’s own interests. Academically and financially it will be much better off in the Big 10 now and in the long term.
What is wrong is that Nebraska fans think their university is somehow a sainted institution and anyone who doesn’t vote with them in the Big 12 are either evil or deluded.
LikeLike
Agreed; fans and administration are two different things.
And, at least from all the bickering that’s gone on in this blog over the last seven months, I’m unsure Texas peeps have any ground to stand on by calling out Nebraska for only serving their own interests. Sounds like both parties have mainly looked out for themselves depending on the situation. Not saying one party is better than the other. The Big12 was/is just a marriage of convenience.
Nebraska knows what they’re getting into with the BigTen. There’ll be no surprises. Same with Texas. I think you guys would be great together in the same BigTen division/pod/whatever. The hatred between the two fanbases would make for entertaining matchups to say the least. 🙂
LikeLike
Eloquence not heard since Tony Blair’s parliament appearances on late night CSPAN.
“Hear, hear!”
LikeLike
Are you serious, how many cocktails have you had tonight?
LikeLike
Wow.
So Texas is being the good conference member by threatening to take a half of the conference to the Pac-10 because Nebraska is leaving due to the fact that it is an outlier? Nebraska isn’t threatening to take anyone with it. We don’t even know if Missouri is coming…
Also, why do I feel as if I could change some small facts and insert the word Arkansas everywhere I see Nebraska and insert SWC for Big 12? We’re seeing history almost repeat itself before our very eyes.
There’s plenty of blame to go around. Texas and Nebraska share the blame for not making it work. The smaller schools didn’t bring any lift and Texas never wanted to be a team member on the Big 12 Network idea (LSN), so the Big 12’s revenue streams remained in the stone age.
I doubt Nebraska will ever make a peep about revenue sharing even though you could rightly point out that both Texas and Nebraska voted to keep unequal revenue sharing.
Regardless, I don’t think any university’s behavior in the Big 12 means anything for how they’d act in the Big Ten.
I say that of both Texas and Nebraska. The Big 12 was a shallow pond with 3 sharks (and one baby brother).
The Big Ten can handle Nebraska. It’s not as if there’s not disagreements in the Big Ten, but the larger schools do actually make a point of looking out for the smaller ones. I think the Big Ten would also be able to handle bringing in Texas.
No one expects any school to not act in their own interest. In the Big Ten they should just not expect to act to the detriment of others…
LikeLike
FWIW….
We keep saying Arkansas is the bad guy, I must wonder looking back at history. Arkansas was the smartest one of the bunch. Name one other school that gained so much with so little in the last major expansion. To go from a small population state with less than stellar academics to the warm comfy confines of one of the top conferences in revenue.
I mean Penn State had huge advantages over Arkansas in their respective jumps. Ladies and Gentlemen of the blogging world I would say that Arkansas did right well for itself. Red headed stepchild in the SWC to butt in the butter tub in the SEC. we should all do so well with so little..
since 1990
NC in basketball in 1994
NC in track in 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 97, 98, 99, 00, 03, 05, 06
NC in outdoor 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 03
NC in cross country 90, 91, 92, 93, 95, 98, 99, 00
SEC west in 95 in football
3 FF in mens basketball during this time
38 of 40 in SEC track titles (the speed in the SEC)
College World Series appearance in 04 and 09
I think the women’s bb has a Final 4 or so as well
Call me crazy, but looks like Arkansas did pretty well!
LikeLike
Arkansas also won the SEC West in 2006.
The Hogs also fill up a 75,000 seat football stadium, 24,000 seat basketball arena, and a 10,000 seat baseball stadium.
Arkansas will be a pre-season top 20 in football, and their baseball team will play in a Super Regional this weekend.
LikeLike
I still laugh at counting three NCs a year in track.
LikeLike
loki,
I do not understand track and field, but it has something to do with winning the “triple crown” of track and field. Arkansas has done it 5 times only one other school has even done it once. Again, track and field is not something I understand or follow, but evidently it seems to matter as different events and NC’s. In the 90’s they won 24 of 30 possible titles, which seems pretty impressive no matter how you look at it!
LikeLike
Is that you Chip? I didn’t know you were a lawyer too?
LikeLike
I trust, then, that you won’t mind if Nebraska, that lone dissenter, goes on to the Big Ten, removing from the Big XII what has til now prevented unanimity, utilitarianism, and lots of smiling? 🙂
LikeLike
we have our own squabbling as well. plus Notre Dame playing the Glen Close roll from Fatal Attraction. we’ve all had crazy girlfriends and know the drill. everything looks peachy now and we’ll see the stetchmarks when we all sober up. most of us want both Texas and Nebraska and all we ask is good football and accepting an equal role in the conference. and as far as finding out Nebraska has issues? we still want Notre Dame and we 100% positive know they are batshit nuts and will try to Lorena Bobbitt us. how much worse could Nebraska be?
LikeLike
if anything texas should be glad nebraska is leaving. Neb is nobody and a big pain.
LikeLike
Ahh, eloquently written like a true southern lawyer. The smeer job is too late though, the deals are just about done.
You should be thrilled with a Big 12 without those corn-shuckers. Texas is trying to keep the Big 12 together for 2 reasons 1) the LSN and 2) it’s hard to find a conference with enough space for all of the hangers-on that come with Texas.
In my view, the issues that you are addressing are very old and long forgotten. Texas got their way in all of those instances. So what’s the big deal, let them go.
PS – Didn’t Texas ruin the last conference they were in also?
LikeLike
Right on the money. If Nebraska was really the problem here, why would Texas take us back in a heartbeat? This schizoid crap gets old. We need you, we hate you. Grow the hell up. Texas doesn’t need to blow up anything if Nebraska and Missouri leave. They will, because they didn’t get their way.
LikeLike
1) Nobody “blames” Nebraska for looking out for its own interests. The question is whether a program that so nakedly looks out for its own interests is consistent with the Big Ten ethos of promoting the conference and (as zeek points out) looking out for the smaller schools.
Texas has a record of doing exactly that.
Nebraska has a record of doing the opposite.
2) I do not understand the Arkansas comparisons. Arkansas did not leave because it was forced out, nor did it leave because of some Texas malfeasance. If the truth be told, Texas was in poor position to dominate that conference either economically or politically. Texas was in the midst of two decades of poor performance on the field, and its revenues were suffering accordingly. At the same time, its conference mates were enjoying Texas’ weakness after many years of Longhorn dominance. Most importantly, in the early 1990’s when Texas received significantly more funding from the state’s coffers and in a conference with eight schools in the state, every conference decision involved legislative interference, and Texas could dictate nothing.
Arkansas left because it got a very attractive offer from the SEC. At the same time, the SWC was suffering from programs going on NCAA probation (A&M and TCU) and another just coming off the death penalty. But even under the best of circumstances, it was a regional conference that would have gotten a poor television contract in the next round of negotiation.
Arkansas didn’t kill the SWC. The SWC was dead with or without Arkansas.
LikeLike
If what you say about Texas looking out for smaller schools is true, you have the perfect opportunity in front of you to prove it. Texas is by far the wealthiest athletic department in the country. They can invite two schools to replace the presumably departing members and continue business as usual. End of problem.
LikeLike
Lawyer, there are times when a witness should be sure to keep their trap closed. Probably good time for a lawyer too. You seem to be digging a deeper hole for yourself.
LikeLike
LL: The Big XII is unstable because it has unequal partners with unequal deals making unequal money. We’re now in an environment where that instability is coming to a point of toppling the conference and, quite correctly, every single school in the Big XII is looking after its own interests.
Texas is no different. It isn’t looking out for anyone but itself. They’re preparing an exit strategy in exactly the same way as Colorado, Missouri or Nebraska. In fact, they’re doing so in an even more public way than the others. Someone else may go first and get blamed, but get real, Texas is doing the EXACT SAME THING.
If UT moves, they want to have others along not out of the goodness of its heart, but to a) appease politicians so as to smooth out its exit strategy, b) to make for a schedule that means as little travel as possible for itself, c) to have as few tough games as possible (OK and USC) to get to the Rose Bowl each year.
LikeLike
If UT moves, they want to have others along not out of the goodness of its heart
Bingo. Bringing Tech, or Baylor, or SFA along would not be done through altruistic motivations.
LikeLike
First, Nebraska’s troubles in football stem from Solich’s failure to recognize the assistant coaches he inherited were draining the program by their disinterest in recruiting and Solich’s inability to close. These problems nothing compared to the Callahan debacle. No one in Nebraska blames Texas for these problems.
Yes, how unreasonable it is for Nebraska to want the conference offices to stay where they were. Can you tell me why it made sense to move to Texas?
Equally as ludicrous is to desire a rotating North-South championship game. How unfair! It makes much more sense to always have the game in Dallas, where Texas fans get the first chance at tickets (as Cowboys season-ticket holders). It’s entirely reasonable for the South champ’s fans always get a day trip to the championship game, while the North Champ’s fans are forced to fly in or take several days off work to drive down.
But all this is beside the point, Nebraska wants out for two reasons: 1. A stable and secure future for the athletic department and 2. The academic prestige and the opportunities related to that.
This is not about Texas, as hard as that is for you to believe. I hope Texas comes to the Big 10, too.
LikeLike
That “Hit” that any Big 12 team takes for jumping a sinking ship will look like chump change considering what the Big 10 has to offer.
Hell, the Big 10 can subsidize them, with ease. In 2-3 years, they will be swimming in BTN backshish.
Non issue.
LikeLike
But MSU cannot afford Izzo?
What’s the point of getting $20M annually???
LikeLike
can’t afford? he gets $3 mill. the Cavs are offering 6.
LikeLike
OK. And, apparently, MSU is one of the 12 wealthiest athletic programs in the country due to Big 10 revenue. If THEY cannot afford Izzo… who can?
LikeLike
UK if the current coach bolts
😉
LikeLike
@duffman why would he go to a program on probation…
LikeLike
loki,
to early, if does not come in cals first year. He needs to be there awhile before the NCAA visits.
🙂
LikeLike
The SEC will strike out of nowhere to snatch Missouri. Or maybe, the Big 10 knows this and doesn’t mind letting them be snatched. If Tx is not part of the picture, then MO may be expendable. Mo would be a market and academic pickup for SEC
LikeLike
OU/OSU/A&M/Texas haven’t gone anywhere. Until they’re in the Pac-10, what incentive would the SEC have to strike at Mizzou?
The SEC is waiting. The Pac-10 has gone all in and plans to pull the trigger on Colorado sometime.
The Big Ten and SEC are probably watching each other to see who tries to make a strike at Texas/A&M first.
Most likely the SEC will make some kind of strike at Oklahoma and A&M. There’s no real reason not to…
LikeLike
More likely is that Delany and Slive are on a conference call drinking single malt scotch and dividing up the spoils and sharing golf tips.
Rivalries and animosity don’t exist at the top like fans think. At the end of the day it might make great ratings, but it doesn’t make for good business. It’s much more likely Delany is sharing BTN success tips with Slive in return for Slive taking OSU/OU/A&M/Tech and gift-wrapping Texas as a nice 4th of July present for Delany.
LikeLike
Shock – The SEC is not interested in either TTech or Okla St. They may take TTech get a deal done with UTx. The may take Okla St to get a deal done with OU. There is no way the SEC takes both.
LikeLike
How would the SEC think about OU and A&M. I have heard of a straw poll and wonder if there was any truth to the rumor.
LikeLike
Wes – A&M and OU alone would probably be the best case scenario for the SEC. Then the SEC could turn their attention to Florida State and one other ACC school.
LikeLike
Missouri is better off waiting. I’m sure it’s agonizing but as Mongo said. “Mizzu just a pawn in the big game of life. “ Good news is it’s a favored pawn behind the Texas, ND, and NE of the world. The most natural place for them to be as well as the best place for them to be besides the Big 12 is the Big Ten. So just keep your powder dry for a moment Mike.
LikeLike
MIKEUM,
If Atlanta is galactic central point for the SEC Missouri might not be a big enough fish fir the distance. Who knows, I just feel bad for Missouri (and worse for Kansas).
LikeLike
Bloody Kansas:
http://www.tigerboard.com/boards/missouri-tigers.php?message=7629172
LikeLike
Wow, now thats teaparty politics at it’s worst.
Good luck with that Sam, oh and I hope you get prostrate cancer and your salvation was a good research school.
LikeLike
I’d call your post political ignorance at its worst, except right now I’m more concerned that John Brown’s posse may ride on Park Ridge, IL tonight.
LikeLike
No worries, Brown and Sam Sam Brownback are both relics of the past. Hosetly I wish him good health regardless.
LikeLike
You’re quoting tigerboard regarding Kansas about an event they’re interpreting third hand? Really?
The Senate story is about Kansas reps/senators publicly stating that we should look into the tax implications behind the ‘superconference’ push. It’s similar to the Hatch movement out of Utah. Nothing new– the Mizzou poster is smearing Kansas.
LikeLike
My bet is CU, UT to Pac10 b/c Scott can’t truly overcome the academic issues associated with OSU and TT.
Big10 pulls NU and MO, upsetting the applecart and putting the Big12South in play.
SEC and Big10 both dance for TX and aTm and they head to B10.
SEC pulls OU and OSU (the one w/ the wagon, not the nuts).
ND, BigEast, ACC stand pat. And thank God b/c the only thing worse than burnt orange is faded glory green.
LikeLike
I’m really surprised that all we’ve heard about academic issues is a few “rumblings” about Tech and OSU, especially when any Pac-10 school can tank this deal.
We also have no idea what Scott has the authority to do for the Pac-10 whether it’s Colorado/Utah or the Pac-16. Perhaps he got the go-ahead on Colorado as a first pull and then has to go back but that would limit his flexibility…
Perhaps he’s trying to stall a bit to get approval for the Pac-16, but until we know what he actually got approval for, there’s too much of a smokescreen.
He might want the Big Ten to pull Nebraska first and see whether the Pac-10 presidents change their mind if the Big Ten then attempts a run. Or of course if the SEC swoops in on OU/OSU/A&M…
LikeLike
exactly. has anyone actually been to palo alto? they’re rolling in money and they take academics very seriously.
LikeLike
Just spent a year there actually. Wife just got her master’s from there. Beautiful campus.
LikeLike
Not quite Michigan/Wisc/Northwestern quality, but very nice none-the-less.
LikeLike
SEC takes the three (OU, OSU, aTm). Gov.Perry doesn’t stand in the way. one bit, pulls out his concealed weapon to the nasty UT coyote and says,”join Wyoming or whatever.” NU and MU bolt. CO goes. Buddy Whoever in Baylor land regrets his cornshucker comment and Baylor’s home attendance drops to nothing because UT and Neb. and A&M are no longer on schedule. UT is scratching head saying, “Everyone wants us…who will have us where we can control the vote.”
LikeLike
C,
if that is your take then hello SEC, especially if OU, OSU, and A&M are already there…
WOW!
My guess is Slive and Delany stop drinking the single malt and playing golf!
LikeLike
Everyone who’s looked into rankings has found that Oregon State, Arizona State, and Washington State don’t fit the Pac 10 academic standards either. Each of those schools was admitted anyway because some schools pressed on the holdouts.
Now, for years the Pac 10 has seen how far it’s fallen behind; they also see how the Big 10 will shoot even further past them. Combine this with the economic slide of the West Coast and it isn’t hard to see how the circumstances are right to increase the percentage of under-performing schools from 30% to 37.5% if it makes them a lot more money.
A 7.5% rise isn’t all that great. Sure, they’d like to move it in the other direction (invite Utah and New Mexico instead of the Oklahoma schools), but that would leave money on the table.
LikeLike
I tend to agree, which is why this deal can still get done. Especially in this environment with athletic departments hurting so much.
The SEC is probably the biggest variable in all of it because its best/easiest grabs are going away…
LikeLike
Gee GOPWolv, thanks for the comments. I really hope that Coach Rodriguez is able to enroll Demar Dorsey so he can play in the fall. He sounds like he would be a perfect representative of Michigan football. Good luck.
LikeLike
R2 on D2. Quite original.
LikeLike
Pingback: Top Posts — WordPress.com
Tom Osborne on Sports Nightly radio show in Lincoln said … He hopes that things can be resolved fairly soon regarding Nebraska, maybe in a few days. Until then its just speculation and he won’t speculate and add to any confusion.
——-
Also, said UNL is looking at expanding the stadium, 20 skyboxes, 1000 club seats, and 4000-5000 normal seats(i know i know has nothing to do with expansion of conferences…)
LikeLike
Actually, that says quite a bit. Assuming an additional 6000 seats, that would put Memorial Stadium at around 87,000 seats, firmly in 2nd place in the Big 12 behind Texas, and in fourth place in the Big Ten (behind PSU, Michigan, and OSU).
LikeLike
Yep, I hope Nebraska gets this thing moving fast.
As for the stadium, thats only with 3/4ths of the total stadium expansion(west, north, and soon to be east hopefully) then the south stadium would be expanded. And Nebraska averaged 85,(something)k last year, so if you had roughly 6k seats that 91k average.
LikeLike
The actual reported attendance with 6-7K more seats would be 91,000-92,000
LikeLike
NU is currently at 85,500
6,000 would put them at 91,500.
LikeLike
Can we get Nebraska to start in Sept? My Wildcats need some help filling seats.
LikeLike
Well, I think it means he’s not planning on joining the Mountain West Conference anytime soon.
LikeLike
Ok, I may be a little slow and dimwitted, but I don’t see how Missouri plays any role in this. Why would Notre Dame sign on with Missouri and Nebraska? There is no guarantee that Texas is coming, so why would ND hamper its ability to play everywhere, (at least in theory, we all know they don’t,) for a couple of trips to Lincoln and
Columbia?
Something that I still don’t fully understand is whether this supposed connection between ND and UT has any truth to it besides the well lamented Northwestern message board rumor. I know why ND would like to play UT, and I can see why UT may want to play ND, but is there a need to blow up the college landscape to do so? If I’m ND and I
want to play UT, then I set up a home and home series and keep my independence. If I’m UT, I stay in the B12 or even go to the Pac 16 and still schedule ND home and home. Why do these two schools need to be in the same conference to play?
Regardless, if we are to believe that ND is somehow the bait that will lure Texas, I believe that the best way to make ND sign, is to offer Miami and Georgia Tech, and tell ND that they will play in that pod. (For those of you you think these two are unrealistic, I would like to remind you that just a few months ago, the B12 was unbreakable, and there was no way in hell Texas go anywhere. Obviously there is some allure to the B10.) Now you have two spots to offer the Texas schools, if they accept then ND goes in that pod, and if they decline, then you can offer Nebraska and one other eastern school (I personally feel Virginia Tech would be a great pickup,) or if the league really wants Missouri, you offer the Tigers spot #16.
Offering Missouri now seems to just take up a slot that can be offered to a more valuable school. It would be one thing if UT told Delaney, we want Missouri, make it happen. To my knowledge, that isn’t the case, and why would it be? The Tigers are a historically average football program (although they have been better recently,) and a historically slightly above average basketball program. In terms of proximity, Columbia is still 800 miles away from Austin, meaning there will be no bussing of sports teams back and forth.
For all you Death Star conference proponents and those who believe it will be Delaney’s ultimate power play, sorry but I just don’t see it happening in light of the recent P16 developments. To put it simply, the Pac 10 is willing do dilute its brand by taking a flyer on Oklahoma State and Texas Tech. It may even be willing to pull the trigger on Baylor of all schools. Texas to the B10 is looking fainter by the hour, especially since there doesn’t appear to be a limit on how low the Pac 10 will go. Therefore, using a slot on Missouri right now makes no sense.
If I’m Delaney, I would recognize the writing on the wall, congratulate Larry Scott for winning the Texas sweepstakes, walk away with your head held high, and move on. I would then take some more time and see how viable a Miami / Georgia Tech / Notre Dame acquisition is. I posted earlier about why I think BOTH can be easily obtained. If this Atlanta to Miami connection isn’t feasible, then I look into forming the “New York Bloc” with Rutgers and Syracuse. I have long felt that Pittsburgh deserved some consideration here, maybe they become a player. (By the way Frank, whatever happened with the Maryland, Virginia, Vanderbilt talk?) Sure, Nebraska and Missouri are in a tight spot, but what can you do, they aren’t B10 schools yet. If I’m those two, I say, sure we’ll sign your B12 pledge of loyalty, but only if everyone else signs. (Does anyone find it hilarious that NU and MU were the only two schools given ultimatums when at least 7 others also would leave in a heartbeat? edit: I’m now reading that CU has been given the ultimatum as well.) That way, if everyone ends up leaving, everyone ends up paying.
While I don’t think the B10 can stick to its original time table, there still is no need to rush things. Delaney may have lost the Longhorns but there are other plays available. (By the way I love how Scott is portrayed as a genius even though the proposed Pac16 single handedly wrecks the B12, leaving 4-5 programs in the complete dust, while Delaney is made out to be a villain. I’m waiting for Pat Forde’s next column chastising Scott and
deriding the Pac 10 for ruining college football.)
LikeLike
Unless the Big Ten wants Missouri entirely on its own merits, I agree with this. Colorado and the Pac-10 appear willing to break the seal on the Big XII. If Nebraska leaves for the Big Ten soon after, then I don’t think Missouri is needed to kill off the Big XII and force Texas to make a decision.
LikeLike
unless Missouri is taken to
a) provide another geographically close school for Texas.
b) allow for only two remaining spots open so the Texas Legislature can’t try and tie Tech to the deal.
LikeLike
yes, but that presumes Notre Dame is in the fold.
LikeLike
a) At this point, UT needs to realize that a move to the B10 is going to involve longer travel. Columbia, MO is still a plane ride away from Austin. A valuable slot should not be wasted on Missouri because of this. That “convienient travel” slot is already being used on A&M, who in my opinion would not be in the discussion if it didn’t involve UT joining.
b) That’s why you bring in Georgia Tech and Miami to reel in Notre Dame. Two slots left for Texas / A&M. If they don’t accept, then you’ve still added three nice pieces.
LikeLike
yes it does. which is why its not done yet. the chess game continues.
LikeLike
Yes, no need for MO if luring TX is still a goal. Vanderbilt is less than 10 minutes further than Columbia, the same as Lincoln. GT is less than 20 minutes longer a flight than Columbia. Both are far superior academically, and GT is also athletically.
LikeLike
I guess my point is that the rumored P16 offer eases some of the geographical concerns that UT may have about a move to the P10 or B10. Therefore, adding Missouri as a way of placating this concern doesn’t make much sense because the Longhorns will not be driving to Columbia.
If I’m the B10, from an football standpoint, I try to sell the Longhorns on games with Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State, possibly Notre Dame if they do in fact join, along with the occasional big game against Iowa and Wisconsin.
LikeLike
Pat fode is a Pampas @ss. I bet he will make Delany out to be the Villain and leave others unscathed including the coveted Texas. I to caught the self righteous yet injured victim tone in his article advice to Delany. The wheels will and have turned without his pampas advice.
LikeLike
How exactly is this game over?
Does a poker game end when one player goes all in?
What about the SEC’s hand?
Why should the SEC let its best possible expansion plays all be absorbed by the Pac-10 as it goes to 16? Where does the SEC get teams for 16? The ACC has the best alternatives but the SEC may be perceived as not being as academically prestigious as the ACC.
There are still 3 things that can happen (the third is weak but the other two are not).
1) Pac-16 gets blown up by Stanford/Cal over Tech/OSU academics…
2) SEC makes a power play for OSU/OU/A&M if it realizes that it is about to lose its best meal ticket to 16. I’m sure CBS/ESPN will be on for a deal for those schools (they can renegotiate).
3) The Big Ten makes a play for A&M.
Admittedly the third is weak. Most Aggie commentators have noted that A&M would probably prefer to be with LSU and Arkansas, and the AD views the SEC as their probable home. So even if the Big Ten wants A&M, the administrators may go with the AD over the academics.
Regardless, scenarios 1 and 2 are still in play.
Until the SEC folds on OU/OSU/A&M or the Pac-16 shows that it is really holding a flush (meaning Stanford/Cal give the go ahead), we should wait.
Nebraska is the best play to set this in motion at #12 because any 5 team configuration includes them, and they set the dominoes in motion.
The Big Ten wants the Pac-16 to balk at Tech/OSU or for the SEC to charge at OU/OSU.
This is not over until all of these things don’t happen…
LikeLike
I can’t fathom that Delany doesn’t already know if the Pac-16 is going to balk at Tech/OSU or not. I mean, these two conferences have massive respect between them and have worked together multiple times in the past.
This isn’t the movie Maverick with Mel Gibson, Helen Hunt, and James Gardner all trying to trick the other at a final table. It’s Rounders with Damon and Ed Norton WORKING TOGETHER to share in profits, with pre-agreed different levels.
That’s why the Pac-10 is moving first, because Colorado to the Pac-10 makes so much sense, and the west coast media and ESPN don’t really care enough to whine, that Colorado won’t be made out to be a villain. This provides Nebraska the needed cover to take the Big10 invite. Mizzou probably is invited as well. Then the SEC acts, right on cue.
I’m starting to think the 5 B10 teams added will be ND, NE, Mizzou, TX, and Kansas if they can split from KSU. Otherwise the 5th team may be A&M, Rutgers, Pitt, or Syracuse.
TL;DR –
1. The Big10 and the Pac10 are working in concert to trigger events.
2. The SEC is fully aware of what is going on, and knows UTexas is NOT an option for them.
3. Notre Dame will join the B10 if Texas does, per Swarbrick’s comment on seismic shifts.
LikeLike
I agree on all points.
In fact I’ve posited that a Big 12 depleted of just Nebraska may yet be enough for Texas to stay.
But if the Pac-10 and Big Ten pull Colorado/Nebraska/Missouri, Texas will certainly end up in one of the two conferences.
Texas isn’t going to go to the SEC to spite the Pac-10 or Big Ten for pulling those three schools, so you’re right that the Pac-10 and Big Ten are somewhat working in concert even if unwittingly…
LikeLike
There’s 0 chance it’s unwittingly, the timing is too perfect. I’d love to see FOIA requests on Colorado to see when the Pac10 talked to them.
LikeLike
@SchockFX – I generally agree with this. I don’t think that the Big Ten and Pac-10 are really colluding per se, but remember that Kevin Weiberg (associate commissioner of the Pac-10) was a Delany protege, commissioner of the Big XII and got the Big Ten Network started. Delany trained that guy, so he’s got to have a very good handle on the thought process there. Neither one is just going to concede Texas to the other, but both of them have vested interest in the SEC staying far away from the Longhorns.
LikeLike
Uh oh, chaos and Armageddon?
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=215&f=2804&t=6015000
(Longtime Houston sports reporter, recently returned from Denver) …Barry Warner on 610 right now.
Sources from the Pac 10, not Big 12 or UH related. Baylor not perceived as large enough and Tech’s academic standards too weak…
LikeLike
Oops, buried the lead:
UH Consideration to the Pac-10
LikeLike
I don’t feel like registering to read the article, but:
1) I hope this means Big 10 is a possibility now.
2) If Tech is weak academically, are they OK with Oklahoma State?
LikeLike
No.
I referenced before that one (yes only one somehow) article spoke about “rumblings in the Pac-10 presidents meetings about Tech/OSU academics”.
That means that Stanford/Cal/UCLA/UW and maybe even USC are stepping up to the plate.
If any one of them has cold feet about Tech or OSU then this deal could be sunk.
LikeLike
A Tier 3 is too weak academically, so they invite a Tier 4? Tell me how that makes sense.
LikeLike
One thing I am thinking, in a football only world the big winner will be the SEC. They have the most cohesive current programs so for the first 5 – 10 years they will have the best shot at the NC….
Texas, A&M, Nebraska, ND, Missouri in a Big 16.. BIG adjustments
Pac 16 + Big 12.. BIG adjustments
most of the SEC has known each other for a century, and the last 2 have been there for a generation…. if they pick up the Big 12, the SEC west already knows them…. if they go east to the ACC, they already play many of the teams every year already..
LikeLike
The rest is really a stroll in the park for the SEC if they sit and wait. The teams they can pick up in the ACC would be most likely duplicating the same markets. The real bang for the buck for them would be from the Big 12. Tex, Tex A&M, Oklahoma T Tech and MiZZu. If I was the man in the SEC this is where I would look next..
LikeLike
Sometimes you gotta work for a living. Just adding.
LikeLike
Alan,
glad to see you, I had a question on secondary pay outs for TV revenue in the SEC. Folks keep arguing no way for texas, but if Florida added 10 Million last year to its 17, that is 27 million annual and that is nothing to sneeze about. makes the SEC with a big hold card that the Pac 10 and Big 10 can not match.
LikeLike
Duff – the LSN is not a deal breaker in the SEC.
Regarding the SEC TV contracts for football, CBS gets the 1st pick. CBS also get 2 doubleheader Saturdays and the SEC CG. ESPN or ESPN2 get pick numbers 2 and 3. The ESPN produced and nationally syndicated SEC Network gets pick 4. ESPNU & ESPN Classic get games too.
For example, LSU’s 2009 football schedule included 4 CBS games, 2 ESPN games, 1 ESPN2 game, 1 SECN game, 3 ESPNU games, and 1 pay-per-view game against my law school – Tulane.
The CBS games are national, not regional, not with a reverse mirror, but national. The SECN is syndicated throughout the SEC footprint, as well as in over 15 states outside the footprint. The SECN partners are generally broadcast channels or basic cable channels.
Getting back to LSU as an example, since I’m most familiar with them. LSU has a multi-year deal with Cox Cable (the largest cable broadcaster in Louisiana) to show football re-broadcasts – a very big deal in the South – men’s and women’s basketball games not picked up by CBS, ESPN, or the SECN, baseball, softball, volleyball and and gymnastics. These games are also broadcast on Cox affiliates in Arkansas and Florida. LSU’s contract is believed to be in excess of $5mm per year.
LSU has had a heck of a run in all sports over the last decade and is very popular with advertisers, but the Houston market has more TVs than the entire state of Louisiana.
So if LSU can make an extra $5mm with its Cox deal, and UF can make $10mm with its Sunshine deal, can’t UTx make at least $10mm with its own TV network in Texas?
LikeLike
Alan,
Thank you for clearing that up!
Many of the bloggers here keep saying NO way to teams like Texas and UNC, but Slive seems pretty smart and as quiet as he has been is a bit unsettling from a Big 10 perspective. It sounds like my worry of added money to Texas / A&M / UNC / UVA is not totally out of the world.
ps.. as I said early on I am a basketball fan and have enjoyed the Lady Tigers for years
LikeLike
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/greenstein/ct-spt-0609-greenstein-big-ten-expans20100608,0,5816071.column
Teddy G’s latest musings. Argues for the 3-pack of Nebraska, ND, and Rutgers.
LikeLike
Remember, this was the guy who once wrote Connecticut was a lead-pipe cinch for the Big Ten.
LikeLike
Say everything, you’ll be right sooner or later.
LikeLike
Some people on this blog do that very thing.
LikeLike
Not Teddy G – that was the clown from ESPN radio (Colin Cowherd)
ND is still not coming!
LikeLike
Teddy G. has been one of the more responsible ones this whole process. He actually understands the big picture and puts rational thoughts in print.
LikeLike
@Vincent – I don’t recall him writing that about UCONN. He did say that about Rutgers, though. Teddy is about as trustworthy as you can get on this story. He’s not throwing crap against the wall like a lot of other writers, especially at this point in the process.
LikeLike
Going to 14 is a solid play. Watch the others scurry and than make some deals baby!
I wish I liked Rutgers more but it is what it is. If it lands ND than it is a solid move.
Leaves the Big Ten lots of options
LikeLike
UPDATES
http://twitter.com/ssipplesports – A good source of mine sticks to the notion that NU has a good chance of landing a Big Ten invite by Friday
AND BIGGER STORY
http://my.journalstar.com/post/Husker_Extra_Group/Husker_Extra/blog/osborne_not_taking_part_in_speculation.html
Tidbits
Osborne “there’s a lot of information that we really don’t have right now. And hopefully we’ll get things put together in the next few days.”
Grindle – Is there a misconception of Nebraska’s relationship with Texas?
Osborne – “I think maybe so. We certainly don’t have anything against anybody in the Big 12. This decision is not going to be based on animosity, on petty jealousy. I mean you’re talking about something that could maintain for the next 75, 100 years. I mean this is a big deal in terms of the University of Nebraska. This is a big deal in view of many other institutions. So you don’t ever make a decision based on personal likes, dislikes. And frankly, I get along very well with (Texas athletic director DeLoss Dodds). I’m a great admirer of Mack Brown.”
“I think the media’s been good and in most cases, they’ve tried to check their facts. And even though sometimes they guess, sometimes they guess pretty correctly.”
“Certainly academics is a major consideration because when you begin to build a conference … there is a lot more to it then who plays whom on what particular day”
My observation… Nebraska is going to the Big Ten and the deal is already done, they are waiting to announce. Start the dominoes……
LikeLike
Lol! maybe Osborn and the Big Ten drop this bomb in time for the 5:00 PM news on Friday. Its all the conversation over the weekend and by next tuesday they get a 9 – 2 vote. Mark 2011 Nebraska becoes the 12th. Sit and watch some more. Next, is it the texas two or ND + Mizzu, ND+Rutgers.
LikeLike
This won’t go like PSU. If they are invited the votes are there. By Fall 2011 they’ll be playing a Big Ten football schedule. They all want to finish before July 1st when the new acedemic year begins, otherwise you’ll hear these discussions for another year.
And yes, I’d bet that Nebraska is announced as joining the Big Ten by 5 PM Friday if not sooner.
LikeLike
Agreed. This is going to be the opposite of an 8-3, several month prolonged will they or won’t they be allowed to come fiasco…
Nebraska fits the bill in every single way from its research funding/institutional fit to its athletic department which would rival OSU/PSU/Michigan.
There’s not going to be any suspense at all. Once it’s announced Nebraska will be playing a Big Ten schedule in perhaps 2011 with a full BTN revenue share.
LikeLike
It’s worth noting that if joining the Big Ten is supposed to before the Board of Regents that meet on Friday, they would have to add it to the agenda at least 24-hours in advance of the meeting. The agenda is made public, but the meeting is closed door.
http://nebraska.edu/board/agendas-and-minutes.html
This means that an announcement would have to occur before 1:00 PM Thursday if they wish to push it through the board. That is unless they plan to sneak it on the agenda, and hope no one is paying attention, but I doubt they’d do that as this was talked about on our local sports radio show.
LikeLike
Just stopping by to ask the kindly readers of this blog to pray for Utah. We may be on life support, but we aren’t dead yet.
LikeLike
most of us are rooting for you to find a home in the Pac 12(?)
LikeLike
Get Utah into the Pac 10 with Colorado before the Texas legislature can F’ it all up. Come Utah, hurry up!
LikeLike
@TheBaron – I’m with you. Utah, BYU and TCU are all schools that I’d take over half of the Big XII for BCS conference slots. I hope you end up with a good home.
LikeLike
When the mess has settled, either the MWC will get the Big 12’s automatic bid, or the remaining Big 12 members will grab some schools. BYU, TCU, and Utah will certainly be in an Automatic Qualifier conference.
LikeLike
@m – I agree that they will end up in an AQ once the dominos start falling. I wuld still like to see them in the Pac though
LikeLike
would….sheesh
LikeLike
Orangebloods.com: Colorado expected to get bad news from NCAA APR Wednesday: football and basketball both stand to lose scholarships. 8 minutes ago via TweetDeck
LikeLike
Yeah a lot of us are hoping that Utah gets the 12th spot. You need to pray that John Hennessy has cold feet about this…
LikeLike
Question? isnt Utah a morman school too? Or does this not factor in with Stanford?
LikeLike
Utah is a state-run university. No doubt there are plenty of Mormons among its students, but the church has nothing to do with the way the school is run.
LikeLike
The University of Utah is in no way a “Mormon school”; it is as secular as they come. In fact, because of our proximity to BYU I would say the administrators and faculty go out of their way to make it as clear as possible Utah has no LDS affiliation whatsoever.
Legitimate research and academics are the top priority. Athletics are an important #2, but still #2. One of our professors just won the Nobel prize in 2007 for genetic research.
The PAC expanding to 16 and not including Utah would be unconscionable.
LikeLike
StvInILL,
I think the issue Stanford has is with BYU, not Utah.
LikeLike
@TheBaron,
At the very least the Mountain West should be pretty much guaranteed the auto BCS bid with the pending dissolution of the Big XII.
LikeLike
Honestly, Utah is in pretty good shape no matter what. Scenario 1 (and probably the best one) is still to go to the Pac-10 with Colorado which is still possible. If Pacaggedon happens, there will be some very good schools (e.g. Kansas) who will need a new home. Utah has a good chance of ending up with them either in the MWC or in the post-apocalyptic Big XII.
LikeLike
MWC held off Boise State for a reason. They’re holding out for something better, or they’re looking to replace the Utes if they go to Pac10.
LikeLike
If the Pac-16 happens, I don’t see why Utah wouldn’t stay in the MWC. I’d kick out Colorado State but then absorb KU, KSU, BSU and the CU/BU loser. That’d bump them to 12 teams to make them AQ eligible and have a more impressive resume for the BCS.
LikeLike
CSU over WY?
LikeLike
OT — News from Washington — Nats beat Bucs 5-2, as a certain rookie righthander goes 7 innings for the win; four hits (one a two-run homer), 14 strikeouts and no walks. Nationals Park: Hotel Strasburg.
LikeLike
The next Mark Prior maybe? hope he last a little longer.
LikeLike
@StvInILL – As a White Sox fan, I’ll withhold comment.
LikeLike
Frank, I was a cubs fan most of my life, then I grew up. I too am a whitesox fan but I am not a cub hater.
LikeLike
go tigers!
LikeLike
I was away from here for a few hours, as a Nats fan, so that I could properly observe Strasmas.
LikeLike
The next David Clyde?
LikeLike
MLB Network did the requisite feature on him before the game.
LikeLike
I think the NE-ND-TX and stop at 14 is still in play. Would provide symmetry for a P10 + Utah, CO, KS, and MO.
I bet the aTm to the SEC rumors start snowballing by the weekend.
If the SEC also only goes to 14, then that leaves 6 B12 teams and the chance to rebuild to 14 with the BCS AQ. Bring in UH, TCU, SMU, BYU, Lou, Cin, and maybe S. FL and UCF or Fresno and Boise to join TT, Baylor, OU, OK St, KS, KSU, and ISU. That’s 8 progams that have been top 25 in the last 3 years, 3 that played in the BCS in that time frame. Solid 5th or 6th conference. Get 7 Texas schools in a BCS conference and the state politicians should be happy.
LikeLike
10 top 25 and 4 BCS in the past 3 years if they include Boise and Fresno.
LikeLike
Once the SEC makes its move we’re going to probably see the ground shift under the Pac-16 invite story.
Dunno if Texas will want to come alone though and be so far away from the footprint. That sounds like what they wanted in 1994.
But in 2010? I think they’ll try to drag the Aggies back from an SEC bid over to the Big Ten and claim it as a victory to the legislature for academics. (Or perhaps I’m naive). I still see geography as a bit of an issue for Texas coming alone if Mizz/Kansas aren’t the last two or the Aggies come…
LikeLike
Maybe I’m not getting your meaning, zeek, but the ground has been shifting under the Pac 10 invite story since last night. Check upthread for a link I posted. Baylor is not invited. The only smoke from the Pac 10 is CU, at the moment.
LikeLike
Er, well I mean we get more rumblings about academics blowing up this deal or the SEC destroying it.
The Pac-16 is still on the table until one of those two things happen most likely…
Inviting CU just forecloses the Baylor problem.
LikeLike
That and PN has a Rivals premium teaser blowing up Tech for the Pac 10 somewhere on this thread.
Me, I’m calling it a night.
LikeLike
Texas is its own footprint though.
LikeLike
False alarm according to the Boulder Daily Camera beat writer Daily Camera. Supposedly no official invite, no announcement tomorrow this waiting sucks.
“Smoke but no fire here. No pending announcements. Basically administrators got advice from their lawyers about different scenarios.”
I can’t take another day of this, I need to get some work done.
LikeLike
Expansion meeting may actually be about contraction:
Orangebloods.com: Colorado expected to get bad news from NCAA APR Wednesday: football and basketball both stand to lose scholarships. 8 minutes ago via TweetDeck
LikeLike
Huh? When did Colorado come under NCAA investigation? You’d think you’d be able to Google something like that.
I’m getting sorely tempted to sign up on twitter just to do Fake Chip Brown.
LikeLike
We’re not under investigation for anything its because of a couple of flameouts that left school while ineligible. Its part of the regular annual APR report dealie with the NCAA rules, and has been expected. Is Chip tweeting the APR results for the rest of the Big 12 too…oops I guess that wouldn’t play with the agenda of the Texas Propaganda Ministry.
LikeLike
Got it.
Somebody should really do Fake Chip Brown, though.
LikeLike
Funny Stuff
Like the Fake Dan Beebe
This Chip Brown fella keeps poking me on Facebook.
Why does TCU keep sending me MP3 copies of the song “Take on Me”?
OR FAKE JIM DELANY
I say that because Ingrid and I are in route to South Bend and she thinks it resembles her hometown in Albania. She loves it.
No Big Ten school will ever use hate speech like “Corn Shuckers.”
OR PAC 16 CONFERENCE
I’ve got the #Colorado Board of Regents on speaker — I can hear Hawkins on other end screaming like a banshee. $50 says his shirt is off.
Damnit. I’m quickly realizing that Colorado doesn’t know what “secret” means.
LikeLike
I think my favorite is Texasguv:
Couple of the latest:
The folks of our great state find USC’s mascot morally offensive. Henceforth, they shall be known as “The USC Abstinence”
Effective immediately, Arizona will be known as Aritejas, California as Calitejas, Oregon as Oretejas, and Washington will be known as Bush.
Baylor is already the Bears, so Cal must change their mascot. Effective immediately, they will be called the Cal Golden Hippies
LikeLike
Meanwhile Wednesday’s NCAA APR release will have a Big Ten expansion candidate at or near the top of the list.
LikeLike
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703302604575294682205167548.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
LikeLike
Congrats to Rutgers. Never would have expected that.
LikeLike
Per 610 am radio – TX Senator John Whitmire (D-Houston):
Been in discussions about UH-P16 much of the day. UH Chancellor in discussions with P10 officials. TX is open to the idea. Still just preliminary.
Reporter Barry Warner says he has 3 P10 sources confirming talks.
FWIW. Doesn’t sound like its close to happening, but the door may be cracked more than I expected.
Hopkins on heart attack alert…
LikeLike
The SWC is back! I’ll have brush up on my Dan Jenkins novels.
LikeLike
might as well do that in the big12.. old SWC plus the states of oklahoma and kansas
LikeLike
They will. They care about the small schools, or so I’ve been told.
LikeLike
Now CU is being replaced by Houston? Wow, lol. Aren’t they also another 30000 attendance school like Baylor. Maybe OU and OSU are out? So we’re going to reconstitute the SWC within the PAC 10?
LikeLike
The last time I tuned in to watch Uh was when Joe Montana (ND) pulled one out in the ice bowl. Great game.Houston is actually an inner city school so I am sure the enrollment is quite high. But a Pac ten school? I don’t see it. Poor Colorado, poor Utah.
LikeLike
Not sure about their enrollment but I was speaking about their football attendance.
LikeLike
UH has 30,000 students and averages about 22,000 for football despite having a pretty good team. Don’t believe this rumor at all. That athletic department is in horrible shape.
LikeLike
“The last time I tuned in to watch Uh was when Joe Montana (ND) pulled one out in the ice bowl. Great game.”
I was there. Damn cold.
LikeLike
Baylor’s already been rejected…if Playoffs Now is right, U Houston is a replacement for Texas Tech, not anyone else.
LikeLike
Would that work for the Pac-10, namely Stanford/Cal? (No knowledge of UH v. Tech)
LikeLike
Well, I’m not the one who knows where all the academic rankings.
I do know that UH and Texas Tech are the two schools that have qualified for the most extra funding the state of Texas is providing to bring universities up to ‘Tier 1’.
I think when Playoffs Now! was listing some academic standards a few threads ago (which is probably 3,000-4,000 posts!) that UH came higher than I expected.
LikeLike
“I’m not the one who knows where all the academic rankings” are!
I should add that I’m sure UH isn’t in the league of Big 10/Pac 10 schools, but there is a chance it might be more acceptable than TT.
LikeLike
@m (ag):
As much as we’ve talked about the academic side, don’t lose site of the athletic side as well.
UH plays in a high school stadium (well, high school stadium by Texas standards) with only 32,000 seats. And UH averaged less than 80% capacity in that tiny stadium last year.
And you know what’s great about that for UH? That was a GREAT SEASON for UH attendance:
The Coogs averaged 25,242 fans across six home games this fall, an increase of 3,723 fans per game over last season. This is Houston’s highest attendance average since the 1991 season, and this was the first time since the 1984 season that the Cougars had no home games with less than 20,000 fans in attendance.
Congratulations, UH, on breaking that 25-year streak of having at least one home game with less than 20K in attendance!
http://indotav.blogspot.com/2009/12/2009-uh-cougar-football-attendance.html
Not. Going. To. Happen.
LikeLike
“UH plays in a high school stadium”
People should know that this is literally true. Robertson Stadium was originally known as Jeppesen Stadium and was built by the Houston ISD when UH was still a junior college. They’ve added on a bit since.
LikeLike
@loki:
when UH was still a junior college
What do you mean “was”?
LikeLike
@Hopkins Horn – Oh snap! Now, I’ve long suggested that the Big East ought to invite TCU and Houston as a pair as opposed to limiting itself to the usual suspects from East of the Mississippi. Of course, John Marinatto makes Dan Beebe look like Bobby Fischer.
LikeLike
“What do you mean “was”?”
My lovely wife (UH ’84) has forbidden me to talk bad about Zoo of H.
LikeLike
Will never happen. I’m sure we’ll here from some pro-TCU legislators, and even some pro-SMU legislators, before this is over.
The more of a clusterf*** this becomes, the better for what I want.
By the way, has anyone heard a peep yet from any pro-UT or pro-A&M legislators? Or are they holding their fire until it’s really needed?
LikeLike
ASU already has Pac-10 dibs on the pitchfork. UH will need to rework the cougar paw.
LikeLike
Despite the animosity b/w Texas and cougar high, UH would be a much better choice than Baylor for a conference that must:
1. Appease Texas with geographically appealing opponents
2. Look to the future for a public school with at least potential for Tier I status.
3. They have at least have a history of athletic success.
4. They may not be essential for the Houston market but at least it isn’t Waco.
5. They can play in Reliant stadium for all conference home games (avoids bleacher-gate type problems.)
Kansas would be even better than CU, Baylor or UH.
LikeLike
You could count A&M out of any Pac 10 move if UH was involved. A&M considers Houston part of it’s territory (NW suburbs are an hour away), and would not want to have anything to do with a move that elevated the Cougars.
LikeLike
Just another excuse from the coward section of the Ags. They were going to the SEC anyway, to hell with ’em.
My guess is aTm and TX will soon go to war in the political backrooms. Probably end up with either TX to the B10+ and aTm has to bring TT to the SEC, or aTm goes SEC with TT and Baylor, TX goes P16 with UH, OU, OSU, CO, and either Utah or KS. Outside chance that they play their cards right and TX goes B10+, aTm goes SEC, and enough B12 schools stay to keep the BCS AQ and then rebuild with UH, SMU, and TCU.
LikeLike
They can play in Reliant stadium for all conference home games (avoids bleacher-gate type problems.)
That just means 30-40,000 empty seats per game instead of 6-10K. An advantage of playing in a high school stadium.
LikeLike
Lump the Houston rumor with BYU, Baylor, BoiseSt, any Cal St rumors. As HH already said – Not gonna happen.
LikeLike
Being a reporter right now must be hard.
“Hey, look up if anyone has projected Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Colorado, and Rutgers yet. Really? Who? That many? OK… try… Nebraska, Missouri, Rutgers, UConn, and Maryland…”
LikeLike
Frank… Zeek hasn’t posted anything in well over 20 minutes. I think something happened to him. Can we look into it? 🙂
LikeLike
I’ve been wondering when zeek sleeps. Maybe he passed out from exhaustion.
LikeLike
Zeek hasn’t posted anything in well over 20 minutes. I think something happened to him. Can we look into it?
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome victim?
LikeLike
Maybe Richard will return.
LikeLike
Heh. I don’t mean to be taking over the blog though with my commentaries. I do get a bit monotonous at times…
LikeLike
Zeek, perhaps you could set up a twitter feed to update everyone in-between your posts.
LikeLike
Is Fake Chip Brown taken?
LikeLike
The “U” is in this race if TX is out – Miami primarily moved to ACC to upgrade its academic affiliation and that is the direction they seek. They will listen to B10. They will never “downgrade” to SEC from the ACC and South Florida is a northeast/international hodgepodge of society. If no pipeline to TX for the B10, they will look for a southeast outpost and Miami is that pipeline. They were independent for years, then Big East, so they are used to being the outpost school.
LikeLike
Works for me. You have to play in Lincoln in November, though. Hopefully we can arrange an Alberta Clipper. 😉
LikeLike
Lincoln, Madison, Minneapolis, Ann Arbor, Evanston. Come on in the waters fine.;-)
LikeLike
A lot of links to Miami in the Big Ten, Shalala etc., but it doesn’t look like it’s going to happen.
Delany is 100% focused on scenarios that put Texas in play for the Big Ten and Notre Dame in the end game.
I don’t see any kind of focus other than those two (and Nebraska to start it all off since Notre Dame would rather be #16 in a 4×16 scenario) this time around.
The others are coming along to fill gaps in the profile, probably Missouri/Rutgers and Maryland if they can be taken…
LikeLike
Miami is NOT an AAU member, thus they will not be invited to the Big ten.
LikeLike
Oh, I completely agree.
I think the Big Ten’s list in order right now is
Texas, Notre Dame, Nebraska, A&M, Maryland, Rutgers, Virginia, Mizzou, Syracuse.
Nebraska (and possibly Mizzou if there’s still a path to Texas or Delany wants to go to 13) is likely to be 12, and after that you start soliciting the rest…
I have a hard time believing we’re targeting anyone too far off geographically other than Texas/A&M because that one is such a prize.
LikeLike
Zeek, I don’t believe the Big Ten will take any more than 2 schools from anyone conference.
I believe they want to bring in schools that can be assimilated and adjust to how the Big Ten does things. Nothing against different ideas or opinions, but just trying to avoid voting blocks with histories.
LikeLike
Texas and A&M would almost have to come in as a package. Take them out of the equation, and you have Notre Dame, Nebraska, Maryland, Rutgers and Virginia. Two football “brand names” and three academic schools with some appeal on the eastern seaboard (and potential to snag some hefty federal research funding). Presidents happy, marketers happy. And only one conference loses more than one team.
LikeLike
What about Vanderbilt? AAU, large endowment, research and med school, not a great deal of athletic competition in football (i.e. not much worse than MU), southern exposure and helps build a bridge to Texas. Oh and send the sec a message – BTN, BTN, BTN
LikeLike
aps, I think that assumption went out with the Pac-16 move.
I think the Big Ten will do whatever it needs to in order to get Texas or Notre Dame.
If it can’t, then we’ll settle down for the long haul and wait for the SEC try to approach the ACC so that we can try to pick off Maryland.
LikeLike
# Texas official tells me it’s Pac-10’s call whether to invite Baylor or Colorado, but one B12 AD: “Texas could bring SFA if it wants.” #ut about 4 hours ago via web
LikeLike
SFA = Stephen F. Austin Univ. Google ’em.
LikeLike
Didn’t need to. Sports fan.
LikeLike
Ah, thanks for the clarification. I was thinking Saskatchwan Fencing Association. My bad.
LikeLike
I’d pay to see that game…
LikeLike
Next on LSN, Stephen F. Austin vs. Washington State. Riveting television.
LikeLike
…and WSU would still lose by 12…
LikeLike
No offense to the guys from Texas. But your state has really turned this entire thing into a circus. None of this stuff is coming from anybody else but Texas. I realize that’s because everybody wants Texas, but well its a bit of a fiasco between every TX school up to SFA clamoring “me too, me too” and the quarter hour updates from Brown and Ketchum. I really didn’t think this was going to turn into a sideshow to rival the breakup of the SWC.
LikeLike
And somehow this was all supposed to keep Nebraska in the Big 12…
LikeLike
Hey don’t blame it on the legislature alone. The discord in the BiG12 has been just as problematic. CHeck out the minutes from their League Meeting:
http://www.bringonthecats.com/2010/6/7/1506558/adventures-of-the-big-12-twelve#storyjump
LikeLike
While I don’t think UH will end up anywhere other than the MWC, here’s a repeat post from a few weeks ago showing the UH isn’t quite the outlier that some would expect. ARWU and AAU rankings for B10+, P10, prospective schools, and some for comparison’s sake:
==============
The ARWU rankings for only the US:
WI – 15
MI – 18
IL – 19
MN – 20
NW – 22
MD – 28
TX – 29
Van- 31
PSU- 32
Pit- 37
Rut- 38
OSU- 41
PU – 42
MSU- 48
aTm- 50
VA – 51
IU – 52
GT, Mia, IA – 56 to 70 level
CT, FSU, NE, Cincy, VTech – 71-90 level
ND, USF, UCF, UHou, MO, S.Car, LSU – 91-112 level
Scores:
You can get the detailed explanation on the ARWU site:
http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2009.jsp
http://www.arwu.org/ARWUMethodology2009.jsp
IA – 00 – 00 – 33 – 22 – 48 – 21 (baseline)
GT – 15 – 00 – 25 – 23 – 45 – 28
Mia- 00 – 00 – 24 – 19 – 41 – 24
NE – 20 – 00 – 16 – 15 – 34 – 18
One frustrating aspect of the ARWU is that they don’t list the total score for the schools ranked below 100. But you can calculate it.
Total scores work out to:
WI = 46.7
MI = 43.8
IL = 42.4
MN = 40.4
NW = 38.7
Duke=37.1
MD = 34.1
TX = 34.0
NC = 33.4
VB = 33.0
PSU = 32.5
Pit= 31.7
Rut= 30.4
FL = 29.8
OSU= 29.1
PU = 28.5
MSU= 25.5
aTm= 25.2
VA = 24.6
Calculated:
IU = 24.4
GT = 22.9
IA = 22.7
GA = 19.6
NCSt=19.5
Mia= 19.2
VTec=19.0
TN = 19.0
FSU = 18.2
ISU= 17.4
NE = 16.8
Cin= 16.8
CT = 16.2
LSU= 15.9
KY = 15.2
UHou=15.1
KS = 15.0
ND = 14.9
MO = 14.8
SCar=14.5
USF= 13.6
UCF= 12.7
WkF= 12.1
Syr= 11.9
——————
P10, candidates, and some neighbor schools’ ARWU scores:
Stan=73.1
Cal= 71.0
UCLA=52.3
WA – 48.0
CO = 36.4
TX = 34.0
USC 32.4
AZ = 26.9
Utah=26.6
aTm= 25.2
ASU= 24.3
Calculated, based on their formula:
ORSt=21.7
CSU= 17.9
ISU= 17.4
NE = 16.8
NM = 15.4
UHou=15.1
KS = 15.0
WSU= 14.9
MO = 14.8
OR = 14.4
—–
KSU= 12.1
SDSU=11.9
NV = 11.4
OU = 11.1
TT = 10.6
BYU= 10.1
WY = 9.6
Lou= 9.4
UtSt=8.7
SMU=8.6
OK St, TCU, Baylor, UNLV, Fresno, and Boise didn’t make the top 152 in the US.
US News rankings:
Stan=4
Cal= 21
UCLA=24
USC= 26
WA = 42
TX = 47
aTm= 61
SMU= 68
BYU= 71
CO = 77
Bayl=80
ISU= 88
KS = 96
NE = 96
AZ = 102
MO = 102
OU = 102
WSU= 106
TCU= 110
OR = 115
ASU = 121
Utah=126
CSU= 128
Tier 3 (unranked, alphabetized)
KSU, NM, NV, OK St, OR St, SDSU, TT, Utah St, WY
Tier 4
UHou
That Tier 4 ranking really screws UHou. Hard to reconcile that with how high they rate in the ARWU: In the 91-112 rank group and a Top 100 score. Ahead of OR, MO, WSU, and KS, and well ahead of OU and TT. That doesn’t mean the US News ranking should be completely ignored, but it does explain why the rumor that TX had proposed to the P10 a Texas-based quad of TX, aTm, TT, and UH might have some truth to it.
LikeLike
I think perception wise that T4 ranking may be somewhat problematic.
Again, it’s not like they actually use those for anything (i.e. it won’t screw Nebraska because they fit in with respect to every other comparison) but it will create a perception problem.
The question has always been whether the Pac-10 feels as if it has to do this expansion for the $ or whether it can afford to care about academics like the Big Ten…
LikeLike
All depends on the criteria you use. UH has a lot of SOTA who are working and not graduating quickly. That will hurt your rankings. Its really a much better school than it is given credit for by USNews. It has good professors and a very good president coupled with a bunch of Mickey Mouse administrators.
LikeLike
Just for kicks let’s assume Nebraska is a lock for the B10. If I were Delaney I would be spending a great deal of time trying to convince A&M to come to the B10. This would certainly gum up the PAC10 plan and possibly start the ND & Texas domino’s to fall.
LikeLike
Actually, I don’t like to see anybody screwed like Iowa State is going to be one way or the other. MAC? I think B12 and BEast football is vaporized. Out of this though I see MWC as an actual player however. The B12 and BEast are being “reorganized” to refine the total pool. I totally see this coming to a B10, Pac10, ACC, SEC conf. + ND coming to the backroom deal in the end if not already. These are power broker politicians with careers/institutions/states in the balance. Even if MWC becomes player, it doesn’t matter b/c the bcs pool is reduced by at least one, if not two (6 to 4, or 6 to 5 depending on where MWC and B12 leftovers + Boise cobble together).
LikeLike
I hate to make this kind of statement, but Iowa State being demoted is good for the Big Ten in the sense that it’ll be only Iowa in a major conference.
I dislike being that calculating about such a situation, but clearly Delany and Scott are going to make sure they’re the only two power conferences outside of the East Coast and South…
LikeLike
Actually if the MWC-B12-leftover hybrid becomes a BCS equivalent conference (which it should) we should up with more schools in the BCS than before, even if the BEast disappears. Counting ND we’re at what, 66 BCS schools? 3×16 and 2×12 = 72, 5×16 = 80. Thus 6-14 schools will likely move up into the BCS (or equivalent) and perhaps even more.
LikeLike
What happens if the 4 remaining Big XII schools just offers all MWC schools to join together under the Big XII name, maybe add Houston or Rice to keep a toehold in Texas recruiting.
MWC instantly becomes an AQ conference under the Big XII name and Iowa St. Kansas, Kansas St, and Baylor get a reprieve from the non-BCS conference wasteland.
LikeLike
Is Okie State out?
Colorado Rivals.com – Adam Munsterteiger – 1530 AM the Fan Austin
-believes Colorado has an offer. Oklahoma State might be out of the Pac-10 bid if Baylor is part of the Texas package
[audio src="http://kznx-am.tritondigitalmedia.com/includes/news_items/6/1167/6.8.10adammunsterteiger.mp3" /]
Well…if Okie State is out…so is OU. Which makes why we are hearing about Houston today.
LikeLike
If something like that happened it would save the Pac-10 from an SEC flank attack.
But still, does the Pac-10 really want to add 5 schools from Texas and Colorado?
I have trouble believing that Stanford and co. will just accept any demand no matter how pie in the sky.
Then again, perhaps that’s what Texas wants if it wants to be able to jump without the baggage elsewhere…
LikeLike
Actually if that rumor was true, it might open the Pac 10 offer up even more to a flank attack. If OK ST is left off the invite list, then OK may be more compelled to go to the SEC if OK ST can tag along and not get left behind. And if OK and OK ST look to be going to the SEC, and if all of these other Texas teams seem to be in play for the Pac 10, maybe this gives aTm the opening it needs to jump to the SEC if it so desires. Then it will be up to UT to decide if it wants to go to the Pac 10 without aTm and OK, or if it would prefer to go to the Big 10 and blame aTm for causing the Pac 10 bid to fall apart. It’s at least plausable if OK ST gets left without a Pac 10 offer.
LikeLike
that explains it well.
However, it all unravels if UT isn’t in the Pac-10 deal. The deal is UT plus a bunch of who-evers..not for the who-evers alone.
LikeLike
No I agree on that point. That is why I said that UT can then blame aTm for the Pac 10 deal falling apart. It’s predicated on aTm jumping to the SEC once the decision is made to invite all of the Texas schools (this gives aTm temporary cover from the state politicians since they believe that the other schools are going to the Pac 10) and before UT has a chance to really think about it and decide if it wants to go without aTm and OK. If UT decides it would prefer to go to the Big 10, it can use aTm as the scapegoat.
LikeLike
If true, all those half-ass TEXAS teams will eventually become like Jacob Marley’s chain around UT’s ankle, haunting them for decades.
LikeLike
Well what I mean, is a flank attack on A&M.
If you put 4 other Texas schools into the group with A&M, then A&M can’t bolt for the SEC with OU/OSU. Politically, it binds everyone to the Pac-16.
That’s just based on this notion that A&M is hesitant about this deal, but that Texas wants A&M in the Pac-16 deal for sure…
LikeLike
I’m not sure what difference it makes if there are 1, 2, or 3 schools tied to UT and aTm. I think that the political pressure is going to be their regardless. Once I found out the there was a “Tech” problem, I knew they were handcuffed to UT (and to a lesser extent to aTm) and the key was buried in the middle of Texas. But now it seems like the state politicians are just getting greedy. Trying to tie Baylor to UT is ridiculous, but trying to tie both Baylor and UH to them is just down right crazy. I think the only hope for aTm to get loose from the other Texas schools is if the state politicians are confident that the others have a ticket in hand to the Pac 10. But even that may be a long shot.
LikeLike
Bamatab, I think you misunderstand my point.
My point is that A&M wants to run off with OU and OSU to the SEC.
Texas is responding to that by jettisoning OU/OSU and bringing Baylor/Hou on as a way of putting enormous pressure on A&M to commit to the Texas group.
Obviously, I hope this is all idle speculation and that we see something more like the original Pac-16 invite, but this process has already gotten mucked up with politics determining invites.
I don’t know how the Pac-10 presidents are watching this without seriously wondering why Scott hasn’t just settled on 6 schools…
LikeLike
Nevermind, you got to it at the end. Carry on…
LikeLike
@Daniel – My goodness, that’s a fucked up rumor. This is why I don’t want the Big Ten to fall into a trap of trying to appease the lowest common denominator. I was almost convinced for a split second last week that the Big Ten might need to consider Texas Tech, but thought better of it. If Texas ends up in the Big Ten, it’s only going to be with Texas A&M (if anyone from that state).
LikeLike
@ Frank – the 3 conferences are all after Texas, and giving their best offer…how can anyone top “Here’s a blank check. We need you so bad, you do what you have to do to make it work out on your end” ?
LikeLike
Still, this is getting ridiculous if Oklahoma is possibly getting dropped…
Texas fans are going to be shaking their heads if that really ends up happening…
LikeLike
The Texas Legislature might be writing “VOID” on that blank check.
LikeLike
@Daniel – That was what I was trying to address in today’s post. The Pac-10 can’t compete financially with the Big Ten and SEC, so its next best play was to effectively offer to move UT’s entire neighborhood. I had long thought that Texas really didn’t want its neighbors outside of Texas A&M (along with ensuring that they can play OU every year). The political squabbling doesn’t surprise me at all. However, I’m still at a loss on UT’s true intentions at this point assuming that it didn’t have any political deadweight. If it really wants to make the most money possible, then the Big Ten is the choice – bar none. If Texas simply wants to keep its current foes under a different conference banner, though, then it’s not going to get better than this Pac-10 offer.
LikeLike
@ Frank I get the feeling that UT doesn’t have enough votes/pull on it’s own to get a majority. UT plus A&M…still not enough votes/pull.
LikeLike
Frank, my bet is that A&M is balking at this deal and searching for an out with OU/OSU.
What’s Texas’ answer to A&M? Bind A&M to Texas even more by bringing in Baylor/Hou. Texas legislature will never let A&M run off on its own while the other 4 go to the Pac-10 (including a new BCS Texas school). And with Texas running the show, A&M would be more tightly bound.
This is just a guess, but this is all about A&M, not about OU/OSU which may have been cracking anyways along with A&M…
LikeLike
It seems to me that it is much too quiet in Norman and College Station. No, “wow we’re going to the P10 with Bevo!” Silence speaks loudly here. Gotta believe UT already knows OU and aTm are gone or have said they may go and this whole P10 is 1) another lifeboat to sweeten a deal for fiefdom continuation or 2) provide the necessary cover for B10 entry. I think the latter (ie the Tech Problem). UT is still very much in play for B10. Not certain if they mind if two ooc games are tied to OU (1/2 a home game in TX!) and a home and home in TX with aTm; both without any conference implications, which in five years is all that matters to advance to NC. Throw in two cupcakes, ie Baylor and UTEP and UT can go to the bank alone rather nicely in B10. It seems to me that 8 conference games is the max if OU and aTm are in SEC.
LikeLike
Like I mentioned above, a package that included UH would be an absolute non-starter for A&M. A&M considers Houston part of it’s territory (NW suburbs about an hour from College Station). This whole deal about adding local schools isn’t directly about money, just indirectly. Texas must have at least one of OU and A&M in the same conference (and they would prefer both) because otherwise, they will have to burn a non-conference home game every other year (i.e. forego about $7 million in gameday revenue) in order to maintain those rivalries. If both schools ended up in different conferences, Texas would have to drop one, and would be torn between dropping one that would get the politicians mad (A&M) and dropping the one that is most important to their bottom line (OU, although the Cotton Bowl expansion actually lessened the importance, by lower the LHF cutoff for OU tickets).
LikeLike
If UT loses $7M every other year, that’s $3.5M a year and peanuts compared to the $20M+/year they would gain by joining the Big10 in TV revenue alone.
LikeLike
@Frank:
I think I just saw the key here:
I’m still at a loss on UT’s true intentions at this point
If even the true king of realignment nerdom (hey, someone else gave you that crown earlier in this thread, not me!) can’t figure out what Texas is doing, doesn’t that mean that Texas is probably negotiating as well as it can? No one can read Texas’ poker face.
LikeLike
My guess is that you’ve got a bunch of legislators trying to help their schools and most of these ideas are DOA.
Texas doesn’t want UH. While they have the potential to be a South Florida (where their President came from), why would any autobid conference take a chance? There are too many other good options right now.
LikeLike
SO the Pac-16 deal is now:
CU
Plus Texas, A&M, Tech, Baylor and NOW U of Houston?
If Okie State is out…so is OU. That adds up actually.
LikeLike
UT might want another “home” game in Houston rather than have only 2500 seats avail for fans at OSU. Maybe they can get the legislature to kick out CU and add UTEP for another “home” game.
LikeLike
UT might want another “home” game in Houston rather than have only 2500 seats avail for fans at OSU.
We already do that OOC with Rice every three years.
The difference is that Texas respects Rice.
LikeLike
[i]The difference is that Texas respects Rice.[/i]
Only in College Bowl.
LikeLike
No, I sincerely think UT thinks very highly of Rice as an academic institution and formerly competitive baseball program. With laugh with the MOB, even when it pokes oh-so-gentle barbs our way.
LikeLike
“we laugh with the MOB…”
LikeLike
“There is no strife, no prejudice, no national conflict in outer space as yet. Its hazards are hostile to us all. Its conquest deserves the best of all mankind, and its opportunity for peaceful cooperation many never come again. But why, some say, the moon? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountain? Why, 35 years ago, fly the Atlantic? Why does Rice play Texas?”
-JFK
LikeLike
Yes! There is no way UH goes anywhere near the P10, or that conference surrenders forever any claim to any kind of academic integrity. My father went to Rice in the 50s, so there is a bias, but for uninitiated, Rice considers itself the Duke/Stanford of the southwest, not without justification.
LikeLike
I wouldn’t place too much authority on that “quote” from Adam. I don’t think he was anywhere near that definitive, I think its been mangled from his report to Rivals and then to Ketchum from Orangebloods “tweet” on what he supposedly said. Adam stated on the CU Rivals board that it was “Very, very, very unlikely to happen”, but that if Baylor made it, it might be in lieu of OSU instead of CU when someone asked him for clarification.
LikeLike
AWWW…that makes more sense.
LikeLike
If you’re Texas, why again would you want the Oklahoma schools in the Pac-16?
— you can schedule Oklahoma OOC, like you did for decades in the SWC.
— no Oklahoma = much easier path to CCG.
— the two Oklahoma schools bring in a small population that could be roughly matched by Utah.
— bringing along 3 other in-state schools gives you enough easy road-trips.
LikeLike
Not to mention a 4 school voting block………..
LikeLike
Or…
UT is trying to show the world publicly that “politics” can’t be appeased in all of this. Kind of a “See we tried to make everyone happy and we couldn’t! The PAC10 just wouldn’t take us all. Guess it’s every man for himself now!”
Perhaps they though all along that the PAC10 would balk at their outlandish request…but the PAC10 didn’t blink.
I still think they’re setting things up politically for UT and aTm to head to the Big 10.
LikeLike
Yet. The Pac 10 hasn’t blinked yet.
LikeLike
One thing I haven’t heard much about is any trepidation a Texas, A&M or any other southern/southwestern potential addition might have about playing in snowy Big Ten conditions. Don’t think it’s a deal breaker with all the loot that’s on the table, but I’m sure someone’s thought about the competitive disadvantage (or at least how it equalizes some of the supposedly existing speed advantages).
LikeLike
Not a factor. Tex has handled Neb in the wind and snow and on the adverse I’ve watched ND whip Tex in 90+ sunshine and humidity. Better teams usually prevail…weather factors both sides.
LikeLike
Agreed. The perceptual correlation between “slow Big Ten”/snowy conditions and “fast” SEC/warm weather is something that’s turned into a recruiting tool even though we don’t get to have bowl games in our native conditions. I’d hope it wouldn’t become even a partial deterrent for some of our targets (either playing in or traveling to). Sometimes perception is reality, but the fact it’s not being mentioned much is a good thing.
LikeLike
a) It seldom snows during Big Ten season, though cold rain does happen.
b) “Intra-pod” games could be set as the last 3 games of the conference season. Texas could play A&M the last game the season and have one away game at either Missouri or Notre Dame the two weeks prior.
LikeLike
True story: I bought an A&M parka when we joined the Big XII, thinking I’d get to use it for trips to Nebraska and Iowa State. It has been 75-80 degrees every time we’ve gone to either place, even in November. I don’t think football weather is a huge concern.
Now, A&M is money conscious, and the idea of flying the baseball and softball teams all over the Midwest for games that may never happen is not very appealing at all.
LikeLike
Now, why would A&M all of a sudden be money-conscious:
A&M is starved for cash because its athletic department fell $16 million into debt and received a loan from the school’s general fund to pay it off, causing a rift between the university and athletics.
http://texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1090747
I don’t think this debt has been discussed too much here, but it is an important factor to keep in mind when we discuss the options for Texas and A&M. Not all Texas schools are rolling in cash, and the need for a cash influx sooner rather than later (LSN!) might be driving some decisions here.
LikeLike
That’s a really interesting point. It would mesh with the speculation on the Texas invites changing, although I’m skeptical of that until we see more smoke.
Either way, A&M may be clamoring for the SEC for the immediate payout aspects of the deal as opposed to a Pac-16 Network that might have start up costs, so that $20M a year deal might not come till 2012…
LikeLike
And it could explain the concern we’ve heard for having to travel to Spokane and Seattle. It’s cheaper to drive the bus to Baton Rouge.
LikeLike
I could see a disagreement among Big 12 South schools on Pac-10 vs. SEC with half wanting to go East and half wanting to go West. Add in the problem of getting Stanford and Cal on board and I still see the Big 12 South to Pac-10 as a huge longshot.
LikeLike
That $16 million dollar deal is really misleading. It has constrained A&M’s budget, but they aren’t bleeding red ink. Several years ago, when Bob Gates (now Sec. of Defense) was President, he asked Byrne what they needed for athletics, and Byrne had some things that he needed to get done, but didn’t have the cash to do it. Gates said the school would loan the AD the money, and the AD could pay it back four years later. Byrne, apparently, hoped they wouldn’t really have to pay it back, but with Gates in Washington, and a lot of internal bickering as a result of the leadershp change, the bean counters finally made the AD start paying down that $16 million. It’s not that big of a deal. Tech has a lot more debt for it’s AD, and UT probably does as well (but with their cash flow, it’s not an issue). Still, I think you can see where A&M might prefer the guaranteed money of the SEC versus the speculative profits of a Pac 10 cable channel.
LikeLike
Snow? GMAFB. Can’t speak for other Big Ten schools, but in its entire history, the University of Illinois has played exactly one non-bowl game after Thanksgiving. And it was last year against Fresno St. in beautiful weather.
For most of the football season, the Big Ten has BETTER football weather than Austin or College Station. A September afternoon game in Austin is not a pleasant experience.
LikeLike
As a 2nd order effect I don’t believe the B12 will be finished. In fact, it may make for a very interesting shell for what remains behind and any other schools that might join.
Let’s take one scenario:
Tex, Neb, Mizz goto B10
aTm goes to SEC
CO goes to Pac10
This leaves Ok, Ok State, Baylor, ISU, KState, Kansas, and TT remaining.
OK will want to go with OK State but that may not be a possibility if aTm breaks up with UT then it becomes a much tougher pill to swallow in OKC if the SEC came calling for OU and not OK State.
So now you are down to 6 schools out of the 12, but still a quorum and still an automatic bid. Again, to be a conference gotta have 6 schools playing each other for 5 years. Now you have an open shopping list for anyone looking to break into the big boys league. (Yes B12 goes down severely in power, but the auto bid deal was with the conference not the individual schools.) Does TCU, BYU, Utah, Air Force, Boise State, and a school to be named later turn down an open invitation? People have talked about the dregs of B12 going to MWC, but why go there when you go to the B12 and have all the benefits you have been working hard to get already.
LikeLike
Exit money stays in the B12.
LikeLike
9 votes to dissolve and not pay the out fee.
Right now it looks like 9-3 vote if Baylor goes to the Pac-16 and OU and Ok St goes to the SEC
LikeLike
You got a solid 3 block right now that wouldn’t vote for NOT dissolving (ISU, Kansas, K-State). So you have to get CO, Baylor, T-Tech, OK, and OK State homes.
To Pac-10: UT, aTm, CO, Baylor, UH, T-Tech
To SEC: OK and OK State to SEC
Does the SEC really want OK and OK State that badly? It doesn’t really expand their footprint into Texas just into OKC media market. I would see SEC taking a stab at aTm and OK, but doubling up on OKs doesn’t make a lot of economic sense for SEC.
That leads you with an 8-4 vote still. I think for B12 to breakup somebody will paying.
LikeLike
@Daniel “Redhawk” Dayton
I think it is actually 7 out of 12, 6 out of 11 if someone leaves first. The Big 12 is a Delaware Corporation. Delaware corporate law states that unless provided for otherwise in the bylaws, dissolution is a simple majority.
LikeLike
Despite the talk of Colorado going first, they simply cannot afford to pay the fee if there is a fee. They require the Big 12 to vanish for any move. There is no “magic pot of money” to pay the bills. They are a public university in a cash strapped state faced with an upcoming disaster of a football season that will result in further losses financially. Not to mention a potential $2mil buyout if they try and find a good coach after next season. I suspect the Regent meeting tonight was to see if there is anyway around the exit fee and to discuss the ramifications of any potential “deadline” the rest of the Big 12 may have put out there.
LikeLike
I’m not sure I follow why the SEC getting aTm would make it a tougher pill to swallow in getting Ok and OK ST if the SEC offered both teams. I think the OK state politicians would be more than happy that both of their schools would be going to the SEC. Plus with aTm going to the SEC, OK doesn’t have to worry about getting locked out of the state of Texas like Arkansas has. They’d still be playing their every year. I think if either aTm or OK goes to the SEC, it makes it a whole lot easier for the other to go.
LikeLike
Was trying to say if UT and aTm breakup it would be harder to justify in Oklahoma City not to break up the two schools and allow Oklahoma to go and OK State to find their way.
I think the SEC would have a real tough time swallowing aTm, OU, and OK State. I’m sure they would sign off on OU and aTm tomorrow, but the addition of OK State would give them a great deal of pause.
LikeLike
I doubt it. If it meant getting into the Texas market with aTm and getting a power like OU (and to some extent getting into the OKC market as well), I think they would gladly take OK ST. It’s not like they would have to worry about OK ST’s academics or anything.
LikeLike
aTm gets you into the Texas market (Dallas, Houston TV sets). Without a doubt SEC roles the red carpet out for them. OU would be more of an target of opportunity, buying an asset on the cheap. OKC helps you somewhat in TV counts but pulling UNC out of the ACC gets you the similar TV sets in North Carolina (Charlotte, RDU) without having to take two pulling from the same region. OU’s options are severely limited if they have to go as a package deal with OSU, which could mean while they are natural rivals and they want to stay together ultimately they may have to split.
LikeLike
As a former Iowan, Iowa cannot support 2 D-1A football programs. Population, economics, etc. is a big driver in this – that is why outside of Texas and maybe Oklahoma, the rest of middle America’s schools are being divided. Neb. has earned their rep. and resume, and the school has benefitted, that is why they are a player here. Similarly, who really knows what ND’s future is. They may decide on purpose to go the way of Navy and Army. Doubt it but then again, the academies did (knowing that they are service to America/federal institutions, not football universities that still need to pay bills privately).
LikeLike
As cold and calculating as it might be, this expansion will upgrade the value of Nebraska and Iowa and perhaps Minnesota by making them the only D1 players for hundreds of miles…
LikeLike
So if the P16 adds CO, OU, TT, TX, aTm, and UH, what’s with all the drama queening? You get the CO all of us want, while OU is an academic stretch but the primary state school and a ratings and SOS winner. TX and aTm are no-brainers. TT is the biggest academic stretch while UH has lousy fan support, but they both have heavy state backing and Prop 4 behind them pushing for Tier One status ASAP. No private schools, all flagships of their systems. If OU and/or aTm bolts you can probably still get Utah and/or KS. But if there aren’t enough Texas schools, the P10 doesn’t get TX.
Not saying UH to the P16 will happen, or is even likely, but it is possible and more in line with the rest of the P16 schools than Baylor. Can’t blame any school on the outside or threatened with trying to secure the best future possible.
BTW, UH’s chancellor was also the USF chancellor when the Big East added them. Sure, that involved some lucky timing. Sorta like now…
LikeLike
What’s the lowdown on OSU getting dropped, how would it impact OU’s place? Could the SEC not sweep in for both?
LikeLike
Nobody has been dropped, just a bunch of hypotheticals.
Sausage making takes awhile.
LikeLike
There are enough systems in Texas to make this work..
Texas System (flagship Austin)
A&M System (flagship College Station)
Texas Tech System (flagship Lubbock)
UH System (flagship Houston)
Texas State System (flagship San Marcos)
North Texas System (flagship Denton)
There are your six PAC additions.
LikeLike
From the Houston Chronicle’s UH blogger:
http://blogs.chron.com/cougars/2010/06/ok_coog_fans_lets_try_to_make_1.html
The MWC, which is trying mightily to close in on automatic-qualifier status in the Bowl Championship Series, appears to be the most attractive (and realistic) landing place for UH.
Those who think UH has a chance of landing in the SEC any time soon need to put down the crackpipe. [HH: No mention of the Pac 10. So would that be two crack pipes?]
The harsh truth is that historically, UH has been about the worst kind of league member to have. UH has proven itself capable again and again of competitive success that hasn’t translated into commensurate fan support. What is in it for a league to add a school that can take championships away from the existing members without adding to the coffers?
Really, UH is the anti-Texas A&M when it comes to being a league member. The Aggies are a conference’s dream: They bring money, they bring support, and they don’t win nearly as much as you’d expect given the resources at their disposal. Win, win, for the other league members.
If I were the MWC, the only way I’d invite UH into the league would be on a provisional basis.
LikeLike
(space reserved for someone to chime in and say that this reporter is an idiot and doesn’t know what he’s talking about)
LikeLike
No, actually he’s one of the few decent ones they have. He’s giving the delusion Coog fans (and we both know they are numerous as mosquitoes, and just as annoying) a reality check. No one is arguing that UH is anything other than a long shot that might get lucky via circumstances.
I just find it humorous that another thing that you claimed could never ever happen once again did: UH actually under consideration by the P10.
FWIW, tomorrow Senator Whitmire meets with Powers and gets to kiss the ring. Might just get them on the standby list (until TX joins ND in the B10+.) I’d say it all hinges on aTm now. Which has Gene Stalling on their BOR.
LikeLike
Accepting the phone call of a university chancellor is not the same thing as being under consideration.
LikeLike
Except that reporter got 3 P10 sources confirming UH is under consideration.
LikeLike
Because reporters with anonymous sourcing have consistently proven to be correct time and time again as this has all unfolded.
Let me put it in a language you can understand.
That station had me on as a realignment expert last weekend. Me. Are you going to trust the realignment-related reporting of a station that had me on as a realignment expert?
LikeLike
@HH, I’d put you on ahead of anyone from the so-called National Media….but sadly I don’t have my own station. Nobody would watch/listen! Heck, maybe I do have a station, I just don’t know it.
LikeLike
They either eat at 7-11 or rob one…
LikeLike
I was going to ask that about your wife.
I kid! I kid!
LikeLike
lol. She was very atypical there. Her dad taught in the Physics department, she lived on-campus, and she got a Fine Arts degree.
LikeLike
That’s it, I can’t wait any longer. I, with this post, officially invite the following schools to join THE BIG 16
Michigan
Ohio State
Penn State
North Carolina
Duke
Miami
Florida
Texas
Nebraska
Colorado
Georgia
Georgia Tech
USC
UCLA
Cal
Stanford
Syracuse
Rutgers
Oregon
Arizona
Northwestern
Vandy
Maryland
I Know, it’s not 16 schools, but in honor of the former Big 10(name) and former SEC (recruiting philosophy) I feel it’s appropriate. This is a powerhouse conference with National appeal, mostly high academic standards, and some kick-ass road trip options. I leave it to our board experts to create the Pods we need. I’ll also state this is a phased expansion, meaning this all sets up stage 2, which I can’t reveal until someone creates a Blog to discuss it. Thank you for reading, you may not have that 30 Seconds back.
LikeLike
The Omaha-World Herald is reporting Nebraska to the Big 10 as soon as Friday. http://ow.ly/1VZ4C
“An executive at a Big 12 school relayed to The World-Herald on Tuesday that he expects Nebraska to become a member of the Big Ten as early as Friday. “
LikeLike
So, by now, hasn’t every day of the week this week been claimed at some point or another? 🙂
LikeLike
This is the first time I’ve seen a legitimate media outlet report it.
LikeLike
Seems like the first words from the NE camp and not of Austin. Let’s see, Austin camp started it and the OWH is going to finish it. Seems like I’ve seen that thread before.
LikeLike
I still think, technically, they have to place this on the Board of Regents agenda for Friday. That has to be done at least 24 hours before the meeting which begins at 1:00 pm. That means anytime between now and 1:00 pm we could word on this.
LikeLike
If/when they do come how big will their first conference game be?
I vote for a road game at Wisconsin.
LikeLike
Unless ND was on, I’d watch that. Great choice for Game 1. I’d also think that their season ender should be against Iowa. Unless Iowa’s got a problem with that. That would be cool.
LikeLike
Agree on UNL-Iowa. For their first conference game though, I think it should be at home. Vs. Michigan would be a good choice. Bonus for them that it’d be a sure win. 😉
LikeLike
I agree on Iowa as the season ending game.
I thought about having their first game be a home game, but think there can be 2 big “firsts” for them.
1st game & 1st home game. Wrap them together and you miss out. Chose Wisconsin cause it’s driving distance for their fans (otherwise I’d choose PSU), great location/stadium/fans, not a pushover like Illinois or Northwestern (so you gain more national attention), and a team that may be in their division/pod. That would add to the atmosphere even more. Let’s get those new rivalry’s started off early and on the right foot. Imagine Wisconsin being able to rib Nebraska on being the first conference opponent to beat them. If that were to happen.
LikeLike
I hesitate asking NU anything :), but if NU does go to the Big 10, would there be any desire to continue that season-ending quasi-rivalry with CU? I would think neither side cares too much anymore.
LikeLike
No real point in continuing it.There have been Nebraska fans saying they’d want the OU game started back up on a yearly basis but honestly it would be pointless.
LikeLike
@Hopkins Horn,
Absolutely no desire at all. I can see scheduling periodic or even rotating on a regular basis old Big 8 teams, but I don’t think there will be any annual match ups against any of those schools.
LikeLike
NU-OU doesn’t matter if it makes no sense for the winning team’s fans to throw oranges on the field.
LikeLike
Zero desire to continue playing CU. Dealing with their fans in Boulder is a nightmare. The entire student section was ejected in 2005.
There’s not much desire to start up again with OU, either. That rivalry died when the Big12 began.
LikeLike
If/When we go to the Big 10 we have to focus on Big 10 teams, not old foes.
Focusing on(and building rivalries with) Iowa, Wisconsin, Missouri(Maybe), Minnesota, etc… should be #1 on the agenda.
LikeLike
“There’s not much desire to start up again with OU, either. That rivalry died when the Big12 began.”
That’s kinda sad. That was one of the great ones.
LikeLike
NU and CU fans can’t stand each other. It’s flat out ugly. I’ve seen evidence of poor behavior from both sides equally. Never understood why NU fans had such a reputation for being classy based on observing them at CU games, but I think it’s specifically the reaction to the CU fans also treating NU fans quite poorly. It’s really a simple case of not liking each other at all. I doubt they’d ever play another game against each other.
I will caution Big 10 fans though, get ready for A LOT of red on your campus and in your stadium on game day. It’s cool if you are a NU supporter, not so cool to see as a home fan when NU comes to town.
LikeLike
I trust wherever NU plays its first B10 game will be a “home” game, especially if it is at ND.
LikeLike
@loki
It is sad. In the 70s and 80s grade school kids would doodle schedules circling the Sooners. OU fans were also the nicest visiting fans NU had during the Switzer years. From my experience, that’s not true any more.
The lack of a true division rival in the Big12 left Most Husker fans a bit restless. Some younger fans felt CU was a rival, but older fans didn’t connect.
LikeLike
@Husker Al
I often think that the B12 should have had a cross-division protected rivalry, like the SEC. But it seems like the NU/OU rivalry was the only one that had a relevant one. ISU, KU, KSU, CU, MU, just didn’t care about the south. OSU didn’t care about the north. A pity.
LikeLike
@loki
You are right. A protected rivalry for OU/NU doesn’t make much sense when there aren’t compelling match-ups among the other members. There was virtually no history between the SWC schools and the Big8 schools at the formation of the Big12.
It was reported last week that in 1996 OU ended the rivalry because they already had to play Texas. That report might have ended any chance at a renewed rivalry for good.
LikeLike
@ several- When the Big 12 formed, Nebraska proposed playing OU every year, and the 2 “off” years the game would count as an OOC game. OU at the time was down, and had texas and now A&M who was strong as in conference games, so OU passed.
OU and Nebraska is still a favorite rivalry. The Nebraska fans are the best. Shockingly hospitable, respectful, and knowledgeable.
I think most OU fans would say that NU is our brother from a different mother.
@Hopkins Horns- If the OU/NU game continued, it would still make perfect sense to throw Oranges on the field.
LikeLike
When the Big 12 formed, Nebraska proposed playing OU every year, and the 2 “off” years the game would count as an OOC game. OU at the time was down, and had texas and now A&M who was strong as in conference games, so OU passed.
Of course most NE fans blame TX for OU’s decision. (I’m not criticizing OU, they had to decide what’s best to them.)
LikeLike
@playoffs now
I don’t think that’s true.
Most Nebraska fans understand that OU’s rivalry with Texas was behind their decision. I haven’t met anyone that feels Texas actively told OU to stop playing NU every year.
LikeLike
I would like to see Nebraska play a home game vs Minnesota..that way I can say I was at Nebraskas first Big 10 game.
But I’d like to see Nebraska end the season the day after thanksgiving vs Iowa.
LikeLike
With this collegiate chess game frazzling my mind, how about a simple game of checkers….. Lebron James to Chicago so Izzo can stay at Michigan State.
LikeLike
The Pac10 really did UT a big favor making it known to the whole world who has control of this invite list.
LikeLike
Izzo’s already come out stating he won’t consider coaching in the NBA until he wins another championship.
LikeLike
Package a 3rd Texas institution in the Big XII deal… Rice.
Very hard to argue in the Texas senate that 3 Texas teams to the Pac 10 for less money is the way for Texas to go.
Rice is very Northwestern-like. Very highly respected academically but not necessarily athletically, located in a huge metropolitan area rife with fresh recruiting opportunities. Got to be a better get if it lands Texas and A&M as well.
LikeLike
I mean Big 10
LikeLike
We’ve been through this eight times in the last month. Do we really need to do it again? A program that falls below the MINIMUM average attendance to remain in FBS? Yes, a top 100 team, but there are only 120 in D1A? A school who had as many basketball wins as football a couple of years ago (3)? A team Texas fears in baseball?
LikeLike
Ha!
LikeLike
I got tired of the ‘Texas has more students than we have living alumni’ stat and needed to try new material.
😉
LikeLike
Well, Rice supporters now have plenty of time to work on that new material after last weekend.
Come on, wish us well against the Frogs, You know you want to.
LikeLike
Go Christians! Beat the Lions!
LikeLike
But isn’t it about academics?
LikeLike
You’ll like the fact that I was dating a Rice girl the year you won it all, and beat us twice in the process. That was fun.
Of course, I had to explain what was going on so that she could appropriately mock me. 🙂
LikeLike
If it was all about academics we would join the UAA and that would be D1A.
LikeLike
“You’ll like the fact that I was dating a Rice girl the year you won it all, and beat us twice in the process. That was fun.”
I’ve seen enough Rice girls to marry a UH girl…
LikeLike
I thought UAA was DIII? JHU was in it when I was a student but left several years ago.
LikeLike
“I thought UAA was DIII? ”
That was my point. Do I need to pull out my Aggie crayons?
LikeLike
(1) YOU said “D1A” above. Look! See?!? Stick that crayon where the sun don’t shine.
(2) Both Rice girls I dated along the way were quite cute, but ultimately a bit nutty. Even crazy. I think one wound up being on lithium, or something like that. Things I wished I had known on the first date. 🙂
LikeLike
HH, you need to adjust your sarcasm meter…
#
jtower says: But isn’t it about academics?
#
loki_the_bubba says: If it was all about academics we would join the UAA and that would be D1A.
#
Hopkins Horn says: I thought UAA was DIII?
#
loki_the_bubba says: That was my point. Do I need to pull out my Aggie crayons?
#
Hopkins Horn says: YOU said “D1A” above.
LikeLike
In that case, please, pull out the Aggie crayons (they come in only one color, right?), ’cause something’s going right over my head.
(searching for a diversionary tactic)
Baseball!!!
LikeLike
“Baseball!!!”
Trivia: One team has won a conference title for fifteen consecutive years across three conferences, including the last tournament of a dying conference killed by the greedy residents of Austin. Name that school.
LikeLike
Congratulations on besting Marshall yet again.
LikeLike
Good to know that 4 tournaments in 15 years is good enough for Texas.
LikeLike
I’ll take the 2:1 conference to national title ratio 🙂
LikeLike
Makes plenty of sense if it changes the votes in the Texas Lege and allows UT and A&M to get rid of the Tech Problem and go to the Big 10.
LikeLike
Reviewing the news tonight, big news out of Lincoln, total silence from RU and Missouri. So is Neb being invited alone as the 12th team (for now)? Hard for me to believe, and quite a slap to RU and Mo. if it plays out that way………
If it does work out that way, I hope its not because the BT is pandering to ND ot TX…..
LikeLike
I actually went to the Rutgers website to try to educate myself as to why so many people think the Scarlets could bring the NY/NJ market and now I’ve found my answer. TONY SOPRANO is a graduate. (James Gandolfini Class of 83′) Now I understand.
LikeLike
In addition to Nebraska, Missouri is meeting Thursday and Friday also. I interpret this as a sign that Missouri is going to join as well.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5265631&campaign=rss&source=NCFHeadlines
LikeLike
Both were regularly scheduled meetings for the Nebraska Regents and the Missouri Curators.
LikeLike
There has been total silence from Rutgers (unlike NE and Mizz) throughout this whole process, despite the Big East treating them like crap with the Tagliabue comments.
I would expect that the first comment you will hear from someone in their administration is after they definitely get an invite, and if they don’t you will hear nothing but “We are committed to the Big East”
LikeLike
The only thing you are going to hear from them right now is that they ranked #1 in APR (Academic Progress Rate) for D1 FBS Universities. That’s 3 years in a row in top 10 and finally a #1 ranking. See Wall Street Journal article here. NCAA full release later today.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703302604575294682205167548.html?mod=googlenews_ws
Since their bowl victory (4 in a row, 4-1 in last 5 years), this offseason they just kept their head down and focused on putting the finishing touches on their stadium expansion, 2 players picked in 1st round of the NFL draft, signing an excellent 2010 recruiting class, and keeping their mouths shut. All the Big Ten stuff is out of their control.
LikeLike
Make your move while you are hot.
LikeLike
More academic rankings, this time TARU:
Click to access research2009.pdf
UH finished in the top 50 in 3 of 9 categories, putting them in a peer group with CT, OR, WSU, CSU, and UMass. Just behind MO and ISU, that had 4, and ahead of NE, LSU, Clem, and NM with 2, and OR St with 1. Most of those had higher research spending, but UH still finished ahead of OR in most measures. OU, OK St, and TT didn’t rank high enough to be listed.
LikeLike
*cough* University of Utah tied for #31 overall with CU. *cough*
FYI – according to TARU, UH is on the top 50 list of public research universities. Public and private combined, UH isn’t on the list. Did I mention Utah is #31 overall, public and private, according to TARU? I think I forgot to mention that. Oh, and #80 in the world on ARWU, eight places ahead of Tx A&M.
The only thing UU isn’t ranked well on is USNWR, which we all know is a joke and more subjective than a beauty contest judged by the contestant’s mothers.
LikeLike
Sounds like NEBRASKA is a GO!
David Ubben is reporting that the Big 12 athletic directors have been instructed to be ready by week’s end for probable Big 12 changes. He also claims that Osborne’s comments are consistent with the report.
LikeLike
Oh, I call 10:02 PM Pacific on the 8th for when we’ll get to 1,000 comments on this thread.
LikeLike
It is amazing Frank and nobody else for that matter, mention the SEC.
IF the college football/athletics world unravels like we say it might, the SEC is not just going to sit there and watch the PAC 10 swoop deep into the state of Texas and Oklahoma and raid great football schools.
My ass.
How can we pretend for 5 seconds the Pac 16 and Big 14 or 16 will be build before the nations eyes without the SEC rolling out of bed and crushing the fantasy that is the Pac 16.
LikeLike
Clearly, you haven’t read much of this thread.
I’ve pointed out numerous times as have others, that there are 3 scenarios where the Big Ten has a shot at Texas.
1) Stanford rejects the Pac-16 on academic concerns over Tech/OSU.
2) SEC crashes the party because OU/OSU/A&M are its best expansion candidates if the ACC schools are not interested over academic concerns.
3) Big Ten goes after A&M.
Those are the three scenarios, a lot of us have spoken of #2 as being the best shot if Stanford accepts the Pac-16.
LikeLike
Morning Folks..
My two worries at bedtime were..
a) will they go ahead and seal the deal on Nebraska?
b) are we missing added money in the SEC?
If an invite is going to Nebraska by friday (and not suffering over the weekend) that part is done and I am happy..
the b) is where I am having some concern…
yesterday I asked a question about secondary revenue in the SEC..
[my question followed by alan’s response]
duffman says:
June 8, 2010 at 7:26 pm
Alan,
glad to see you, I had a question on secondary pay outs for TV revenue in the SEC. Folks keep arguing no way for texas, but if Florida added 10 Million last year to its 17, that is 27 million annual and that is nothing to sneeze about. makes the SEC with a big hold card that the Pac 10 and Big 10 can not match.
Reply
Alan from Baton Rouge says:
June 8, 2010 at 11:16 pm
Duff – the LSN is not a deal breaker in the SEC.
Regarding the SEC TV contracts for football, CBS gets the 1st pick. CBS also get 2 doubleheader Saturdays and the SEC CG. ESPN or ESPN2 get pick numbers 2 and 3. The ESPN produced and nationally syndicated SEC Network gets pick 4. ESPNU & ESPN Classic get games too.
For example, LSU’s 2009 football schedule included 4 CBS games, 2 ESPN games, 1 ESPN2 game, 1 SECN game, 3 ESPNU games, and 1 pay-per-view game against my law school – Tulane.
The CBS games are national, not regional, not with a reverse mirror, but national. The SECN is syndicated throughout the SEC footprint, as well as in over 15 states outside the footprint. The SECN partners are generally broadcast channels or basic cable channels.
Getting back to LSU as an example, since I’m most familiar with them. LSU has a multi-year deal with Cox Cable (the largest cable broadcaster in Louisiana) to show football re-broadcasts – a very big deal in the South – men’s and women’s basketball games not picked up by CBS, ESPN, or the SECN, baseball, softball, volleyball and and gymnastics. These games are also broadcast on Cox affiliates in Arkansas and Florida. LSU’s contract is believed to be in excess of $5mm per year.
LSU has had a heck of a run in all sports over the last decade and is very popular with advertisers, but the Houston market has more TVs than the entire state of Louisiana.
So if LSU can make an extra $5mm with its Cox deal, and UF can make $10mm with its Sunshine deal, can’t UTx make at least $10mm with its own TV network in Texas?
Reply
duffman says:
June 9, 2010 at 4:48 am
Alan,
Thank you for clearing that up!
Many of the bloggers here keep saying NO way to teams like Texas and UNC, but Slive seems pretty smart and as quiet as he has been is a bit unsettling from a Big 10 perspective. It sounds like my worry of added money to Texas / A&M / UNC / UVA is not totally out of the world.
[back to my thinking]
Everybody says NO WAY to Texas to the SEC!
but I see two problems..
a) this is a chess game and Silve and Delaney control the board {ND, TX, and any conference NOT the Big 10 or SEC are the peices} going forward this is how I will be looking at this.
b) if the SEC has secondary deals as Alan has explained, I no longer saying that Texas to the SEC is not possible in any way shape or form. If such a deal can add 10 + million a year to Texas and maybe 5 + million a year to A & M this has to be considered..
Texas in SEC = 17M + 12M = 29M
A&M in SEC = 17M + 5M = 22M
I am not saying this will happen, but I do think it makes the SEC a viable alternative and might be why Slive has been so quiet (knowing he has a bag of $$ at the end of the rainbow for Texas and A&M)
a) Texas and A&M were once part of what is now the SEC
b) Texas would find a nice home in baseball and women’s basketball
c) Texas will stay in a warm climate year round (sports outside of football).
d) IMG represents Texas, The Red River Rivalry, Florida, Tennessee, and Kentucky.
e) if this turns political (which negates academics) the average Texan may feel happiest in the SEC over the Big 10 or Pac 10. I am not saying HH or other folks on this board, I am talking the Texas equivalent of the Wal Mart wolverines.
f) Texas would get a platform in the SEC for the LSN, which it will not get in the Big 10 or Pac 10! If much of this had to do with Texas getting a form of the LSN, the SEC offers this option. It would also open up the SEC for cross content on the LSN!
I will ask Alan or Patrick what kind of value this adds .. as baseball and women’s basketball type sports would find compelling matchups [UT vs UT in the Big Orange Basketball Blowout] like a double header with the schools women’s and men’s basketball. With these type of things the added revenue would accrue directly to the bottom line of LSN, and not the national media. These type of things might not appeal to a national audience, but would to Texas and Tennessee. Again IMG represents BOTH schools so they would be the winner at that level.
Just my thoughts and concerns this AM!
LikeLike
ps..
this also allows the SEC to reopen their ESPN contract if there is a clause for expansion as adding 4 teams (including Texas and A&M would qualify) and with two of the BIG 4 [CA,TX,NY,FL] and being the most likely benefit of college football (we keep talking about how big college football is in the south).
ESPN gets the block to FOX and an SEC with texas would have to add to the value of the contract not reduce it. Nebraska is my warm comfy blanket, but Texas is quickly becoming the nightmare!
LikeLike
Nice read.
LSN is Silve’s ace in the hole for sure. UT has already dumped some money into that project and would more than likely want to start it. I have read different numbers on the sunshine deal. From 5-7 million now 10 mill. but either way it is serious supplemental income, with the LSN providing huge potential.
One thing is Silve has been quiet, and that has to be a little disturbing for the Pac and Big.
Mack has lots of pull and we think we know where he stands on this.
IMO UT is the leader of the largest dysfunctional family picnic (Big 12) and I think many of those teams want to get out from their shadow, unless they can be seen as equals.
I would not be surprised if OU, aTm, try to get a deal before UT so they have a soft place to land, which could very well be the SEC. and than UT will have a big decision to make.
LikeLike
i pray that texas has that decision to make. about time we had an easy one.
LikeLike
So these are seriously your arguments:
(1) Texas might move to the SEC because of a long-forgotten, century-old conference affiliation?
(2) Texas might move to the SEC because it would supposedly provide a better home for women’s basketball? (No offense, women’s basketball fans.)
(3) Texas might move to the SEC because politics negates academics?
(4) Texas might move to the SEC because it would be more appealing to the t-shirt fans who never attended the school?
(facepalm)
LikeLike
HH,
actually d) and f) are what really bothers me!
again we are just armchair quarterbacks, and in the end we will have no real say it what actually happens. my concern is that you keep pushing a “perfect” world, while I keep trying to add in the realities of an “imperfect” world.
I personally would be pro ND and on paper it looks like a deal that just can not miss! However, as was posted yesterday what looks great on paper does not mean it gets translated to real life. On paper Bill Clinton looked like a 99 -1 long shot at Oaklawn when that election started. A decade later you had a 2 term president!
I personally am feeling that either ND or Texas will wind up in divorce court no matter who they marry. On paper they both look like major home runs for the B 10, but the more I read here the less I think they are. This is my opinion and not the only view out there. In fact Nebraska may be the best fit for the Big 10 in all of this….
a) THEY WANT THE BIG 10 WITH NO STRINGS OR EGOS!!
b) they fit well on paper
c) they probably fit best in the real world
Silve being so quiet is setting off alarm bells..
It is not the thing you see that usually stops you, it is the thing you do not see. I have no problems with your thoughts in a “perfect” world about Texas, I just know we do not live in such a world and no matter what we argue here I will bet a dime to a dougnut that when this all ends it will hinge on a most “imperfect” action that causes this thing to end in a way the majority of folks never saw comming.
Delany and Slive are well paid to protect the interest of the schools they represent. We know the Pac 10 plan, and we have a pretty good idea of the Big 10 plan. We have no clue what the SEC plan is!?!?
LikeLike
slive is quiet because he doesn’t have any cards.
LikeLike
Slive is trying to figure out how to crash the party.
He’s probably sent feelers out to targets like FSU/GTech/Miami/Clemson about SEC expansion.
If the news isn’t that good from that, he’s going to have to turn the SEC’s guns towards the Pac-16 situation.
If the SEC can’t wrestle OU/OSU and possibly A&M (maybe Tech as a second play in Texas if UT is totally unwilling), then the SEC is almost certainly foreclosed a western expansion and its prospects for getting to 16 include a lot less than marquee teams other than possibly Pitt/WVU if they want to start moving northeast…
So Slive is figuring out his options. The Big Ten if it really wants Texas has to hope that he swoops into the Pac-16 situation and takes OU/OSU/A&M/Tech, but we don’t know…
Even at attempt at A&M/OU/OSU might be enough to kill the Pac-16 idea, so the Big Ten most likely has to set the dominoes in motion and wait.
LikeLike
The SEC has the same problem poaching ACC school as they do with UT–academics. The schools in the ACC like being in a conference with UNC, UVA, and Duke. It increases their prestige.
Maybe Clemson doesn’t care, but GT and the U certainly do and FSU probably does. But I don’t think the SEC would be all that excited about poaching Clemson.
The ACC is a lot stronger than people think. I’m betting they are more likely to poach schools than they are to lose them.
LikeLike
Don’t misinterpret NU based on the NU fans. The NU, KU, KSU, UM fans complained more back in the 90s when the B12 North was carrying the South competitively. You never hear Pearlman talk like the fans. This is about money. The frustration from the B12 administration is 1) badmouthing the rest of the conference-MO governor, Osborne-but he has changed his tone some; 2) having everyone else hanging for 12-18 months while B12 has a TV contract to negotiate.
NU recruits nationally and the B10 would probably be a great thing for NU financially and academically and wouldn’t hurt competitively. Not so sure about Missouri competitively who needs TX recruits.
I beginning to wonder if the conspiracy theorists are right about Delany. The 12-18 month announcement has made the ACC deal look spectacularly well managed. Everything is chaotic (fun and interesting too-maybe Delaney is just one of those people who thrives on chaos!). Putting your finish date BEYOND the time when the P10 and B12 need to renegotiate their TV deals and cutting off Iowa State geographically is not exactly a considerate, altruistic approach.
The B10 tribe seems intent on wiping out some other tribes and carrying off their goods and women.
LikeLike
I really do disagree.
The 12-18 month timeline was a perfectly placed timeline to do due diligence on all prospective additions, allow plenty of time for swap over, but still didn’t bring them in so soon the per school payout would drop through the floor before a new tv deal was finished.
Meanwhile it allowed the conferences who had schools taken time to find replacements and get them in place before their tv contracts came due. The only conference that could have possible been effected was the Pac and it was highly unlikely they were going to lose a school.
I mean who knew the Big12 would completely implode because Mizzou was asked about their interest in the BigTen? Did anyone really think (at the beginning) Nebraska would be in play? Even Frank never called the Big12 South going to the Pac.
Fact is the BigTen did not want, nor did it achieve, the same image the ACC got in its round of expansion.
The ACC did things in the dark, had the schools in without any warning, and completey took all by surprise.
The BigTen, by comparison, was up front and in the open.
LikeLike
Just had an interesting thought. If the Big 12 implodes by next Friday, what happens to the bowl games and bowl tie-ins?
I assume there is plenty of time to sort it all out, but the Big 12 just committed to the Yankee Bowl or whatever. Are we going to end up with bowl games with Big 10 team #11 vs. Pac 10 team #11? Riveting TV there.
Also… how does this impact qualification for bowl games? Are combining teams into power conferences going to result in more 5-7 teams? Will the rules change to allowing 5-win teams into bowls?
None of this impacts whether expansion will take place, but just something to also think about as additional changes the landscape occur.
LikeLike
eBay auction.
LikeLike
As an example, if the Big 10 goes to 16 teams, isn’t it going to have to require 9 conference games? 7 intra-division and 2 OOD?
With 8 games, you end up with 1 OOD game. That means Nebraska-Penn St. would happen once every 8 years. And if you start talking about protected rivalries?
So, now you have 3 OOC conference games and 9 conference games. How are Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, and Rutgers going to get the three conference wins necessary to be bowl eligible without pulling some upsets?
LikeLike
@ezdozen – I’m fairly certain that the Big Ten would employ a pod system as opposed to 2 permanent divisions. This could allow for 9 conference games with everyone playing each other at least 2 out 4 years if you have 2 divisions that always are opposite of each other. Or, you could have 8 conference games where the pods rotate every year similar to the NFL, which means you play OOD schools once every 3 years, plus one permanent OOD protected rival.
The Pac-10 proposal on the table is different because it naturally divides into 2 geographic divisions where you’re not giving up any history whatsoever between them except for moving the Arizona schools to the east (who are the most recent additions to the Pac-10, anyway). It’s really 2 separate conferences merged under one banner.
LikeLike
Like the rotating pods better… at least you’re playing everyone every other year. helps with unity
LikeLike
Frank, here’s how you could do an 8-game conference schedule with four pods. This scenario assumes the five newcomers are Nebraska, Notre Dame, Rutgers, Maryland and Virginia:
East: Maryland, Penn State, Rutgers, Virginia
Central: Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State
Midwest: Illinois, Indiana, Northwestern, Purdue
West: Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Every team plays an eight-game football schedule with four permanent rivals — the three in its group plus one designated game. So you would preserve such rivalries as Notre Dame-Purdue, Michigan-Minnesota, Ohio State-Illinois, Penn State-Michigan State, for example.
Pods would rotate in alignments over a three-year span, and in the year your group plays the group your designated rival is in, you would get a substitute game from one of the other two groups. So, for example, the year the Central was aligned with the Midwest, Ohio State could have Nebraska (from the West) on the schedule instead of a second game with Illinois.
Under this plan, all teams would face each other at least once every three years, and the “subsitute” rival (e.g. Ohio State-Nebraska in the scenario above) twice every three years.
For men’s and women’s basketball, you play home-and-home within your group, once against the 12 other teams, for a total of 18 games.
LikeLike
Another advantage: You certainly aren’t going to get Notre Dame under a 9-game conference schedule. With this, you might — and everyone in the league would have ND visiting at least once every six years.
LikeLike
Frank;
What do you do if pods don’t work? They didn’t work in the WAC. That was the trigger that broke the conference. They tried to re-align into East/West and that is when the Mountain 5 bolted.
LikeLike
NO!
3 things broke the WAC: Money, money, and money!
The networks refused to pay for the extra schools so it was a huge money loser.
People need to stop saying anything but money broke up that conference.
LikeLike
It broke up when CSU/Wyo/AF were about to be split up and they were concerned about having lost every year games with BYU/Utah. In the end that is money, but they split w/o worrying about TV deals. They wanted their rivalries. If they were making more money they still would have soon split after the divisional realignment. If you remember all the comments at the time, it was all about rivalries (which do translate into cash, but not directly).
LikeLike
Personally I like the idea of have 4 pods x 4 teams. Play each other pod on sequential years for a total of 7 games.
For the 8th game there would be a “designated rival” for each school in each of the other pods. If “pod north” was playing “pod east” in a particular year, then the 8th game would be the designated rival from the “pod south”. Basically the rival game would be from the pod your pod will be playing next year (or previous year, it matters not).
This allows all teams to play every 3 years, and creates a series of 3 “2 year on, 1 year off” rivals out of pod.
LikeLike
Missouri and Rutgers should go over .500 against Purdue, Minnesota, NW, Michigan State, Indiana, Illinois. .500 against Iowa, Wisconsin, Notre Dame, TAM, and under .500 against OSU, PSU, Nebraska, Texas, and maybe Michigan if RR rights the ship. I think they will become a solid Tier 2, sometimes Tier 3 performer. Annual Bowl eligible with solid conference record and good OOC record.
LikeLike
Michigan State and Illinois aren’t exactly the patsies you make them out to be. Rutgers wouldn’t beat either this year.
LikeLike
Yeah Rick I think you have your estimates all wrong. Indiana is the only real consistent 3rd division dweller among the group. We all know that football is merely a conduit to basketball at Indi. Depending on whether Purdue has a quarterback and a little defense they are a solid 2nd division team. Minnesota is a solid 2n division team. Michigan state and Illinois are all over the place but I historically I would not stick them both in the 3rd division. Northwestern over the past 15 years overall have been solid 2nd division team. I think Rutgers would have more than they bargain for playing a Big ten schedule and I would pencil them in the 3rd division and optimistically in the lower second division. Maryland, second division.
LikeLike
Maybe someday we’ll find out who was right.
LikeLike
Rick I see both Maryland and Rutgers on the bubble now along with Missouri depending on what ND and TX does. I do think the BT needs to go east for Joepa’s sake. You can almost count ND in as an Eastern team. And Texas hurts all as they come in with A&M. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
LikeLike
As much as I like Maryland as a candidate, i think they are a big reach as a possibility. And right now they would be a solid tier 3 performer. Pitt, RU, Missouri as a solid tier 2. Syracuse Tier 3 for now. TAM tier 2. ND tier 2. Michigan tier 2. For that matter, other than Indiana, Maryland, Syracuse as tier 3, everybody else but PSU, OSU, Texas, and Nebraska is tier 2 beating the crap out of each other and all with the same records give or take a win or loss here and there.
LikeLike
@ mushroomgod and others focused on Rutgers. I’m going to argue that Rutgers is going to receive an invite on the back end if at all (meaning near #14 or #16) not at the beginning.
The focus of Delany is Texas and Notre Dame. Since Notre Dame continues to balk at being #12 of 16, Delany is going to pull the trigger on Nebraska and release the dominoes hoping to get Texas and/or Notre Dame (if Texas is on board to the Pac-16).
Scenario 1
Nebraska is #12. Then stop and wait for the SEC interrupt the Pac-16 superconference coronation or for Stanford to reject the Pac-16 on academic concerns. Obviously, both of those rely on other actors, so Delany is going to have to make a decision again for how long he wants to wait on Texas. My guess is, he’ll be privately talking to Dodds and have Gee talking to Powers to figure out where Texas is going.
This scenario gives Delany the maximum flexibility to react to a change in the Pac-16 situation. He will have only taken one of the three whales while positioning himself to have two extra slots to go with Texas and Notre Dame (for A&M and someone else).
Scenario 2
Nebraska is #12, Missouri is #13.
This scenario leaves the Big Ten at 13, which is an inherently unstable mode and suggests further expansion (although we did stay at 11 for 20 years so perhaps that is an idle threat… but we won’t be putting a moratorium on expansion this time around…).
Regardless, Delany may be hesitant to pull the trigger on Missouri unless he feels that Notre Dame isn’t going to come until #15-16. He also may be hoping that such a move increases the pressure on the SEC to go after OU/Oklahoma since it will be the first time a major conference has breached 13, and Slive will undoubtably be thinking that the paradigm has began to shift. Can Slive keep the SEC at 12 and lose OU/OSU/A&M, which are their best 3 fits if the ACC is closed off?
Rutgers fans must be patient. Rutgers will get an answer on expansion once the Texas/Notre Dame situations clear up. In fact Missouri fans are most likely sweating Notre Dame’s signaling because the easiest way for the Big Ten to go to 14 is Nebraska and then Notre Dame/Missouri, or Delany’s preferred Notre Dame/Nebraska/Missouri but that looks to be off the table.
Rutgers has a shot of being #13/14 with Notre Dame if Notre Dame signals a willingness to join with Rutgers, but clearly there’s been no signals of that either.
Rutgers is more likely to be #14 or #16 depending on how things shake out. If the Nebraska/Missouri scenario takes shape and the Pac-16 does materialize, then Rutgers is the most likely #14 candidate out there (since Notre Dame is uninterested).
Regardless, a lot of this depends on the SEC or Stanford crashing the Pac-16 or how long Delany wants to wait after making his opening move on Nebraska.
LikeLike
What if the magic number is 14, and 16 was just a threat for Notre Dame?
Big 10 takes Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas. Kansas upgrades the Big 10 basketball situation, which is very MSU/OSU focused on a national level (even though Illinois and Wisconsin fly under the radar).
Pac 10 takes Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M, and Texas Tech. Only one straggler here.
SEC takes Oklahoma, Oklahoma St.
3 conferences of 14.
Big East nabs Memphis to replace Notre Dame in other sports, sliding up to 9 football teams.
ACC stands pat.
MWC conference absorbs Baylor, Iowa St., Boise St., and Kansas St. They are given the former Big 12 AQ as a means to placate Congress.
Nobody loses a home. Everyone upgrades. Notre Dame stays independent. Who loses here? Other than Beebe, of course.
LikeLike
I think we’ve established that basketball has no TV value (or next to none in this equation).
Kansas isn’t going to get an invite at this point in any scenario.
Nebraska/Missouri is a launch pad to Rutgers if the Pac-16 works out.
But if the Pac-16 doesn’t as you’re implying, the Big Ten will turn its focus entirely to Texas/A&M once again.
Texas/A&M/Tech going with Colorado is still a geographic lift. All of a sudden the 8 school SWC (with Arizona/ASU) doesn’t materialize and there’s the possibility of the Big Ten snatching Texas/A&M.
Also, the SEC will go hard after A&M to get a Texas presence as well, so there will be a tussle over all of these schools.
Kansas would have to fit into the equation for it to work. Only if Texas says it will come to the Big Ten if Kansas comes would the Big Ten pull the trigger on that move…
LikeLike
Really? If it was so easy and so resolved, why is it not done already?
Didn’t Delaney just say that this could happen in stages? What if the first stage is the major conferences dividing the Big 12?
And then the next stage is the decision whether, and how, to divide the Big East? I am a Big East guy, so I could care less what happens to Kansas. I just wonder if there are 4 teams left standing at the end of the first division… why wouldn’t the Big 10 pluck Kansas at the end? I fail to see how adding one of the elite basketball programs hurts anything at all.
The Big 10 can later choose whether to go Notre Dame + Pitt (HR + best option, aside from market) or take Syracuse and Rutgers (Plan B to lock up the NYC market). But delaying things buys more time.
If the ACC starts thinking about leading the charge to 16 by poaching Big East schools, now the Big 10 can swoop in with the real last ditch effort for Notre Dame.
LikeLike
Also, remember that these past five years is Rutgers’ peak.
Rutgers is 43-21, with bowl wins over Kansas St., Ball St., NC State, and Central Florida. Loss to ASU.
Kansas is 38-24, with bowl wins over Houston, Virginia Tech (Orange Bowl) and Minnesota.
Given that Rutgers is still going to be available as team 15 or 16, why not take Kansas if they are available? The state is adjacent to Nebraska, Iowa, and Missouri. Seems like a natural fit to me.
LikeLike
ez,
I argued this early on as a triplet
Neb, Kan, Miz and keep getting shot down.. even when they are all AAU, expand the footprint, add political clout, and are already midwestern in feel / action.
LikeLike
But the Big Ten wants Texas and/or Notre Dame.
Everything the Big Ten is doing is an attempt to better position itself to catch Texas if the Pac-16 doesn’t happen due to inside forces or outside forces.
Rutgers doesn’t really fit into that right now.
Neither does Kansas unless Texas says that it is going to come with Kansas (say A&M/OU/OSU are hooked by the SEC and the Big Ten can’t grab A&M away)…
LikeLike
Also, I think my post implied that there’s 5-7 actors that are moving at the same time. The Big Ten has to be able to predict the moves of the other actors in a way that maximizes its chances of getting the two actors that it most prizes to sign on; that is an incredible lift now that the Pac-10 has gone all in on Texas…
LikeLike
I can’t see PSU agreeing to Colorado in a five team BT expansion without any eastern teams…
LikeLike
Ditto for Kansas…
LikeLike
So PSU’s one vote kills it?
LikeLike
right. PSU can see the value of going into the middle of the country for Texas but not if its just 3 or 4 teams from the Big 12 North. the same goes for Michigan in all likliehood. I believe about a third of our enrollment is out of state and most of it is from the northeast. we would likely join PSU in wanting an eastern presence if we are not getting Texas.
LikeLike
IU also gets a lot of students out of the NE area, as does NW….
The others may be less, but hardly any students come from Kansas or Colorado to BT schools….
LikeLike
It won’t be PSU’s one vote that kills it, and it won’t happen because Delany’s only focused on scenarios that target Texas and Notre Dame. Until Kansas or Colorado or whoever is a part of getting Texas/ND, Delany isn’t going to move.
Nebraska fits into every scenario and is thus guaranteed an invite.
(Well there is that scenario Frank mentioned but I think Delany’s narrowed the field now that the Pac-16 has moved).
LikeLike
How is there no Eastern partner? Under my line of thinking, the Big 10 ends up with either ND/PItt or Syracuse/Rutgers.
And I suppose it is still possible to see MD/Virginia or some other combination.
All I am saying is that which if Stage 1 is dividing the Big 12. Naturally, if the Big 10 CAN get Texas, then that changes things. But, assuming for a moment that it cannot, Kansas does not disturb the Notre Dame or Rutgers additions in any way, shape or form.
LikeLike
Also, it gives additional time for the NYC market to shake out. If the Big East destruction occurs in, say, 2015, we could be looking at Rutgers as an established football power, which makes them more than just a market add. If that happens, the security of Rutgers as bringing the NYC market increases AND the name value jumps.
Meanwhile… all of this expansion discussion has been great P.R. for the Big 10. Why not do it again in a few years?
Also, my plan would ensure a landing spot for all current BCS teams AND more BCS spots AND additional time for Notre Dame to figure itself out.
If Brian Kelly can restore Notre Dame, that becomes an even more valuable add down the road. If he cannot, perhaps it was not worth adding in the first place. And so on.
LikeLike
The Big Ten isn’t going to expand for the sake of expanding. That’s what you’re suggesting by saying Missouri/Kansas.
The Big Ten is only aiming for scenarios that bring in Texas/Notre Dame out of self-interest.
Adding both Missouri/Kansas reduces the likelihood of getting those two because it reduces flexibility.
Delany is going to want to have 4 slots open so he can figure out where to go next.
Missouri as an invite is an interesting gambit if it ends up paying off by increasing the probability. However, that in itself is speculative since it requires the SEC to move as a result of the addition of Missouri and the Big Ten going over 12.
Kansas only gets an invite as #14 in a scenario that brings in Texas as #15 or 16.
Rutgers is more likely to get the #14 spot if the Texas scenario is closed because Rutgers may increase the probability of bringing in Notre Dame as #16.
Once the Texas scenario is gone, the Big Ten will focus on expansion scenarios that bring in Notre Dame or that pay off.
Nebraska -> Rutgers + Maryland/VA or Maryland/GTech is the best option for trying to get ND in as #16 but that’s way down the line…
Kansas just takes up a spot and doesn’t increase the probability of landing Texas or Notre Dame.
Unless Texas is coming as a result of Kansas being add, Kansas is not going to be a part of the Big Ten.
LikeLike
I think you can basically just cut and paste that anything said that does not comport with Texas to the Big 10 you are going to disagree with.
LikeLike
Yeah these are definately Midwestern schools but half of them are in the eastern time zone. there are also few places like them out east. nice campuses and welcomeing and some in or near big cities like Chicago, minneapolis and Columbus. But if you really want the country without to much twang we have those too.
LikeLike
ezdozen, you’re thinking way too much about the endgame instead of what Delany is thinking about.
How does Kansas in the Big Ten increase the odds of Notre Dame joining? It doesn’t.
In the absence of a Texas/Notre Dame scenario, Delany will focus on the best possible fits for the conference.
Those are probably Maryland/VA. If those are also off the table, then he’s going to look at Rutgers/Pitt/Missouri/Syracuse to round out the conference.
Kansas doesn’t make sense anywhere in all of this. Saying that Kansas doesn’t hurt anything is different from saying that Kansas makes sense in how the scenarios play out.
Right now the focus is on Texas/Notre Dame. If Missouri fits those strategies, then it will get an invite…; it’s one of the few that makes sense regardless in most cases as well…
There are several actors in this game, until we start to see moves other than the Pac-10’s opening move for the Big 12 South and the Big Ten’s move on Nebraska, it’s way too early to prejudge the next moves.
What is clear is that Delany remains focused on Texas and Notre Dame.
Let’s say the Pac-16 does appear to be in progress. Then Delany will turn his focus to what makes sense in terms of looking at Notre Dame or aiming at D.C./NYC without Notre Dame (if ND isn’t interested in being even #16). Perhaps he stops at 14 like you say, but Kansas still doesn’t fit better than Nebraska/Maryland/Rutgers (a near-optimal 14) or a backup of Nebraska/Missouri/Rutgers or Nebraska/Rutgers/Pitt.
LikeLike
I am sorry, I forgot that you knew exactly what Delaney was thinking.
LikeLike
Who loses here? Other than Beebe, of course.
Perfect
LikeLike
Thanks for your post; I continue to believe you have the most cogent take on this. But, I don’t see a reason for your Scenario #2. What is gained by offering MO a spot this early? Perhaps to squeeze ND by merely eliminating a spot? I know you spelled it out clearly, but–as you’ve said several times–the B10 is still in the strongest position, why make any moves other than the best ones?
As others have said, something better happen soon!
LikeLike
I agree with what you’re pointing out which is why I think Missouri’s invite is contingent on either of two scenarios playing out…
1) the impact that it has on Notre Dame (to join with Missouri as #13/14 which is unlikely) or
2) the impact that it has on the SEC to announce expansion scenarios targeting OU/OSU/A&M (because Missouri is #13 and the Big Ten is the first football BCS conference over 12, so the SEC feels it has to get into the game because ACC schools are not willing to come due to the academic perception of the SEC and near similar $).
Both of these scenarios require other actors to be more likely to move in a way that opens Delany a path to Texas or Notre Dame.
We have to think in terms of the paths that expansion will take and where the end of the path is.
If all of the paths are foreclosed then the Big Ten may stop at 12 with Nebraska.
Missouri enters the picture at 13 only if it makes Texas or Notre Dame more likely to join.
I tend to agree that adding Missouri is too speculative at this time, but Delany is privy to far more information than any of us as to whether the Pac-16 can truly materialize or Notre Dame’s motives or the SEC’s expansion scenarios…
LikeLike
I think the B10 actually WANTS Missouri as a member, regardless of whether they bring along TX or ND or anybody else.
Remember that when expansion came up, Mizzou was one of the first schools mentioned as being a natural fit with the league, even before TX was brought into the discussion.
LikeLike
I tend to agree that Missouri and then Rutgers are the most likely behind Nebraska based on their fit, etc.
But only Nebraska really fits into every single possible scenario unless you restrict the Big Ten’s ACC raid to 1 school, etc.
i.e. Nebraska/Rutgers/Maryland/VA/ND is a remote possibility, but you’re generally right that Missouri is probably a fit in almost every other scenario.
It all depends on whether Delany is ready to close off scenarios such as VA and focus exclusively on Texas/ND. If he doesn’t get Texas or ND, he makes a tactical retreat East and focuses on Rutgers/Pitt./Maryland and maybe Syracuse.
As you state, Missouri is probably somewhat near being a lock. The only question is whether Delany is ready to pull the trigger and close off another slot.
4 slots open means maximum flexibility. Once you go down to 3, you start narrowing the possibilities somewhat considerably because of schools that might want to come with each other…
My guess is still that he goes for Missouri if he thinks he can leverage it for more, otherwise he’ll just wait. No harm in keeping maximum flexibility if Nebraska alone destroys the Big 12…
LikeLike
I could see ND wanting a few eastern schools to maintain its presence there…and notice I said “eastern” rather than Big East. ND would probably be comfortable with Rutgers, Maryland and Virginia, all good eastern schools in athletics and academics. Being in a conference with ND probably puts UMd and UVa in the Big Ten, whether or not the ACC is raided by the SEC.
So why invite Missouri now when four schools with more appeal to the Big Ten could still be landed?
LikeLike
Derrick,
There has been little information coming from the Big Ten itself. Beyond UT and Notre Dame I don’t think anyone knows who else they truly want. Everything else has been speculation.
LikeLike
willarm1,
It just keeps nagging at me about Silve, especially in light of how the SEC came out of the last expansion. I know HH and others probably think I am just way out there. The Big 10 and Pac 10 keeps acting like academics will swoop in and save the day, but my feeling is the masses will decide this in the end. I argued early on about the political fall out that we saw last time expansion happened, and this will be much bigger.
Your last paragraph is the crux of where my thinking is troubled. We keep seeing Texas as driving the bus! What happens if the bus pulls into the SEC with OU, A&M, and TT already on it. Then Texas is on the next bus, and under that scenario, it is SEC bound!
LikeLike
No. The best positioned conference for a shot at Texas if the Pac-10 invite dissolves is the Big Ten.
Mack Brown and the administration at UT aren’t interested in going to the SEC. There’s academic perception issues as well as actual academic issues.
The Big Ten is hoping that the SEC crashes the Pac-16 party, so that it can try to invite Texas alone or invite Texas and A&M hoping that Texas can drag A&M north with it…
LikeLike
I don’t think this has been threaded, but maybe this was discussed at some point in the past few months. Knowing the breakup of B12 would occur after NU leaves, Delaney and Dodds know the B12 is gone. UT has a Tech Problem and knows it must wait for the SEC to take aTm, OU and OSU leaving the four slots open for B10. Prior to the KU ticket scandal, I can see UT orchestrating to bring Mizzou and KU (both baseball and basketball schools) in order to bring in ND and especailly sweeten the basketball flank. (I understand KU has as much a KSU Problem as UT has a Tech problem, but I’m certain if UT is half the academic and research school it purports to be, Powers and Dodds have solved the Tech Problem. Such an alignment provides natural rivalries for KU-NU (100+ years), Mizzou-Iowa(border states), UT-Penn St or whoever UT annoits. KU is quiet and allows the Big Boys to move the pieces. Then the scandal happens which squelches their entry bringing in JoPa’s Eastern desire, Pittgers. NU says, “we gotta move,” MU says, “we gotta move”, ND say,”just a minute” and KU is now claiming NU is “going to destroy it all.” Just a random though
LikeLike
It’s a distinct possibility. But we all have to wonder exactly what Texas wants.
The Pac-10 is giving Texas it’s optimal scenario, a SWC. Texas probably really wants that without any Texas schools going to the SEC.
Thus, A&M can blow this thing sky high if it bolts for the SEC.
I don’t think Dodds and Delany are really working in concert, especially since the Pac-10 has offered Texas a much better deal. Delany is hoping that the deal is either blown up or goes through in full so that the Big Ten has an opening in other areas (read ACC).
LikeLike
zeek,
I think you hit the nail right on the head! What does Texas want!?
I think one day texas woke up and said I am god! Maybe it had just won a NC, maybe it saw all that money rolling in, and maybe it was just Texas being Texas.
A) when you start thinking this way you are to blind to see the truth.
B) you are not god.
We see this in relationships, business, and politics among others (usually advanced by booze or drugs) with the same result. At some point we get back to reality and life goes on. The problem is that MAYBE Texas let the god thinking go a little past where it should, and now does not have the answer.
I am beginning to think that Texas has no idea how to get out of all this as the train has already left the station. right now we are just alnog for the ride.
🙂
LikeLike
Hey Duff
In a strange way I agree with you and zeek. I do think the public is going to weigh in on this if say, ou, osu and tech go to the SEC.
But zeek is right in that, what Silve does could very well bring UT to the Big Ten, and UT may be hoping for this type of political cover to make the jump to the Big Ten.
I personally believe Silve will not stay quiet, and his hubris may indeed help the Big Ten land two more hr’s (Tex,Nd)
I think Texas will feel immense pressure(from fans) to join the SEC if ou,osu,tech or A&M go. Dodds will have to convince the president and BOR that the LHN is more important than CIC, and that could be a major uphill battle.
Silve should remain relatively quiet, if his goal is to keep TX and ND out of the Big 10. But these guys have huge ego’s and Delaney is probably betting that Silve will at least try to get OU, OSU, and a TEX school out of this deal.
Putting Fan pressure on Tex is the only way I see the SEC getting UT, that and telling them the LHN is a go, and all the cash is yours to keep.
LikeLike
I think Texas will feel immense pressure(from fans) to join the SEC if ou,osu,tech or A&M go
Huh?
LikeLike
Really Horn,
you don’t think UT will feel pressure to stay with those schools?
and jumping to the Big Ten, maybe with just Nebraska will be met with open arms?
One thing the SEC has is the best football conference, and I’m sure there would be plenty of popular support for a move, if those schools were involved.
As I said, the BOR and President is a different story.
LikeLike
Longhorn fans (and by fans, I mean those who matter, and not the t-shirt, football only”fans”) generally do not want to move to the SEC. Exceptions exist, but more would rather move west or try and stay put.
Longhorn fans don’t want to be forced into doing anything by A&M and OU.
Putting those two together, and I don’t see see how relevant Longhorn fans would want to be forced into a conference they don’t want to join due to pressure caused by their two “inferior” rivals.
LikeLike
To elaborate, if Texas perceived that A&M and OU were entering into an unholy alliance to force UT into acting in a way perceived to be against its interests, UT’s response, at the end of the day, would be “fuck you” and “fuck you” to A&M and OU, respectively, and to go off in a different direction.
LikeLike
Again the scenario consists of how the SEC gets UT.
You obviously don’t think it could ever happen, I tend to agree, But what was laid out was the only way I believe UT would go to SEC.
But those t-shirt fans could make lots of noise if OU, A&M, were already SEC members and Tex was without a conference.
But that is the only way I see UT going to the SEC.
LikeLike
Something struck me about your comment.
The inferior rival comment.
If the non-T-shirt wear’in fan thinks like that. Then it would be smart for OU, OSU, A&M and Tech to join the SEC.
They can be treated as an equal member, and be in an elite conference without having to deal with UT and their obvious superiority.
This of course is great for the Big Ten, Bad for UT’s superior outlook. They would now be a Big Fish swimming with other Big Fish. Instead of a swimming in their own private spa.
When Nebraska, then CO. drop.
What will those other inferior rivals do, If they are courted by the SEC?
What will Texas do? Of course the Big Ten will take them.
SEC is a non starter apparently.
The Pac 10 will have less mojo without the rivals coming along with Tex.
Is Nebraska leaving a sign that a dysfunctional Big 12, is pushing back against The superior treatment UT has been receiving for the last number of years?
Might other teams do the same? It sounds as if aTm might be trying to distance themselves, courting an SEC invite.
Can Texas keep the Big 12 together?
I guess my question is, shouldn’t Texas actually be trying to keep like teams together instead of telling those teams.
“no matter what happens, Texas will be fine.”
I guess that is, and has been. the problem all along.
LikeLike
HH,
I get that you want texas to happen, that is your opinion and okay. We can all see this and it is understandable. I am not opposed to texas, I just think it is not a good long term fit for the Big 10. I would like to feel like the Big 10 is the good guy in this deal long term, and maybe I am a misguided pollyanna and Jim Delany is one of Satan’s minions and it really is about $$ and “research” was just a nice way to say we are greedy bastards.
I am older I hope and pray this is not the case, but it is not out of the question. i said early on I felt better about A&M, and all along I have always felt Texas was not good for the Big 10 long term. Maybe I am just a fuddy duddy but college sports are an old friend, and I see the changes coming. Many of my friends across several conferences have shared many a game together. we may not root for the same teams, but we are still friends after the event is over.
When you follow a team or sport long enough you know all the people sitting around you. As you get older you know their children, and if your health is good you even begin to get to know the grandkids. You see many changes, and maybe that is just the way it is. I have been in a great many venues and seen fans in t shirts and coat and ties. No matter what they wear they are still fans.
If you are an IU football guy and you are still sitting in the stands after all these years you are a real fan (one who it there for the good and the bad). Everybody loves a winner, but when family and friends are in the stands in the bad times you get to see faith and character up close firsthand.
If it is called EGO or INDEPENDENCE it is not the Big 10 way. If ND or TX do not or can not change to fit the Big 10, I would rather not have them. I have not hidden this information and have been very clear up front. I am older and I have seen a great deal over a long window. If the TX & ND addition means bigger money, and fewer average fans in the stands I will feel sad for the game indeed.
I am not saying Texas will wind up in the SEC, especially as I picked them from the beginning to call the Pac 10 their new home. I am saying that a possibility exists they will call it their new home (maybe less than 10% but a chance that should be factored into the conversation). It does not mean I am stupid because my degree did not come from Austin. I would like to think that I am an ambassador for the Big 10. If people feel we are snooty, then when posting before the general public on this blog maybe we need to be aware of this. How we communicate here will be how we are viewed by folks we do not know outside the Big 10. I do not wish to reinforce stereotypes that do not reflect well on the Big 10 institutions as a whole. Let someone from some other conference be that person that everybody dislikes, I want the Big 10 ambassadors to be above it and act like better human beings.
willarm1,
thank you pointing that out by bringing out the “inferior” point. If you say everybody else is inferior is the wrong way to go about it. A real leader looks out for those around them, and does not run ahead for their own gain or advantage. Nobody like a bully long term and sooner or later they walk away. I think if any conference wants A&M first, and shows such intent good for them. A&M is a good school, and should find a home somewhere they are appreciated. If A&M came to the Big 10 without Texas I for one would be happy to welcome them. If Texas respects A&M and OU it should not be a “forced” decision as HH implies. If Texas really feels this way then that just makes we want Texas less.
LikeLike
The general opinion here has been that if the Big Ten couldn’t get UT that the Pac 10 would be just fine as long as they didn’t end up in the SEC.
Couldn’t the SEC be thinking pretty much the same thing, i.e. UT to the Pac 10 is ok as long as it’s not the Big Ten?
Slive must know that the SEC is UT’s last choice so why would he make a move that could possibly give an opening for a UT move to the Big Ten?
LikeLike
Agreed But,
If Pac and Big go to 16. Silve will have to act.
Meaning I think he would love to have a Texas presence for recruiting, as well as the appeal of say OU.
Silve raiding Clemson Fla State maybe Miami just pisses of SC and Fla. Those are SEC controlled States in terms of recruiting, now they are all on equal footing, possibly diluting the product of SC and Florida.
The SEC overall product will always be solid, but opening up new area should be important to Silve. If the SEC is forced to go to 16.
LikeLike
willarm1,
I have said this all along, we expect the Big 10 to expand footprint, while thinking the SEC will be content to stay were they already are. I think this is wishful thinking by Big 10 fans and in no way reflects the reality of the situation.
LikeLike
This gets back to the demographics debate from a few blogs ago, but I was hoping to get some thoughts on this . . .
For Big 10 expansion to be a success, Delany and co. must expand the conference footprint to either Texas or the Southeast.
The Big 10´s in the driver´s seat now, because of academics, tradition and the BTN, but that could change over the next 10-20 years as other conferences copy the Big 10´s media model within higher growth states.
That makes this round of expansion, from the Big 10´s perspective, as much about preservation as it is about academics and money.
LikeLike
Yeah, the Big Ten needs this expansion round to go to 16 and nets either Maryland/VA or Texas. Either of those is an incredibly successful expansion, but the road to Texas is far easier and more navigable than the road to Maryland/VA.
To get to Texas, the Big Ten needs the Pac-10 invite to get blown up by say A&M/OU/OSU bolting for the SEC.
To get to Maryland VA, the Big Ten needs the Pac-16 to materialize in full (i.e. all SEC expansion candidates go west), and then the SEC and Big Ten have to divide up the ACC (SEC goes after FSU/Clemson, Big Ten aims at Maryland/VA). That’s a much more difficult road to go since the ACC seems to be a happy bunch of schools that aren’t interested in the expansion going on, but you never really know…
LikeLike
To get Maryland and Virginia, all the Big Ten has to do is get Notre Dame, which recruits the Washington area heavily and has many alumni there. Being in a conference with ND would be viewed as a major boon by UMd and UVa, and Rutgers could fill the 16th slot. A ND/UMd/UVa package works for all concerned.
LikeLike
Disagree about your premise….I think an eventual expansion including ND, Neb, Mo, Rutgers, and Pitt would be a huge success, with no expansion to TX or to the SE.
LikeLike
I agree- going south isn’t a must-have for success. Adding ND or Neb is a big win in itself.
LikeLike
I agree that package is a winner. Without ND add Kansas or Syracuse and it still is a money maker.
LikeLike
Remember, the Big 10 may not have the leverage 20 years from now to attract these home run candidates. This may be the one and only shot to position the conference for long-term success — 50 years down the road.
That said, I think the past 20 years or so of football recruiting offers some relevant lessons for the universities as a whole. What it´s shown (and, to an extent, what has been reflected on the field) is that Texas and the SE are growing rapidly and producing a disproportionate amount of talent. Obviously, we have to consider other variables when trying to extrapolate these results to other sports or to academics, but the point still remains that these areas of the country are growing and becoming much more powerful.
As a result – and as a Big 10 fan – it worries to see the relative power of the Midwest diminishing. If you want an example, look at the Nebraska and then look at rest of the Big 8. Nebraska is still valuable today – despite their demographics – because they invested and built their infrastructure and were able to leverage their success into becoming a national brand.
In short, this is the challenge the Big 10 and the member institutions are facing today. Right now we´re at our zenith and right now is when we need to expanding and ensuring our future. That is where Texas, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia and Florida all come into play. The Big 10 has the means to become a national brand, but in order to achieve that and to remain relevant long-term, it is crucial to play our cards right and bring in new members from these critical regions.
LikeLike
If (and this is a big if) the B10 really is worries about geography and demographics killing them in recuiting, then maybe they should consider the Tex/TAM/TTech option, so long as there are assurances that money will be poured into Tech’s academics. I know it’s been said before, but if the B10 can actually make a deal to get 4 HR (Neb, ND, TEX, TAM) and 1 sacrifice (TTech), then it really needs to consider it.
LikeLike
I think Delaney prefers states like TX/MD/VA, but understands there is a vast market in the east. I think Rutgers is essential if UT is out. NY, NJ and the northeast have a lot of students going to private schools and lower profile state schools. That is a vast pool for B10 schools to recruit students from. Doesn’t help as much for football recruiting, but it does in every other way. And the huge population in the expanded B10 area helps get media coverage which does help in recruiting. Tennessee, Notre Dame and Nebraska have all depended on athletes from outside their area for many years.
LikeLike
Yeah Rutgers is the optimal backup if the Big Ten can’t break into the Sun Belt. That’s why it looks so likely to nab a spot at 14 or 16.
LikeLike
Another very good article from Mr. SEC (“The Frank the Tank of the South”). He does out the averages of research and alumni for all the conferences.
http://www.mrsec.com/2010/06/the-academics-of-expansion-a-conference-comparison/
LikeLike
@M – Mr. SEC has written some great posts on this subject. He’s one of the few SEC writers that I’ve seen that can take a step back from looking at this purely in football terms.
LikeLike
Agreed. That was informative.
LikeLike
Fantastic analysis. Worthy and must read.
LikeLike
This is an older article (about two weeks old) from Mr. SEC that ranks Baylor 10th on a list of SEC expansion criteria (actually pretty good!)… http://www.mrsec.com/2010/05/expounding-on-expansion-the-teams-that-fit-by-the-numbers/
As a Texas resident and christian, I think the entire Baylor to the PAC10 campaign is providing yet another embarassing national glimpse into the true nature of Texas state politics. Baylor has a pretty good set of objective merits for inclusion in a major sports conference despite the self-righteous behavior of its representatives…
LikeLike
Not totally scientific but some better number than that derived from ones gut. I like. And I can clearly see that Baylor would noy be in the top 4 in an SEC courting either. Why the hay are they even in the conversation in the Pac ten?
LikeLike
@StvInILL, I read this a little different. Mr. SEC ranks nine teams ahead of Baylor for SEC expansion purposes (Texas, Texas A&M, Notre Dame, Virginia, Oklahoma, Florida State, Maryland, Virginia Tech and Missouri). Assume Texas, Texas A&M and Oklahoma all go to the PAC10 while Missouri and Notre Dame go to the Big Ten. That leaves four ACC teams ranked ahead of Baylor (Virginia, Virginia Tech, Maryland and Florida State). For various reasons, I don’t think the SEC is going to entice every school it wants to leave the ACC, which might well put Baylor into the top four for SEC expansion. That would be important if the SEC decides to go to sixteen.
As far as the PAC10, agree with you one hundred percent, Baylor is a terrible match for that conference. My opinion is that support for Baylor joining the PAC10 in place of Colorado is truly an attempt to sabotage the PAC10’s proposal by making it unpalatable to that conference and all the other interested teams. If Baylor University’s leaders want to invest their reputation in that sort of effort, it could come back to bite them in the long run.
LikeLike
Giving Baylor the maximum score for population is a bit silly, as is giving it points for TV markets. Also, using relative rankings for geography really doesn’t work; a 6 point difference between Baylor and UT!
Overall, I have to think Texas Tech would bring much more than Baylor if either had to go alone or with a partner school, yet Tech is well behind Baylor by that scoring system.
LikeLike
Baylor is physically pretty close to Dallas/Forth Worth TV market and actually has a pretty good draw throughout the southeast part of the state as well (including Houston). Texas Tech does have some pretty avid fans throughout the state but is located in Lubbock, which is not much of (or near) any media market at all. From an standalone point of view, Baylor should bring substantially better markets than Texas Tech. Tech packaged with UT and A&M as a statewide draw for the PAC10 plan really plays to its strengths (such as they are…)
LikeLike
Nice article…..
Living in SEC country now for about 7 years.
I have never EVER heard a concession to the Big Ten. academically or otherwise.
This blog and that article, is proof that not all SEC fan is a Wal-Mart SEC guy.
Now how do I get my neighbor to stop blaming me for Woodson beating Manning for the Heisman Trophy?
LikeLike
I still think that the subplot to the expansion scenario is that the Big Ten and Pac 10 are in partnership. Let’s think about this. The reason for expansion is to increase revenues (while adding only universities that fit your culture and academic standards, of course). The way to make money, at least on the athletics side, is through television, primarily cable (the BTN). The two ways to increase revenues for a cable channel are a) more subscribers, which means more markets where your channel is on the basic package, for which you get greater subscriber fees, and b) higher ratings for your events, which generate more ad dollars.
The optimum of course is a national cable channel that is part of the basic package everywhere, and which broadcasts high-interest events year-round. Think ESPN.
But the dilemma for the Big Ten is that it can’t do all that through expansion, because it can’t possibly add every market out there, unless it wants to become a 20-member (or more) conference. But it effectively is limited to five additions. So how do you solve the problem? Through a partnership with another conference that covers large markets you don’t and can’t add without giving up other markets, that’s how.
So…
The Big Ten and Pac 10 (which has its own ambitions and its own geographic problems) reach an understanding. The Pac 10 expands eastward to add schools in the Central Time Zone (the B12 six), while the Big Ten expands to the East Coast to add the major markets there. Then the Pac 10 starts its own cable channel a la the BTN with BTN partner Fox, and Fox then peddles the two channels coast to coast as a package deal. Now, the BTN gains subscribers on the West Coast and Texas while the Pac 10 gains subscribers in the Midwest and East. The partnership then adds national brand Notre Dame in 2015 when the NBC contract expires, leaving the Irish independent but part of the Big Ten/Pac 10 alliance for TV purposes.
In this scenario, the Big Ten can use its five expansion slots on the most effective additions without having to worry about markets like Texas or reluctant additions like the Irish. It adds national brand Nebraska and uses the other four slots to establish a beachhead for the partnership in NYC (Rutgers), Washington/Baltimore (Maryland, Virginia) and perhaps even the South (Georgia Tech, UNC, etc.)
At the end, the alliance (Big Ten, Pac 16, Fox and Notre Dame) has an empire that covers all of the country except the deep South, and even there the package would be a strong sell. And it has a list of brands in football (USC, OSU, NE, PSU, TX, etc.), basketball (UCLA, MSU, MD, maybe UNC) and even non-revenue sports with which it can offer a compelling year-round schedule to generate ad dollars. (That would make Fox Sports competitive with ESPN.) It would be something none of the partners could do on their own.
Just thinking out loud…
LikeLike
@Mikebuz
I think you are right but I think the SEC is heavily involved with conversations with both the Pac-10 and Big-10.
LikeLike
Maybe to a certain extent, in the sense that the BCS conferences have some overlapping areas of mutual interest. But in the end, i think the SEC and Big Ten are more rival than partner, something that I don’t think describes the relationship between the Big Ten and Pac 10. At the risk of oversimplifying, I think the Big Ten sees the SEC as crass and the SEC sees the Big Ten as snooty. Just my impression.
LikeLike
mikebuz,
i think you see it very well it is the Jocks and Nerds all over again an we are back in HS.
crass and snooty sounds good too!
LikeLike
“At the risk of oversimplifying, I think the Big Ten sees the SEC as crass and the SEC sees the Big Ten as snooty. Just my impression.”
The phrase “slack-jawed yokel” should come up somewhere too :P.
LikeLike
The Chess analogy is being overplayed at this point because it suggests that this is a zero sum game. Its not.
Division 1-A College football is a $4-$5 billion business right now and it is organized in a sub-optimal way. There is going to be an organizational shake-up because the most powerful people in the space understand that there is another $1 billion in TV money sitting there if they can overcome all of the politics to get to the right structure.
The ‘game’ that is being played here is to achieve the following:
1. Organize in a way that the industry is able to realize that $1 billion incremental pot of gold.
2. Get as much of that incremental $1 billion for my school (in the case of NU, UT, ND, etc) or schools (in the case of Scott, Delaney and Slive as possible.
3. Manage my brand
4. Don’t tilt the balance of power so much that we end up doing irreparable harm to the industry.
The industry needs the Pac-10 and Big-12 to address their TV situation, each is woefully underfunded as it stands today and its quite obvious that Texas and California (the states) hold the markets that will drive the TV revenues for those two conferences. If Texas, ND and Nebraska all end up in the BigTen there is way too much power in that conference. If Texas and Oklahoma end up in the SEC it would have the potential to do long-term damage to the sport by allowing the SEC to choke off recruiting pipelines across the country. Bottom line is that if you are trying to maximize the TV revenue for the industry and maintain some semblance of balance of power then Texas has to end up in the Pac-10, ideally with Oklahoma in tow.
Nebraska has to decide if it agrees with the Big Ten’s vision or if recruiting dictates that is should align with the Pac-10 and Big 12 schools. Money and other considerations point towards the Big Ten but it might well decide it is better off keeping the recruiting pipelines into California and Texas.
Notre Dame’s key consideration is going to be determining if it is better off with the enhanced revenue opportunities in the Big Ten or if it should lead whichever schools get left behind by the other moves. I wouldn’t be a bit surprised to see Notre Dame lead an organization of BC, Miami, Baylor, Duke, Wake Forest, Syracuse, UCONN, BYU, Kansas and others. The leprechaun could be the tallest midget.
Independence isn’t going to be an option because the TV money is going to dictate that the conferences feed into a national tournament that will ultimately determine a champion on the field.
LikeLike
Good post. However the element of self-interest continues to override balance, so the B10+ will make a play for TX as long as there’s a chance.
LikeLike
Interesting thought.
If you want to maximize you do what SEC and ACC have done. You split up states. Texas & Texas A&M would go different ways. I hope that doesn’t happen.
LikeLike
@bullett
Exactly. And its really interesting when you start think of the SEC already being linked to NC State and Virginia Tech.
LikeLike
But that would be the best solution for all. No losers in that situation. Texas to the big ten and A&M to the Pac Ten or SEC. Win, Win. And I am sure in a natural process, this is exactly what would happen. Leave Tech where it is, in a lesser league. I blame Texas politics for it not happening sooner. It would be better for Texans to work on winning three leagues than all three teams losing the conference championship in one. Just my humble opinion.
LikeLike
I know the cow is well out of the barn now.. but just for the heck of it.. where would we be now had this been the original leak out of JD and the Big 10?
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Today the Big 10 announced that it would explore and expansion of the the current membership and has identified 5 early prospects
a) Texas A & M
b) Nebraska
c) Maryland
d) Stanford
e) Toronto
would it affect where we are now?
LikeLike
LOL! Duffman you have mentioned this Toronto thing before. I’m afraid i will have to plead the yokel when it comes to Canadian colleges. You might make a case for Toronto with guys like myself before pasting them onto the list. Just saying.
LikeLike
The University of Toronto is an excellent and very large university in a huge market. It is an AAU member that does huge research at the level of the top schools in the Big Ten. It would actually be a quite appealing target if they had an athletic scholarship program or if they had a sports following at the level of the US.
I’ll know wait to hear Rich2 chime in about the U of Toronto’s sliding academics and FLP extolling the virtues of the importance of the independence of St. Francis Xavier in Nova Scotia.
LikeLike
Toronto would be the best road trip in the Big 10, hands down.
LikeLike
DD,
It would be McGill that wants to remain independent!
🙂
LikeLike
StvInILL,
my point was it would have set a very different opening gambit. you go for the ones publicly that make ND and Texas feel ignored. and as any red blooded american male with any game can tell you “ignore the pretty girl” and at the end of the night she will be the one taking you back to house.
That said I still think Toronto is the bold stroke move..
a) nobody expects it
b) it is a tip top international educational institution
c) they are already in the AAU
d) the big 10 becomes international
e) they are right next door
f) baseball schmaseball .. they have hockey
g) road trips with Red Green & Corner Gas folks
LikeLike
“a) nobody expects it”
Nobody expects Miami (OH) either but I’m not about to advocate for them.
“Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!”
LikeLike
Man,
true, but toronto has the academic chops that miami (OH) does not..
nice python reference tho..
🙂
LikeLike
B12 2nd order effect
Throw one more possibility given some of the discussion in my thread from last night. As Guido pointed out, Colorado doesn’t have the money to jump ship so unless the conference dissolves they still pay. But what if instead of OK State being the linchpin, its actually CO.
So go back to scenarios from last night
B10 – Mizz, Neb, Tex
SEC – aTm, OK State, OU (still a BIG if that SEC takes OK State)
Leaves the remaining 6 in B12: TT, Bay, ISU, KState, KU, CO. You still have a quorum and a conference.
Now add TCU, Air Force, CO State, Boise, Utah, and BYU.
4 pods, 2 divisions
ISU, KSU, KU
Bay, TCU, TT
CO, CO State, AF
Utah, BYU, Boise
ISU, KSU, and KU get to stay in Tier 1 conference
Baylor, TT get a natural Texas rival in TCU
TCU, Boise get to come play with the big boys and an automatic bid
Utah keeps BYU and plays with big boys
BYU keeps Utah and gets a natural rival/like-minded institution in Baylor
CO doesn’t have to pay and gets a less-Texas centric conference along with natural geo rivals
CO State and AF get to play with the big boys and join CO in an interesting set of games.
Kinda of makes sense to me.
Media Markets: Salt Lake, Denver, Dallas, Topeka, Omaha, Des Moines, Kansas City.
Natural Headquarters: Denver or Kansas City
LikeLike
Okay look…if CO doesn’t end up in the PAC 10…its not going to be because of money. Let me make that clear. The university understands the stakes of this game. One of their number one concerns about re-alignment is the hit to the ACADEMIC reputation of the school that they will take if they are left out in the cold. For the first (and perhaps only) time the academic and athletic sides of the house are in full alignment. They both want the PAC 10. The academics are salivating at the idea of being lumped in with Cal, Stanford, and UCLA. Colorado is not going voluntarily move to the MWC to avoid paying a penalty that would be paid off within one year in the new conference. We may have some administrators that may sometimes act retarded, but they are not going to go full retard on this.
LikeLike
Interesting scenario…..
Also, the 6 leftovers from the B12 get an influx of cash over the next 2 years from the 6 outgoing members giving up portions of their league payouts.
I expect that the remains of the B12 will link up with one of the Western conferences in some form.
LikeLike
I haven’t posted anything until now but I have been following this blog for a couple months now and really enjoy it. Thanks Frank, great job!
Anyway, I think this is working out exactly how Delany wants it to. Think about this. What if part of the underlying chess game is to top the SEC and grow the BTN with an unoffical alliance with the Pac 10. First, if the Pac 16 happens and Texas/A&M and OU all go west then the SEC must go to ACC for expansion if wants to expand. There isn’t a flagship school west of Arkansas that they would want which I can think of at that point. IMO, Florida State, Clemson, Miami and GT are their best options and are not as strong as Texas/A&M and the Oklahoma’s. Plus they dont add a new footprint to the SEC conference. If the Big ten adds Nebraska, Mizzou and ND (when ND they see that the Pac16 is happening and dont want to get left out), the Big Ten could then wait and see what the SEC does. If they start to break up the ACC, the Big Ten could try to convince Miami and GT to come in as #15 and #16. With the Big Ten at 14 schools at this point and Nebraska and ND being two of the additions, i think they would have to seriously consider it. So from an athletic viewpoint who are the big winners, the Big 16 added a 3 top tier football schools in Nebraska, ND and Miami and the Pac 16 added TX, A&M and OU and the SEC really got the short end of the stick.
Now what about growing the BTN? Fox may propose a deal to package the BTN and PTN together which would distribute it throught the entire Big 16 and Pac 16 footprint which would cover 2/3 of the country. This is huge. With ND, it wouldnt be a stretch to think that it would in time move into the north east also.
Checkmate, game over. BIG 16 and PAC 16 come out smelling like roses. Just a thought…
LikeLike
Let me see if I understand how the B12 works…
(1). Heavy rumours that NU & MU might receive a B10 invite & might accept;
(2). Heavy rumours that CU & possibly 5 other B12 schools might receive a P10 invite;
(3). P10 Commish has OK from memebers to make (2) happen;and
(4). B12 issues an ultimatum that NU & MU must declare their undying loyalty to B12 by Friday???
REALLY? Is there really any wonder that the B12 is about to join the ashheep of NCAA conferences??
LikeLike
Keep in mind that the Texas governor was not only an aTm cheerleader (literally) but also an Ag Commissioner from west Texas. Hence TT will be protected. Even UH advocates like state Senator Whitmire note that TT is the identity and lifeblood of Lubbock, and Baylor for Waco to a lesser extent.
That doesn’t mean TT has to go to the P16 or SEC. But the state will try mightily to leverage this realignment to find good landing spots for as many of their major schools as possible. The fate of TX and aTm may rest on if the movements can still result in a BCS AQ B12 being rebuilt or the reputation of a bulked up MWC. Is it guaranteed a BCS AQ or an equivalent? Both options could provide suitable homes for UH, TT, Baylor, TCU, and SMU. Especially Baylor, the others have demonstrated ability to succeed at the top level in football, now that June Jones has arrived at SMU.
A B12 that only (!) lose NE, CO, TX, aTM, and two or less of OU, KS, and OK St will keep its BCS AQ. It takes 9 votes to dissolve the conference, but supposedly NCAA rules require 6 schools that have played together 5 years for a conference to retain its BCS AQ. However I seem to recall an article a few months ago saying that provision had been repealed.
LikeLike
If this mess was happening in 2011 rather than 2010 (an election year), Perry would proably be knee deep in it, and fighting for A&M first and foremost. However, since it is an election, and A&M is in pretty good position to take care of itself, Perry will probably end up just laying low, and letting various members of the legislature do the horse trading. That’s actually how it played out last time–Ann Richards, the governor at the time (who was up for reelection), stayed the hell out of the way while Lt. Gov. Bob Bullock (who had no chance of being defeated), called the shots.
Perry won’t stick his neck out for Tech, or Baylor, or anybody else.
LikeLike
Really, the best thing for Texas as a whole would be for UT and A&M to move to the Big 10, with UH and TCU taking their place in the Big 12.
Tech’s conference money would drop, but not as much as UT and A&M’s money would rise. UH and TCU would see decent rises. A Texas school would win the conference and get to a BCS bowl at least every 4 years (probably more often) giving it a good revenue boost and more exposure.
Every school would be better off in a more stable conference where more teams were equals.
Sadly, I don’t think any legislator will be able to see this.
LikeLike
I tend to agree, but we have to see what the SEC does. Will UT go through with the Pac-16 without OU/OSU and possibly A&M? I guess it could plug the holes with Hou/Baylor/Utah, but we have to see.
As of now, the Pac-16 is the only game in town, and if remains that way, the game is done.
That is an insightful post though about the optimal scenario. I doubt many would think of that though, let alone legislators hell-bent on keeping them all packaged as a big group and adding more Texas schools if possible…
LikeLike
Just found this.
http://www.isutobig10.com/
LikeLike
Ha!
From the first sentence of the first substantive section:
Despite it’s modest football success, Iowa State is sought out for it’s traveling fanbase.
Based on that sentence, I guess I really don’t need to scroll down the academic compatibility section.
LikeLike
@Mike – Oh man. Those poor people at ISU. They know they’re completely screwed in every scenario.
LikeLike
Now, now Fank, the MAC, Northern Illinois, Western Michigan and Miami of Ohio would love em.
LikeLike
Posted this way upthread the ISU’s of the world:
Schools like Iowa State, Syracuse, and K-State should see the dissolution of the B12 and Big East and the inevitable formation of the four 16-team super conferences as an opportunity to gracefully exit the big time football arms race. Other than a few fluke seasons over the past few decades, they never were relevant on the national stage and in the post-realignment era, they never will be again. Drop down to FCS or DII and just emphasize their basketball programs. And yes I know I-State’s been pretty moribund there too lately. Be like Northern Iowa, Butler, and Gonzaga: focus on the one sport where it’s possible to remain relevant in the sporting arena and create positive pr about your university without having to maintain a 9 figure athletic dept budget. Continuing the charade of being a major player in football and being a perpetual also-ran just contributes to negative name associations. Not that alumni and administrative egos will ever allow this to happen but still …
LikeLike
CJR,
great post..
the other option is a home below DI, but above D II..
the new world sports order
1) THE BIG 3 / 4 – National Champ
2) THE REST
a) fill OOC for the BIG 3 / 4
b) have a playoff for schools like USF and UL
3) D II
4) D III
LikeLike
Future big staring contest: leftover Big 12 teams vs. MWC. Who survives to create the next BCS conference? I’d put my bet in MWC, they seem to have their act together, good cohesion and a good commish. It can’t be understated what an acoomishment it would be for them to get AQ status, a path they are already on and would be done deal with adding B12 teams and possibly Boise. Throw in Wildcard of possible Az schools and you Have quite a strong Football and BB conference covering Cal-Tex-Kansas and everything in between. That should net a real nice TV deal.
LikeLike
As long as the Big 12 has enough schools to keep its automatic qualifying bid, it wins.
LikeLike
yed but if they drop below 6 they become toxic and have zero chance. 6 is a big tipping point.
if 6 go it’ll be a real poker game between the remants evaluating the risk of holding on to the potential of remaining AQ or grabbing onto one of the few MWC slots that could lead to BCS status. should be an interesting stare down.
LikeLike
I think they’ll offer UH and Fresno State membership along with several MWC schools. UH and Fresno State won’t need any inducement to join; I find it hard to believe TCU would pledge allegiance to the MWC when it could join Baylor, Houston, and maybe TT or Oklahoma State in a conference that has a permanent BCS bid. Then the conference is on really firm ground and I think the rest of the chosen MWC schools (Utah/BYU if they’re available are certainly on that list) will come.
LikeLike
sounds like a good mix. but my point was that if they have to replace 7 schools then they have to wait 5 years in order to have 6 teams playing together for 5 years and get AQ status. The MWC already has those six teams so adding strong programs gives them a quicker shot at AQ but doesn’t have enough openings to take a large number.
so if they lose six they are right at the tipping point and it becomes a game of hold ’em to see if someone doesn’t want to take the risk that someone else grabs one of the MWC slots first.
LikeLike
But politically it will become dangerous to revoke the automatic BCS status for the schools left behind.
Maybe they’ll be a compromise and they’ll all be accepted into the MWC, but I think its more likely that the BCS will announce the Big 12 keeps its bid and then the Big 12 can pick the schools that make the most sense for them.
LikeLike
maybe m(AG) but college football as we all know is pretty cutthroat on the money level. the 6 for 5 years rule is written into the agreement. I find it hard to believe anyone will feel compelled to feel sorry for the left behinds. like the Big Ten, SEC and Pac 10 would forego a likely BCS slot to help them out.
LikeLike
Nobody wants Hawaii. The road trips for non-revenue sports are killer. Even the extra football game each year doesn’t make up for it. It’s sad, because the islands have a lot of great college sports fans. But geography is just too much.
Substitute Nevada-Reno. They’re the school most likely to get plucked from the WAC for the MWC with BSU and FSU if they need three to replace departed teams.
LikeLike
Hank-They want to minimize the prospect of Congressional hearings.
Since the real money is being made off the regular season in expansion, they’ll be OK with losing a little BCS money in the postseason to throw the Senators from Iowa, Kansas, and Utah a bone.
Josh:
UH=University of Houston
LikeLike
The Mountain West already has a sports network, so I think they are better positioned to absorb the remaining Big XII members rather than the other way around.
LikeLike
They don’t own their own network, so it’s not a big financial winner for them like the Big 10 Network.
LikeLike
If you’re a Kansas or a Colorado or a Iowa State, would you want to be absorbed by the MWC? Might be more cozy to steal from the Big East and take a couple of Texas schools and Memphis.
LikeLike
Twitter is (usually) over capacity.
Too many tweets! Please wait a moment and try again.
LikeLike
@Playoffs Now! – Seriously. They’ve got a couple of hamsters running their servers over there.
LikeLike
Frank,
Thanks to link to mrsec. I did not know they had a version of the CIC in incubation in the conference. The more I read the more I learn.
Not like we have not looked at tons of issues but looking at the link it hit me about what the value is in expansion talk about recruiting. I am not just thinking sports, but academics as well. I keep looking at Vandy.
Everybody on here agrees that they are at or near the top of the academic pile, yet they remain in the SEC. then I start thinking of Texas and UNC. What is the competitive advantage to go far outside your current sphere unless you are #1. We all seem to agree that UNC and UT have the academic chops, but the farther they go from home, the schools that stay close can ratchet up recruiting the students that are still close.
An early comment I made was that most schools are regional not national. rice will draw a student in Texas the same way Duke may do in NC. The point of Missouri getting a 1/3 of its players from texas was an eye opener. In essence the farther you go, the more you will become the island than the continent. If you are a state school you are always limited by the state you reside in.
Back to Vandy who can go anywhere, but has stayed in the SEC even after schools like Tech left. Then it hits me, for what they give up in football they more than get back in academics. Vandy may not get the top recruit in the south to come play football, but they are probably at or near the top when an outstanding academic decides on a college. they have a nice marketing niche against say a Big 10 or Ivy where they are just in the pack.
Now comes the radical thought. Somehow ND and Texas wind up in an ACC / BE merger! i know way outside the box, but at this point how far out is it compared to everything else that has been debated. What kind of combination would this look like? basically a 4th conference is created by combinations of the best of the Big 12, ACC, and BE? We keep saying why these 3 conferences go to the P 16, B 16, SEC! If the other option is to create a fourth conference from the best of the 3 it would get benefits of joining the Big 3, but remain their own identity.
comments? this is really out of the box!
LikeLike
ND may very well end up in the ACC. That’s one of the more underrated moves; nowhere is the Big Ten ever really guaranteed of landing ND (especially with BC/WF and other schools more fitting ND’s profile as an undergraduate focused school).
As for Texas, there’s no way the ACC would accept the Tech problem or Baylor or any of that. The ACC prides itself on having highly ranked undergraduate programs and being academically comparable to the Big Ten or Pac-10.
I can definitely seem them trying to snag ND down the road, but Texas seems like a really hard lift unless Texas is willing to not bring Tech/Baylor and the rest of that show…
Also, the ACC just settled its contract, re-opening it for ND or Texas would be worth it.
In summary, I’d just say that ND to the ACC is a distinct possibility. I tend to think that the ACC is actually a better institutional fit even though football/tradition-wise, the Big Ten probably makes a bit more sense.
However, ND would get it’s more national schedule since it’d have most of its conference games away in the Southeast and could just load up its OOC out west.
I tend to think the ACC will make some kind of play at ND sometime, but that’s going to happen much after the Big 12 implodes…
LikeLike
I realize the irony of saying that the ACC wouldn’t accept the Tech/Baylor problems right after the Pac-10 went and invited them both even after many of us said that about the Pac-10.
Still, the ACC is especially built around Duke/NC and they’re probably going to put a halt to any expansion plans that diminish their influence. ND would probably be their focus in any expansion plans…
LikeLike
@Zeek,
I think you know this as well, but Texas-to-the-ACC is even less of a non-starter than Texas-to-the-SEC, regardless of the Tech/Baylor Problems, and you know what I think of that latter option. 🙂
LikeLike
ND to the ACC makes sense on a few levels. I’m surprised we haven’t heard more.
As the ACC already covers the East Coast from Boston to Miami, the only hole is really near NYC. If the ACC adds some or all of UCONN, Syracuse, or Rutgers, it gives ND their national schedule more or less right there. BC and the new schools in the Northeast, UVA/VTU/MD in the mid-atlantic, Miami and GT in the south, and the NC/SC schools blend into the mid-atlantic and south.
Notre Dame’s home games, plus their current Big Ten opponents cover the midwest, and USC/Stanford cover the west.
Still not the independent schedule they prefer, but it probably offers a better geographic spread than a Big Ten schedule.
Also, the ACC schools are a bit smaller and have more private schools, so the institutional fit is better.
BTW, it’s been reported that the new Michigan AD is looking to decrease the amount of games between ND and UM. They extended the contract until 2031, except for a two game break starting in a few years (maybe 2017?) Michigan would like to change it to a two-years-on/two-years-off schedule, so that Michigan can schedule some other top programs without overloading the non-conference schedule. Perhaps ND would also do something similar with MSU and Purdue if they entered the ACC, make it a 6-games-in-8-years schedule.
LikeLike
The UM-ND contract and the ESPN-ACC contract have something in common…
Neither is currently signed.
LikeLike
still worried this is all a ploy by the big 10 to get notre dame in the fold and NU & MIZZOU are left with egg on their faces. I’m not going to believe otherwise until I see a press conference scheduled & it’s confirmed that Tom Osborne is in Chicago.
LikeLike
Don’t worry about that. ND won’t join as #12 unless its in a move to 16. They’ve rejected this approach before, and they will again if the Big Ten proposes that.
Nebraska is virtually guaranteed an invite in any scenario unless the Big Ten doesn’t expand at all.
Yes, Delany is focused on ND and Texas and other scenarios involving them, but every single scenario involves Nebraska (except Frank’s way out of the box Texas/A&M/Vandy/Maryland/VA).
However, you should actually feel more safe for Nebraska -> Big Ten because of the Pac-16 situation.
The Pac-16 situation has forced the Big Ten to move which means Delany isn’t thinking about out of the box scenarios like Vandy. He’s going to be entirely focused on picking up pieces that make sense on their own instead of a package of 5 teams.
What I guess I’m trying to say is that any expansion that occurs in waves includes Nebraska in the first wave or second if ND is the first wave…
LikeLike
@fivetitles
Your post seems to assume NE and MO are in equivalent situations (my apologies if I’m putting words in your mouth), and I’m not at all sure that is the case. By now, NE appears to be a virtual lock, but MO depends very much on what the P10 (or Texas) does.
This is far-fetched, but suppose–for whatever reason–UT and A&M decide to follow NE, then the B10 almost certainly goes east with Rutgers/Pitt/MD and demands the “final answer” from ND.
Likely, not at all. I just think MO will be dangling in the wind for a while longer.
LikeLike
I wouldn’t worry. Harvey Perlman has enough titles currently on his resume to not get double-crossed, unless the Big Ten thinks making an enemy of the chair of the president’s oversight committee on the BCS and the chairman of the NCAA Division 1 football committee is a good idea.
LikeLike
I’m in my early twenties and don’t really remember the details/processes of previous expansion/realignment, specifically the SWC/Big 8 merger and the ACC raid of the Big East. Questions:
1. Was the fervor/craziness the same then as it is now. For example, in the Chicago Tribune there are almost daily articles about expansion; was that the case in previous expansions/realignments?
2. What effect do you think the blogosphere/tweeting/24-hour news cycle has had on expansion and the way its been occurring?
Sidenote – The guy from Orangebloods.com must have some sort of agenda. What is it? He wants Texas to stay in the Big 12, move to the Pac-?, etc…?? ESPN is reporting, citing Orangebloods.com, that if ND joins the B10, then ND wants the conference to stay at 12 members. Is Orangebloods trying to scare Nebraska and Mizzou into committing, preserving the B12?
LikeLike
The guy from Orangebloods.com must have some sort of agenda. What is it?
Ultimately, his agenda is driving traffic to what is mostly a walled-off pay site. This story kind of sucks for the suckers who signed up for Orangebloods, thinking they’d get the exclusives no one else has, and the biggest legit story they’ve landed is put out there for all the world to read for free.
Now,if your question is what is the agenda of the people from UT leaking him this information….
(cueing it up for the tinfoil contingent from Lincoln to chime in!)
LikeLike
The people criticizing the reporter for the possible source of his information have yet to note that, by and large, what he has reported has been true…
LikeLike
The agenda from UT, or whomever, is to get to a happy resolution for whatever university plants the information. No need for tinfoil.
I think the Lincoln contingent is done with the rampant Texas rumors, they are heading to the Big 10. The question becomes now what?
What will Texas choose to do? It is on their hands now, Nebraska has made their choice in the thier own best interest. Will UT go to the Big 10, Pac 10, SEC, or hold together some type of Lonestar League?
LikeLike
Ha! I started as a student at A&M when the SWC had 2 years to live. The internet was mostly academic information and students communicating with each other. There certainly wasn’t realignment blogs or even an ESPN site that would report on it.
So it was only really covered in papers, and I don’t think their was much coverage until it was pretty much a done deal; then all the Texas sports reporters loudly lamented that they might not be able to do their job without getting on an airplane.
Poor reporters!!
LikeLike
George,
Great point about Orangebloods! Is the tail wagging the dog? In the modern world Orangebloods driving expansion over a top media outlet is somewhat baffling.
on your points..
1) donor levels were small enough that you did not have to get a second on your house to keep your seats. Less hype, as things were still small moves and the money was smaller so less seismic shift.
2) the rise of terrible sources and way to much belief in the fact that your sister ==> friend ==> uncle ==> neighbor ==> hairdresser ==> mother ==> 3rd cousin twice removed ==> overheard it from to guys talking at the local 7 11 is now the way it works. 20 years ago it might have looked like this AD ==> Coach ==> Reporter ==> Media outlet ==> Fan or maybe AD ==> Sugar Daddy Donor. Just look at where we have gotten with technology.
😉
LikeLike
As I recall, the demise of the SWC and departure of the Texas 4 to join up with the Big 8 became public knowledge over the course of several days. Prior to antying entering the press, discussions had been going on for some time, but I don’t recall any of that leaking out the way that this story has. For one thing, there were fewer players involved, and for another, the politicians really put the deal together quickly once it became apparent that there was going to be a move.
Of course, Arkansas’s departure from the SWC a few years earlier put everyone on notice that this was a possibility, but without the internet to feed rumors, and without the schools constantly leaking things to the press, most of the sausage making was done out of the public eye.
LikeLike
btw Frank since its a bit slower today I just wanted to mention how valuable this blog has been in satisfying the need for a mulitlayered, complex puzzle brought on by post Lost depression. It even has science vs faith. If not for this blog I would be on methadone by now.
LikeLike
Hear, hear! Good observation, Hank. The expansion frenzy over the past few weeks has helped fill the post-Lost void for me as well.
LikeLike
It has kept college football being discussed in a dead period.
God Bless us, everyone.
LikeLike
hank,
what are you talking about.. with the blog I am descending to a place that even rock cocaine or meth would not have this kind of control. It will have to come to an end soon, or there will be a new mental disorder called the “FRANK”!
symptoms include
obsessive realignment disorder – ie one day you put the couch in the Living Room and the next day you put it in the Kitchen.
financial paranoia – ie you rearrange the family budget so 80% of the family finances now go to just sports and cat toys.
loss of appetite / excessive appetite – ie you now only eat where a computer is within easy grasp, or you just stop eating all together because you might miss the next rumored expansion.
headache / eyestrain – ie your stress level goes up as you lose your sight from reading all the small type in the blogs.
loss of sleep – sleep .. when your home team could move to the conference now forming in china! are you serious!
lack of attention – hey why am I writing this anyway I could be reading another blog………
🙂
LikeLike
Yes, yes. I feel better about myself now. I’m not the only one. I bring up Google and now asks ME “Big Ten Expansion?”. Frank’s blog was the most informative information I have seen on the subject. I’m glad I found it.
LikeLike
Good call, Duffman, I’m right there with you. Along these lines, has anyone else noticed how often we commenters say things like, “Remember what Frank says, 11+1=13,” or “As Frank tells us, Think Like a University President”? It’s as though Frank is the Realignment Prophet, and we are his loyal followers.
LikeLike
jd,
I must not just give props to Frank, but the posters as well!
Commentary has not descended to verbal ‘mines bigger than yours’ that affects most bolgs. Most posts have showed multiple insights and well thought out reasons for why something should or should not be. I have learned much and even changed my mind on some teams in the expansion process, based on what I have read. The links have been numerous and covered a ton of different sources.
I am only sad that more blogs (especially sports ones) do not have the same courtesy and content. Frank may have started this but everybody else has made it a great ride.
ps.. Because of the blog, I am now aware of Rice, and care where they wind up.
🙂
LikeLike
With this said, I’d like to point out that mine is, in fact, bigger than yours.
LikeLike
“ps.. Because of the blog, I am now aware of Rice, and care where they wind up”
Loki wipes a tear from his eye…
LikeLike
Iowa governor (and Virginia Tech grad) sticks his nose into it:
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20100608/SPORTS0206/100608038/Gov.-Culver-wants-to-mold-realignment-Iowa-State-discussion
LikeLike
So it’s not just the Texas politicians…
LikeLike
the difference is Texas politicians are actually holding a hand.
LikeLike
Perhaps. But it also means Delany better have himself 8 votes aside from Iowa. Clearly this governor is hoping for another ACC situation to arise.
Then again, you could at least see the argument for VT. At least they were good at something.
LikeLike
I guarantee Delany has 10 votes not to invite Iowa State. If the governor wants to force Iowa to go to the mattresses and screw up a big pay day for Iowa on a Quixotic effort to some how make Iowa State look like anything other than Floyd of Rosedale he’s nuts.
LikeLike
Wow, more politics. Exactly what we need in sports.Well let’s see? Iowa state may have the lowest enrollment of all the schools mentioned, the least glorious sports tradition and it’s no Northwestern academically. I think this governor is blowing a lot of hot air really. As I mentioned in another post, the MAC would love them some Iowa State. Else a diminished big 12 conference will remain their home.
LikeLike
The political response has not ended — nor should it — state legislatures have absconded with billions of dollars from the hard-working citizens of these states and given them to the “flagship” state institutions of higher education. The state legislators have every right, in fact, a duty to get involved in this as well. This is not an “academic freedom” issue.
LikeLike
“There needs to be more fairness in all this to everyone concerned,” Culver said in an interview Tuesday with the Des Moines Register.
So, Gov. Culver thinks it would be more fair to have two Big Ten universities from the state of Iowa, population 3 million, possibly denying a spot for just one Missouri university, population 6 million?
LikeLike
Exactly. Iowa currently is at or near the bottom of the Big Ten when you look at Research $, Academic standing, endowment, enrollment, alums, and state population (tv hh). While it still moslty fits the profile of a Big Ten school and has a nice football program, by no means is this a school (or a state) that is in a position to make waves and try to throw it weight around in The Big Ten.
LikeLike
None of the Hawkeye fanbase thinks the state Iowa has the political power to do anything about ISU. (nor do any Hawk fans want ISU in the B10) I think this is simply the governor making himself look good to the ISU fans (however few there are) for the election this fall.
LikeLike
I agree. Though the fact that he has no actual power to change anything will mean he will fail in his quest and may end up making him just look ineffectual.
LikeLike
I don’t think that I saw this posted yet, but is so my apolagies…
New Greenstein article up – Source: Big Ten Expansion will happen ‘in steps’
http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/06/source-big-ten-expansion-will-happen-in-steps.html
This lends more truth to Nebraska being in by the end of the week.
LikeLike
lmao at “Jim is getting his hand forced, and he doesn’t like it”.
He has no problem keeping 20 schools and 5 conferences in limbo for an indefinite time, but don’t scrfew with his time table….
LikeLike
To follow up, could this be why MO and RU are not being talked about today?
On Tuesday, TO said he still needed “lots of information” , presumably from the BT. If Neb is priority #1, perhaps there simply has been insufficient time to work out the details for RU and MO…….
LikeLike
Well, sure. Adding Nebraska alone–right now– is the safest and surest move the Big Ten could make.
Think about how things have progressed from the start of the expansion talk six months ago. Dr. Saturday and Brian Cook were convinced that the Big Ten should add Pittsburgh and stop, that Notre Dame was unquestionably the best addition for the Big Ten but unavailable, and that Syracuse and Cincinnati and Louisville were potential candidates, and Missouri was on the fringe. Right now, the Big Ten is about to invite freaking NEBRASKA into the conference (and thinking of expanding to 16), Texas is actually the best option for the Big Ten and could actually come, Notre Dame is feasible, freaking RUTGERS is the odds on favorite from the Big East to leave, Missouri is more desperate than anybody to jump ship, the Pac-10 basically tried to annex the Big XII South, and we’re on the verge of the superconference era. Once you step back and evaluate everything that’s changed, you can appreciate how incredible it is to be a college football fan right now.*
*If you’re a Big Ten/Nebraska fan. Otherwise, hyperventilation time.
LikeLike
Things are moving fast…
Lincoln Journal Star reporting that the Nebraska Board of Regents executive board is having a conference call today witch is “likely to discuss realignment”.
http://my.journalstar.com/post/Husker_Extra_Group/Husker_Extra/blog/regent_conference_call_likely_to_discuss_realignment.html
LikeLike
It is a little slow today so I thought I would throw my theory out here for dissection and attack.
Big Ten comments from the recent meetings included information that the expansion research has been going on for a while (i.e. started before the Dec 2009 announcement). Rutgers has been mentioned as a candidate in most of the leaks surrounding the research the Big Ten did, but not so much recently when all of the Nebraska, ND and Pac 10 stuff started.
What if the research told the Big Ten that establishing a geographic foothold next to NYC was a home run and needed to be part of any expansion? In that case, Rutgers is no longer leaked as part of the discussions because they are no longer being discussed, they are already considered “in”.
The Big Ten wouldn’t announce a separate expansion of just RU because that wouldn’t excite anyone outside of NJ, but everyone could be working under the understanding that RU is going to be part of whatever expansion can finally be worked out in the Neb, ND and Texas discussions.
LikeLike
Seems like a possibility, but if you know with certainty that RU will eventually be included, not sure why you would delay…..one possibility would be that Delaney’s displeasure with forcing his hand concerns the TERMS of inclusion, which hadn’t been worked out….(v. the teams)
LikeLike
I’m with you Phil.
I think RU is in. But the announcement needs to come at the right time.
The stage has been set for other Big 12 schools to defect. Texas and Texas A/M could be getting closer to joining the Big 10. The timing is almost there.
Once they are ready to announce, THAT would be the perfect time to also announce Rutgers. It would display balance to the league (east as well as west additions) and it would create the PERFECT scenario for Notre Dame to finally get off its keister.
15 teams. Spanning from Texas to NYC. More college football superpowers historically than any other conference. The Big East gone. The PAC10 hobbled (stuck at 12? No Texas annex). The SEC reined in on its recent successes.
Maybe I’m wrong about timing. Maybe Rutgers, UT, and aTm will all have separate announcements? Maybe it’ll be a one by one thing. But whatever the case, I strongly feel that Notre Dame will only come when 15 are already in.
LikeLike
Has this article been addressed already? Anyone familiar with any articles that specifically state an official invite has been extended to Nebraska?!
http://www.thebuckeyebattlecry.com/?p=5338
Reports: Nebraska receives official invite to join Big Ten Posted on June 09, 2010 by Jim
A match made in heaven?
Breaking news.
Update: This is not just a re-post of the Omaha World-Herald article, that is cited to support speculation that Nebraska will actually join the conference. Multiple sources have confirmed this morning that an official offer has been extended to Nebraska by the Big Ten.
Let the chain reaction begin.
Who will be next? Notre Dame? Missouri? Texas? Someone east?
LikeLike
Interesting. Can’t speak to the Buckeye Battle Cry’s credentials; perhaps someone else can. I have no clue who their sources could be. If OSU intended to do a leak I would assume they’d go to the Dispatch (again) or even Bucknuts. But, who knows.
LikeLike
BBC is worthless, unless you’re looking for something to confirm every negative stereotypes you’ve held about Ohio State fans.
They were kicked out of SB Nation for pulling some really sleazy crap that violated the network’s privacy policy.
LikeLike
Well there you go then. 🙂
LikeLike
I think Delaney–publicly at least–will say that NE is stage one and “we will continue to consider our options”. Privately, the B10 tries to see what, if anything, they can do about UT/ND. Remember, the P10 chose to go all in right off the bat; there isn’t much else they can do for Texas. I think Delaney will try to leverage both UT and ND at the same time, maybe Texas makes the medicine “go down good” for ND (no intentional double entendre there).
The next public B10 announcement won’t happen unless/until they know what UT and ND are going to do. Apologies to zeek for any plagairism.
LikeLike
so, fox sports ohio has the invite as “official” now. interesting, but nothing is official until a press conference is scheduled. bold statements though…
http://www.foxsportsohio.com/06/09/10/Reports-Nebraska-to-Join-Big-Ten/landing.html?blockID=250141&feedID=3724
LikeLike
Being reported in Omaha as well
LikeLike
Interesting note from that article:
“Over the weekend, the Big 12 Conference demanded a loyalty pledge from all of its’ members, and only 9 teams complied. Two of the three holdouts, Nebraska and Missouri, were given until this Friday to decide if they wanted to stay in the league…”
Who was the third team who didn’t kneel to the Big 12?
LikeLike
Would think probably Colorado
LikeLike
@Derrick – Very safe to say Colorado. I think Chip Brown has been on top of this story as well as anyone, but his sources are definitely providing the optimal Texas viewpoint on all of this or at least from someone that wants to badly keep the Big 12 together (i.e. Baylor might get into to the Pac-10 over CU, MU and NU could get left at the alter by the Big Ten due to Notre Dame, etc.).
LikeLike
Was very likely the reason the Board of Regents at Colorado met last night with the lawyers.
LikeLike
Yalta Conference for TX and aTm tomorrow.
And uh oh, they may simply reload the B12 instead of going P16 or B16. Dagnabbit!
LikeLike
Uh oh for who?
LikeLike
Me, for starters. I’m really hoping NE’s departure prompts a run for the exits.
LikeLike
Could be that Fox TV (not FSN) offer, modified post-NE.
Ugh, just say no to Joel Meyers.
LikeLike
More Smoke?
http://my.journalstar.com/post/Husker_Extra_Group/Husker_Extra/blog/regent_conference_call_likely_to_discuss_realignment.html
LikeLike
I refuse to believe this without multiple confirmations…
Orangebloods.com: Baylor’s addition to the Pac-10 being met with resistance by Cal-Berkeley bec of Baylor’s religious ties. 10 minutes ago via TweetDeck
LikeLike
Are you surprised?
LikeLike
The Chasm of Sar is deep.
BTW, John has a long mustache.
LikeLike
Yeah, denial is classic stage one.
LikeLike
Yay for our fellow hippies. I was hoping they wouldn’t let Colorado down. 🙂
LikeLike
# Orangebloods.com: BYU and Air Force have been identified as possible schools to join B12 if the league loses 2 schools and can be salvaged. 14 minutes ago via TweetDeck
# Orangebloods.com: Texas and Texas A&M will meet Thursday to discuss if they are on the same page if B12 falls apart. 15 minutes ago via TweetDeck
Which suggests they are NOT.
LikeLike
HMMM…B12 to add BYU and AF but not Utah? Could that mean Utah already spoken for? Or more likely – just choosing BYU for the SLC market over Utah?
LikeLike
BYU, good fan Base and big boy potential. Apparently no one in the confrence will care enough about their LDS affiliation to kick them off the football field for eating crackers. Air Forse? Aservice academy yet has played big boy ball at times. I might have been looking TCU, CSU, Utah, mephis, and louisville as well.
LikeLike
Maybe settles out everything.
Big 12 Wins:
Keeps the family (mostly) together and by taking BYU and AF improve the geographic footprint adding a major market SLC. While Nebraska travels not a lot of TV sets there. CO settles maybe a little as they now have a few more playmates close to them while creating more of a western beachhead.
Pac 10 Wins:
By B12 taking BYU, Utah would be free to join the Pac 10 then Pac 10 grabs whoever they like in MWC and WAC.
Big 12 and Pac 10 Win:
Both start some sort of alliance in the next round of TV contracts. Schedule some interleague games, etc. VERY appetizing to broadcasters probably more so then SEC but not as much as B10.
AF and BYU get the chance for an auto-bid. And if Mizz left you sub TCU back into the mix.
NCAA and BCS Wins:
BCS wins because three possibly four of the strongest non-BCS Auto-bid programs get into a conference which no longer monkeys in the national championship game for at least 5 years (save Boise state of course).
LikeLike
There in NO ONE in the WAC that the Pac wants and its arguable that the only team they would want in the MWC is Utah.
If the Pac expands it needs at least (bare minimum) CU and Utah. No CU – No expansion. My feeling is that CU dream scenario is a move to the Pac w/ only Utah, but they would move to Pac regardless of what the B12 does – if given the opportunity.
LikeLike
@Playoffs Now!
# Orangebloods.com: BYU and Air Force have been identified as possible schools to join B12 if the league loses 2 schools and can be salvaged. 14 minutes ago via TweetDeck
Doesn’t this suggest Pac-10 might be close to pulling Colorado and Utah?
Second one seems to be Texas looking Texas A&M in the eye as they try and figure out if the Big12 can be salvaged.
If true, it means Missouri stays put for now.
LikeLike
that is supposed to increase the B12 tv contract? BYU and Air Force….
I enjoy TX v OU as much as anybody, but don’t you have to offer at least one other marquee game per year?
Dr. Pepper presents the Big 12 Championship Game
Texas or OU vs an unranked opponent from the north
LikeLike
Or…
it’s to discuss the logistics of their move to the Big 10. Nebraska only needed to consult internally to make their decision to join…the two Texas schools have so many affiliations and politics to contend with, plus they need to be on the same time frame. Do they both announce together? Politically should one join first? Those kinds of things are huge.
Or…
if the BIg 10 isn’t their slam dunk destination like I think it is, then they need to talk about where the other is heading and how to make the whole thing fit for the legislators and fans.
LikeLike
Ugggh…I really hope they don’t try and stay in the Big 12.
LikeLike
OT for Big Ten fans
Michigan has released Demar Dorsey from his LOI per Angelique Chengelis of the Detroit News (I can’t locate the link)
LikeLike
Dorsey will have any number of other schools vying for his services–mostly from the SEC
LikeLike
whatever you want to say about the kid’s past his treatment by the Detroit media and Michigan athletic department bureaucracy has been lamentable.
LikeLike
I agree that the media has not been kind to the kid- Detroit media are a bunch of self-righteous hacks. But it sounds like the football program has been fighting for him all along.
LikeLike
the football team has. but the old Michigan Man faction in the AD has been fighting them and decided not to accept DD.
LikeLike
Yes… the Local Detroit media has been second-rate and full of itself lately.
Unfortunately, it hasn’t always been that way. The trust in local sports media is pretty much gone.
While Dorsey certainly made his own mistakes, I do not like how this was handled, and I hope the kid does well.
LikeLike
The Message Board Mafia says it is a conspiracy against RR.
LikeLike
Yes, conspiracy of some sort…IF Rich Rod would have won, or at least had a winning season, he could have taken a chance with Dorsey and TPTB would have looked the other way. Now, with Rich Rod’s existence hanging on one season, 2010, I’m sure admissions looked at this one (again, after all the great local press reports) and figured, “Do we want to deal with this kid if RichRod ends up gone?” And the answer was pretty simple…
Sigh…I wish life was simpler like it used to be and everything wasn’t under the microscope 24/7. I think Dorsey needed a break and I hope he gets one.
LikeLike
Missouri is screwed. If the B10 wanted them, they would offer them now. They will either be out of a conference or will beg Texas to save the B12, agreeing to a deal they can’t walk way from.
LikeLike
Missouri needs clarity from Texas/ND as to their actions.
Delany is trying to figure out where all of these schools end up before he commits to a Missouri or Rutgers strategy.
Missouri and Rutgers are still the two most likely to get invites after Nebraska, especially if ND or Texas is coming.
They were always dependent on other actors though more or less. Only Nebraska really controlled its own destiny entirely as a pickup the Big Ten was going to make regardless…
LikeLike
Delany started this and UT and the Pac 10 are going to end it. Delany is trying to “slow play”. If the Big 12 stays intact and just reloads his chance to get ND is finished. He got a great school in Nebraska but he doesn’t force ND’s hand.
LikeLike
I agree, but the Big 12 staying together is the optimal scenario.
Just think about it, take Nebraska now, get to 12.
Pac-10 takes Colorado/Utah.
SEC does nothing, ACC does nothing.
In 3 years (before 2015-2016), the Big Ten move on Texas quietly.
Obviously, I think Nebraska more or less destroys the Big 12. I don’t see Texas sticking around…
I think a Pac-16 sets off a scenario that either gets you ND or Maryland/VA if it forces the SEC to go to 16…
LikeLike
B10 not going to creep up on UT. After this business, there will be ironclad contracts all around. This is where the merry-go-round stops. Besides, I think B12 and Pac-10 solidify relationship with a HUGE TV deal that dwarfs B10 network at that point. SEC, B10, and Pac-10/Big 12 networks for everyone. If B10 wants UT they better strike now because once this is finished its done for at least 20 years.
LikeLike
I’m sure the Big ten likes them much. But in anyone’s mind do you choose Mizzu over Texas +1 or ND by its lonesome? The answer is a resounding NO00oo. Missouri still has the Big 12 to fall back on should the majority of the conference survive. What are they gonna do, kick them out? The SEC would be a new market for them but no fit for the more lofty academic goals of Missouri. The Big East would love em and they could dominate it in football where they would not likewise in the SEC. Mizzu unfortunately has got to play the waiting game.
LikeLike
Without the implosion of the Big 12, ND still holds all the cards and will choose to stand alone. Even if the B10 expands, it still does not matter because the college landscape remains relatively unchanged.
LikeLike
Internet went out last night. I’ve been in the dark on this board. Saw where Iowa State govenor is sticking his nose in this or trying to. As if Iowa needs or deserves two BCS teams. All this reiterates Duff’s and others’ observations that Neb and Mizzou (and I guess Rutgers) bring a lot of value in simply being a lone state school.
Part of the problem now is everything is being done behind closed doors. That makes perfect sense and all, but sooner or later you have to make things public and that will really help you shake out the poltical discourse. As of now, there is no incentive for Iowa U to say anything. Same can somewhat be said of A&M. But as soon as an invite is public, let’s say a public invite for A&M or UT then the smaller schools have to say why they are as deserving as the main flagship. While the citizens of such states may be sympathetic to Iowa St/Tech, the bigger schools can start making the argument that they can’t be left behind to satisfy the needs of the little brother schools. Public opinion could swing one way or another, which would turn some politicians. But there is little public opinion until that happens. Sure, we are all tuned in and a lot of sports talk shows are tuned it. But until the front page story in the Dallas Morning News and Des Moinse Register is “B10 Officially Invites UT (or whomever)” by and large the general public will be disengaged.
Now with respect to the Iowa govenor, I think him govenor getting involved may be good thing and here is why. Sooner or later, someone (or some state) is going to lose out. It is better for an early political defeat rather than to continue to allow precedents get set where legislatures can dictate expansion. If Va Tech had ultimately lost in its battle, would that not give conferences and schools more resolve to battle back. Sure the politicians will always get involved, but everytime they engage in battle and win, it moves the goal posts in their favor. So if one loses, that moves the goalposts back toward the schools and conferences. Iowa is probably the easist battlefield on which to win such a battle right now. Kansas may be the second easiest, once they realize that KU is going to be left behind (partly because of their own “State” problem – but also because they are just not that valuable in terms of what conferences are currently looking for). But if it becomes apparant that KSU is holding back KU, maybe there will be less of a need to satisfy KSU with a BCS conference.
Here is where the other schools have to be team members for the good of the conference. It wasn’t just UVA that allowed Va Tech to join, it was also Duke/UNC who also voted against expansion. Looking back, don’t you think they would have voted in favor of it in order to get Syracuse. Wouldn’t that have allowed the ACC to retain its “basketball conference” identity? VA only had veto rights, becauase the other two schools already publicly stated what they would do.
For the B10, the other schools must simply allow Iowa to vote no. The only other state that I could see playing that game is Pennsylvania. As long as the other schools keep quiet they can play this game and win. Win the Iowa battle to set up some momentum for Texas. I’m sure most will say it will have no bearing, but really it does even if only a little. Precendents are important for a reason – even if it is set in a different state. You just need to swing the momentum back to you (in this case the schools and conferences).
Finally, I keep getting back to the big picture of congressional politics. It only takes one influential senator or congessmen to make waves. I think one of these conferences is going to have to deal with Kansas. Leaving them out in the cold could have long-term negative consequences for the BCS conferences. Maybe fitting them into the ACC could work because of basketball. Maybe the MWC or a revised BXII would work. I don’t really know. But it would be better to take care of them. From a national perspective, the KU problem is worse than the Tech problem.
LikeLike
I meant Texas (as a state) in place of first A&M reference in 2nd paragraph.
LikeLike
sh,
one of the reasons I wanted Kansas for B 10..
as an AAU school with a top basketball team, they would be one less person to pick a fight when they have no major conference to call home. i mean kansas state is not the same in visibility of the Jayhawks on the national stage.
it could be the black eye thing for the Big 10
LikeLike
http://www.columbiatribune.com/weblogs/behind-the-stripes/2010/jun/08/should-missouri-answer-the-ultimatum/
Some insight on what happens if the schools do not respond to the ultimatum.
“Again, hypothetically speaking, if two schools were facing the same ultimatum, Lattinville said it would be in their best interest to consult before offering an answer to the Big 12. “It makes really good sense,” he said. “And I don’t answer unless I have to because my answer is likely to be relied on. And even if it’s unreasonable that” the conference “relied on it, you better believe a lawsuit would follow it or that they’ll threaten a lawsuit recognizing that it’ll take 6-9 months trying to figure this out. And that’s going to be a deterrent to another conference picking you up. And if you lose, you could owe exponentially more than what your buyout is.” “
LikeLike
Frank,
from this link….
http://www.texas.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1092612
GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION?
It has been expressed to Orangebloods.com by a top collegiate executive that any movement toward four, 16-team super conferences will be met with resistance by Congress.
The executive said that could be bad news for college athletics because Congress has already taken some cursory looks at the fact athletic departments enjoy a tax-exempt status as part of their universities.
The executive said if it appears the rich are getting richer in college athletics, there will be a hard look at whether to take away the tax exempt status of athletic departments.
“And it won’t just be Orin Hatch (a member of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee from Utah and longtime BCS critic) looking into this,” the source said.
Stay tuned.”
FOLKS THE IRS IS THE BIGGEST GORILLA!
restate the key sentence..
The executive said if it appears the rich are getting richer in college athletics, there will be a hard look at whether to take away the tax exempt status of athletic departments.
and one more time a few key words..
“take away the tax exempt status”
If anybody out there in blogger land this is the lifeblood of ticket sales via corporations & “donations” for the right to get seats!
WOW! WOW! WOW! WOW!
and now the fat lady may be getting ready to sing….
LikeLike
See my point in my last blog post slightly above. Congressional politics is important. Why it is important to take care of Utah and Kansas. These inquiries always come from states who don’t have schools in BCS and want to get in. You don’t see Michigan congressmen raising a stink. Nor do you see SD congressmen making waves. If these conferences want to consolidate power, they better remember where the real power resides.
LikeLike
Maybe DeLoss, er, Orangebloods ought to realize who gets slapped with the biggest tax bill.
The Ministry of Information down there really should have worked on some kind of coherent message beforehand.
LikeLike
The mere fact of one or more 16 team conferences is not going to trigger such a review. It is only if they cooperate (conspire) to control a playoff system, bowl access etc. in such a way that others are locked out.
If this is a significant threat it will not play out for a long time and in any case expansion will proceed apace.
LikeLike
@Duffman
“In summary, BCS states have 52 Senators to 30 from the outsiders, 331 to 92 congressmen, and ~234 million to ~64 million people. These numbers get even worse with some very simple assumptions (New York wouldn’t care, Rutgers, Nebraska, and Oklahoma will likely still be in a BCS conference) Unless many elected officials are willing to support something that would harm their constituent BCS school (or at least a school in their state), no Hatch-like action will be successful.”
Utah + Kansas doesn’t make a legislative win. See the larger analysis earlier in the thread.
LikeLike
So? That’s not how politics works.
Attached to the bill will be something else that benefits each of the states–such as keeping a military base open in North Carolina… and so on.
LikeLike
The Big Ten, SEC, Pac-10, and ACC alone control enough senators to stop anything from hurting their schools…
Why won’t those senators/representatives fight back just as hard?
LikeLike
yeah but when anti trust and loss of tax exempt status are the buzzwords. It can be driven by a VERY small minority once it hits the public and the media sh$tstorm that could follow. Think how many long time fans have been getting phased out because of the “hefty donations” that come with the tickets. our economy is not in great shape right now, and there is already a backlash on wether the pros are worth it.
LikeLike
Yes. It doesn’t matter if you have the votes to win, becuase it reallyl isn’t a political winner. No one wants to vote on it. The best strategy is to prevent it from ever being brought up. The hammer may never come down, but you don’t want it ever raised. As the current structure sits, only Utah is out of the fold if you will. Hatch raised it and got Utah invited to the party through these added at-large BCS births.
LikeLike
I don’t think this is as big an issue as it sounds. Let’s say they strip the tax exempt status from college athletic departments…all the donations would go to the university general fund instead, and the schools simply fund athletics out of their general funds. Not a chance in hell Congress would strip tax exempt status from entire university system nationwide. It’s an empty threat.
And if the schools have to start paying tax on their athletic revenues, what’s that total about 30% tax rate? Many of these schools are gonna see their total revenue increase by more than that, so they still win.
LikeLike
Derrick,
you are looking at the wrong end of the picture. When State U goes to Daddy Warbucks for the athletic department think of it like a country club.
a) a substantial initial “donation” – maybe 50K to 500K per seat just for the right to get the seat
b) a substantial annual “donation” – maybe 500 to 5,000 per seat just to keep the seat
c) the cost of the actual ticket (maybe 50 bucks face value) for each game
Now Daddy Warbucks says no way am I paying that much for a ticket. Then the AD winks and says that the “donation” can be written off against his income tax. Daddy Warbucks writes the check.
To your point about it going to the general fund, not so fast. When you donate a sum like that you get a letter that gets forwarded to the IRS stating if you receive and undue benefits from that donation. This is an IRS red flag waiting to happen as right now that letter says the “donation” is connected to the seats. I for one will not think the IRS will not notice that all the big general fund donations suddenly have the best seats at every game.
It has been a form of scalping by the state universities for years. It would all come public to the general public if they take away the current tax exempt status. You are missing the tax dodge is set up to entice the donor, not the university.
LikeLike
Following the comments under Duff’s point. It only takes one senator or one congressmen to cause headaches. Some are more powerful than others. Look at Iowa, Senator Grassley is as powerful a Senator as there is with respect to tax-exmption. So long as Iowa is safely in the BCS fold, there is probably no reason to worry about him. He would run the risk of upsetting a lot of constituents. But what if he were the senator from Kansas, and he saw his two schools getting left behind. You don’t think he has enough power and clout to make waves. Orin Hatch already showed us the power a Senator can have.
LikeLike
So, for the sake of argument, somebody has to find a good home for Kansas and Utah. Just puts pressure on a couple of conferences to consider them more strongly. Also puts pressure on Texas to keep the Big 12 together by replacing the departed. Orangebloods rides to the rescue again!
LikeLike
The political pressure started with Texas and it should end there then. Take away the Texas add- on’s and we have more room for the Utah’s and Colorado’s of the world. And a smarter distribution of Texas teams.
LikeLike
@duffman – This is whole lot of BS bluster from Congress in order to get TV face time to appease the lowest common denominator of the public. It’s one thing to threaten this and a whole other matter for Senators and Congressmen to affirmatively vote to take money away from their flagship universities. We’ll see how popular that would be when that comes up for a vote. Plus, a disproportionate share of the nation’s top scientific and defense research is performed by schools within the BCS (and specifically by schools in the Big Ten and Pac-10). I’m sure they’d like to imperil that so some MAC schools can get some better access to bowl games. DC can STFU on this matter – they need to read up on NCAA v. Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma to understand that schools and conference have the ability to make autonomous decisions.
LikeLike
I think you underestimate the power of the tax-exemption.
LikeLike
frank,
you will have to take my word on this. I know this end of the game better than a vast majority of folks. if it is ever under serious scrutiny, many folks will start ducking for cover.
LikeLike
He’s right though that this is just an easy topic to hit at.
Everyone loves trust-busting when you make it sound like you’re going after national railroads or oil companies or telecom giants.
But when it affects your state’s flagship that tends to have a ton of bandwagon fans, the politics become questionable…
LikeLike
zeek,
normally I would agree, but the “donations” have become so demanding in the past 10 – 20 years that many big donors are getting pretty ticked off. I know some folks who have been donors for generations that are starting to say no and this is a backlash no state university wants to deal with.
if we were in a great economy, or the “donations” had not risen so fast I think this would not be the case. I am not so sure right now, and I am not a university president.
LikeLike
If 16 teams is the trigger for action on the part of the fed, then perhaps the original plan was to go 14. Assumeing NE is a done deal,it could be another reason we wait. Texas + 1 is 14 or ND + Rutgers/Missouri is 14.
LikeLike
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/spt/colleges/topstories/stories/060910dnsporealignsider.1504c14.html
This is the likely scenario of how a Pac-16 would work, as several here have speculated. Seems the only way Cal and Stanford would give the OK for school like Tech and OKSt to join. This is, however, a terrible situation for Colorado (visit to USC once every 8 years?) should they get the invite, and equally tough pill to swallow for the AZ schools. The whole point of Colorado wanting to be in the Pac-10 was to get away from the Tx and OK schools and play more games on the West Coast where they do most of their recruiting and have larger alumni bases. If this plan is being pushed forward with no hope of blocking it, still seems in the best interest of Colorado and the AZ schools to team up with the Kansas schools and the MWC to form something else.
LikeLike
So it is possible the Pac-10 actually loses members (UA, ASU) while gaining a mess of Texas and OK.
That really would ensure the result is Pac-8 + “the eastern division formerly known as some other conference”
Rather diminished academic upgrade for UT, TAMU nicht wahr?
LikeLike
It’s the kind of situation where both sides can argue for conflicting situations.
Stanford/Cal can say they dropped UA/ASU as you say, upon a new SWC division, and rebuilt the old Pac-8.
Texas/A&M can say they joined a conference with Stanford/Cal/UCLA/USC/UW.
Colorado on the other hand has to go and explain to its fans that it will only travel on the west coast around once a year…; they’re the ones who get most shafted by the Pac-16. I guess the money will be enough to console them though…
LikeLike
We’ll shut up and take it, its better than the ridiculous MWC scenarios that the MWC boosters are trying to pump through the local media here in Denver over the last couple of days. Though I think Colorado infinitely prefers the pod system, and I would think the AZ schools do to.
LikeLike
I think that the “one out of every 8 years” is if you one play one cross divisional game equaling a total of 8 conference games. The Pac 10 currently plays a 9 conference game schedule. If they kept this and played 2 cross divisional games, then you could play teams once every 4 years (Texas could play the Washington schools one year, then the Oregon schools one year, the Northern Cal schools one year, and the Southern Cal schools one year and then rotate back). If you go to 16 team conference, I would think that you’d probably have to play more in conference games.
LikeLike
How hilarious would it be if Nebraska gets the Big 10 invite and decides to stay in the Big 12 anyway and everything remains status quo?
I’d laugh my ass off.
LikeLike
It would be quite a bizarre situation to say the least…
LikeLike
Don’t go getting a girdle to hold your sides in. Nebraska isn’t turning down the Big Ten. We’d fire them all and vote out any Regent who objected. People here know the score on what this does for Nebraska.
LikeLike
Oh, I know they’re not saying no. It would just be awesome if this showdown in the Big 12 ended that way.
In fact, I think it would be great to try to watch the Big 12 teams get along after all this. That would probably be more entertaining than any football game.
LikeLike
I also think it would be great watching Missouri if they don’t get an invite. They’re basically the ones that started all this with their pandering to get into the Big 10 and basically calling out the Big 12. How ironic would it be if they wind up in the Mountain West when all is said and done?
LikeLike
There is a chance that they don’t get an invite.
Basically, Delany is telling Missouri that the Big Ten has to see a path to 14 or 16 before it invites Missouri.
(At least that’s my best guess).
Perhaps Delany does see a path to 14 through Missouri and Rutgers as a back up no matter what the rest of the expansion looks like.
In that case we would see Missouri invited. But if Missouri isn’t invited, it’s just so that Delany has 4 slots open in one of his preferred scenarios opens up.
In any case, Missouri makes sense in a lot of ways, the Big Ten can’t invite them though until we can see who comes in as 14/15/16…
LikeLike
Missouri has been wanting into the Big Ten for as long as I can remember, same with Colorado wanting the Pac 10. Be somewhat hypocritical for someone who supports Nebraska going to the Big Ten to find any fault with schools trying to find places more in line with and more capable of enabling the future they’d like to have for themselves.
LikeLike
I wonder though how long that process would take? If they don’t get an initial invite to the Big 10 and the Mountain West offers them a spot immediately, do they say no and hope for the best? Or do they take what they can get now?
I guess they could always jump to the Mountain West and then go to the Big 10 with an invite even if it comes a month later. I wonder what penalties they would incur under that scenario?
LikeLike
I assume that was meant at Robert, since I’m a supporter of Missouri in the Big Ten.
I was just bouncing off how the Big Ten will approach a basis for Missouri’s invite.
We can’t forget that these are still business deals even though they’re obviously vastly more important for the schools themselves.
LikeLike
Yeah, zeek, sorry. It was @ Robert. This format does have some tricks I need to remember.
LikeLike
eapg, I don’t really care where Missouri winds up on a personal level. I just think from an irony/karma standpoint, it would be hilarious if they were left out of the Big Ten and Big 12 basically by their own doing.
It’s one thing to want to go to another conference (Colorado). It’s another thing to call out the conference your in and basically give them the middle finger (Missouri).
LikeLike
On a personal level, I don’t have a dog in their fight either. But I will say if they have been operating under some kind of assurance from the Big Ten then I would not be happy to see the rug pulled out from under them. That’s not the way you do business. If they haven’t had such assurance, but only feelers, then they’ve made of mess of this for themselves.
LikeLike
I doubt the Big 10 told them they were in for sure, but I imagine they were told something to the effect of “Oh yeah, you guys are right at the top of our expansion list.”
But I’m not even talking about just Missouri’s unwillingness to pledge their loyalty to the Big 12 at the recent conference meetings. I’m also referring to Missouri’s governor basically begging for a Big 10 invite for months and many of the other pre-Big 12 meeting comments that, in essence, put the Big 12 on shaky ground to begin with. This stuff was happening before any of us even had Nebraska on the Big 10’s expansion radar.
LikeLike
There still is a remote chance that the Big Ten goes for its Texas gambit before its ND gambit.
Basically, what I’m saying is that picking up Nebraska now to 12 means that if the SEC does crash the Pac-16 party as many have speculated, the Big Ten can just offer 2 spots to Texas/A&M and say it’s going to stop at 14.
Thus, you end up with just Nebraska/Texas/A&M.
Adding Nebraska opens the field to all varieties of scenarios, since it’s the lynch pin to all of this. It was just a question of whether Delany could get ND to sign on before Nebraska. Clearly the Pac-16 situation has forced his hand on Nebraska even though he would never admit it…, but it does bring a lot of clarity.
LikeLike
good point
LikeLike
Nebraska is the move, for sure.
what about Tex/ND stop?
LikeLike
Delany will quietly propose that to Texas and ND for sure, especially if the SEC tries to invite A&M/OU/OSU or A&M/OU/OSU/Tech (the latter would be more likely to elicit this kind of response).
But that’s unrealistic. ND isn’t going to go anywhere until they see a lot more movement in all likelihood.
But you are right that he will attempt that. At this point Delany is just looking for how the scenarios roll out. If Missouri fits into his scenarios, that’s probably where he goes next. If Rutgers, etc. then that’s where he goes.
Nebraska was the only obvious play on the board because it satisfied every criteria from the getgo and was willing to take an invite…
LikeLike
Silve has quiet as a mouse. (first time for everything)
When is he going to start pounding his chest?
hey Zeek;
Don’t you think Mizzou and Rutgers could be a long way off, because Texas is going to be pretty deliberate?
LikeLike
Well it depends on how fast the Pac-10 and Texas move.
Typically, these kinds of deals are sewn up pretty fast. The window is the next 3 months; I’d estimate the next 5-8 weeks are going to determine where most of these schools land.
Once Nebraska publicly accepts its invite or we hear it does, the phones are going to be off the hook wheeling and dealing.
The question is whether the SEC waits for the Pac-10 to submit formal invitations or what.
There is still the possibility that Texas stays (admittedly remote), etc.
But, this will be a relatively quick process because the focus is going to be on Texas/A&M and the SEC for the most part.
The focus is going to be off of the Big Ten and Nebraska and Notre Dame (because ND probably won’t come on till 16 is in focus).
LikeLike
That does make sense.
Lots of buzz about the end of the Big 12 right now. Silve should make an appearance soon. (fingers crossed)
apparently fox sports ohio said an invite has been given to Neb.
I guess Friday is go time.
I see, more unproductive days in my future.
LikeLike
Maybe the next 3-4 weeks. New acedemic fiscal year starts July 1 at most universities. What isn’t done by then would be delayed another year.
LikeLike
But it does mean you question whether Delany was serious with the idea that the Big Ten wouldn’t take an inordinate amount of schools from one conference.
LikeLike
He was serious about that idea until the Pac-10 invited the Big 12 South.
I think all of the rules (except regarding teams leaving stable conferences) are out of the window. Nothing that we thought a month ago is as sure as it was before the Pac-10 did the most unexpected gamble anyone could guess…
He’s already about to blow up the timeline, and now that the Pac-10 is threatening to take a half of the Big 12.
Thus, I think if Texas would come with Nebraska/Missouri/Kansas/A&M, then that’s what’s going to happen.
At this point, there are no rules to what schools Delany would target. I would work off that assumption…
LikeLike
Interesting. With everything that has happened so far, the Big 12 is the one conference you could take five schools from that wouldn’t present a threat of being a collective of five votes on conference issues, as long as you split it up with those five.
LikeLike
@eapg – That is my thought process. The B12 N and S are so divided on issue (at least perceived) that it is almost like they are 2 conferences.
I realize that the Pac has put a package together (allegedly) to entice TX, as they are the prize, but the B12 S strategy (minus BU plus CU) does bring in a block of 5 in voting into the existing conference hierarchy.
While I am sure this is what TX prefers – I am a little worried about that as a Pac fan. That is why I would prefer a TX, aTm/OU, TT, CU, and some combo of KS, Utah, or MO.
Feasible, probably not – but the optimal situation for the Pac to bring in potentially 3 from B12 S, 1 from MWC, and 2/3 from B12 N.
This would alos provide the legislative cover for taking care of KS and Utah that some have concerns (if valid) about.
LikeLike
“I realize that the Pac has put a package together (allegedly) to entice TX, as they are the prize, but the B12 S strategy (minus BU plus CU) does bring in a block of 5 in voting into the existing conference hierarchy. ”
While you might see an East/West divide in championship game voting (I think you’ll end up rotating sites), I think you’ll find that UT, OU, A&M, UCLA, and USC will side together against greater revenue sharing while the Northwest schools, OSU, and Texas Tech will favor it.
Similarly, on academic standards, UT, A&M, Colorado and the California schools will probably be one block against the Oklahomas, Arizona State, Oregon State, and Washington State.
I see divisions in this proposed conference, but not an important East/West division.
LikeLike
Yes, Texas schools before Notre Dame.
There are enough assets in the Big 10 currently for Texas. Notre Dame would be a cherry on the top for them.
But for Notre Dame, they still need to get alumni on board. The two main concerns–a. not being “national” anymore and b. being left out of the power structure, missing out on a good thing.
Texas schools take care of A. At the very least, they get SoCal, Texas and neutral roving site (with Navy) every year. With BC and Miami on future schedules, they’ll maintain national identity even in the Big 10.
Assuming the Big 10 takes Rutgers, the Big East will start to crumble. That will force ND to look at its options. At that point, with the Big 10 at 15 schools, the choice will be clear.
Texas schools will join before ND.
LikeLike
Which schools/markets does the Big Ten want to add? I don’t know the exact order past #1 (Texas), but the other places are (Big) east, Notre Dame, and a certain national powerhouse with the hots for the Big Ten called Nebraska, and a longshot at ACC markets. Missouri, with average athletics tradition and good but not great demographics, would come behind all those priorities.
If Nebraska and Missouri are added now, bringing the total to 13, the Big Ten will be limited to three more schools.
*Adding Notre Dame, UT, and A&M would leave out an eastern addition, which is a higher priority than Missouri.
*Adding UT, A&M, and Rutgers/Pitt would leave out Notre Dame, which is a higher priority than Missouri.
*Adding Notre Dame, Pitt, and Rutgers would leave out the state of Texas, which is THE priority.
So if Missouri is added, the Big Ten is guaranteeing itself to miss out on Texas, Notre Dame, or an eastern school.
Now if only Nebraska is added now, what options for numbers 2-5 remain?
*UT-A&M-Rutgers-ND.
*ND-Pitt-Rutgers-Maryland, where MD would have PSU, Pitt, and Rutgers within easy driving distance. Or *UT-A&M-Rutgers-MD, where two markets larger than Missouri (DC/Baltimore and New Jersey) are left in play.
Nebraska alone would be a solid addition, arguably better than any single addition than ND or UT, so I expect them to be invited shortly. As for Missouri… they’re certainly burning some bridges with their old Big 8 friends.
LikeLike
Folks – Remember, Notre Dame IS the East. No other school is followed more closely given the combination of Irish and Catholic concentration in the Northeast. Get Notre Dame, and you get best bang for the buck covering the East, Midwest and Nationally. Home Run!!! Grand Slam is get Notre Dame (East + National) plus Texas/ATM/other (South) and Nebraska (National + required to break up the Big 12). End of Story.
LikeLike
Notre Dame may be the east, but it’s not in the east, and thus could want some eastern teams in the mix, just as Penn State does. This was one of the reasons ND went to the Big East, so its teams other than football could play at eastern locations. (Remember, it recruits many students, whether athletes or not, from the east.) I honestly don’t believe the Big Ten is interested in any Big East schools other than Rutgers, and so northern ACC schools such as Maryland and Virginia could be used to lure ND (and vice versa).
LikeLike
Agreed. I believe Nebraska is probably as low as the Big Ten wants to go academically, and it compensates in many other ways (football and other sports, fan intensity, improving research). The conference presidents likely view Missouri as Nebraska with a lower-level athletic program, and would like to admit members with better academic profiles (while providing a decent athletic and market boost) before committing to Mizzou.
LikeLike
First blood may have just been drawn.
Chip Brown has just reported on 104.9 The Horn out of Texas that the Nebraska regents met unofficially and have decided to move to the Big-10.
Keep on I on Orangeblood so we can confirm this.
LikeLike
Excuse me, keep an “eye” out for confirmation…
…I swear I didn’t ride the short bus to school. Honest…
LikeLike
But I though Chip said that Nebraska was going to be left out in the cold?
LikeLike
I recall him writing something similar to that.
Honestly, who knows? This could be nothing more than Chip trying to stir the pot even more and nothing is actually going to happen.
LikeLike
Brown has just added that Nebraska has chosen the Big Ten to his Twitter.
Granted, he reported it over the radio as well, but let’s see where this goes now.
LikeLike
Is this UT’s last ditch effort to keep the conference together.
Because they see The Pac 10 deal being weak or easily ruined?
Them wanting to look good?
Someone help?
LikeLike
From my perspective, it has more to do with Texas wanting to remain the top dog, as well as creating their own network, than anything else.
Texas, from my understanding, has a great deal of respect for both the Pac 10 and the Big Ten.
LikeLike
I know exactly where KU, KSU, ISU, and Baylor should end up. They should join with Rice, SMU, TCU, Houston to form the “I was abandoned by Texas” conference.
LikeLike
Rice, SMU, TCU and Houston are also all in the “I was abandoned by Arkansas before I was abandoned by Texas” conference. KU, KSU, ISU and Baylor may wind up with a “I was abandoned by Nebraska before I was abandoned by Texas” conference. Mostly, I just like college football better since a university is not likely to leave town in the middle of the night like a damn NFL franchise. The conference stuff is actually kind of fun by contrast, despite people that cite it as a supposed weakness of the college game compared to the pros.
LikeLike
LikeLike
FYI update on what’s happening from 1620 The Zone in Omaha. Nebraska Regents are still in a conference call. Because of Public Records laws, they must update their agenda for their Friday meeting by 1:00 pm Thursday if they’re going vote on it.
Also, they mentionded Frank again. 🙂
LikeLike
Michael, good summation but also consider that the master plan may have always been geared at 14 schools. !4 offer a dramatic change but it lessens the impact on scheduling. A 16 team conference has an inherent problem with scheduling. If you think 14, its still just about ND or TX. And if you can unhitch A&M, it’s about both. With those two or just TX, the Eastern expansion is rendered irrelevant.
LikeLike
It is interesting that at the beginning there were many posters who said even 14 teams was too much, and now everyone accepts 16 as a fait accompli.
LikeLike
Yeah, I was one who thought 16 was waaaay too much. I still do. I think that move busted out by the Pac ten with the six Pac made it seem more likely that it could happen and that the BT was now in an arms race instead of a quiet trip to the gun store.
LikeLike
They added a hidden “11” to the BIg 10 logo when PSU joined. Maybe they’ll change the logo from blue to red now that Nebraska joined.
LikeLike
I heard someone once say the “10” can also repesent the number of states involved. We still have time to make that true.
LikeLike
Good point. Add ND, Neb, UT, A&M, and Tech, and then you have 16 teams in 10 states, so still the Big 10. Nice.
LikeLike
The Tech scenario is pretty much off the table for the Big Ten.
LikeLike
No matter what happens, there are going to be some interesting games in the Big 12 next year. My favorites:
Baylor @ Colorado
They should make this into a relegation game. Winner gets the Pac-10 invite.
Texas @ Nebraska
Always interesting, but just a bit more kick now
Missouri @ Texas Tech
Oklahoma @ Missouri
Really every game against Missouri should be interesting, but when your governor specifically calls out two schools for being stupid, it tends to add some spice.
LikeLike
The Mizzou governor called out Okie State, not Oklahoma. So I don’t sense Soonerland has any extra antipathy towards the Tigers.
LikeLike
for the notre dame fans out there..
looks like UK will play ND in Louisville in basketball soon….
LikeLike
Here’s a Notre Dame rumor from a regular poster on Pitt Blather:
“My brother is a ND Alumn (and a Pitt Alum (MBA), and a Dickenson/PSU) alum (Law)) that attends at least one ND home game a year using a ride on the corporate jet (the owner of the company is a big ND fan, my brother is a VP). He has talked with other corporate jet types in South Bend that tell him that rumor is the Big 11 is not the only conference that ND has talked with about the potential of joining. They have also talked with the BE. Their terms were that the (1) The BE does not add any more teams (allowing them a little more schedule flexibility; and (2) ND gets to bring its NBC contract with it, and keep all of the proceeds from it. According to this rumor (and that’s all my brother said that it was), all BE schools agreed except…you guessed it Pitt, who balked at the NBC coming along for the ride. I think this scenario also includes RU leaving for the BIG 10. This would allow ND to schedule 5 non con games per year…I have no idea if this is true or not, but it is logical. ND gets to choose the lesser of two evils in losing its independence (8+ conference games vice 7 conference games), and they get to keep their NBC money. Seems reasonable to me that they would say to the BE: “If we have to join a FB conference, we would rather join the BE (we are already there in all other sports), but we can’t do that and lose money in the process.”
http://www.pittblather.com/2010/06/09/duck-the-shrapnel/#more-8668
LikeLike
This would mean JD’s next move would be Rutgers. Rutgers is similar to Nebraska in that it is a natural fit with the BigTen and would probably come if asked. At 13, then JD could really just wait.
ND to the Big East I don’t think would trouble JD that much. And the Big Ten has operated with an odd number of schools for a while.
LikeLike
So then, ND balking at joining the prestigious BT to join the BE??? Not that I say I don’t believe it, it just doesn’t make sense over they and their alumni crying about staying “independent”. Which as I pointed out yesterday, they are not. Look on the BE web site and see if ND is independent. Consider these facts; 1) playing football inside the BE changes little for the conference as they are still vulnerable to poaching. 2) Continue to get punked by ND by not reaping a share of valuable TV money from the NBC contract. It’s as I have always thought about ND. They are a Midwestern school with probably too much eastern influence inside the administration. They continue to defy logic. I guessing the easterners’ running this school don’t want a relationship with the BT because they don’t know geography very well or they are way too greedy to have a religious affiliation attached to their institution.
LikeLike
ND in the Big East wouldn’t technically be an independent, but they’d pull all the strings in that conference (kinda like TX in the B12). I could see how that would be attractive to them.
LikeLike
Despite the BTN’s desire to add ND they are an institutional outlier compared to the other BTN schools.
LikeLike
Chris Brown now re-affirming that the Nebraska Board of Regents have indeed agreed to join the Big 10.
According to a fox News Ohio report out of Omaha, Nebraska has received a formal invitation from the Big 10.
Also, and very noteworthy, Chip Brown is reporting that Missouri has not received an invitation to the Big 10.
http://www.1011now.com/home/headlines/95986394.html
LikeLike
Not to rain on the Chip Brown parade, but the Omaha sports radio station is reporting that the meeting is still on going as of 3:00 central.
LikeLike
Huh.
So the Fox News Omaha news station is reporting their in, while another is saying to wait because the meeting is still in session.
Dammit people! I just want answers! KHHHAAAAAAN!
LikeLike
Chip isn’t really big on getting details right. The executive committee of the Board of Regents met on conference call today. Their reason for doing so would be to place this on the agenda of the Board of Regents meeting Friday. It requires 24 hours notice to change the agenda. Any votes are done in public meeting.
LikeLike
FWIW
CFL – is reporting the first two past Nebraska for the Big 10 are….
a) Rutgers
b) Maryland
LikeLike
That would be an amazing expansion if pulled off. Maryland has been one a lot of us have wanted…
The question is what Maryland wants, it’s slightly an outlier as a much larger institution than your typical ACC school. We’ll see what happens.
Nebraska/Maryland/Rutgers would be an awesome Big Ten though…
LikeLike
Next, on BTN, Maryland-Rutgers!!!
LikeLike
The northeast corridor will be riveted…
Still, hard to argue against their value as academic institutions, and they are both large.
They’d also be much more likely to be able to build out to 70000 stadiums and use nearby stadiums (i.e. Redskins/Meadowlands) as well in the Big Ten.
LikeLike
One more thing Hopkins Horn, you won’t be as snarky when I whisper into some Big Ten president’s ear about bringing in JHU to the CIC 🙂
LikeLike
Bingo, would MD-Illinois doesn’t get the blood pumping that much (maybe in bball).
LikeLike
Cool. Gotta scout our next opponent. How are the talks going with Prairie View in the SWC II? 😛
LikeLike
I personally don’t like as MD as much as others. The only thing it has for me is its proxmity to DC. I know it has other good qualities, but it just doesn’t have that wow factor for me. A MD/UVA expansion looks better, but I’d rather have a UVA/UNC expansion. A MD/Rutgers expansion is even less appealing. I realize expansion is being driven by things other than simply creating the best football possible, but let’s face it, at the end of the day, that is how we as society judge these conferences. We look at them superficially, and just say our conference is better than yours. Adding Neb helps in that regard, but adding Neb, UT, and ND blows everything away. I guess after being a part of this blog for so long, I just raised my expectations to high. As a B10 fan, I think it is the greatest conference. But let’s face it the SEC currently has it over them right now when it comes to football. So MD/Rutgers may be a great long term play and be awesome. But I would be dissapointed. I blame Frank for getting me too invested.
LikeLike
Maryland is a play for the academics as a compromise in some sense. They tend to be among the closer institutions to the D.C. hub of the universe as it were.
But they’re both longterm plays, so you are right.
I just think it works well to have an immediate value school, Nebraska, matched up with two of the best longterm plays out there, Rutgers/Maryland.
Both Rutgers and Maryland are large institutions that would be able to put extra money to good use, etc.
But you’re right that the immediate wow aspect towards football is not there with either.
LikeLike
In terms of football, Maryland (its 2009 disaster notwithstanding) compares favorably to Virginia, North Carolina or Rutgers. It’s struggled a bit in recent years, but much of that was due to Virginia Tech entering the ACC and becoming more appealing to metro D.C. recruits. The Big Ten has more interest in the Washington area than many realize (schools such as Illinois have corraled much D.C.-area football talent), and moving to the Big Ten might pay off for Terrapin recruiting. It certainly would help at the box office with brand names like Penn State, Wisconsin, Ohio State and Michigan (and Nebraska?), and probably lead to further enlargement of Byrd Stadium. Football drives the athletic engine, and Maryland can make a heckuva lot more revenue in Big Ten football than if it could sell out every men’s and women’s basketball game at Comcast Center.
And we haven’t even taken the academic/research benefits for College Park into account.
LikeLike
Maryland is one of the few schools out there that has as much to offer to the CIC as the CIC would offer to it. There’s not many schools you can say that for that are in this discussion.
LikeLike
I still don’t quite understand all the Rutgers love, but y’all are smarter than me.
Maryland would be a nice add, would love to see UVA come along with them. Charlottesville would be the best road trip in the Big 10.
LikeLike
I’m with you Derrick, on all points. Maybe it is the stereotype of Jersey. On the other hand, MSU has to be happy as Rutgers will replace them as bottom-dweller of the B10. There I go again, with my MSU bashing. I’m sorry Spartans – just making another joke (although at your expense).
LikeLike
How does Rutgers become the bottom dweller of the Big Ten when Syracuse, the bottom dweller of the Big East, held their own (one win, one reg loss, one OT loss) against three Big Ten bowl teams last year?
LikeLike
Phil, don’t waste your time.
LikeLike
http://www.itsalwayssunnyindetroit.com/2010/04/michigan-states-nuclear-physics-dept.html
of course it is USN&WR…
LikeLike
As a Terp fan, I’d love to see that happen, though I’d hate to see Deborah Yow with egg on her face. Might it be one of Mote’s final moves at College Park (he’s scheduled to retire Aug. 30)? He has ties to Cal, so perhaps he has an indirect feel for the power of the Big Ten.
If it was Nebraska/Rutgers/Maryland at 14, whom becomes the next two? Would they be enough to lure Notre Dame and someone else? Would the A&M/Texas combo still be in play? How about Virginia as a partner to Maryland?
LikeLike
I think Virginia would definitely be asked as well. Maryland + Virginia makes too much sense for UVA to not at least be asked…
LikeLike
But doesn’t UVa have their own “tech problem”?
LikeLike
Not if Slive wants to expand his footprint north…
LikeLike
So maybe Vincent has been right all along…
LikeLike
We’ll see. Let’s let the chickens hatch first.
LikeLike
Any direct link to CFL, Duffman?
LikeLike
vincent,
CFL – ESPN had it on the tv.. wonder if they have a replay access on the computer tho….
BTW.. If you are a Terp fan you know their AD has roots in UK and 10 – 20 years ago the schools were friendly. Yow is well respected with AD’s across the country and certainly has done a great job at Maryland.
LikeLike
She has indeed done a great job — look at all the national titles the school has won, its balanced budget, great hires like Brenda Frese. (And I’ve always thought her supposed tension with Gary Williams was overblown. Every coach has their fiefdom, and I know for a fact Gary gets along better with other Maryland coaches than Driesell did.)
I think her earlier comments were political in nature, and probably only dealt with Maryland as a 12th Big Ten member. If it gets in with Nebraska and Notre Dame, I can imagine her and a number of other folks in College Park humming, “We’re in the money…”, hopefully not in the Ginger Rogers pig Latin from that “Gold Diggers” film.
LikeLike
I did not see this mentioned yesterday, so forgive me if it is a repeat. The B10 might not be a good thing for Rutgers.
“Rutgers Big Ten Decision May Put School’s Sports Deeper in Debt”
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=awsYE5sQ7mgo
LikeLike
I think the article underestimates just how much more Rutgers will be earning in a few years from the Big Ten.
Also, somehow getting $20M extra a year (say in a few years) doesn’t equate to a requirement that they spend much more than that to keep up with OSU/PSU/UM/UNL (guess I can add that 4th now eh?).
As long as they’re prudent, they’ll be fine. There’s no reason to keep up with the Joneses until they absolutely have to…; last I checked Iowa and Wisconsin get along just fine.
LikeLike
Even if correct, the story is a nothing burger re: Rutgers accepting an invite. Reporting about state budget issues for university funding is not news for jjust about every state school in the country.
The stadium comment was just odd ’16-year old stadium’ suggests it needs some work — it was just upgraded. The RAC (basketball arena) does need an upgrade and that apparently is planned to begin soon — presumably independently of a Big Ten invite. Increasing coaches pay etc. to compete in the Big Ten is small beer compared to the increased enthusiasm from fans and athletically-inclined donors. The article mentions the usual hand wringing about money spent on athletics vs. academics (and I am sympathetic to those that question the trade-off).
Overall — this story could have been written about any number of large state schools. The only Big Ten additional expense amounts to the idea one will need to pay coaches more and invest more in the football and basketball programs to compete at the highest levels in a better athletic conference. The exit fee is more than covered by additional BTN revenue as we know.
So the premise of the headline that a move to the Big Ten is somehow a financial burden for Rutgers really doesn’t stand up.
By the way — no mention of the CIC and other benefits (for and from alumni who recognize the academic implications).
If an invite comes down (the application has already been made) McCormick accepts in a heartbeat and the senate faculty approves the move in about a New York minute.
LikeLike
Oh yes re: stadiums. The new Giants stadium is 28 miles up I-95. If Rutgers is in the Big Ten a couple of home games a year can (and will) be played there. (If you want some variety Yankee Stadium is 46 miles away also on I-95.)
LikeLike
Nothing burger is right. Rutgers stadium just was upgraded with contingency plans to go to 70,000, Rac (BBall) funding beginning, coaches salaries (Football) already close to Big Ten with Schiano making over 2 million a year now, State Budget funding tight (no news flash), faculty complaining (join the club). Typical NJ type article looking for the bad in something good.
LikeLike
If you want to take away even one good recruit from Penn State, Michigan or Ohio State, this is a given. These are just the thee strongest programs in the league. The Scarlet night will need to go an extra mile just to equal the school with the least facilities. They are all considerable. In any case an investment in facilities is an asset to the university. This is both in terms of wooing recruits to the athletic programs and to the perspective student population. If Rutgers was thinking about sitting on it $22ML per year they are sadly mistaken. Even Penn State had to do some upgrading to comply with Big ten Standards. Rutgers should have been committed to this long before now. Yo Maryland!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LikeLike
Rutgers is not delusional about anything, totally understands the revenue split deal and by-in, is well prepared to accept membership. They have been around a fews years and are quite educated about all the issues that come with the Big Ten.
LikeLike
By joining the BigTen, both Maryland and Rutgers can start fighting PSU for recruits, which is a battle they’re losing at the moment. PSU has recruited both areas very well over the years.
And Zeek has the right idea. Rutgers/Maryland don’t have to outspend OSU/PSU/UM/Neb, just find what works and use it. Anthony Davis, who just went in the draft, was a 5* recruit that spurned OSU’s advances for Rutgers because it was close to home. The #7 recruit this year on Rivals.com’s early 100 ranking is from Maryland. There are recruits in their areas. Sell the home area, and the east coast lifestyle versus the midwest. Do what Wisconsin and Iowa are known for, which is taking slightly less-heralded recruits, peppering with some higher-regarded recruits, and producing good teams.
This idea that Rutgers might be screwed if they can’t be PSU is ridiculous.
LikeLike
I think recruiting in NJ and in FL also gets easier if Rutgers is in the Big Ten. Check the NJ kids that have gone to the Big Ten in the past — think about that type of quality deciding to stay in state.
LikeLike
There were some good ones come through from NJ and DC lateley. In the near term, its a plan. but kids are swayed by the bling and facilities, then tradition. Rutgers has some work to do.
LikeLike
Don’t confuse RU’s relatively small stadium size with the quality of their facilities. Areas like the weight rooms have been upgraded and a $5mm recruiting lounge was just added to the stadium last year.
The stadium itself supposedly can be increased to 62,000 in one offseason by extending an upper deck in one end zone. Adding an upper deck to the other end zone to get over 70,000 would take a little more work. As mentioned above, I am sure part of an RU invitation would be their agreement to play 1 or 2 games a year in the new Giants/Jets stadium, which I believe holds over 80M.
LikeLike
Not that this is any great scoop.
I texted the guy at U of M AD, that was my liaison for the tickets I bought in the new part of the stadium this year. (hopefully a buy low, sell high situation)
I wrote; lots of Nebraska talk out there?
He replied: You probably know as much as I, but tomorrow promises to be an interesting day.
Like I said not a huge scoop or anything.
LikeLike
Hard to believe a guy trying to sell tickets would push such a belief.
LikeLike
yea buy at Michigan he doesn’t have to try to sell tickets. he’s more likely to vet ticket buyers to make sure they will sit politely and applaud and not stand and obstruct anyone’s view.
LikeLike
I better watch it…..
I have qualified, but you never know now a days.
LikeLike
Question for Hopkins Horn and other Texas guys out there: Assuming that the Huskers and Big 10 official announcement comes on Friday, how soon do you think Texas acts on the Pac 10?
As stated by many, I would be down with NU/MU/ND/UT/A&M to the Big 10, but I don’t see it happening. If the Pac 10 is going to take all of Texas’s buddies, then that’s where they will end up.
LikeLike
I think the answer depends on a factor none of us here know for sure, despite all the speculating: whether the Tech Problem can be overcome.
If it can be (and keep in mind that, as far as I can tell, not a peep yet has been heard from the pro-Texas forces in the Legislature — perhaps fire is being saved for when it’s needed) and the Big 10 is, in fact, a viable option in UT’s eyes, and the addition of Nebraska doesn’t cut off additional Big 10 expansion, it might be worth it to Texas to prolong the process, even for a couple of years, to see how things otherwise play out.
If Texas senses that the Tech problem cannot be overcome, I think a deal with the Pac 10 is wrapped up pretty quickly (within weeks, if not days), once the leeches are shaken off the leg.
LikeLike
Thanks for the answer.
Are you thinking of making the trip to Lincoln on October 16th? Taking into account 0:01 from last year and this offseason, I’m guessing that will be one wild atmosphere.
LikeLike
It’s a road trip I’m going to regret never having made (though I have been to Lincoln a couple of times and enjoyed it quite well).
Despite the animosity you might see here at times (and I have some zingers stored up for once it’s official), I think a number of Texas fans still look back fondly upon the way they were treated when they visited Lincoln for the first time in 1998. I was at NU’s return visit to Austin in 1999, and I have never seen Texas fans so consciously going out of their way to be courteous (not that we normally aren’t , but this seemed beyond the norm) to the Husker fans who visited that day.
LikeLike
@HH
I was at the 1999 game in Austin. (Damn fumbles.)
It was one of the best experiences as a visiting fan that I can remember.
LikeLike
I think if the Tech factor is an equal deal breaker to both conferences, then the politicians will have to free things up for Texas. I would hope they are not so dens or the Pac Ten is not so desperate.
LikeLike
What makes everyone believe (at least on Frank’s ole Blog here) that Texas will automatically bolt to the Pac 10? There’s a lot of buffalo chips that have to be cleared up before Texas will, pardon the expression, be allowed to join the Pac 10.
My guess is Texas, being Texas, is going to try and control the show. If they do that by trying to get more of the revenue from the new TV contract, keep some sort of caveat in the agreement for the TLN, or come up with some other “controlling” element of an agreement, the Pac 10 tells Texas to pound sand, and rightly so.
IF that happens, Texas will either sit and suffer with a re-alligned Big 12 that will now have votes to get a fair distribution of revenue, or look for somebody else to go with…The Big 10? Yes, there’s the SEC. But this is more about academics than it’s ever been about athletics, folks. Don’t forget that.
My guess is that Texas has played all the scenarios out and wants to see what it can get the Pac 10 to agree to. My guess is Stanford will tell Texas where to shove it when the time comes. Just a hunch…..
LikeLike
We don’t automatically believe it.
But we have to be realistic.
What are the odds that the Pac-16 comes to fruition at this point with Stanford/Cal seemingly being sold on a rebuilt Pac-8 while shoving the unwanted ASU/UA off on the new SWC division?
The odds are fairly high, probably around 60-70%.
Only two things can really stop this show (and a third I suppose). 1) Stanford/Cal balks, but this is unlikely if they think they’re recreating the Pac-8 which they want. 2) SEC jumps in for A&M/OU/OSU. This is more probable. 3) Big Ten makes a run at A&M. This is unlikely but it may happen.
Those three scenarios probably have a combined odds of somewhere in the 30-40% range.
Being realistic means that we have to wait till something unlikely happens that blows up the deal. Until it does, more speculation about Texas/A&M won’t go anywhere…
LikeLike
I just don’t see how Texas and A&M could get away from Tech now that we know the Pac 10 would take them. That would be a battle of epic proportions considering the state of Texas just passed a measure to help them achieve Tier 1 academic status.
I doubt Texas wants to have that fight.
LikeLike
For our Big Ten-centric commenters, I’m wondering how a Neb/Rut/Mizz/Md/UVA expansion strikes you. Success? Disappointment? In-between?
LikeLike
Any expansion that gets Md/Va is a big success. That’s just about all you can say.
LikeLike
Yes, I see MD and UVa as great fits and academic home runs (UMd in research and UVa more in academic reputation, although they are a good research institution as well).
Schools that are academic HRs and play competitive D-1 football are the real measure for exceptional expansion in my opinion. (I think the Big Ten presidents will look at it the same way).
LikeLike
@ jd wahoo
If we could trade Georgia Tech or UNC for Mizz I would consider that an excellent outcome.
LikeLike
I would love Neb/Rut/Mizz/Md/UVA. I want what is best for B10 institutions, not just B10 football teams. That combo is a huge win in terms of fit, desire to be here (well, I don’t know about MD/UVA), academics and research $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. Four flagship schools in mostly large states without a little brother, and UVa which has a gigantic endowment.
On a selfish football note, it would benefit the University of Iowa very well. We’d now have four border rivals, not even counting ISU. Nebraska would be a GIGANTIC game. Mizzou would be a nice place to take 20k fans to every other year. Mizzou, Maryland and New Jersey are pretty good bets for recruiting going forward. I think they satisfy the demographics angle without going Texas on us.
LikeLike
greg,
haha.. this was my suggestion back in feb or march
I am a big fan of getting single state flagships!
LikeLike
Mizz is the weakest link but I would love any expansion that would bring in UVa. Big thumbs up.
LikeLike
I’d consider that a big success.
Neb is a homerun add
MD/VA combo is a homerun
Mizzou and Rutgers are ground rule doubles
LikeLike
Academically it’s a success, no question. Give me ND instead of Missouri and it’s a total win, but I could be happy that Neb/RU/Mizz/UMD/UVA.
LikeLike
UVA/Md (plus Johns Hopkins for the CIC) 🙂 would be huge. Nebraska adds the football cache, results in only 1 first tier dynamo per pod, and Mizzou/MD expand the footprint with millions more subscribers.
5 new states, 10 new senators and I’m certain the investment pays off in both research and cold cash ROI for the individual universities. You should see a Big Ten / Pac10 partnership emerge on a national distributorship of the BTN, which completes with ESPN, and the BTN buys a stake in the new PTN).
The Big Ten is simply playing a different game than the rest.
LikeLike
(Putting on JHU hat) Keep your bloody hands off our research dollars!
(Switching hats) You eating that?
LikeLike
Academic success.
Research success.
For viewership, a success. Nebraska adds interest, New Jersey plus whatever more Rutgers can provide in Philly and NYC adds viewers; Maryland (with or without Virginia, which seems less likely than MD) gets a chunk of Baltimore and DC.
For football, it’s okay. I like that Nebraska is a power on the other side of the footprint to help balance out the eastern power schools. However, another big name would be nice for the athletic side of the expansion.
Overall, over the long haul, I think it would be a good expansion for the Big Ten.
LikeLike
I’m all over that Maryland thing. And UVA? Academically a Hugh win but would like to see a school with more football punch. This is basically Pitt south with a higher academic rating. But this would be good for JoePa, fair for viewship, good for the confrence.
LikeLike
If the Rutgers/Maryland news is true, doesn’t that mean the B10 has given up on getting both ND and UT? Or are Rutgers/MD intended to entice ND? Or are the last two slots now offered to UT/A&M? I personally am agnostic about MD -> B10,
but these two particular teams seem to imply all the better options are already gone. Insights, please!
LikeLike
No, ND is never truly off the table until it joins a conference.
As for Texas, Delany probably senses that Texas won’t be joining the Big Ten if the Pac-16 deal gets to the invite stage (i.e. not willing to bet on the SEC crashing the party or Stanford balking, etc.).
He’s setting up a backup plan that gets to 14 or perhaps 16, but I really doubt he goes to 16 without ND unless ND says it would rather join the BE or something…
LikeLike
But you are right that a Maryland/Rutgers strategy may mean the combo ND/Texas deal is totally gone and Delany doesn’t want to waste more time pursuing it unless ND/Texas come back to the table.
LikeLike
Nd info. Don’t know if it had been posted already or not
http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/06/nds-swarbrick-sees-shifting-college-landscape.html
LikeLike
Well that might help to explain the set of next targets that the Big Ten is leaking.
Leaking paths to 14/16 that allow the Pac-16 to occur is also a way of forcing ND to really understand that the train to 16 team conferences is going to be leaving the station.
LikeLike
So if TX off table.
Neb, Rutgers, Md, UVa, ND.
ND joins because writing on the wall.
LikeLike
Essentially, ND knows what it has and isn’t going to be forced to play its hand any time soon.
LikeLike
And adding Rutgers, Maryland and Virginia gives Notre Dame eastern rivals for the Big Ten, preventing alums from saying ND has abandoned its eastern fan/student/alumni base. It serves the purposes of Penn State as well.
LikeLike
Any value to taking Neb alone? Especially if you just can’t get UT. Going back to 11+1 = 13. What does 11+3 have to equal and does Neb/Rut/MD equal that? No one knows for sure, these are all just speculations of course.
Plus, I would like someone a long smarter than me, with access to some numbers, to do a back of the envelope calculation to determine if it makes more (or any really) financial sense for the BTN to become the ND broadcaster over adding them to the B10 fold? I keep thinking of this in my mind. What if the BTN locked up ND rights for 10 years? Does that get them on in the east coast. Do you then need to take Rutgers? I suspect the B10 network has run this calculation.
Just because it is the BTN doesn’t mean it should be limited to Big 10 only. The reason you would is because it is better to own the content than distribute it. But on the other hand, you want to expand distribution without splitting up your ownership. In this regard, ND may be helpful because for them remaining independent is of such importance. I know Duff and I have kicked this around. Maybe it is a silly idea. Even if BTN offered $10 MM more a year than NBC, ND may want to be on Over-the-Air network anyway. Who knows, just wouldn’t surprise me if this happens someday.
LikeLike
SH,
Fixed cost vs Incremental cost
you make sense to me, from a business standpoint.
The Fixed cost for the Big 10 is there even if they stay at 11 till the end of time. If they are pushing ND in off peak, it is pretty much gravy. Still sound like a win for both parties – Big 10 gets added content, and ND is not straddled with hard cost.
LikeLike
Neb/Miz/Rut/Virg/Mary would be a slight disappointment, because only Nebraska out of this group is going to ever win any BCS-type bowls. Listen, I know we’re talking about markets and academics and the like, but let’s face it, the thing that has most of us most energized is the football aspect of it. As a Wisconsin alum I want to see the Big Ten have bragging rights on the football field, not just on the balance sheet. To me that means 2 HR football schools. Two of Neb/Tex/ND to me is the goal. At least in a 16-team deal. 14 with just Nebraska adding to FB works for me, because ND will still be lurking out there.
LikeLike
I agree JC, and I would benefit from the addition of those first five schools because I’m an alum of one of those schools. But I think you make the SEC’s argument better right of the back. But I’ve never liked the whole east coast expansion idea.
LikeLike
1 great football program (Nebraska) and 1 kind good basketball program (Maryland). Virginia was good in the Ralph Sampson era.
LikeLike
I apologize if I saw this here (been reading about this stuff from everywhere), but it’s perfectly logical that ND might consider the Big East over the Big Ten. If they can’t be independent, they might desire their own fiefdom (somewhat like Texas in the Big 12). They could run ram-shod over the rest of the Big East (which is really a basketball conference) in football, leading to an easier path the BCS and a National Championship shot. The Big East is so hard up right now, it might even let them keep their NBC contract. Alternatively, a ND/Big East network would include Chicago, NY plus the NE and wherever else ND’s national footprint could attract. Not a bad starting point. Plus, the BE is a better cultural fit with less research and graduate considerations, and at least some other existing private, small and Catholic school inclination. ND’s endowment per student is pretty good without this already.
I’m not convinced Notre Dame truly is interested in the All-for-All philosophy the Big Ten espouses or the level of competition it guarantees. The Big East remains an easy excuse to duck (yeah, I said it) the risk of losing an identity borne of entitlement as much as uniqueness.
LikeLike
Jeff – I’m not sure they could run ram-shod over the BE, I mean they have lost to Navy 2/3 years. But yeah, they probably have an easier time going to BCS from BE than B10 – that is for sure. But what is the benefit of being in the BE to them. They already are right now save football. I’m not totally dismissizve of your post, just curious.
LikeLike
C’mon, we all think more of ND than that, right? There’s no reason for them to join a terrible BCS conference. If they want easier schedules, they can choose to create those while also playing a more national slate. All ND needs to do to sniff the BCS is to make it into that top 12 or 14 that makes them eligible. Joining a BE football conference (barring some further BE expansion bringing in good teams) would put lie to their claims that they care about tradition, national schedule, etc. I don’t buy it.
LikeLike
@SH: LOL, I’m speaking figuratively. This is supposed to be ND we’re talking about. When it’s at the point we’re discussing if they can beat Navy, that’s really the point, isn’t it. I just hope they man up and try to improve themselves by joining the Big Ten instead of hiding in the Big East and acting like they’re entitled to a National Championship because they beat a bunch of basketball teams.
LikeLike
Well, what if Rutgers is still around? If they are Big 10 quality, and Notre Dame would have to beat them, it would seem to be a well-deserved National Championship.
LikeLike
@ezdozen: I think the days of the Big 2, Little 10 are done. Gonna need to be more than one quality opponent. Remember the recent debates about a one-loss SEC team being better than undefeated teams from some other conferences? That seems like the new world order, and might apply to the champs of the Pac-16 and the new Big Ten over a Big East, WAC type undefeated champ.
LikeLike
Latest chatter that I’m hearing:
(1) Nebraska is in the Big Ten as school #12 ASAP.
(2) Big Ten will still push for ND over the coming weeks.
(3) Big Ten has more leverage with ND at 12 instead of 13, so that’s why NU would be solo invite for now.
(4) If ND signs on, an Eastern school (likely Rutgers) comes along to get to 14.
(5) Missouri is not looking like it’s in a good position unless the Big Ten decides that it’s worth it to go up to 16. Belief is that Mizzou has absolutely no leverage in this situation and the conference can grab it whenever it wants (if it actually wants it).
LikeLike
Frank:
C’mon and announce Nebraska already!
Can you expand on #3? Why would they hold more leverage at 12? Because they can offer ND the chance to pick its partner for #14?
Depending on how this played out, I either feel bad for Missouri or feel like they got caught counting their chickens before they hatched. So much attention has been paid to Nebraska, but it seems like most of the smoke always emanated from Missouri.
LikeLike
yes. because ND still gets an opportunity to influence further expansion
LikeLike
Really? And we devoted two threads to why Missouri was the key to landing Notre Dame and Texas.
LikeLike
Also, with Nebraska, ND has to face the reality of joining a conference.
I thought Swarbrick’s quote in the article linked above was telling:
“There are so many things that can produce seismic change,” he said. “Generations of young people are growing up who are so accustomed to rapid change. They don’t understand things that don’t change. They have shorter attention spans, are accustomed to change and less oriented to tradition.”
Does that sound like a problem with younger boosters / grads / fans?
LikeLike
Makes sense at all levels.
ND doesn’t want a diluted pool unless there is a guarantee of TX, but Nebraska isn’t chopped liver. Taking a tier 2 school isn’t going to happen while ND is still being courted (MU, Pitt, Cuse, Rutgers, etc). Nebraska is getting an invite because the Big 10 doesn’t want its window to close on grabbing Big 12 teams.
This goes along with Delany’s quotes of staggering expansion.
If you’re a MWC team, do you accept an invite from the Big 12? Risky business indeed.
LikeLike
…. and Mizzou collapses at the finish line again.
LikeLike
“Yes, Mike Alden? It’s Craig Thompson from the Mountain West. Listen, I’m gonna be in town, wondered if you had a few minutes to chat…”
LikeLike
@Frank:
Assuming all that is true, is there a timeline in which 2 and 4 might happen? I would think there’d be a push over the summer, and if a deal couldn’t get worked out, negotiations might take a break for a few months until football season is done.
LikeLike
If the Big 12 implodes, my god, the Missouri chancellor is going to have be burned at the stake.
If I were the Big East football schools, I would offer Missouri, KU, KState and Iowa State full membership, and then separate into two divisions.
East
West Virginia
Syracuse
Uconn
Rutgers
Pitt
USF
West
Louisville
Cincinnati
Missouri
Kansas
Kansas State
Iowa State
Seriously, how do the BE football schools NOT do this? They get to twelve schools without raiding any non-BCS conferences. The other conferences would probably quietly applaud this move because it would eliminate the Big 12’s BCS bid, and there would be 5 BCS bids.
LikeLike
Pushes Big East basketball to 18 members, making it a no go. I don’t think the Football only members will leave for those four.
LikeLike
FLP: when are Swarbrick and Jenkins going to finally say no means no. This must me infuriating and worrisome at the same time for you and the nation.
LikeLike
Rick, you got it. If you go to NDNation this question is one of the hottest topics. I could not agree more. Now that it appears that Nebraska will go to the Big 10+ and six are going to the Pac 10+, I think that ND ultimately will join an ACC/Big East blend.
LikeLike
The fact there is no final no means to me they are in serious contemplation and deliberation. I suppose when the Texas shoe drops it’s fish or cut bait time. I would be very worried if I were you.
LikeLike
Actually, that would be 20 basketball members.
Four five team pods for basketball would work pretty well. Home and home with your pod, plus one game vs two of the other pods, for a total of 18 games.
A: Syracuse, UConn, Pitt, Nova, GTown
B: Saint John’s, Seton Hall, Providence, DePaul, Notre Dame
C: Rutgers, W Virginia, S Florida, Louisville, Cinci
D: Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri, Iowa State, Marquette
LikeLike
That’s actually a pretty dang good conference, especially in basketball. In fact, I’d argue that it would probably only fall behind the ACC in hoops on a general level. And some years, it could be top dog if Kansas, UConn, Syracuse and Louisville are all on top of their game.
This really would be a great landing spot for all teams involved. At least until the ACC and SEC decide they’re ready to expand.
LikeLike
Man do I hope you’re right. The idea of adding four yawners simply to get to sixteen is disgusting. Especially when you look at the Home Runs the Pac10 and SEC will be trotting out. Oklahoma, Texas, Miami, Florida State etc. etc.
Please BT. Stop with NEBRASKA at 12 and try to get ND. If you can’t get ND (and Texas is out) STOP AT 12.
LikeLike
Amen. Really, Rutgers won’t join 5 years from now. What’s the rush?
LikeLike
I agree that there’s no rush on Rutgers.
Maryland/VA/NC though are a different story entirely if they can be swung.
LikeLike
I’d take those 3 in a heartbeat over Rutgers.
LikeLike
totally agree. with NE B10 is bad-ass league. let’s just enjoy it for a few years.
LikeLike
All of those points make sense. Plus, Delany gets to keep maximum flexibility with 4 open slots if other scenarios open outside of ND.
LikeLike
Great job JD, er, Frank!
LikeLike
Not fully related to topic.. but a good read on the future of sports..
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/story?page=091005yankeestickets
The concept of harvesting he discusses in the article is a real long term problem I have seen coming in sports. In the earlier discussion on the “tax exempt” it might be something to file in the back of your mind.
LikeLike
I respect the Longhorn posters on here and the UT in general. I also don’t begrudge the school looking out for the best deal it can get, if that means the B10, B12 or Pac whatever. And I understand its “Tech” problem and the way that football is more important to the politics of the state than pretty much anything else.
But I’m getting really tired of the way the Texas media, and the national media who takes their cue from them, is spinning this as “Nebraska is killing the Big 12.” If the B12 dies, Texas will kill it. UT is so big that they could replace Nebraska with Rice and the B12 would still be a viable conference. National broadcasters would still want their games. Oklahoma and TAMU would still want to be a part of the conference. Maybe Texas can’t abandon Texas Tech, but other than that, Texas can do whatever the hell it wants, and no one can force them to do otherwise.
This situation is like a spouse putting a gun to the dog’s head and saying “If you leave me, I’ll shoot Rover and it will be your fault!” And the national media is buying it. No wonder Lincoln wants out of this marriage.
I don’t know whether this line is coming out of Austin or whether it’s just something idiot columnists are making up, so I don’t want to blame the UT directly. But it’s awfully clear that UT is happy with this storyline and have said nothing to contradict it. Again, I don’t wonder why Nebraska doesn’t want to stick around.
LikeLike
Well why wouldn’t UT want to spin that story line. All institutions spin. That is why some call the media “useful idiots.” But I can understand why a Neb fan would not like it. But I don’t think I would care. You are leaving the B12 for the B10. As long as your fans are happy, who cares if you get some blame. Just don’t let your President make some silly announcement about how this was in the best interest of your student athletes.
LikeLike
Seriously, if the Big 12 loses Nebraska…. and maybe Colorado…. why couldn’t a weakened Big 12 survive. Texas gets it’s LSN, and ALL of it’s buddies remain.
Maybe they throw Missouri out for insubordination and they end up in Conference USA.
Add 3 to the Big 12 – Houston, Tulsa, Air Force, Utah, New Mexico, Memphis, whatever…
Or take 4 (or 5) to the Pac 10.
Texas is leaking like a BP oil rig that if Nebraska goes the conference is dead. We have learned that the conference must have been pretty damn unstable to begin with. If ANY single team left the Big 10 or Pac 10 or SEC would the whole thing collapse? Hell No.
LikeLike
They have plenty of choices to keep it together if they really want to. That is the big question. Do they really want to? Add TCU, Houston, Utah, BYU, Cincy, Louisville, lots of great choices. Come on!! The conference does not have to implode unless they want it to and are looking for a way out and a scapegoat.
LikeLike
I don’t look at that list and see a lot of “great choices,” particular if the MWC schools choose (wisely, in my mind) to stand firm.
LikeLike
Remember the SWC, Patrick.
LikeLike
Other schools are not without options. I don’t see A&M and OU being a part of a conference with UH or Tulsa, respectively.
A&M officials are split on where to go. Don’t know that tomorrow’s meeting will solve that. Things are moving too fast for A&M’s taste, right now.
LikeLike
One of the best comments I have seen. UT is in the driver seat. They can do whatever they want. If the B12 dies then the blood is on their hands and believe me those of here in the state will remind them of that. Add Baylor to the list of jilted lovers and ticking off TCU, UH, and Rice. UT is going to have to run to the west coast because 20% of the state will have it in for them.
LikeLike
Oh no! Baylor, TCU, Rice and UH are mad at us!
LikeLike
I’m not sure they are in the driver’s seat though. If they are Tech is grabbing the steering wheel while Baylor is pumping the breaks (or at least messing with the radio).
LikeLike
I’m getting the sense (just a hunch, mind you) that Baylor has just been sent to the corner of the room called “C-USA”.
LikeLike
Having grown up near Waco, I know there are few that more adept at dealing with and enjoying politics then a bunch of Baptists. You have been warned.
LikeLike
“. UT is so big that they could replace Nebraska with Rice and the B12 would still be a viable conference. National broadcasters would still want their games. Oklahoma and TAMU would still want to be a part of the conference.”
Ummm…no. The only team in the Big 12 that Texas A&M considers an historic rival is UT. Not either of the Oklahoma schools. Not Texas Tech. Certainly not the Kansas schools or Iowa State. Baylor is a school that we have a very long history with, but it hasn’t been competitive in a long time.
If the Big 12 starts losing its big brands or markets from the Big 12 North, why would we want to stay unless politics absolutely forced us to? If UT refused to play us non-conference, that would be sad, but it shouldn’t prevent us from moving to a more sensible conference.
The most annoying thing about the proposed Pac 16 expansion is that we have to have not 1, but 2 Oklahoma schools with us. Playing OU is fine and is often a big game, but I don’t think they’re worth bringing OSU along. That’s 2 schools from a small market so that UT can play their rival in-conference. I’d rather bring in a Utah, Missouri, Kansas, or even New Mexico to bring more population into the new conference.
LikeLike
I believe (no knowledge) that the next domino to fall will be Colorado.
LikeLike
So, if the Big 12 collapses around Mizzou, would they be a feasible Big East school? Mizzou does border a Big East state.
LikeLike
It might also bring KU and KSU into play.
I’m sure you’ve talked about this above, so forgive the question if it is redundant: If Mizzou is left out of the Big10 what are the odds of the Big12 surviving? Doesn’t losing only one team (CU pending) change the Big12 South’s justification for leaving?
LikeLike
for all Husker fans
welcome to the conference (hope I’m not premature)
the Big Ten loves travelling trophies. we all have several we play for. Michigan has the Little Brown Jug and Paul Bunyan’s Trophy. I’m sure you have a few as well.
In order to welcome you to the conference and spark a rivalry we propose a traveling trophy between Michigan and Nebraska. The 1997 National Cahmpionship. We each have half and the winner would get the whole championship till the next game. You should love this since you didn’t deserve your half in the first place. (there is a reason Missouri is still waiting for an invitation) I understand Penn State wants to talk to you as well.
Anyway welocme to the team. Looking forward to many great games.
LikeLike
Nebraska would have killed Michigan.
(Avoiding hurling objects coming from Ann Arbor.)
LikeLike
don’t make me come down there
LikeLike
Damn. Can’t imbed images. 🙂
LikeLike
yeah Michigan does suck a lot.
LikeLike
hmm… I feel I should say something here … but what? hm…
how about: Callehan vs. Rodriguez: discuss!
But I concur; welcome huskers; will be fun to see the stadiums in years to come; Red and Scarlet look pretty much the same from blimp-view.
LikeLike
You mean 11-1 Nebraska that lost to Mizzou that year? I don’t recognize the Frost kick TD.
LikeLike
@Hopkins – You got UT convinced to come with the Cornhuskers?
LikeLike
I’m consoling myself by picturing how trips to Tempe might work out.
LikeLike
Is it to late to start ASU to Big Ten campaign.
LikeLike
@Hopkins – Tempe might make you forget about all those great weekends in Ames and Manhattan. However, I do hope the Big Ten and Texas can work things out. I would hate to give up the trips to Austin.
LikeLike
Ah, what a year? For me this is the best thing about not having a suppossed playoff. I guess some (probably most) would argue, it should have been settled on the field. But I prefer 12 year old debates that have no answers, only passion.
Tom Osborne was a whiner then and is a whiner now.
LikeLike
Nebraska and OU use to share a “traveling trophy” it was called “The Orange Bowl Championship Trophy”
LikeLike
ye
LikeLike
yea we had our Big Two and Little Eight Days as well
LikeLike
still do; big evil grin.
LikeLike
I will miss the Sooners the most. I got to talk to Bob Stoops and Sam Bradford for a minute last year. Bob was telling Sam about the 2001 NU/OU game. He pointed out on the field where their reverse pass failed and where Nebraska’s reverse pass worked (and got Crouch a Heisman).
LikeLike
If SEC grabs Sooners..
You can play them in the Outback Bowl.
LikeLike
Can’t spell “Outback” without “OU”!
LikeLike
How about that Horn, right on que.
OU replaces University of Tenn.
LikeLike
i was going to say if OU goes to P16, you can see them in the Rose Bowl… probably someone else already mentioned.
LikeLike
It’s not official yet but I think a better rivalry will be with Wisconsin or Iowa. With Wisconsin I suggest the red and white trophy. The two schools use the exact same color scheme. This is for who gets to claim those colors in the conference.
LikeLike
For Iowa, I suggest an ear of corn. Ba da bing.
LikeLike
I think the Iowa rivalry will be a good one, and Wisconsin, too, with the Barry Alvarez angle.
If this thing stops at 12 (even if temporarily), I would be in favor of Nebraska and Penn State being in the same division. I don’t see two six team divisions based on geography. It didn’t work well in the Big 12 to have three of the top four traditions in the same division (UT, aTM, and OU).
I’m well aware that Iowa and Wisconsin have been every bit as good as Penn State over the last decade, but it only makes sense to split the traditional powers equally.
LikeLike
@Hank – Thanks. I can’t wait to see the Big 10 teams in Lincoln. Hopefully when Penn St comes Joe Paterno will still be coaching. It was awesome to see him on the sidelines last time they were in Lincoln.
LikeLike
dude your grandkids will se JoePa coaching. He’s going to be like Floyd of Rosedale, once the real thing moves on they will just replace him with a brass replica serving the same function.
LikeLike
fwiw Michigan has had 5 coaches while JoePa has been at PSU. and we’re not exactly known for coaching turnove.
LikeLike
Hopefully 6. Not a fan of Rich Rod.
LikeLike
This should happen.
LikeLike
I’ve been a Nebraska fan since the 70’s. The first time I heard of a Nebraska traveling trophy was when playing NCAA 2003, as apparently there is a Nebraska-Missouri Victory Bell. For years we apparently just left it in Lincoln rather than bringing it to the game.
And we’d gladly play Penn State every year; they’re still bitter about 1994; we’re still bitter about 1982.
LikeLike
@Hank.
Penn St. and Nebraska are pretty much even. I understand they have corrected their end zone measurements since stealing our trophy in 1982. 🙂
LikeLike
Nebraska got whatever payback they were due by “stealing” PSU’s trophy in 1994 – and without even playing a down against them.
I am hoping that Mr. Spanier works very hard to make PSU-Nebraska a yearly game. Although I will agree that Nebraska-Iowa ought to be a yearly season-ending rivalry game.
BTW, in 1982 the problem wasn’t with the end zone, as I recall, it was with the sideline.
LikeLike
Great idea. Sorry you could only claim 1/2 national title since the leather helmet days 🙂
But if we’re “N”, look forward to settling things on the field regularly against what is still the all-time best CF program.
I sense a rivalry.
LikeLike
There is a definitely a UM-Nebraska rivalry percolating…
This is great news. I would be happy if this ends the expansion.
LikeLike
Big 12 is dead:
Original Six P16 right now will leave.
Orangebloods.com: Texas AD and President gathered coaches at 2 p.m. to tell them they did all they could to save B12 but were unsuccessful. 2 minutes ago via TweetDeck
LikeLike
On ESPN: some at aTm wants to talk to SEC, driven by BOR Gene Stallings, but Texas Gov. Rick Perry, an Ag, is insisting TX and aTm stay together.
LikeLike
Should say that was according to Chip Brown on ESPN just now. Said CO, OU, OK St, TX, aTm, and TT will go to P16, but TX and aTm will meet tomorrow to make sure they are on the same page.
LikeLike
Gene’s still kicking? Learn something new every day.
LikeLike
Give Perry, an Ag, credit for taking the long view. He knows the relationship between UT and aTm is good for both schools.
LikeLike
I love it….
Texas did all they could to save the Big 12.
LikeLike
Texas did do everything they could. They were willing to keep the conference together as long as all other current members stayed, even if it resulted in less $ than they could get elsewhere. Texas tried. You can’t fault them for looking elsewhere now that one of the three flagship schools has jumped ship like a dirty rat.
LikeLike
lol.
Nebraska is a problem for Texas. Everyone else is still there. Make it work.
LikeLike
I must of missed the statement that they were going to propose and equal stake for all members of the Big 12.
Might have worked better than a deadline.
My bad.
LikeLike
Nebraska wasn’t concerned about unequal revenue sharing, they benefitted from it, too. I can’t believe you all are blaming this on Texas, amazing.
LikeLike
Come on..
If you are trying to save a conference you do not increase the timetable by setting a deadline.
Delany made it painfully clear he wasn’t in a hurry.
That Deadline killed any chance of real negotiations to keep the conference together.
Who set the deadline?
LikeLike
Dear Texas folk,
I don’t think Nebraska gives a damn anymore. YOu can continue to BLAME them and rally your hangers-on, but the truth is Nebraska moved to the Big Ten for better Acedemic opportunities, more money, and 11 mentally stable universities.
Good luck in whatever you decide with to do with all of your power and political pull.
LikeLike
Nobody from Texas is blaming Nebraska for taking a much better opportunity; I think they made a smart decision. We’re just saying “STOP BLAMING TEXAS FOR THE DEMISE OF THE BIG 12!” Nebraska jumped ship, we didn’t!
LikeLike
We’ll miss you too, Patrick.
LikeLike
We, here, holed up in South Bend(pun intended), prefer to consider Nebraska, an intelligent, super rodent!
LikeLike
Texas hypocrisy sickens me. Welcome, Baylor, ISU, MU, KU, KSU. Take a seat over there with SMU, TCU, and Houston. I’ll buy.
LikeLike
http://www.entertonement.com/clips/trsqsttszv–Meet-Ken-and-Lonny
LikeLike
Poor loki, still bitter after all these years.
We were just going to go out back and burn this garbage bag full of slightly wrinkled $20s. Wanna buy your drinks with them?
LikeLike
“We tried to save the Big XII by negotiating to join the Big Ten and SEC. We tried to save the Big XII by negotiating to join the Pac-10, taking OU, OSU, Baylor, A&M and Tech with us. Unfortunately, it didn’t work, so now we’ll be forced to leave the Big XII. Damn you Nebraska!!)
LikeLike
TX, just add another school–surely losing little old NE with 700K TV sets and haven’t won a conference title in 11 years shouldn’t cause TX and little brothers to bolt?
LikeLike
They only started these negotiations after Mizzou, Colorado, and Nebraska had spent weeks or months in their own negotiations (or at least had stated their desire to move). You really have a problem with Texas doing their due dilligence AFTER three other conference members have started the process? Come on.
LikeLike
You’re naive if you think Texas just started due diligence.
LikeLike
Everyone’s been doing due diligence for months. That’s why the dominoes will fall so quickly.
LikeLike
It was prudent of Texas to negotiate with other leagues. The reason why people are jabbing at Texas is that Texas is attempting to portray itself as a victim when it was very much at the helm.
No one can really point to any concessions that Texas has made to really keep Nebraska in the league. If Texas wasn’t taking the victim position, then no one would be making that argument.
LikeLike
I have absolutely no problem with Texas doing whatever they want to maximize their school and athletics. What I have a problem with is the whole “Poor, poor Texas” attitude coming out of Austin and the idea that they selflessly tried to keep the band together.
Texas is big enough and rich enough that any conference they played in, especially along with TAMU and OU, would have been a viable BCS conference. Networks would still want pay big money to televise Longhorn games. They would have been stronger than the Big East and probably the ACC in football. They could have invited BYU and Air Force and still have a championship game. Heck, both of those schools would have been an upgrade on Colorado.
But Texas figures that taking six members to the Pac 10 was more profitable, so that’s what they’re doing. Fine. But don’t feed me any of this “Nebraska made us do it” BS.
LikeLike
Let’s get real. Every school, first and foremost, is looking out for its own interests. It’s why Texas looked to join the Pac-10 then Big Ten twenty years ago, why Colorado, Missouri and Nebraska are interested in other conferences, why Iowa State wants to hold onto the Big XII so desperately now, why A&M is looking to the SEC, why Texas Tech is trying to latch on to Texas’ coat tail.
There nothing wrong with that. That’s life. Pretending otherwise and pointing fingers as to who did what to whom to make yourself seem more saintly is pointless.
LikeLike
So, is the Utah fan still around?
A couple of weeks ago, you seemed rather sure that Utah would accept an invitation to join the Big 12 if one were offered to be a replacement school for a departing school.
Still sticking with that answer today? Or would you rather stay put, see the Big 12 blow up, and grab a Kansas and a Kansas State?
LikeLike
If you mean Utah fan, I’m not sure who you are talking about. I’m a BYU fan (we’re cooler anyway) and we were having discussions about Sunday play and BYU. It looks like the Big 12 is done, but if it were to remain together, I would think any other school (BYU/Utah) would accept an offer to join the Big 12 as long as it could be assured that TX and friends were serious about staying (read: not going to the Big 10).
If BYU can’t obtain an invite from a stable Big 12, I would rather the Big 12 blow up and then reconfigure a new conference. Remember, the MWC does not have an exit penalty for schools that leave. Assuming the P16 comes to fruition, I would like to see a new Mountain-Midwestern conference.
Mountain division: BYU, Utah, Colorado St., Air Force, New Mexico, Boise St.
Midwest Division: Kansas, KSU, Mizzou (if around), Iowa St., TCU, Houston
This way, BYU isn’t stuck with the bottom feeders in its conference.
LikeLike
Interesting.
Mizzou to the Big East makes sense to me, though.
Would there be room for Mizzou, though, given the 16-school basketball structure?
LikeLike
This is pretty much how Utah alumn feel, too. If the PAC is dead and off the table and a stable Big 12 invited Utah it would be taken in a heartbeat. However, Utah would go to the PAC before the Big 12 if both were an option.
The best case scenario for most Utah fans and alumn is a PAC-12 with CU. The next best case scenario is the PAC-16 with whoever is in. The next best would be moving to a stable Big 12 that still has UT and OU, replacing Nebraska or Mizzou or whatever. The next best would be a new MWC with the Big 12 leftovers if the whole south division went to the PAC without Utah.
The worst case scenario would be the status quo. When times are changing, you better be changing too or be prepared to be left behind.
LikeLike
@ Hopkins Horn: I think Mizzou would be a lock for getting an invite to the Big East and I would be willing to bet the Big East would look into a mega-conference with Kansas, KSU, and Mizzou that stretches across the country. The best sceanio for the MWC is that the Big 10 raids the Big East and leaves the Midwest schools with no choice but to team up with the best of the MWC, WAC, and C-USA.
@The Baron: Wait? The Utes would rather leave for the Pac-10 than stay in the MWC and be with BYU? That’s the first I’ve heard of this. TIC.
LikeLike
Baron – maybe the Pac 10 is not off the table for Utah. UTx and A&M are meeting tomorrow. Maybe A&M decides to go to the SEC (unlikely, but still possible). Stanford & Cal hang tough in their opposition to Baylor. Utah gets the last invitation to the Pac 16. Pac 16 picks up another good media market in SLC. Utah has academic credibility. Utah is a good football/basketball combo.
A&M can then go where they probably really want to go – the SEC. The SEC can then turn their attention to Florida State and shut down expansion at 14.
If FSU goes to the SEC, the ACC doesn’t have to implode, since they can go steal Pitt, Syracuse, UConn, West Virginia, & Louisville.
MWC is now down to 8 schools, so they can invite the 5 Big XII leftovers and Boise, to get to 14. At 14, the MWC could sustain the possible future loss of Kansas and/or Mizzou, and still be OK.
Big Ten grabs Rutgers & ND because of the “seismic shift.”
Mizzou and Kansas can also be taken from MWC, if the Big Ten wants them.
Under this scenario, the conferences now look like this:
Pac 10 at 16
Big Ten at 14 or 16
SEC at 14
ACC at 16
MwC at 12 or 14
Its a win-win for almost everybody, except Cincy and USF.
LikeLike
Alan don’t you think the Big and Pac, Acc and SEC will go to 16 though?
isn’t this how they squeeze the BCS out of the picture. With their own 8 team playoff.
LikeLike
willarm1 – I know it can be done if we were to have a college football czar placing schools, but realistically, I just don’t see how it could be done. Some geographically logical schools are just non-starters for money, academic or athletic reasons.
LikeLike
@Willarm1
very interesting; sorry, I’m sure it’s been said a dozen times, but I finally see the glimmer of how a playoff might result from this. (I’ll have to give a bow of deference to PlayoffsNow).
So, 4 sixteen team conferences = 8 divisions.
Each Conf. Champ Game = round one (in the respective bowl games.
That gives us a a semi round and the NC round.
For the four teams in the Football Final Four, only two extra games (well, one for two and two games for the other two). That might actually fly among the University Presidents.
LikeLike
HH,
you miss the the easy points….
a) The big 10 with Nebraska is now the Big 12 (irony)
b) The last 4 teams should stay in the big 12 long enough to collect their 20 million each. Then disband..
c) If Nebraska has to pay a 10 million exit fee, will they still have to pay an entry fee to the Big 10 / 12?
d) If Jim Delany was a real rat ba$tard, He would become the Big 12 long enough to collect the 80 million exit bonus, and really scorch the earth.
LikeLike
SIAP: I really feel bad for the guys if this breaks down the way its looking, but it looks like the rest of the country knows something Kansas doesn’t know:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/fp/flashPollResultsState?sportIndex=pollindex&pollId=92092
LikeLike
Man that sucks….
Will ND take any heat from this. Independence is so important, that only a seismic shift can make them act.
LikeLike
Not trying to make light, but that graph is hilarious.
LikeLike
I feel for those guys as well but it does make be want to laugh. Hello? McFly?
LikeLike
LOL………Check out Alaska. They hate the idea of the Big XII.
LikeLike
That is dramatic. And a picture of denial on the part off Kansans. To put a positive spin on our friend from Kansas, it True that not everybody left when the dustbowl devoured the state and there was little to stay for. my hats off to those who did and made something out of it. Better days may yet be ahead if only you lower conference standards a bit.
LikeLike
How’s your backhand?
LikeLike
The state of Kansas…..eternal optimists.
LikeLike
If they are going to expand and Texas is off the table, I would love to see some real ‘Out-O-the-Box’ thinking from Delany. If the schools say no, they say no.
I would like him to go for FLORIDA (who I think is too good for the SEC) and MIAMI (who is not), or perhaps Georgia (raby rabid fans) and Tennessee (in the BT neighborhood). I realize these are the longest of shots but what the heck, you only expand once-or twice.
I loved the Toronto pick someone mentioned the other day. To go international (and yet relatively local) for the BT would be awesome and VERY marketable.
LikeLike
So if the B12 (and perhaps the BEast) dies after 2 more years, wouldn’t that trigger an early renegotiation of the BCS?
Certainly the Fiesta Bowl loses its tie-in. That could be worked around, but if the dominoes keep falling and the SEC goes to 16, do the remaining 4 or 5 BCS conferences want a work-around?
LikeLike
Will there be a BCS?
LikeLike
The money is being made off the regular season so there won’t be any movement for a playoff anytime soon. Certainly not more than a +1.
They will throw a bone to the remaining Big 12 schools if they move to a new conference to make sure that new conference has a BCS bid to avoid political complications.
I think there’s a chance the Fiesta Bowl loses its affiliation because the Big 12 or its successor could move to the Cotton Bowl.
LikeLike
added
LikeLike
**BREAKING**
Agenda for Nebraska Board of Regents meeting has been revised.
http://www.nebraska.edu/board/agendas-and-minutes.html
Added:
VI. RESOLUTIONS Resolution regarding UNL athletic conference alignment.
~~~~~~~~~
Vote will happen Friday.
LikeLike
Wowwie. Well that looks official to me.
LikeLike
I guess they could say they are staying…. well probably not.
LikeLike
What will Silve have for some of the Pac 10 Targets?
The fun begin….
LikeLike
Hope Chip Brown enjoys road trips to Pullman. What an ass.
LikeLike
He’s an ass for being right?
LikeLike
In fairness…he also said Nebraska wouldn’t have a seat at the BigTen.
LikeLike
with the scheduling agreement it’ll be once every 8 years. I think he’ll survive it.
LikeLike
FWIW
IN THE BEGINNING….
“Chicago-based William Blair & Company LLC was hired to evaluate whether adding as many as five schools would generate enough revenue to make it worthwhile, the Chicago Tribune reported in March. The firm evaluated Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, Missouri, Syracuse and Rutgers, according to the newspaper.”
AND FIRST INVITE GOES TO….
NEBRASKA!!
Open commentary going forward??
were the original 5 listed decoys?
is swarbuck in or out? does his feeling equal ND?
what if missouri is left at the altar, after declining the Big 12?
is Maryland next?? it makes me wonder as nebraska was either?
Does UK / KU go to the ACC for basketball?
Does anybody sincerely believe texas tried to keep the B 12 intact?
comments!
LikeLike
ND has to still be in. P16 plus an imploded (or potentially imploded) BE is “seismic.”
The question is really whether they are 13 or 16. I don’t think ND would care all that much between 12 and 13 so long as 12 was Neb.
LikeLike
Yeah, adding Nebraska is a 11 + 1 = 13 situation, so I don’t see how ND would complain.
LikeLike
Interesting. Can someone tell me if Neb has been trying to make academic/research improvements for the past 5-10 years. I mean concentrated efforts – I realize schools are always trying to get better. With hindsight, it seems like this has been in the works for a while. And I don’t mean serious discussions, but was something ever said to Neb, like “hey we think you are a perfect fit, but for your academics.” Or has this all come about because of BTN? Does this merely tell us that football brand value is just too valuable. I mean not exactly the same, but Neb is like Green Bay a little in some repspects – No? At the NFL level, GB just has a ton of football brand value, and in today’s world that is very valuable.
LikeLike
Nebraska recently began a project called the Innovation Campus which will occupy the old fairgrounds and is specificly designed to encourage public/private research efforts. This is and important iniative for them and the state and association with the Big Ten research facilites can only help.
LikeLike
Here’s the link:
http://innovate.unl.edu/
LikeLike
@SH first…no I don’t think this was a “years long plan” to grab Neb. I think Neb realized that other Great Plains states were gaining ground (or exceeding) their own academic rankings and knew that while football draws tv, academics is the lifeblood of the university. Without new students, who are “only” attracted by good academics, the university would wither. Neb investing in research was them understanding that Federal research dollars are the “national tv contracts” of academics.
Personally, I think the BigTen always thought they would expand with Mizzou out of the Big12, hope to get ND, and try to move east into NYC, maybe the ACC.
However, Nebraska had apparently grown tired of the Big12 and I wouldn’t be surprised when the rumors of Mizzou came out Nebraska didn’t make a “friendly” phone call to some folks at BigTen universities to let it be known if the BigTen was interested, so to were the Huskers.
LikeLike
Yeah, Nebraska never seemed like a team that would leave the Big 12 until a couple months ago when the Big Ten talked to Texas (I think around Feb.).
Then Omaha/Lincoln journalists started pushing for Nebraska to consider its options.
FWIW, Nebraska has done a pretty good job of increasing its research expenditures; still not as big as most Big Ten universities, but it should be able to get there someday, and its facilities for athletics are top notch. Also as Hank pointed out, they are spending a lot on the Innovation Campus, so they aren’t standing still.
Just like Texas A&M, I don’t think either could have gotten into the Big Ten in the mid/early 90s.
Now it’s a different story, both fit in well.
LikeLike
I believe this was the start of Nebraska looking.
“Nebraska athletic director Tom Osborne met with Ohio State head football coach Jim Tressel on April 19, according to an e-mail Osborne sent to Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman on April 20. ESPN.com colleague Mark Schlabach obtained the e-mail through a records request to Nebraska.
“I think it would be a good time if we met sometime soon regarding the expansion landscape,” Osborne wrote to Perlman.”
LikeLike
Wasn’t there a B10 comment about a school calling up they didn’t expect to be interested? Could that have been Nebraska instead of an ACC school as was speculated?
LikeLike
Texas most definitely was trying to keep the Big12 in tact…but only so long as Nebraska was in it. Once they lost that national draw they recognized the writing was on the wall as far as ending up in another SWC situation and immediately began talking to the BigTen/Pac.
Once it became obvious TT was going to be a problem, if only for the BigTen, then it pushed the 6 school move to the Pac because it simply doesn’t want to be in the SEC (IMO) and it knew it could get the legislature to buy off on an “academic upgrade” to force TAMU (and thus likely Ok) to come with instead of going to the SEC (which still remains to be seen if its been an effective plan).
LikeLike
Very nicely summarized.
LikeLike
I believe Texas is doing exactly what needs to be done to free itself from the parasites feeding off of it.
LikeLike
I believe Texas is doing exactly what needs to be done to free itself from the parasites feeding off of it.
They still have a Texas Tick attached…
LikeLike
Well, if the Pac 16 happens, I think Oklahoma State is actually a bigger parasite attached.
LikeLike
but to Texas….that’s everyone NOT named Texas.
LikeLike
Cautionary Tale for all “capture a major metro market” expansion posters here:
I’ve had the two main Chicago sports/news stations on all day today. Finally CLTV mentioned NE invite at 5:30 CT—as it’s 4th story! Behind Blackhawks (understandable), also behind Carlos Zambrano starting tonight for the non-contending Cubs, White Sox trades etc. Been on the air 30 minutes and haven’t even mentioned it. This in sports-mad Chicago home of the BT headquarters.
My point: college football is not a big deal in NY, LA, Chicago, etc. compared to pro sports. Don’t rely too much on taking on a college just because of its location.
LikeLike
As cutthroat of me as it may sound, adding Nebraska and destroying the Big 12 increases the brand value of the western half of the Big Ten immensely.
Nebraska will be the only “big” conference BCS team for quite a few miles.
Think about how much Iowa’s value increases because Iowa State is now demoted to a second level BCS conference.
Over time the Pac-16 and Big Ten will become far more valuable because of a move to squeeze out the middle player.
Outside of the South and Northeast generally, the Big Ten and Pac-16 will be the only games in town in terms of superconferences.
LikeLike
Like I said yesterday, Delany wanted this Bomb to go off on Friday in time for the dinner time news 5:30 – 6:00 PM here in the Midwest. Then the nation is taling about it all weekend and the Pac ten is scrambleing during that time.
LikeLike
Re the Chicago media
Just keep in mind that there hasn’t been a press conference or an official announcement. I’m pretty sure once that happens there will be more coverage; right now it’s still speculation.
LikeLike
How does OK feel about this? Does this give OK a lot more leverage?
Does this mean Rutgers is in trouble or just set for state 2? They are a large state and play 30 min from NYC, yet Neb was taken ahead of them. Is that only a sequencing factor?
LikeLike
Nebraska or Notre Dame had to be #12. Why? Because both of them are 11 + 1 = 13 kinds of teams. The Big Ten can stop at 12 with Nebraska or Notre Dame. It can’t with Rutgers.
Rutgers isn’t in trouble at all. If Texas is not coming (which it looks like its going to the Pac-16 by all accounts), then Rutgers is a lock at some point. The question is when. Is it #15 along with ND as #16? Who knows.
Perhaps the Big Ten goes hard after Maryland and Virginia now or something to that effect.
There’s still 4 open slots; even if you assign 1 to Notre Dame, the other 3 are there. Rutgers is a near lock for one of them at some point…
LikeLike
Furthermore, if Texas is really off the table, then Delany is going to look hard at the ACC to see what he can get. Maryland/GTech or Maryland/Va. Perhaps neither of those is possible, but it would be the next try I would guess.
LikeLike
part sequencing factor part keeping options open if needed if Texas/TAMU/ND still viable.
LikeLike
Ok, we’ve talked about this before, but now that this has happened, if UT comes to B10 tomorrow and says we are in but Tech has to come along (I’m assuming A&M goes to SEC for this hypothetical), does B10 say (1) done, (2) absolutely not, or (3) we’ll get back to you.
A week ago, I would have said no way B10 takes Tech, but now as the first domino has fallen, don’t they have to consider it? They would be at 14 and could stop. Pretty powerful conference, no?
LikeLike
Maybe, but that really requires the SEC to crash the party.
Texas seems to have enlisted the Aggie gov of Texas to help out, and he wants them to stay together. Thus, the Pac-16 is more likely to happen than ever.
LikeLike
I know, but I wanted you to play with that assumption. Purely hypothetical, what do you think the B10 would say?
Also let me give you another hypothetical – ND/Rutgers or ND/A&M – just which pairing would you rather have? Not a qusetion on who ND would prefer. I say ND/A&M – but biased since live in Tx.
LikeLike
I think anyone would say ND/A&M.
Back to your hypothetical though, the Big Ten would try to figure out a way to get Texas in alone.
I really don’t see any possibility in which Tech gets 8 votes.
LikeLike
I would think they say no to Tech. even if they stay at 14 for awhile they wan’t to keep slots for additive schools. it’s tempting but I just think Tech won’t fly.
LikeLike
I don’t think they’d have the votes. Were I a president of a Big Ten school, I’d vote no, too.
LikeLike
Unless TTU has been accepted to the AAU since last week, the answer is still no.
Academics played a bigger role in this than people like to admit. Sure, UNL goes to the bottom of the Big Ten academically. but they’re still pretty good. They’re a school that’s done a lot in the past few years to improve, and they’ll fit in fine. Tech would not.
The Big Ten will not accept some schools as being more or less equal than others. There will be no “Texas Tech in the Big Ten, not in CIC.” We just don’t work that way.
LikeLike
If UT and TAMU are really off the table, the strategy has to be hard east/mid atlantic. In that event RU is an important piece. If MD/UVa are available that could be another move.
Without UT I think getting ND to play requires offering a national schedule — so NYC, DC are positives. Maybe Miami or GaTech also fits with that thinking.
If ND is off the table then I think the probable pool is RU, Pitt, MD, UVa, and maybe MO. GaTech and Miami are interesting.
I think the interesting question is whether the SEC feels compelled to expand with a western move off the table. Personally, I don’t think so. If they do poach ACC schools then the Big Ten might see an opportunity to reach into the ACC core (NC-Duke), so in that case one might be playing for Uva, MD, NC Duke. Honestly, I don’t think the Big Ten is prepared to wait for something like that to play out. They will expand to 16 and if a situation arises some years out I suppose they might consider going larger. (I suspect after 16 it will be more of conference associations though — package TV deals, scheduling agreemenst etc.)
LikeLike
I really think the only school in play from the ACC is MD.
Va is tied too much with VT and VT won’t be going to the SEC after the strings that needed pulling in the legislature to get it into the ACC (and why would they allow the “academic drop” from that conference swap?)
North Carolina, the state, is the heart of the ACC and NC is, IMO, just like Texas in that its the head of a core of teams that aren’t going anywhere alone.
Miami is a small private university with decent academics, but not great (and not AAU). Geographical outlier of mass proportions to boot.
FSU, see above only make it public university.
GT…I like a lot on many levels, but in the end I just don’t see it. The BigTen wants the top school in its state or top universities already in its footprint.
LikeLike
The most probable solution is Nebraska/ND/Maryland/Rutgers/Missouri.
I don’t see Pitt or Syracuse beating out Missouri for the final spot, although you never know I suppose…
LikeLike
Pitt makes it a significantly better academic win (3 better than average of Big Ten schools vs 2 below rest of Big Ten). With two national football brands, I think the presidents are willing to give up the marginal increase in footprint offered by MO (assuming St Louis is already opened by Illinois)
LikeLike
That’s a possibility.
All the more reason to do that if it makes Maryland or ND more likely to join.
After all, Missouri and Rutgers are two that the Big Ten can call and invite whenever.
ND and Maryland are much more difficult to sign on…
LikeLike
If the Pac-16 is real then learning if MD can be pried loose is key right now.
LikeLike
Hey Zeek;
Does Delany go after is beloved NC? Like someone said, it is the Tex of the ACC.
could he handle the disappointed look from his old coach?
can the acc be poached? what about nc state?
seems like a very difficult task.
LikeLike
NC looks totally solid where it is.
4 NC schools in the ACC after all, it’s a fiefdom. NC figures itself to be like Texas in some sense.
As others have pointed out, you have three rings to the ACC.
The inner core of NC and perhaps the 2 Va schools (but mostly seen as UVA and its tag along brother), then the slightly outer middle circle of Maryland and Clemson, and finally the outer circle of BC/GTech/FSU/Miami.
I think all of us agree that in terms of institutional fit, the ACC is a strange assortment of schools from giant schools like Maryland/FSU to tiny private schools.
Maryland is probably the easiest to grab away other than BC in some sort of ND deal (lol at that), but they’ve been there an awful long time.
Maryland is a place that fancies itself to be both Southern and Northern at the same time (I lived there a while and was born around there).
Maryland would be a hard piece to move. Probably not immovable like UNC might be unless the SEC tried to take 4 away and wreck the conference, but still I don’t see UNC up and leaving the conference.
UNC will stay and rebuild even if big draws leave in my opinion unless the Big Ten and SEC try to take up to 7 teams or something crazy. I don’t see that happening, the ACC is too solid for a head on raid to wreck it.
Maryland is the only one I think the Big Ten can grab since institutional fit and regionally I think it fits better with a Big Ten (that would also include Rutgers or Pitt.), especially since the ACC didn’t add Syracuse last time or anyone that regionally made sense…
A lot of rambling on, but it would require a lot of heavy lifting to get Maryland is the summary.
UNC won’t go anywhere unless the conference implodes, which won’t happen.
UVA might be gettable if the Big Ten and SEC agree to split up UVA and VTech, that doesn’t seem likely though…
LikeLike
PSUGuy, over on the GT forum they would prefer the Big Ten over the SEC.
So, GT is not that far fetched. Particularly if FSU, Clemson and some other school is taken from the ACC.
LikeLike
I really think we’d have to add Maryland and UVA or something in order to justify GTech.
Just look at history. The ACC expansion to BC hasn’t brought much market share in the New England markets at all. It looks like just a random outpost.
Now GTech is a bigger draw in Georgia than BC in Boston probably, but still, you want it to be geographically rational.
Although, Atlanta probably has far more Big Ten graduates than Boston has ACC graduates, so it would make sense on some levels.
Still, you don’t want a geographically random outpost, especially if its not the main draw in its state…
LikeLike
Agree – UNC is in EXACTLY the same position as UT with regard to the B10. It’s main in-state rival (Duke) would be acceptable to B10, but it’s also tied to a secondary public (State) and a small private (Wake) that B10 doesn’t want. UT got around this because the conference on its other flank had the proper composition and the extra room to take in the accessories – but UNC can’t do that, b/c its other flank is the SEC, which is academically unacceptable for all of these schools. If UT didn’t have the Pac-10, it would probably stay put and rebuild its conference…which is also what I’d expect UNC to do if/when Md leaves.
But, heck, maybe all bets are off now.
LikeLike
I doubt it’s causing too much heartburn at OU, though I don’t see it as giving us (OU) more leverage in particular. The Nebraska rivalry as a real factor died with the advent of the Big12, so no tears. Nebraska appears to be taking what seems to be the best opportunity for it, so good luck.
The Pac16 plan is politically palatable, preserves some current rivalries, keeps things close and at least on paper should be capable of generating competive revenue streams in the future.
The SEC is also possible for OU, particularly if one or both of A&M or Tech is in. (I’m on board with the idea that Texas will not go to the SEC unless all other decent options evaporate somehow.)
Those seem realistic, but no big change in leverage.
LikeLike
@ChicagoRed,
I actually worked for CLTV over 10 years ago selling ad time. I wouldn’t read too much into what any Chicago media outlet covers or how they cover it. It’s always going to be Chicago-centric stuff 1st and anything else next.
Maybe NY and LA don’t care about college sports, but Chicago does. We’re crawling with B10 grads. Hell there’s at least 2 bars dedicated to each team in this town.
Thanks for the laugh Red I hadn’t thought about CLTV in forever. Classic.
LikeLike
It’s a Pro Town but not as apathetic as New York about college sports. There are enough Big ten alum here that the interest is sufficiently high. It’s exponentially higher when you team is doing well.
LikeLike
What is this a CLTV reunion? I worked there for a few months when it started in ’93.
LikeLike
Then how do you explain today’s “yawn” by Chicago sports media?
LikeLike
Yawn? The Hawks are playing Game 6 tonight. Trumps most everything.
LikeLike
Does anyone else find it ironic that Kansas and K-State could wind up in the MOUNTAIN West?
LikeLike
funny, and ironic I suppose.. but the first hour or two of colorado is just as flat as kansas
LikeLike
michael, you will enjoy knowing that some residents of wichita, when touring visitors around town, make a big deal about going out to ‘mount wichita’. it is the highest point in sedgewick county and is the land fill.
LikeLike
You’ve obviously never made the walk from the RV parking over by Phog Allen Fieldhouse to KU’s Memorial Stadium. The one thing that KU’s campus is not is flat. Google Mt. Oread.
LikeLike
Oh, I know. I’m well aware that Kansas isn’t actually the flattest state despite popular perception. That title goes to Florida.
I was just trying to make light of all this anyway.
LikeLike
Does everyone automatically assume B10 will make another move? I don’t see another move unless ND or UT is a part of it. The B10 has made a big move, grabbing a headline name – without ND/UT there is no other headlining move to make. I guess taking 2 from the ACC would be bold, but I don’t think B10 wants to be seen as causing 2 conferences to fold. I think they sit back and watch for now. Going to 14 or above is just risky, because the past is not kind. The B10 (along with SEC) is in the best position to do it, but it is risky.
LikeLike
I feel bad for Mizzu they way they are left hanging but if we’re at a point where there is no TX and no ND coming in then I think this is a mizzu’s fans best scenario.
LikeLike
missouri may wind up the most hosed, colorado and nebraska have home to go to. The tigers are gonna have to answer some questions, like why would they go out on a limb with no invite? If I was gonna act like I was going, it would be with paper in hand.
LikeLike
If Maryland indicates it would come, it would be voted in tomorrow.
You can take that one to the bank. I can guarantee that some Big Ten president will at least inquire into the possibility. But the benefits of planting a flag in Maryland with UMD would be too much for them to pass up.
They’d probably get Rutgers along with them if ND still indicates it won’t come.
Plus, Penn State would push behind the scenes for that kind of expansion as well.
You have to look at it in terms of what pieces are out there that we would have to get immediately if we could get them: Texas/ND/Nebraska/Maryland/VA all fit that kind of bill.
Missouri/Rutgers/Pitt. are more helpful in terms of filling out the extra 14th and/or 16th spaces.
LikeLike
Why the rush to add more mouths to feed when each has to earn over twenty million bucks to earn their spot? To me, even ND is not worth all those second tier schools. The Big Ten will lose all exclusivity if that occurs.
LikeLike
I did quick excel and ran some numbers. Rough order stuff.
If I added Syracuse, Rutgers, and Mizzou, at $.36 profit with the likely number of tv households per state. I come up losing money over-all, in a 16 team conference, by $750k.
What I’m saying is if I only take into account three schools (with 5 total new ones to feed), and only cable carry rates, the BigTen almost breaks even.
If I take into account the other 2 schools BTN value (which I didn’t before), increase in national tv $$$ (as a Nebraska would do), BTN advertising dollars and whatever else its clear that in all liklihood the BigTen will make much more money than not by expanding judiciously.
The reason why you expand now is to ensure you get those schools you want and aren’t instead left with the Iowa State’s of the collegiate landscape.
LikeLike
Throw in Notre Dame, and you are definitely grabbing NYC, while also landing upstate NY and all of New Jersey. Huge market grab.
From there, it is Maryland or Missouri for spot 5… one more huge market.
Assuming Texas is of the table, this is a solid plan B for maximizing revenue.
LikeLike
What second tier schools are you talking about? These candidates are not second tier anything. They are World Class Universities that have the chops to be Big Ten members. As far as the financials for each, spend a few hours and read thru the 10,000 or so posts since January where the financials have been discussed ad nauseum. The numbers work for the expansion candidates. It is fascinating reading that I highly recommend.
LikeLike
Does it not make sense to anyone else that the Big 10 would on first pass try to grab one team from each of the Big12, Big East, ACC?
Objectives met:
1) They move from 11-to-14 teams expanding their base significantly
2) They injure, but cannot be blamed for killing competing conferences as they only cherry-picked one team from each, which should be replaceable
3) They do not get to 16 which appears to be the super-conference size that might bring about political interference
4) Should others eventually move towards super-conferences of 16 (which is the only circumstance I can think of which would bring ND into a conference), they have 2 very attractive spots for ND and another regional team (I just don’t buy the fact that Texas will accept the geographical distance, nor the equality that the Big10 will dictate)
With that in mind – Expansion Plan:
Big12: Nebraska
Big East: One of Pitt, Rutgers or Syracuse
ACC: One of Maryland or Virginia
Thoughts?
LikeLike
Makes good political sense. Say Nebraska is $12, followed by Rutgers and Maryland. Notre Dame then is lured as #15, with the Big Ten giving it a list of choices (Missouri, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Virginia) for #16.
Were this scenario to happen, I’m not sure which of those four ND would want, though Missouri would likely be out of the running and I don’t think ND is as enamored of Pitt as people think just because it’s occasionally on its football schedule. SU, as a private institution, might be more to ND’s liking, although Virginia’s academic allure might tip things in favor of UVa.
LikeLike
Oopsie…wrong shift key. Nebraska should be #12, not $12. No disrespect to the good people of UNL.
LikeLike
The chancellor for the Maryland University system is Brit Kirwan. Previously, he was the President at Ohio State.
LikeLike
From the Houston Chronicle’s Aggie reporter:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/college/7044884.html
Also, as the Big 12 splits up, Texas and Texas A&M haven’t ruled out becoming members of the Southeastern Conference, the source said. UT officials confirmed Wednesday there is a meeting scheduled between A&M and UT on Thursday to discuss their courses of action. That could include pushing for Baylor to be a part of the Pac-10.
I’m still not certain the B10+ is off the table, if aTM goes with TX. The thinking being that if they can save the B12 BCS AQ for a reload of UH and perhaps TCU and/or SMU, the legislators would be ok with that. Would actually be better for TT, Baylor, and OK St. because they’d have a real shot of winning conference or at least playing in the conf. title game.
Reports are the gov. wants TX and aTm to stay together. One wants the P16, the other the SEC, compromise on the B10+? Nice cover story…
LikeLike
According to the Chronicle story, it appears that the SEC is still on the table for both UTx and A&M. What does the Texas Guv say about the Texas 4-pack to the SEC? That could be the only alternative to keep Baylor in the mix.
LikeLike
Wow. Wouldn’t OU/OSU get totally shafted? Where would they end up? Staying in the Big 12?
LikeLike
yea in an AQ conference they would dominate
LikeLike
Zeek – I’d certainly rather have OU, and then throw Baylor and Oklahoma State under the bus, but the SEC Texas 4-pack is probably on the table.
LikeLike
alan,
that was what I asked earlier.. and it got shot down.. but they say BOTH Texas & TAMU not JUST TAMU..
maybe slive had a texas 4 plan all along..
playoffs does make a point for a ruse tho..
If all 4 come, then Bama and Auburn go east? that would become a brutal conference bracket…. with UT, UF, UGA, and USC, but separating saban and miles might make somebody happy.
LikeLike
duff – I really doubt Baylor or TTech have any appeal for the SEC without both UTx and A&M. If UTx doesn’t come, then I think the SEC would welcome A&M by themselves or maybe with TTech if things also worked out on the eastern side with Florida State and someone else.
Under this Texas 4-pack scenario, both divisions would be very difficult, but since A&M is currently down and Ole Miss and TTech are hit & miss (pun intended), the SEC East would be more of a bloodbath.
LikeLike
interesting.
taking that a step further.
if the idea is to argue that if they go alone and leave a till vital Big 12 that elevates potentially Houston, TCU and SMU into an AQ conference. then they can also point out that going to the Big Ten allows them to negotiate an expansion commitment that excludes Missouri thereby keeping an other strong school in the Big 12.
LikeLike
To me, any scenario that includes Syracuse is a failure. The idea that they might take up one of only five slots with so many possibilities remaining is bizarre.
Does anyone else think the meeting between TEXAS and aTm might include a discussion about joining the Big Ten?
LikeLike
It would surely include discussion of the SEC and Big Ten as well as their primary offer on the table of the Pac-10.
But if the Tech problem is real, the Big Ten will be dismissed almost off-hand unless Texas can count on a big legislature lift…
LikeLike
zeek,
they are gonna jump to the ACC with ND
😉
LikeLike
I am still perplexed by the thinking that Texas Tech is unthinkable, even though It would bring with it (in TX aTm and most likely ND) a football/money bonanza that dwarfs all the other eastern options combined.
How ND, TX, aTm, NEB, and TXTech is unacceptable but NEB, MIZZOU, SYRACUSE, VIRG, and RUTGERS is, is logic I will never understand.
LikeLike
If the Big Tens blows it with TX and ND because of their refusal to take TTECH, it will be a huge fail for the BT and a huge win for the PTen, which will also have Okl.
LikeLike
I think it goes to CIC and academics. TTech is basically the equivalent of WV or Cincinnati. No way they can get the votes. Just no way. The majority of B10 will not let football run the show. I think NE is the lowest they will go and that’s saying something! And they will only take NE because it is special in a way most of the others are not.
LikeLike
The need 3 things, eyeballs, academics are the top 2. Football is the third. They don’t need a conference of 16 ass-kicking teams. You need a few punching bags.
LikeLike
I’d nominally agree with you (even though I’m kind of a Syracuse fan). The problem is $$$. If the same contracts for cable carry rates holds then the BigTen could get $.70 off every one of the 10 million or so tv sets in NY (the state).
That’s $7 million per month.
$84 million per year.
From carry rates alone (+for advertising).
For Syracuse…
Again, a big if, but its an if that needs to be looked into hard.
LikeLike
What we need are five more Penn ST. (;
LikeLike
I think it is correct to say that NYC and Chi are more pro-sports oriented, but you can’t deny the huge #’s of B10 alums in these cities. Go to sports bar in NYC on a Fall Sat and you’ll see Michigan, Wisconsin etc. fans thick on the ground. Local sports outlets always plug pro sports b/c its local news/events. I don’t like Rutgers to the Big10, but I think Delaney could swing getting on basic cable over there w/ the help of alums (ie, me, Mich alum paying for BTN in LA).
LikeLike
I think alot of followers here need the appreciate the reality here that TX may be gone and the second wave of this – the Big East reorganization begins – with MO still in the air. Hence, why I hypothesized that MO may entertain SEC talks for at least the money end vs. staying in limbo. Why SEC would be interested in MO- because the SEC have limited TV market expansion options if looking purely within their geographic footprint. Maybe SEC starts the Big East cascade with WV? Maybe Big Ten considers they do not want to chance an SEC or ACC flag placed in Pitt and pulls that trigger as a defensive move. Lots of possibilities but there is no way that the SEC continues to sit by idle for very long. Nothing has to be done immediately on the east front (ND is the goal), but the plans B and C after TX moves west, which may require multiple offensives to get there (i.e. the Big East forced hand plan), have to be considered now. Surely Delaney has a hundred scenarios on his desk that he is contemplating. But it seems more like the TX option is closing with the Pac offer to bring all their friends if that becomes a reality.
LikeLike
MIKUM – the SEC doesn’t need TV market expansion. I have a post somewhere up there that explains the SEC TV contracts. For the SEC to expand, they need additional compelling football games that would make CBS & ESPN pay them more money.
LikeLike
alan,
you said the SEC had something like 24 markets outside the SEC.. who are they? that might be a good indication where they might go?
LikeLike
Duff – here’s the link for SEC Network affiliates. Its 10 months old, so I’m sure there will more saturation for the 2010 season. With national broadcasts on CBS, ESPN, ESPN2, and ESPNU, as well as the SECN, footprint ain’t a problem.
http://www.secsports.com/news/default.aspx?ArticleId=12966
LikeLike
i was surprised to find SEC already in NC and VA.. in NC they have multiple stations..
LikeLike
Well, there is an SEC school in three of the four states that border NC: Tenn, UGA, and S. Carolina. A lot of alumni from those schools live in NC. Virginia is a little more distant from SEC land
LikeLike
Like Texas and a Missouri/OKLAHOMA combo. This would constitute undiscovered country for the SEC. All else in their sights in the east is overlap.
LikeLike
humm 4 to SEC TAMU, Mizz, OK, OSU
LikeLike
If that, then TX/Tech/Colo/Utah to Pac-14?
LikeLike
No. Pac-14 will not work.
TT is acceptable to Stanford, Cal etc. only if they can drop the Az schools into an eight team conference that the Pac-8 doesn’t have to play very often.
LikeLike
With the dominoes seemingly about to fall, and possibly fast….what’s your prediction on the final outcome? My guess:
Big 10 adds Nebraska, Rutgers, Missouri and stops there.
Big 12……..Survives! and replaces just 2 teams. (no clue on who they bring in though)
Pac-10………no expansion. After Big 12 South thing blows up in their face, and Colorado can’t afford the move, they petition NCAA for championship game and get it because NCAA is hoping mega-conferences does not happen.
Memphis backfills into the Big East
SEC and ACC have no changes.
Boise St to MWC.
Expansion talks begin again in exactly 3 years.
That would probably be a huge let-down for many, but I really think it’s the most likely outcome when the dust settles, despite all the talk people are doing.
LikeLike
B10: adds Neb, ND, Rut.
B12: exists and adds Lou and BYU (Texas contines to piss on everyone)
Pac: adds Utes and CO.
MWC: adds BSU
ACC: pat
SEC: pat
Big East: adds Memphis.
Conference USA: I forget who they hell is in that conf.
LikeLike
Good lord…
LikeLike
I think the big winner will be the Big East (compared to the expectation of each conference before things began)
The Pac10 and Texas do form the “Western Alliance”,
a conference with 2 loosely affiliated divisions that could be thought of as individual conferences in their own right, the new old Pac8 and SWC2.0.
The Big East splits, with the football schools adding Memphis, Mizzou, Kansas, and KSU. They fully expect to be directly or indirectly raided by the BigTen in the next 5 years, but will still have a strong conference.
All the other major players stand pat and wait to see how the “Western Alliance” experiment works out, seeing if Texas/A&M will again become available.
LikeLike
BREAKING NEWS: “Big Ten Offers Texas, Texas A&M, Missouri and Notre Dame”
From Northwestern message board from same poster as previous thread…
LikeLike
link?
LikeLike
http://northwestern.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=57&tid=143839427&mid=143839427&sid=901&style=2
The offer to Missouri is contingent upon Texas joining.
LikeLike
For what it is worth, his original post that was deleted is back up also with an update at the bottom from today.
http://northwestern.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?highlight=expansion&sid=901&fid=57&tid=142885732&mid=143003382
LikeLike
What do you think boiler?
sounds to good to be true.
LikeLike
William,
I am with you. It sounds too good to be true.
LikeLike
How cruel. Why is someone messing with the collective emotions of Mizzou fans one last time?
LikeLike
Do you think there are some Missouri supporters figuring out how to bribe the Texas state legislators right now?
After their fans disparaged Texas for so long, how much fun would it be to play them knowing forever after that we got them in?
LikeLike
wow, HUGE news!
Want to get excited but have my doubts with texas and nd!!!
LikeLike
From Chip Brown Twitter
Sources say Colorado’s mtg Tuesday night was about Pac-10 and Buffaloes will “opt out” of the Big 12.
Six schools being invited by Pac-10 – TX, A&M, Tech, OU, Ok State and Colo – expected to accept invitations, begin play in Pac-16 in 2012.
LikeLike
So would the PAC 16 take OU, OSU, TT and CU without Texas and A&M?
LikeLike
Doubt it. They need 6 +Az schools to recover the Pac-8. That’s the deal that gets Stanford and Cal to sign off on the expansion.
LikeLike
We’ve been theorizing about the Pac 10 for months; the reason for going to two 8-team divisions isn’t the California schools–it’s the Northwestern schools.
From reading about the Pac 10, the Northwestern schools have a large amount of alumni in Southern California and have big fundraisers once a year when their school visits either USC or UCLA. On top of this, much of their recruiting is in California. Any schedule that gets them less than 1 game per year in LA is going to make them hesitant to sign off on expansion.
This is the real reason why the Pac 10 plays a 9 game schedule now–the Northwest 4 want to make sure they visit LA every year; that’s the reason why 16 teams (with the 4 NW schools grouped with SoCal in a division) is actually easier for them than 12.
LikeLike
Sure the other Pac-8 member votes coem for just that reason.
The bottom line is that the new SW division teams get to play in California once every two years. I doubt the Arizona teams are happy with that, and Colorado has to feel snake bitten.
Most surprisingly to me is that UT is OK with it.
LikeLike
Looks like a Pac Ten style desperate move. I really don’t by this one. That’s busting the 16 cherry all at once. Does not seem like the BT style. Then again if it delivers TX and ND, I don’t think I can fault Delaney.
LikeLike
It’s worth a try.
Whoopdeedo if Texas rejects it.
Texas and A&M are meeting tomorrow to discuss their options.
Swarbrick was more open than in the past about the winds changing.
We’ve been discussing the ND/Texas/A&M/Mizz/Nebraska option for almost 3 days now.
LikeLike
I’m officially conceding.
I’m now preparing to defend the honor of Whataburger against the cult of the In-N-Out Burger.
LikeLike
Am right there with you – tried INO in San Fran once, didn’t see the big deal.
LikeLike
arizona has been sucked into the cult of in’n’out. I wonder how the Whataburgers stay in business. Maybe they’ve been holding out for SWC2.0.
LikeLike
Oh, I’m hoping this one’s happening.
LikeLike
If true:
Remember the Big Ten will only offer if they know the answer will be yes.
LikeLike
For the sake of the argument..
TX and TA&M go to the Big 10
ND and Maryland go to the Big 10
The Big 10 gets to 16
while great for the Big 10….
you have just pissed off the Big 12 (what ever remains)
you have just pissed off the Pac 10 (they may not expand)
you have pissed off the ACC and the Big East
If USC gets the death penalty (not likely, as they are blessed)
and Utah and Colorado may not help the Pac 10 (cash negative)
What happens if every major conference blacklists the Big 16?
LikeLike
They can just play each other for 12 games and laugh to the bank?
LikeLike
As utterly, completely, and totally thrilled as I am that Nebraska is about to become a Big Ten member, and I mean that sincerely, I do feel for Missouri if they don’t get an invite.
If earlier speculation was true, and the Mizzou “leaks” were really done at the Big Ten’s behest, it seems to me that the Big Ten led ’em down the primrose path and then threw ’em away like a used candy wrapper. I realize all’s fair in love and war and all that, but it just all seems rather…unseemly. I sure hope that’s not what really went down.
When all this is over, it ought to make a really great book.
LikeLike
Unless you have an invite, why act like you do? If they relied on leaks not coming from the Big 10 brass, then they were simply foolish.
LikeLike
Pretty much in line with all the speculation, but it looks like CO is gone to the PAC 10 regardless according to the LA Times:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/sports_blog/2010/06/pac10-poised-to-become-16team-conference.html
I’m assuming that whole number one target comment is meant to apply to a 2 team scenario where TX is out of play.
LikeLike
Wow, what a scoop. I could have written this.
LikeLike
Don’t tell anybody I said this, but… my sources are telling me that Texas is a valuable school that the Pac-10 may be interested in.
In any case, the more articles that come out about conference motives, the better; what’s that saying? “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire”.
LikeLike
james,
I heard the Pac 10 wanted Baylor, but Baylor said they would only come it Texas did!
LikeLike
Been away for a few hours. Did I miss anything? 🙂
LikeLike
No not really.
36 hours – 1700 posts
Maybe a “What the hell is going on?” summary is in order. @Frank the Tank
Nebraska is going to the Big Ten Friday.
Colorado is going to the Pac Ten ASAP.
Texas / A&M are meeting tomorrow to decide their fate with Big 10 and Pac 10 invites.
Missouri is dependent on Notre Dame to the Big 10 (and maybe Texas / A & M as well)
OU, OSU may go Pac 10 with UT…. but rumblings about SEC
Texas Tech, Baylor are attempting to tie themselves to UT / A&M for the Pac 16
Kansas, K State, Iowa State are screwed in any senario.
LikeLike
no one has physically accosted anyone yet, but i suspect it is close.
LikeLike
the funny thing is the name Big Ten could turn out to be more legit then it is now if nebraska, notre dame, and some other school is added…that equals ten states
LikeLike
Breaking: Big Ten Offers Texas, Texas A&M, Missouri and Notre Dame
http://northwestern.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=57&tid=143839427&mid=143839427&sid=901&style=2
LikeLike
There is also this:
Breaking: Notre Dame, Rutgers, Maryland, and Syracuse to the Big Ten.
“WFNI in Indianapolis just reported…
…. that ND Rutgers Maryland and Syracuse are Big Ten bound also. The excitement may just be beginning with Nebraska.”
Who knows what to believe…
LikeLike
Big Ten becomes the Big 18.
LikeLike
You’re playing with my emotions, man!
LikeLike
If it’s got Syracuse as a candidate, it’s probably bunk.
LikeLike
Actually, this makes sense as a leak to encourage Notre Dame to accept an invite even if Texas & A&M decline to join. “If Texas doesn’t work out, the Big East is finished.”
LikeLike
Ran across this comment about your rumor.
“1070 The Fan 316781 posted less than a minute ago 1276136314 2401940 2401720 1070
@Todd: Todd – WFNI (1070 The Fan) announced that the Nebraska deal was done…but only acknowledged that another source was reporting Notre Dame, Syracuse, Rutgers, and Maryland’s interest in joining the Big Ten. We actually scoffed at the idea on-air and never really gave it any credence.”
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/403805-breaking-news-notre-dame-and-four-others-to-join-big-ten-conference
LikeLike
Yep, now on Monday when Stanford voids Texas Tech and OSU, this can happen. The MWC and Big12 remnants will combine to keep the other Texas BCS schools as BCS.
LikeLike
It is almost like people are just making shit up. Just saying.
LikeLike
i get that feeling too..
LikeLike
As much as I enjoyed the post on the NW message board, there is just no way it happens. I will come back and eat crow if it does, but UT is not in the cards at this point.
The ball with the PAC10 is rolling too much for UT to just pull out and leap to the Big10 now. It could possibly bog down with complications (Baylor), but I think that it is going to happen.
Why tie up Missouri with Texas? If I am the Big10, I send out the Missouri invite tonight so both Mizzou and Neb can have official signing days on Friday. With just one school gone, the Big12 could frantically try to put some pieces together to salvage the ship. With 2 schools gone, and probably 3 (Colorado leaves before the rest of the Big12 South), there is no way to plug the holes in the ship.
I think Notre Dame is the big fish still left out there that Delaney is going after. He is using Texas and the Pac16 to pursuade ND to sign on, lest they be left out in the cold when the nuclear fallout of the super expansion sets in. ND does not want to be in Kansas’ shoes, once the Pac10 makes the offer, and it looks like they will shortly, ND will come to do some talking…and they wont just send their AD this time.
LikeLike
Besides, someone made a pretty good point a while ago. If the Big10 gobbles everyone up and becomes the unquestioned super power in college athletics and the unquestioned money maker…whats the point if there are no other conferences that rival the Big10? If you destroy everything else, whats left to rule over?
LikeLike
Gigantic piles of money.
LikeLike
isn’t there a ton of dough to be made by just pooling the existing conferences into the BTN? Think how much ro-tel they’d swing if we got a bunch of pac10 games on there.
LikeLike
To say other conferences are destroyed is hyperbolic nonsense. Texas could hold the Big 12 together and reload, it just doesn’t make financial sense for them, just as it made no financial sense for Nebraska to stay. Conferences will readjust with new members, athletic focus will be recalibrated in some cases, and life will go on much as before. These schools aren’t going to dry up and blow away.
LikeLike
Conference USA, Mac, Sunbelt teams come and play for money!
The SEC would at least play against the Big 10 in bowl games.
LikeLike
“Why tie up Missouri with Texas?”
Apparently they’re not sure they like Missouri by itself. But the Texas two likely appreciate them as a somewhat geographically close school.
The pod suggested days ago was, I believe ND, Missouri, Texas, & Texas A&M. Certainly would make sense, if Nebraska is tied to the western 3.
LikeLike
Yeah, I’ve been stumping for that pod as a way to deal with the regionality of it and give ND a chance to play in Texas every year against one of the Texas schools.
LikeLike
Hey, would have given you credit, but man the posts all blur together this past week and didn’t feel like trying to find it.
It actually would work out OK for Notre Dame. Instead of playing 3 teams from the Big East and 3 from the current Big 10 footprint, they play 2 teams from Texas and 6 in the midwest (assuming an 8 game schedule). So it’s still a fairly national schedule if they get around for their OOC games.
LikeLike
So would Vanderbilt
LikeLike
Tomorrow DeLoss Dodds and Bill Byrne will be meeting in Rockdale, TX on RC Slocum’s ranch to ensure that both schools are on the same page going ahead. From one of the posters on AY who works in the administration we learned the following things:
1. A&M and Texas are tied at the hip. They will not seperate.
2. Tech and BU are not neccesarily tied to Texas. BUT the legislature is trying to set Tech up to eventually be on the same level as A&M and Texas academically and that is the main pressure to keep them together.
I believe that the following scenarios are currently in play in order of likelihood:
1. This is a plan to keep Tech and not take BU to the new Pac 16.
2. This is a plan for A&M to and Texas to jump to the Big 10.
3. This is a last ditch effort by Texas to prevent A&M from heading to the SEC with OU.
LikeLike
NEW MESSAGE FROM PBC the NW very credible source!
“The Big Ten has no word on whether Texas & Texas A&M will accept the offer. Apparently the two schools are meeting to jointly determine their course.
Everyone in the office on pins & nails. The admin has no predetermined backup plan if this fails. We should know in the next week or so.”
LikeLike
I could see Delaney making a last proposal to UT but I find it hard to believe that he would have no other plans unless this is all happening faster than he wanted.
LikeLike
I think it is along the lines of your first scenario. We may all have underestimated the Texas Legislature’s power in this process. If they are planning to raise a stink about Baylor being left behind, the clusterf’ck that will ensue if both Baylor and Tech get left will be unbearable.
The “Missouri invite is contingent on Texas” might be a misunderstanding. That Missouri invite might be contingent on Texas and the rest of the Big12 South (minus Baylor) heading to the Pac10. At that point, I expect the Big10 to act quickly to grab Missouri before the SEC sets its eyes on the St. Louis market.
LikeLike
I believe the Big Ten Network is already basic in St Louis because of the interest in Illinois. So the only real reason the Big Ten might grab for it is Kansas City.
and hasn’t the SEC indicated they are not so much interested in new markets but in controlling their existing turf?
LikeLike
Things have definately changed in the past couple weeks. The SEC has said one thing that I definately believe: they will be reactive. If they perceive that they can stamp Missouri as SEC territory, they might give it a shot.
LikeLike
agree that things change and the SEC could respond. will be fun to watch
LikeLike
If that’s true, MO has got to be SOL. They’d be better off with Kansas to score the BB team and get the same market.
LikeLike
BTN may be on cable in STL, but it’s at 0.10/per on the Missouri side, which has 90% of the STL area population
LikeLike
“I feel quite confident that the Big XII will remain intact.” Dan Beebe
Here’s the video:
LikeLike
thats old!
LikeLike
LMAO, classic.
LikeLike
Love the comparison, though I bet to KU, KSU, MU, and ISU, he’s more of a Nero fiddling while Rome burns.
LikeLike
So in the last 4 hours we have UT:
1. Going to Pac-10 with friends
2. Going with aTm and Mizz to the B10
3. Going to SEC in the original Texas 4-Pack
4. Going to SEC with OU, TT, aTm
Best for UT
1. B10
2. Pac-10
3. SEC with OU
4. SEC with 4-Pack
Easiest to Pull-Off Politically
1. SEC with 4-Pack
2. Pac-10, B10 tie
4. SEC with OU
Personally, I would rather go to B10 and money with aTm and leave the 4-pack behind. Pac-10 makes things easier. 4-pack to OU has no chance. You could throw Baylor under the bus for Pac 10, but not for the SEC.
BTW, nowhere has there been any discussion about sticking around the B12 and making things work. Translation: B12 is cooked.
Sucks to be Baylor, ISU, KU, KState, and possibly OK State and Mizz
Think about this the national champion in Men’s College Basketball from 2 years ago is going to be playing in the MWC or C-USA. That’s like the Saints getting relegated to play in the CFL.
LikeLike
“Easiest to Pull-Off Politically
1. SEC with 4-Pack
2. Pac-10, B10 tie”
If the Pac 10 could take Texas Tech, the Pac 10 would be easier politically than the Big 10.
I hope we’ll go to the Big 10, though.
LikeLike
Was thinking about that and with aTm, UT, Mizz, Neb, CO gone you have problems but you don’t nuke the conference. If you read my 2nd order effects above comment section the magic number is 6. As long as you have 6 you have an auto bid.
Assume: CO, Mizz, Neb, aTm, UT gone:
Left: ISU, K-State, Kan, TT, Baylor, OU, OSU
OU is probably the friskiest but unless the Pac-10 would be willing to take them both with CO and Utah (doubt). I think OU would be stuck.
Utah goes to the Pac-10 with Colorado and it becomes the Pac-12 and a nice consolation prize to UT sweepstakes.
Now you rebuild around the best of the MWC and WAC.
BYU, AF, CO State, Boise State, TCU
That’s pretty damn good line-up and while its not perfect for TTech and Baylor its better the being relegated to conf without an auto bid and what would be a boat load of exit fees from those leaving.
LikeLike
I agree; if only the Texas legislators could be convinced.
I’m not a Texan (though I went to A&M), so I don’t even have a representative to pester. Just have to watch from afar.
LikeLike
BTW Frank, the same poster also did this post where he quotes your hypothetical Powers-Delaney convo and says “Without giving an opinion, I think Frank the Tank is on to something here”.
LikeLike
If the OK/TX/CU go to the PAC10, I would imagine that the BigTen would invite ND, Missou, Kansas, and Rutgers to go along with Nebraska (already in the bag). Except for ND, they are all AAU members and geographically, it is a good fit and definitely accomplishes the Death Star conference, even without Texas.
However, like you, Frank, I think they’ll hold off to see what ND does to see if they can get Texas to flinch, specially as the Texas legislature has their input on Baylor, let alone a TxTech issue (if we hold out a Kansas and/or Rutgers for Texas and A&M.
LikeLike
OT
the USC boards are lit up with talk of pending NCAA sanctions announcement tomorrow. talk is 2 year bowl bans, 30 scholarships over 3 years and vacted wins. we’ll see tomorrow.
LikeLike
Link?
LikeLike
hearing it from a guy on my Michigan board who was referencing the US Rivals boards. sorry I’m not a Rivals guy. I’ll ask him but you may find it before he posts. also mentioned a source named Tony Di Francisco
LikeLike
http://usc.rivals.com/barrier_noentry.asp?ReturnTo=&sid=995&script=content.asp&cid=646634&fid=&tid=&mid=&rid=
I can’t access it to check but if your a Rivals subscriber it should work
LikeLike
And Auburn gets the 2004 BCS crystal ball?
LikeLike
Has to be vacated. No one knows what would have happened had OU played Auburn.
LikeLike
Hop – I know it will be vacated, but Auburn was undefeated and came in 2nd.
Kind of like the 1st runner up in a beauty pageant, when they find out that the winner was in a porno . . . except much uglier.
LikeLike
Auburn didn’t play USC
AND…OU was #2 in the final BCS poll
LikeLike
and I should add, depending on whither we get a forfeiture or vacate of the game…OU might not have played USC either.
LikeLike
Daniel – the “final” BCS poll was released in December, before the bowl games were played. Look at the AP and the Coaches’ polls that were released after the bowl games. Auburn is #2.
I said above that it will be vacated. I’m just goofing around.
LikeLike
Me too….sorta. I think I’m the only person from OU who would see how great and how funny it would be if some how OU won the NC after quitting in that game.
LikeLike
Heck no, but I bet you a $100 that they claim it (they already claim the internet site created by the kid from Auburn that claimed them the “people’s national champion” that year. They’ll definitely try and claim it.
LikeLike
As deserving as that likely is, the bowl bans thing sucks for the kids on the team now considering most of them were likely in junior high when that crap happened. That said, it sounds about right. Wonder what the B-Ball program is getting, aren’t they up for sanctions as well over the Mayo thing.
LikeLike
It does suck for the kids. Then again, at least they were all recruited by Pete C. Had to know something was up. It’s worse when kids not even recruited by the tarnished coach have to pay the penalty.
LikeLike
The NCAA should sanction coaches somehow. A penalty like that should lead to a 20 year ban.
LikeLike
Pete Carols ass long gone! Left his national championship program in the dust with sanctions. God I hate cheats.
LikeLike
Best penalties to impact the actual culprits and leave the current crop alone:
*Hold coaches 100% responsible for knowing what’s going on with their players rather than the current culture that encourages playing dumb/turning a blind eye.
*Vacate all wins and titles.
*NCAA “strongly encourages” organizations that sponsor individual recognition (i.e. Heisman) to rescind awards.
*NCAA fines a school in an amount that is equivalent to all bonuses coaches received for their wins during the period of infraction. Up to the school if they take it out of their budgets, raise it from boosters, or sue the coaches for restitution.
LikeLike
If Notre Dame gets to choose who comes with it, why wouldn’t it be Syracuse?
#1 Both are private, similar schools academically.
#2 Both have a long football tradition that has fallen on hard times recently due to poor hires (Greg Robinson, Charlie Weis)
#3 Syracuse has supported Notre Dame in the Big East on a limited basis.
#4 Unlike Rutgers or UConn, Syracuse agreed to play ND in the Meadowlands several times during the remainder of the decade
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/239181-syracuse-schedules-notre-dame-in-the-new-meadowlands
If anything, I would think ND is confident it can deliver NYC, while Syracuse would deliver upstate NY. If the Big 10 insisted on Rutgers, then you have a solid NYC/NJ grab.
Add in Missouri or Maryland and you land one final great market, while also remaining perfectly contiguous.
LikeLike
Makes good sense. Take MD over MO I say.
LikeLike
Well, as a Plan B to Texas schools & Notre Dame anyway.
LikeLike
Honestly, I’d rather have the Plan B. Call me crazy, but I would.
LikeLike
I would also; with TX schools, as we’ve seen, you get TX ego and politics. If Big 10 were to get ND (still doubtful, imo) and NEB, RU, MO, and Syracuse/Pitt would work fine. I’d prefer Pitt over Syr., and would assume ND would also, given their tradition of playing Pitt, but that would be a huge outcome in either event.
LikeLike
Just a question. I know it has been discussed before, but haven’t seen it discussed in awhile. Why wouldn’t the Big Ten go to 18 teams? 20 teams? Is 16 felt to be the maximum, realistically speaking?
LikeLike
it may happen eventually.
first step is 16 and see if that integrates well. then who knows. 16 is enough for me right now but if a 16 team conference is really two 8 team conferences an eventual move to 9 or 10 team conferences is not unthinkable.
but 16 is enough for the next stage
LikeLike
Increasing the membership from 11 to 16 is a gigantic lift for a conference that’s expanded by 2 teams in what 80 years? Let’s get to 16 first and see how that works.
Plus, schools would freak out if they weren’t playing each other that often.
Even if you stagger the home/home (instead of back to back), you end up with quite a few years in between certain schools playing other schools.
The smaller schools would freak out if they weren’t bringing the OSU/PSU/Michigan’s to town every other year…
LikeLike
Because I, as an Iowa fan, would like to play Penn State more often than once every nine years.
LikeLike
No way no how is Texas going to SEC
They think they are far and above SEC as far as academics and as far as ethical recruiting goes. They dont like to get in battles with those scum/sleezeballs
LikeLike
Let’s all just agree that 1% of the B10 proceeds goes to keep Izzo at MSU for carrying the B10 for the past 15 years.
LikeLike
jj,
whatever it take.. izzo is the bomb
LikeLike
they could rename it Izzo State and I’d be cool with that.
LikeLike
haha JJ dont worry, hes not going anywhere.
LikeLike
Yeah, UT is looking into joining the Pac 10 where they have 100% NCAA compliance!!!!
LikeLike
KS can’t go anywhere without KSU, so that won’t happen.
BTW, the MD board is overwhelmingly in favor of a BigTen invite if it comes: http://www.insidemdsports.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34195
As one poster put it:
“I love that after years of being the outcast in the ACC you can look at boards of these other schools and we’re being mentioned as an attractive option. We’re like the hot girl with low self esteem who was in a bad relationship with a white trash d-bag (the four NC schools) who gets swept off her feet when a handsome young professional comes along and shows her how great she really is.”
LikeLike
Well get an invite over there already…
LikeLike
Do you live in Kansas? The regents said while they’d like and prefer to keep the two together and that there was no “law” and that it would be possible to split them up.
LikeLike
FRANK, NEED NEW POST! WORDPRESS HAMSTERS DIED 300 POSTS AGO!
LikeLike
A little Nebraska a little USC.
one year bowl band. by a source who got the delaying of the report story correct. for whatever that is worth.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/huskyfootballblog/2012073058_nebraska_to_big_ten_usc_to_get.html
LikeLike
in honor of the Big 12 I am listening to
LikeLike
RIP BigXII
LikeLike
I’m personally crossing the fingers that we jump to the Big Ten.
LikeLike
*we being Notre Dame
LikeLike
you’re the first Domer I’ve heard say that. fwiw as a Michigan fan I really want you guys as well. its been a great rivalry and can only get better. happy to hear your interest, we tend to only hear from the NDNation guys
LikeLike
I don’t believe that IrishTexan is an ND alum. How do I know your name really is “Hank”? Or mine is “Rich2”? The joys of the internet. Further, the point makes no sense. I enjoy it when we play Michigan in football and similarly I also recently have enjoyed Zyr vodka in my martini. But it does not mean that I think that this compels ND to join the Big Ten any more than that it means that I should become a Russian citizen.
LikeLike
fwiw my real name is Hank. I have plenty of Domer friends and would love to see you in the conference. Have for years. If you don’t want it so be it. I’ll take IrishTexan at his word. its costless.
LikeLike
I don’t think you’re name really is “rich2”. 😉
LikeLike
What kind of last name is “Tank”?
LikeLike
Rich, it doesn’t matter what you believe. I graduated from Notre Dame in 2007. I am a born and raised Texan. And I am not the only Irish alum who believes something proactive should be done to ensure we get a seat at a good table.
Am I in the minority? Absolutely. But I know what the Big Ten can do for us academically, and I want it.
LikeLike
Thanks, Hank. I know my views differ from a lot of ND alumni, but I don’t think independence can last forever. A game based on tradition is changing way too fast. I think ND needs to do what is in its best interest while it still has the ability to be proactive. The academic benefits of the Big Ten make it my personal favorite option. My next choice would be the ACC, but I wonder how much of that conference will remain intact if/when the SEC goes shopping.
I know how it goes with NDNation folk. I was a big reader of Blue Gray Sky, which was a much more palatable blog option for ND fans.
LikeLike
I just had a really stupid thought…what if ND doesn’t plan on joining the BigTen?
BigTen expands with Neb, Mizzou, Syracuse, Rutgers, MD.
BigEast responds by picking up Kansas and…ND.
Hear me out…
The BigEast, as constituted with Kansas/ND would give ND games in the north east (UConn), mid-atlantic (kinda, Pitt), “the south” (Louisville), Florida (USF), and mid-west (Kansas). USC, Michigan, & Navy (and Purdue if wanted) could be kept as OoC rivalries with the final game going for a OoC game in the SW, Pacific NW, or wherever to fill in their “national schedule”.
“Joining a conference” shock would be mitigated as ND is already a member of the BigEast in everything else and it can sell the move as also joining its other Catholic schools in a like-minded conference. And as the only “national” draw in the BigEast, it could shape the conference more along its desires…be a “Texas to the BigEast” if you will.
Also, while it isn’t at 12+ schools, the BigEast still maintains its AQ status. Guaranteeing a BCS birth for ND even in the event of super-conferences.
The BigEast gets another great bball school (Kansas) and of course, ND. The BigTen gets a nice balance of national & regional athletics (football&bball) draw, academics, market/state expansion and gets a little PR boost for pushing ND to the BigEast instead of “taking everything for themselves”.
I know, stupid. Feel free to flame.
LikeLike
Why wouldn’t Notre Dame just join the Big Ten then? Apparently, their biggest drawback to joining a conference is independence, so I don’t know why they’d choose the Big East over the Big Ten.
LikeLike
there are historic factors similar to any ancient tribes with feuds dating back to hunter gathere times. both sides have their versions of the atrocities perpetrated against their ancestors.
LikeLike
Maybe to give a catholic middle finger to the new bully in town. I don’t know what the hell is going to happen to my Jayhawks, even though we have a f’n national championship and Orange Bowl in the past five years…but it’s almost worth it to never be associated with Texas again. Hey the Big 8 got what it deserved and either the Big 10 or Pac-10 is doing the same thing now. Nebraska and Oklahoma thought they were powerful too when Texas came…but watch. Somehow, some way, within 10 or 15 years a Texan will be your conference commissioner and you’ll be stunned that everything seems to be going in their favor. I know you just think it’s sour grapes, but they are the best politicians and they love power. Now could someone please make a call and get my top 3 basketball teams a fucking real conference to play in?
LikeLike
Because Fielding Yost hurt their feelings.
LikeLike
No, it’s not stupid.
The Big Ten is actually a very bad fit for Notre Dame in every aspect except sports (ignorning regionality for a moment).
The Big Ten is a bunch of schools that average 40000 enrollment (including Northwestern…).
The Big East and ACC are better fits based on the schools in their conferences as well as the chance for ND to play in a region outside of Indiana.
It’s not a stupid thought at all. The only thing that keeps the Big Ten in the running for ND is that its the best football conference that ND would probably join (they’re not joining the SEC and the Big 12 is dead, and they won’t join a Pac-16).
So if your choices are ACC/Big Ten/Big East championships, obviously Big Ten championships have more meaning, and the Rose Bowl bid, etc. Tradition-wise a move to the Big Ten makes more sense, but you never really know. Institutionally, it’s always been a bad fit.
LikeLike
I agree ND is not an institutional match for the Big 10. But geography and football are more important and ND is homerun for the BTN.
LikeLike
I was thinking ND slips into the defunked big 12 along with WVA and louville. They still own this confrence but more so.
ND
Missouri
Kansas
K-State
Iowa State
Baylor
louville
In fact they can creat a revers BE by adding basketball schools Marquette, Depaul. this would be more plausible if the had a midwestern admin.
LikeLike
1800+ posts.
Time for “Expansionpalooza Overflow Thread II”?
LikeLike
How about a welcome to the Big Ten article? 🙂
LikeLike
great stuff
LikeLike
I’ll put one up soon. Consumed by the Blackhawks game right now but I saw that Northwestern rumor. WOW!
LikeLike
You’ve got a break before OT. Get to work.
😉
LikeLike
Re new post (Frank)
Frank, how dare you watch sports when there are so many articles and posts to read and comment on?
You really need to get your priories straight.
I bet you’re even going to work and having dinner with the family.
LikeLike
Question for all of the Horns/Aggies fans (primarily Hopkins Horn and m (AG)).
I know that it’s way too late in the game for this, and that the Pac-16 is likely to materialize in the coming days, but what if Delany went to Texas/A&M and told them that the Big Ten would guarantee an invite to Texas Tech when it becomes a “Big Ten university” in terms of levels of research/academics etc. based on a set of benchmarks to be worked out later (possibly AAU or something of that nature, although there’s way too many universities in line for that for Tech to get that realistically any time soon).
Obviously, that would be more of a speculative agreement, but would that actually do anything? I can understand that politically it won’t solve the Tech problem, but if Tech stayed behind in a Big 12 and kept it alive for the interim, it could work in practice.
LikeLike
Interesting outside-the-box idea, but I don’t see how it would work in practice.
I think it would also be a massive blow to Tech’s pride in the short term. The headlines would blaze that Tech isn’t a good enough school. I’m not sure how much Kent Hance would enjoy that.
LikeLike
Good point, but all this talk of a “Tech problem” can’t have been that much of an ego trip. I think you’re right in any case that it would look bad.
LikeLike
HH,
Currently tt isn’t good enough. If, however the Big10 is forward thinking and if they assess that tt has real potential (??) they should take tt. It would be inconsistent with their immediate needs but maybe prop 4 would work and boost lubbock to the big time. As I have previously mentioned almost all of the “top academic schools” have a medical school which provides patient care revenue as well as add a great deal to research revenue. Tech does have a medical school, ironically UT medical schools and MD Anderson don’t count in UT’s revenue.
LikeLike
TT could go full bore in academic upgrade for 20 years and still not make the grade. They have a long way to go. It is hard to build a top tier research/academic institution. It is striking that Texas, with all of that oil money available for investing in its universities has just two good state institutions. Even if there has been recent attention to building a better collection fo schools, is there support for a sustained effort over decades?
LikeLike
‘All of that oil money’ goes to just Texas and aTm. The PUC is only for those two. The other 30 schools fight for scraps.
LikeLike
*PUF
LikeLike
Yeah, I don’t see how the Big 10 could leave a permanent invite open. Interesting idea, though.
LikeLike
Hey, at least I’m trying. Regardless of what happens over the next few days/weeks, I’ve enjoyed chatting with all of you guys about this.
Plus, we’ll all still be fighting for the same thing, the Rose Bowl.
LikeLike
You mean Vince Young Stadium?
LikeLike
It’s over, zeek. It’s over. It’ll be OK. The sun will still come up in the morning.*
(*Offer doesn’t apply in Philadelphia.)
LikeLike
Either way I’ll be happy. I’m one of those who’s hoping that we can get Maryland and Virginia. I won’t mind a Pac-16 if there’s good opportunities elsewhere.
LikeLike
You may be into something here. Remember the 7 games guarantee for ND and Texas. They may end up in a pod with 3 teams for awhile. This way one division will have 7 teams one 8 and they play a 6+1 and 7+1 schedule with one guarantee rival and rotating pods. This even confirms MSU’s president statement that every new team will be on par with Big Ten academically from the moment they join.
LikeLike
She may have been referring to Nebraska
LikeLike
I think she was referring to any school that will join Big Ten.
I’m just speculating here.
LikeLike
I keep posting that a God & Country conference is a real possibility
LikeLike
sorry that was supposed to attach to the ND possibilities
LikeLike
http://my.journalstar.com/post/Husker_Extra_Group/Husker_Extra/blog/an_updated_regents_agenda.html
University of Nebraska Board of Regents will convene at 1:00 p.m. and receive public comments relating to UNL athletic conference alignment. The Board will be briefed on conference alignment and consider a resolution on the subject.
http://my.journalstar.com/post/Husker_Extra_Group/Husker_Extra/blog/regent_chair_doesnt_know_of_any_big_ten_invite_yet.html
“First of all, there are several factual errors. No. 1, there’s been no vote by the board at all. No. 2, as I understand it, there are no invitations that are extended. You decide if you wish to make an application and then they react to your application.”
Some political dodging, but accurate. Nebraska won’t vote until Friday, then they would APPLY for admission to the Big Ten, then the Big Ten would need to approve that application.
Most of us have known that is the process, but we also recognize that there has likely been discussions in the background notifying the Big Ten of Nebraska’s intent and then notifying Nebraska of the Big Ten’s response. Also recall that Delany said the BT presidents can vote electronically.
Maybe Missouri and Kansas should just send in applications?
LikeLike
Adding…
At its meeting on Friday, the Board will be briefed on UNL athletic conference alignment and consider a resolution. No action was taken during today’s conference call, and none will be taken prior to Friday’s meeting.
But at Friday’s public regents meeting…..
LikeLike
ESPN reporting that CU has their invite.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5270048
Tomorrow is going to be very interesting to see if the PAC 10’s “all in” move pays off. Think its pretty good odds unless the Big 10 is willing to swallow Tech. Its one thing to dick over Baylor and say the conference didn’t want them, its something else to deliberately leave Tech behind behind when there is a public offer on the table that gets them into the big boys club.
LikeLike
I hate not having an edit feature…
LikeLike
“Tomorrow is going to be very interesting to see if the PAC 10′s “all in” move pays off.”
A&M hasn’t been saying much, but I’ll be convinced Byrne and Co. are on board when I see it. The last few days have been consumed with a pretty slapdash Texas gambit of trying to threaten and cajole Nebraska when any objective observer could look at the situation could see that the goose was cooked a long time ago. The idea that things are just going to go smoothly from here on out seems naive. Nebraska was a simple, straightforward no-brainer deal for both sides, we’re just getting to the fun part with Texas schools mixed up with Texas politics. Lots of twists and turns ahead.
LikeLike
At this point, the Big Ten’s only hope is that the Pac-10 balks at Baylor and/or Texas Tech and/or Oklahoma State and somebody vetoes it, leading them to add Utah and Colorado. That’s not much of a hope, though. Nobody should have any loyalty to anybody in the conference anymore; they’re all rats scurrying off a sinking ship.
LikeLike
Damnation, the edit button got me too. The Big Ten’s only hope for landing Texas is the above, and hoping that crazy Texas politics prevent the Pac-10 move from happening.
LikeLike
respectfully disagreeing with James. TX to P16 is NOT a loss for B10; B10 needs P10/16 to continue as a premiere conference; the Rose Bowl Conferences are — well, if not coordinating, then at least — being complimentary.
The B10 Network (Fox 49 percent owner) will soon be combining with the soon-to-be-created Pac16 network (Fox being a 49 percent owner). Mega-cable channel on every basic tier in America.
LikeLike
In fact the Big10 and and Pac 10 are “partners” in the Rose Bowl. Each conference has a seat on the RB Board of Directors IIRC.
LikeLike
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5270048
Colorado already has a PAC 10 invite.
Utah is the top alternative canidate.
If the Big 10 snubs Nebraska (unlikely) the Pac 10 would invite them.
LikeLike
Sorry SuperD…. watching Blackhawks also.
GO HAWKS!
LikeLike
Wonder if Kansas couldn’t make a play for a spot in the Pac 10 in that scenario. They’re better than Utah…
LikeLike
Better than Utah in basketball. That’s about it.
LikeLike
Blackhawks Fliers 3 -3 at the Overtime break
LikeLike
Christ! When will teams learn that you can’t rope-a-dope with a one goal lead. And Hossa? WTF!
LikeLike
its disapointing they had like 31 shots to 12 and are just tied. Now sudden death.
LikeLike
Emrick just said that the Calder Cup Final is now tied at 2-2. How can the AHL still be going on? That’s grounds for arson.
LikeLike
So remember the ACC’s recently signed TV contract? Remember that it was surprisingly large due to a sudden bidding war initiated by FOX. Who owns half of BTN? Fox News Corp.
Anyone think it’s a possibility that Fox helped raise the ACC TV contract to make the SEC poaching ACC schools that much more unlikely? The only reason to join the SEC from ACC would have been an extra $14M a year, but now that the contract difference is around $7M, how much less appealing is the SEC to an ACC school?
LikeLike
I understand that I’m one of the very few SEC fans on this is a Big Ten-centric board. I have really enjoyed the back and forth with other posters, and I’ve done my best to ignore most of the jabs at the South and the SEC. Some of what has been said is very true, but all this cheating business is really unfounded. The SEC is not dirtier than some other conferences. I looked at the NCAA major infractions database and guess what I found. From 2000 to the present here’s the breakdown by conference of schools that show up in the database:
Big XII – 9 violations; 6 schools (Okla 07,06; Col 07,02; Baylor 05,00; Kansas 06; Mizzou 04; UTx 02)
Big Ten – 8 violations; 7 schools (Minn 02, 00; Purdue 07; Iowa 06; Ohio St 06; Ill 05; Mich 03; Wisc 02)
SEC – 8 violations; 6 schools (Bama 09, 02; Ark 07, 03; S Car 05; UGA 04; Aub 04; UK 02)
Pac 10 – 6 violations; 5 schools (Wash 04, 03; Ariz St 05; Ore 04; Cal 02; USC 02 + pending)
ACC – 4 violations; 4 schools (FSU 09; GA Tech 05; UMd 03; Miami 03)
Big East – 2 violations; 2 schools (WVU 07; Rutgers 03)
MWC – 3 violations; 2 schools (TCU 08, 05; BYU 08)
I didn’t read all the reports to find who committed human sacrifices and who didn’t, but this is the MAJOR violation database. The Big XII (RIP) and the Big Ten (surprise) show up just as much as those cheaters down South.
https://web1.ncaa.org/LSDBi/exec/miSearch
LikeLike
Mich 03? was that basketball or has all this reporting about U of M’s first major violation in 120 years been bull.
LikeLike
It’s the final ruling from the Fab Five payment bonanza.
Ohio State’s is the fallout centered on the O’Brien/Boban Savovic basketball payout (not Clarett and football, which wasn’t found to be much).
Restricting the search terms to 2000-2010 and only football or basketball, aka sports that matter, we have:
SEC: 8
Big12: 7
Pac10: 6 (+1 for USC today)
BigTen: 5
ACC: 2 (FSU’s recent wasn’t listed though)
BigEast: 1
Perhaps that’s just framing the argument in my favor, but these are the two money sports.
LikeLike
SEC is such a cesspool it is virtually impossible to distinguish an NCAA violation from business as usual.
LikeLike
Reception is reality. But thanks for the stats, it puts things in perspective.
LikeLike
Perception I meant.
LikeLike
I’m not sure about what sport all of those came from, but, for example, Purdue’s violation was from women’s basketball. That’s a little different from football or men’s basketball.
LikeLike
Proactive and defensive in the same post. I like your style, Alan. 🙂
LikeLike
Iowa’s violations were in men’s swimming. Apparently some swimmers didn’t declare all the previous schools they’d attended and the coach didn’t act immediately when he found out about it.
Man, I bet Reggie Bush is kicking himself right now that he didn’t get those kinds of benefits.
LikeLike
To be fair the the 07 violation for CO was a stupid self-reported misinterpretation of some obscure rule. We had some walk-ons (mostly for non-revenue sports) accidentally paying a few bucks less than they were supposed to at the training table, or eating there to often, can’t remember the exact details. It was pretty ticky-tack.
LikeLike
GO BLACKHAWKS!!!
LikeLike
So, Frank, I know you’re dying a million deaths right now, as Game 6 enters overtime. I was in this same position 11 years ago and 10 years ago as a Stars fan, wondering between OT periods why I was doing this to myself. Nothing is more excruciating as a sports fan as it’s going on than NHL playoff overtimes, particularly when the Cup could be won or lost at any moment.
Good luck keeping your sanity! 🙂
LikeLike
And as I hit enter, NBC flashes the “10 years ago tonight” highlight of the Devils beating the Stars in OT. I was there. Thanks, NBC. I needed to see that again.
LikeLike
Just be glad it’s not overtime in Game 7… Man, is that stressful. I’m a Miami University Alumnus, and the National Championship Game from 2 years ago (Where Miami had a 2 goal lead on Boston University with about a minute left, and ended up losing in overtime) is one of the more painful sporting memories of my life.
LikeLike
Congrats, Frank!
LikeLike
What was that?
LikeLike
Patrick Kane, I believe.
LikeLike
I’m mostly happy for Hossa. I hope Pronger doesn’t puke on him.
LikeLike
Here come the Hawks, the Mighty – Blaaackhawks!!
LikeLike
Philly fans can be vicious. Hope they don’t burn down the stadium. :- ). Wow, 49 years to pay dirt for the hawks. Best sweater in the whole NHL and I am not really a big hockey fan. It’s all goood!
LikeLike
Just ordered a few jerseys in different colors. The Roar is Restored!!! Never forget my first Hawks game. The anthem, the Zamboni, Bobby Orr and Lord have mercy, the Roar from the Madhouse on Madison!!
What a great week this is turning out to be.
LikeLike
Do they have the parade on Friday? If so, better do it in the morning, because the Sox and Cubs will be playing on the North Side in the afternoon.
LikeLike
Nope. Ticket tape parade at 1:20. Serves MLB right for scheduling interleague play during the NHL and NBA Finals.
LikeLike
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=5267138
“If there’s anything about this I think is widely misunderstood, it’s the extent to which academic decisions are influencing this,” Swarbrick said. “They sort of underline the very discussion here in a way the general sports fan can’t really appreciate.”
LikeLike
LOL! Has nobody informed Mr. Swarbrick that the PAC-10 is allegedly inviting the academic toilets that are Texas Tech and OK St and also an unimpressive Oklahoma? Out of 6 schools only 3 would pass the academics smell test. Clearly, academics are an extremely low priority for PAC expansion, if they are even a priority at all. At least the Big 10 is sticking to their academic guns.
At this point the evidence says Mr. Swarbrick must think the Big 10 is the only conference expanding. He’s going to be shocked when he finds out the PAC invited tier 3 and 4 schools from Lubbock and Stillwater over tier 1 schools in their own back yard, just ’cause “Texas said so.”
LikeLike
Exactly. And that’s exactly why he joined the Big East, right?
LikeLike
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5270048
…The coach said it’s possible the Pac-16 would push for two automatic bids to the BCS, one for each division champion. That potential bonanza could open the possibility of the two division champs from one league playing for the national title, and it would eliminate the need for a conference championship game.
“The Pac-10 doesn’t believe in a championship game,” the coach said. “And coaches in the Big 12 don’t like it anyway.”
LikeLike
I can understand this if the Cotton Bowl is added as 5th bowl, but not with the current setup. If they do it, they should require a conference championship be played just to keep the chances of two schools from the same conference playing in the National Championship.
LikeLike
scott c,
what is the point of expanding if you take away the conference champ game. while an individual conference might like this, it seems highly unlikely the rest of the football world would.
human nature likes a playoff, and to think this would not happen seems far fetched.
LikeLike
Agreed. I am not big on conference championship games either but if your going to have a 14 team conference or bigger, there should be no ambiguity concerning who IS the conference champion. Most likely some of these teams will be ranked and possibly the better team can be undefeated and the next up can have one loss early or against a top 12 opponent.
LikeLike
So if the WFNI report is accurate and the Big 10 adds ND, MD, SU, and RU along with Neb, how would you divide up the divisions.
I’m guessing that PSU would want to be in a pod with SU, RU, & MD and Neb would want to be in a pod with Iowa, Wisc, and Minn. But would you then group ND, UM, MSU, and OSU in the same pod forming the strongest pod by far (but keeping some major rivlries) and thus creating the weakest pod by far with NW, IL, IN, and PU? Or do you even those last two pods up by putting ND, PU, IN, and OSU in one pod and UM, MSU, NW, & IL in one pod (and thus losing themajor rivalries? I’m guess you’d have to leave the rivalries intact and have an extremely strong pod and an extremely week pod. What are you Big 10 fans’ thoughts on how to divide that grouping up?
LikeLike
Not sure what to make of this:
http://my.journalstar.com/post/Husker_Extra_Group/Husker_Extra/blog/regent_chair_doesnt_know_of_any_big_ten_invite_yet.html
Basically, the regent chair of Nebraska says he doesn’t know anything.
“First of all, there are several factual errors. No. 1, there’s been no vote by the board at all. No. 2, as I understand it, there are no invitations that are extended. You decide if you wish to make an application and then they react to your application.”
Could just be technicalities or regent trying to say “Nothing happens until I approve it”.
LikeLike
If you’ve seen articles, the Regents have no idea which league is better or what they’re supposed to do.
Most of them are totally out of the loop (at most schools), since this is all handled by the AD/Chancellor in terms of negotiations. The Chancellor (or President) has to present it to them and make an argument either way. Usually they listen and just go with that.
Still, they don’t really know what’s going on generally with all of these things swirling, or at least that’s what they claim. Some of them even said they don’t know which is better till they get presented with arguments for both sides…
LikeLike
It’s technicalities. They have to approve the resolution before an public meeting. If they stated they already approved it, there could be some trouble. I’m not a lawyer (there are a lot on this board, though 🙂 ), but I believe they are required by law to follow a public process as this is a public university. Believe me when I say that in no way will the regents vote agains Perlman and Osborne. Nebraska will approve the resolution, hold a press conference right after and state that they approved a resolution to apply for membership in the Big Ten, then Delany will hold a quick vote (he said they could do it over the phone), and the rest will be history.
LikeLike
That’s just legalese. The subject of conference affiliation is on the Board of Regents agenda for Friday–that’s public and on the internet. We know a vote is coming Friday, and there’s no chance the vote loses.
On top of that, the Big Ten doesn’t invite anyone. You apply to the Big Ten and then we accept you. UNL has undoubtedly been told that if they apply, they will be accepted.
LikeLike
If they stay at 12, I have to think the divisions go like this:
Neb, Iow, Min, Wis, Mich, MSU
OSU, PSU, Ind, Pur, Ill, NW
I know OSU and Mich dont want to be in separate divisions, but can you really make PSU be in teh West division, which is really the only way to balance things out?
LikeLike
Neb/Iowa/Wisconsin/Minnesota/Illinois/Northwestern
Michigan/Mich St/OSU/Penn State/Indiana/Purdue
You have 3 of the top 4 in the east, so its slightly top heavy, but having Nebraska/Iowa/Wisconsin is actually a good idea for the west, and Iowa/Wisconsin are 5-6 so it’s not actually that bad.
A Big Ten with Nebraska was always the easiest to set up geographically.
LikeLike
Agree this is the only way it makes sense if they divide. but what if they don’t have a championship game, which i suspect they may not. it gives you possibble co-champs to secure a guaranteed 2 BCS games. plus you avoid the same 2 teams playing 2 weeks in a row, which is the UM /OSU problem.
end of year rivalry games:
UM/OSU
NE/IOWA
MN/WI
MSU/PSU
IN/PUR
NW/IL
Break it into 2 weeks to extend the season or have a conference wide bye week heading into it. it would work pretty well, i suspect.
LikeLike
Nebraska and Texas officials are denying what Orangebloods.com is reporting. Let’s see how it plays out. I like our chances. 12 minutes ago via TweetDeck
LikeLike
They’re denying what, Nebraska to the Big Ten? That’d be crazy…
LikeLike
Nebraska hasn’t put in an application and the Big 10 hasn’t voted them in yet. Nebraska votes on whether to put in an application on Friday. So they aren’t in the Big 10 yet.
LikeLike
In their defense, they are denying that a vote took place and that an invitation was extended. Can’t have a vote because it has to occur at the public meeting due to laws and the invitation will never happen as Nebraska has to apply, not be invited. I’m sure they have assurances, from the Big Ten that they’d be approved, though.
LikeLike
Also, Chip Brown was reporting that a vote took place while the conference call was still going on. So unless these regents are sending him secret IMs, he’s just pulling it out of nowhere. Remember, this is the guy that stated Missouri was a lock and Nebraska should be worried it would left out of the expansion last week. He has no contacts with Nebraska or the Big Ten, he initially was just inserting his own speculation about Nebraska and Missouri into the Pac-10 story, and now he is just regurgitating the same stuff that’s being reported by writers with actual connections like Teddy Greenstein and Lee Barfknecht and stuff that’s talked about on this board.
LikeLike
What, specifically, are they denying?
LikeLike
Chip Brown = Texas puppet (fugly puppet ta boot)
LikeLike
I just found this article. It supports what you are saying.
http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/nu-regent-chairman-reports-on-big-10-inaccurate-28499
I don’t know if this was posted earlier. It’s been hard to keep up today.
LikeLike
The points the article makes is:
“1) The Chairman of the Board of Regents at the Univ. of Nebraska has confirmed he knows nothing of an invitation to join the Big 10.
2) The Colorado Board of Regents Tuesday confirmed that no invitation to join the Pac-10 had been extended to the school.
3. Also today, Orangebloods.com reported: “Texas athletic director DeLoss Dodds and president Williams Powers gathered UT coaches today at 2 p.m. CT to tell them they did everything they could to save the Big 12 but that they were unsuccessful.”
The AUSTIN AMERICAN-STATESMAN’s Alan Trubow reported after that Orangebloods.com report:
(Univ. of Texas head baseball coach) Augie Garrido said DeLoss Dodds did meet with ut coaches today but never mentioned that Big 12 was dead or anything was final.”
LikeLike
Mizzou doesn’t need ND to join the Big10, they need Texas & A&M. If UT & TAMU opt for the Big10, Mizzou will be invited as well, and ND likely will join also, but if the Texas schools decide to (or are forced to by politics to) head west, Mizzou has no shot at the Big10. ND may still join, especially if Maryland can be pried away & ND can name who comes along (2 of Rutgers, Miami, & Syracuse, likely; maybe Virginia can be pried away, but I’ll believe it when I see it). The advantage of adding more ACC schools is that it sets you up to to take the ACC core eventually when the Big10 expands to the Big20.
LikeLike
I agree. What I think people might not have thought about is the possibility of Texas and A&M setting up on their side to get the PAC 10 invite so Tech, OU, and OSU feel happy that they have a home and accept and then Texas and A&M say no thanks, were going to the Big Ten.
The PAC 10 still wins by increasing their footprint for their PAC 10 network and Texas gets in a conference they feel is the better fit.
As for ND, they will see the power shift and realize they have to get on board and join the Big Ten and then Mizzu will be the last school to join.
I also agree that the Pac 10 network and the Big Ten Network will use Fox to make both networks a package deal coast to coast.
As for the BCS, I think once all the dust settles and the SEC and another conference is there,ACC, MWC? there will be 4 Super Conferences and then you will hear Delany agree to the play off knowing that there’s more money to be made in a playoff (Figures have shown up to $750 mil). There are less conferences on the landscape putting more Big Ten conf members in the brackets. Even if the Big Ten doesn’t win, they should have enough schools to reap the pay outs of being in those brackets.
The Big Ten (If the projections are correct about each school going from $20 mil to $40 mil. could be looking at $800 to $900 million dollars a year for the conference. That’s $50 mil to $56 mil per school a year.
LikeLike
I realize this is Big Ten focused blog and you guys are working scenarios to get UT into the league, but I think you’re smoking something if you think Tech and OSU are getting into the PAC 10 without UT/TAMU leading the charge. Their offers have to be conditional on UT. I have my doubts that Cal/Stanford would vote for Oklahoma without UT.
LikeLike
I’m still not sold on Miz being some kind of sweetener to Tex. Wouldn’t they rather have Rutgers along to play at New Giants Stadium or something? Nor do I see ND being interested in a “national” pod that includes Miz. They just seem like small potatos at thsi point. Fallback option at best.
LikeLike
Pingback: Chicago Blackhawks Honorary Expansionpalooza Thread (and One More Super Death Star Conference Rumor) « FRANK THE TANK’S SLANT
Dear Big Ten: Roll out the red carpet for the Big Red
By Dennis Dodd
CBSSports.com Senior Writer
Nebraska’s history is filled with legendary players such as quarterback Tommy Frazier.
They’re special, Jim, so be kind. In fact, a red carpet of some kind wouldn’t be considered over the top.
They are the Big Red. The only Big Red that matters. Nebraska. A program that forged its reputation playing walk-ons from the state’s cornfields. It was recruiting New Jersey before Rutgers had a clue. At one time, its coaches used to know California better than The Governator.
It is a national program with incredibly deep local roots so be gentle, Jim, because Nebraska football isn’t a “brand” or “inventory” as you like to call the games you sell to networks. Nebraska football isn’t just something to fill air time on the Big Ten Network. It is a culture. It is brawn. It is Outlands, Heismans.
It is the Great Plains version of Michigan — with its pride still intact.
Now it’s all yours, Jim. Don’t mess it up. Don’t make Nebraska football into … Purdue, something lost in the haze of a 16-team conference. I’m talking to you, Jim Delany. This is on you, the Big Ten commissioner. You didn’t just invite a school or a team or a program. You invited a state, its people, its past, its future, its ethic.
You invited 45 percent of Notre Dame Stadium. That’s the percentage of red that showed up in the Irish’s football shrine when the teams met in 2000. You invited one half of the Game of the Century. You invited those thousands of balloons that are released into the Lincoln sky after the home team’s first touchdown. You invited Devaney, Osborne, Gill, Rozier, Alberts, Wistrom and Suh.
You invited the Corn Belt to the Rust Belt. Will the fit be more comfortable than Nebraska’s long-distance relationship with Texas? We’ll see. Nebraska AD/legend Tom Osborne didn’t want to leave the Big 12. He really didn’t. Nebraska would have been fine staying in the conference if Texas hadn’t taken over the league in everything from academics to finances.
Once Texas issued that “ultimatum” last week, it was over. Nebraska knew it couldn’t go back to a league where one of the members was issuing deadlines.
It is sad because the Huskers have played members of the old Big Eight for a century. It usually beat the hell out of Missouri, Kansas and Kansas State but that’s beside the point. Back then, they were all partners who genuinely liked each other. Now a school like Kansas suddenly finds itself reduced to second-class citizen status. At least KU has basketball to perhaps save it. Where is Kansas State going to end up?
Where is Kansas City going to end up? If the dominoes topple as projected, the ancestral home of the Big Eight/Big 12 is diminished. The city hosted multiple Big Eight/Big 12 tournaments and those leagues’ championship games. The city built the Sprint Center just so the Big 12 wouldn’t move the basketball tournament. Now what does it do? Nebraska’s in the Big Ten, Missouri might be headed there. Iowa State will end up in the Mountain West, if it’s lucky.
It’s all collateral damage and it’s only the beginning. The way it looks, Jim, this isn’t going to be expansion, it’s going to be waterboarding for the affected fans. Nebraska today, Notre Dame tomorrow, Syracuse on Monday. It’s all so torturous and tawdry.
Nebraska is not a domino to be tipped over, Jim, it is a tradition. Before there was Tim Tebow, there was Tommie Frazier. Florida State and Miami showed Osborne and Huskers how to win during a series of beatdowns in the 1980s and 1990s. Osborne calmly took the knowledge, retooled and ended his coaching career with a flourish — winning three out of four national championships.
Will it happen in the Big Ten? That’s a key question. With 14 or 16 teams, there is the danger that Nebraska will become Purdue, a middling program with a diminished pedigree. Nebraska is at a tenuous point in its history. Football is strong, but not back — not all the way. How will that comeback be affected by a Big Ten schedule?
Or does matter? Twenty million per year is 20 million for Big Ten schools. The figure reportedly will double in coming years if Delany does this expansion right. If not? Well, there is a chance that Nebraska will never be itself again. For all its greatness, the program does not have a recruiting base. The hire of Bill Callahan showed just how close Nebraska could be to ruin.
Now it is changing everything. Without Nebraska football, the state would be a slightly warmer South Dakota. With Nebraska football, the Big Ten has inherited a jewel that had better not be damaged.
These are humble, proud people who have created their own “brand.” That goofy overalled mascot who roams the sidelines might be a stereotype but so is Osborne. He is a solid rock of a man who, for better or worse, has gotten to Nebraska to this point. It might be the high point of the school’s history. Nebraska certainly is going to make money and make history, but it’s also going to lose part of itself.
So when you officially admit Nebraska into the Big Ten, Jim, avert your eye from the bottom line for a second. The Huskers’ decision didn’t come lightly. Osborne probably told you at some point that Nebraska liked the Big 12 — it loved the Big Eight even more. This Big Ten is going to take some getting used to.
All those great Oklahoma games? Relegated to the media guide for good unless the Sooners agree to a non-conference matchup.
All those Orange Bowls? Thank God for DVDs.
All those dollars? Nebraska just couldn’t say no.
We ask just one thing, Jim. Treat them right. Roll out the red carpet for the Big Red. They’re special.
LikeLike
hoffa,
great post.. thanks..
I am happy to welcome Nebraska, it is a jewel.
LikeLike
agreed. love adding Nebraska. great program. a plus addition. hopefully one of several.
LikeLike
likewise. I’ll repost if you reposted on the new thread.
LikeLike
Alan in Baton Rouge and Bama man. Here is an interesting post.
http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/06/baylor-tech-now-part-of-meeting-with-ut.html
LikeLike
And if you still wonder, this pretty good information will answer many of your questions.
posted 1:21p, 06/10/10
– As we all know, A&M and UTexas are meeting now.
– will meet with Tech and Baylor later today.
– A&M says want to go to SEC, not Pac10.
– R. Perry says we must stay together, but doesn’t care where we go (P10 or SEC)
– Deloss thinks tv share money is equal between 2 conf, but UTexas can start Longhorn network in SEC but not in Pac10, which equals even more money.
– Deloss says its currently 50/50 whether UTexas goes to P10 or SEC.
– LSU has been talking to A&M. No formal invite but informally SEC will likely take both A&M and UTexas. Would even consider bringing in Tech and Baylor if they must, while OU/OSU are passed over. (What???)
LikeLike
tell me.
LikeLike