pianoknight

Yeah those cases probably had women judges, anyway.

Pac 12 doesn't have an issue with Bible Thumpers. It's just that when the Bible (or Book of Mormon) Thumpers decline to participate in sporting events on the Sabbath that problems arise. That's a huge scheduling headache.

The Pac-12 as a conference doesn't have problems with private religious institutions, but some of the member schools (see: "Science, Not God!" Snobs at Stanford) are more than happy to block a religious school.

Also, the two UC-system schools (UCLA, Cal) have given off the impression that they would not want to mix the "Californias" and the "California States". So in theory, schools like UC-Irvine and UC-Santa Cruz would stand a better chance than San Diego State, San Jose State, Cal State Fullerton, etc... Of course SDSU is probably the next best athletic department out there besides the "Big 4 Californias" that are already in the Pac-12.

Finally, the league strongly prefers major research institutions, so that's another strike against schools like UNLV and especially Boise State. Up until recently, BSU offered a Truck Driving Program and they're basically the academic equivalent of ITT Tech.

The Pac-12 really can't seem to get a consistent message or concept about what they want.

Okay - I guess that the power conferences are taking a brief Final Four break from reorganizing and letting the Big East complete it's disintigration into the "new" Big East and the AAC.

What's happens next? Do the SEC and BIG 10 stick at 14 for a couple of years, or do they start going after more ACC and Big 12 teams? What about the PAC 12? How where do they go for expansion - picking off better mid-majors like Boise St and San Diego St or trying to also poach from the Big 12 (with the assumption that the 14 SEC and 14 BIG 10 schools are "unpoachable")?

I really think that the advent of the playoff system in 2014 will all but force us to have four "power" conferences. My guess is that either the Big 12 or ACC gets absorbed/folded into other conferences and possibly aligns itself with the SEC, much like the B1G and PAC are paired up with the Rose Bowl.

Essentially, it's like the B1G/PAC becomes the NFC and the SEC/ACCBig12 becomes the AFC, really. Winners play in the title.

The AAC... it doesn't roll off the tongue like the ACC does. I can't believe they would go with an accronym that is so close to another conference's. I guess it could just reinforce that they are going to try and push farther west and pick up more little brother schools in major markets across the country.

The AAC is nothing but a renamed Mid Major.

I see what you did, there.

People are just going to start calling them the American Conference. AAC is already too close to ACC.

Said it before, but the (football) Big East should just be called the "Conference of Misfit Toys."

I'm surprised by the Sun Belt, actually. They're also gaining FCS powers Appalachian State and Georgia Southern in a couple years. Coupled with semi-good-and-occasionally-great teams like ULM and Arkansas State, the Sun Belt is becoming a decent mid-major conference.

I think this will help the storm along. I am sure the SEC really wants the Virginia and North Carolina market.

I'll bet Larry Scott is scrambling in reaction to this. Right now, only the Big Ten, SEC and Pac-12 appear stable enough to host their own networks and this move will likely see the SEC and B1G battling for TV supremacy. The Pac-12 severely shot themselves in the foot with their regional model and distribution problems.

I feel like we're in the calm before the storm.

I can totally see a bunch of major football shifts happening this year since it's the last before the playoff system.

Hmm that not be bad I'd figure they try to replace the Omaha market. What about the Dakota's?

There are only two major sports things that matter in Omaha:

Husker Football

Creighton Basketball

To a lesser extend, you could include UN-Omaha Hockey and of course the College World Series, but you'd be hard pressed to replace the Omaha basketball market without the Jays. The Husker basketball team has some loyalty, but then the Huskers aren't looking to leave the Big Ten any time soon either.

Another reason why I am sold the Big10 and Big12 are not done. Also will be the reason ND never joins the ACC.

No one thinks the B16 TEN is done expanding. Nothing insightful or profound with that statement.

There are many posts on other threads here about the possible impact of Speed becoming FOX Sports 1.

However, regardless of the re-branding of SPEED to make it more mainstream, there are a few key issues FSMG (FOX Sports Media Group) must deal with.

1. Contracts: The current Big Ten contract with ABC/ESPN runs through 2016 and they will have an exclusive period to re-negotiate as well as the right to match.

2. Eyes: Most cable households have ESPN and expect to see college sports there. Recruits look at ESPN/2. They did not look at The Mtn. or even at CBSC.

FOX had issues with seeing Big XII and Pac-12 and C-USA games on FX. Today, FX has households than SPEED on basic cable, yet there is the thought to move it to basic cable still has the NBCSN issue...it's not ESPN and they do not have the games which ESPN has.

Bottom Line: Outside of the NBC/NotreDame deal and the SEC/CBS, the less you are ESPN, it is hard for people to change networks to see your games. Ask the Mountain West.

Some of this also goes to the distribution model. The Pac-12 network shot itself in the ass by splitting up into 7 regional affiliate networks - one for each region. So if you're from Arizona and you move to Washington, you'll have trouble finding the Wildcat/Sun Devil Channel. It will all be Husky/Cougars up in Washington. The Big Ten and other conferences (correctly) understand that to really push the agenda of a big time conference network, you need it centralized so you can produce a massive inventory.

Case in point - this last year's Civil War game. I forgot which cable provider it was, but either DirecTV or Comcast was unable to broadcast the game. In Eugene. And in Corvallis. I know a crapload of Duck/Beaver fans who completely missed out on Civil War because it was essentially blacked out to about half the residents in their own state. What a bunch of horse poop.

Try NOT showing the Iron Bowl to half of Alabama and see what happens.

I stopped believing the B1G cared about "cultural fit" once they added MD and Rutgers. It's all about BTN now.

You get it. People are wasting their time on here arguing that the Big10 is expanding with their old ways in mind. It is all about footprints, Big10 network and fox/espn. AKA money. Nebraska is all of the proof you need. And don't give me the "they were AAU at the time they got in the conference" Yeah. well the conference knew they were going to lose that AAU status. The same people that voted them in the Big10 voted to take away their AAU status. They wanted the brand and the area. THAT is CFB today. Why? because it is now a huge moneymaker. Unlike the old days. NWO, get use to it. It will make life easier.

I will partially agree with you. The AAU membership was not a deal maker/breaker for the Huskers. However, you can't deny what I was saying earlier about Nebraska fitting the "giant land-grant, farming community school with agricultural sciences and Midwestern values." Those things pretty much run through all Big Ten schools, even the "fringe" ones like Northwestern which aren't land grants.

Maryland and Rutgers broke the mold, not Nebraska. I don't say that to offer some sort of protection or justification for my own team, but if the Big Ten was completely gonzo for the BTN revenue, they at least partially obscured it with Nebraska since the cultural fit was there already. Hell, Nebraska spent a good part of the early 1900s trying to get B1G membership anyway.

I'm not upset about Maryland and Rutgers - I think they are actually decent pick ups for the B1G. But at that point it very clearly was about televisions and money, while Nebraska could at least make the regional/rival/culture argument.

So...the case for KSU joining the B1G is a research lab and a football team that's been good under exactly one (1) coach? Do I hear that right?

For what it's worth, Kansas State is partnering with Nebraska on that billion-dollar Federal research grant.

I'm not saying that fact alone guarantees them membership, but the fact that they're already actively a part of an academic partnership with an existing Big Ten school can't hurt their chances. The Big Ten, for all the pretense about televisions and media money, still values academics highly.

I realize that the Big Ten wants to expand into ACC/SEC territory for the markets, but if I had my pick I wish they'd pursue schools like Kansas, Missouri or Oklahoma - other Midwestern schools that fit the classic "Big Ten" profile. North Carolina and Virginia are fine schools, but each time the league adds a "cultural outlier," the brand is weakened.

That's why Nebraska joining was such a natural fit. A large, public, land-grant school sitting in the middle of farmland with Midwestern values is a natural dovetail into the Big Ten. That's why schools like Kansas, KSU, etc., are a better fit than Georgia Tech or Florida State, IMO.

The dynamic of Haves/Have Nots that raiding creates is interesting.

A school like Florida State, Notre Dame or Oklahoma could flaunt themselves around to the highest bidder, while the Iowa States of the world are sort of stuck with whatever they get.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just an interesting dynamic.

I'm a bit homerish obviously, but I would agree with others that Nebraska joining the Big Ten was probably the best conference expansion move in the last several years. A&M-SEC is a close second, in my opinion, since it got the Ags out of their Hornshadow.

I'd argue that Virginia Tech joining the ACC was a good move for them. They've been in the thick of the conference championship picture for most of their time in the ACC.

That's fair, although I wasn't really thinking that far back. The whole Big East/ACC defection with Miami, VT and Boston College was for the best.

My point was more towards this notion of the coming super conferences.

I'm a bit homerish obviously, but I would agree with others that Nebraska joining the Big Ten was probably the best conference expansion move in the last several years. A&M-SEC is a close second, in my opinion, since it got the Ags out of their Hornshadow.

I know the UVA/UNC angle was already being discussed, I was just adding that another media source was running the story. I wasnt very clear.

It's the same source.

Yeah, not my finest post. It was late and I was adding that from a tablet, so I missed some of the earlier conversation.

Back to a 20 team Big Ten. If UVA and UNC are #15-16, who are the other four? All ACC members, or does the league consider making offers to schools like Kansas and Missouri?

Interestingly enough, a 20 team format allows for two divisions of 10 (or 4x5), but it cleverly allows the league to market themselves as "The Big Ten(s)"

I know the UVA/UNC angle was already being discussed, I was just adding that another media source was running the story. I wasnt very clear.

Where there's smoke there's usually fire.

Maryland 247 is reporting that both Virginia and North Carolina have offers from the Big Ten. Maybe the UNC Chancellor bailing is related.

http://www.landgrantholyland.com/2013/2/19/4005512/report-north-carolina-has-big-ten-offer-virginia

This is kind of on-going, but I strongly suspect history will consider this a failure:

The Big12 is meeting later this month. The Commissioner said the Big12 may become more proactive. They are looking at adding 6 more teams. It is coming, people. Don't think for a second it isn't. It has been coming for years. The payoff is almost here.

It might happen, but the Big XII scooping up Northern Illinois and Tulsa ain't exactly what I'd call a payoff.

Now, if they managed to swing the Florida State-Clemson deal, the avalanche will probably start.

They wont add six teams unless FSU and Clemson are involved. The four others are buddies for FSU and Clemson.

Well no . Of course they are going after Florida State and Clemson. I would expect Cincinatti, Louiville, Clemson, and Florida State. As for the other 2 teams, its intriguing to me. I would assume they would like Georgia Tech and North Carolina. But if this motivates the B16 TEN to speed up their invitations (which it will), I would expect Georgia Tech and North Carolina to go to the B16 TEN, leaving Virginia and Virginia Tech to get an invite from the Big XII. Just think if that would happen... talk about a big F-U to the SEC. Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, and Virginia Tech all being swept from under their nose.

I like it.

So the death knell of the Big East is at hand then... Thank God. That conference has needed someone to put it out its misery for a long time now.

I wouldn't be surprised if the death knell of the ACC isn't far behind. Obviously Maryland jumped ship and there have been a substantial amount of rumors surrounding Virginia, Virginia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Clemson, Georgia Tech and Florida State.

Don't worry ACC, you can still survive with Wake Forest and Miami.

The Big12 is meeting later this month. The Commissioner said the Big12 may become more proactive. They are looking at adding 6 more teams. It is coming, people. Don't think for a second it isn't. It has been coming for years. The payoff is almost here.

It might happen, but the Big XII scooping up Northern Illinois and Tulsa ain't exactly what I'd call a payoff.

Now, if they managed to swing the Florida State-Clemson deal, the avalanche will probably start.

Looks like Arkansas School for the Deaf is trying to join the Big East.

http://www.arschoolforthedeaf.org/education/components/sectionlist/default.php?sectiondetailid=310

They have, BY FAR, the best mascot in all sports.

The Big Ten announced that the new, 14-team divisional alignments (featuring MAryland and Rutgers) will be unveiled sometime in spring.

It's not exactly news, but they've at least committed to a time frame for announcing the layout. Here's hoping they go East-West, but it'll be a moot point once they go to 16 teams anyway.

I think it all depends on their time frame for adding the 15th and 16th schools. I believe their end game will have Michigan and Ohio State in separate divisions (as they rightfully should be), with a a divisional cycle. Each team plays the 3 teams in their division, plus all 4 teams from another division, and a protected cross over game i.e. Michigan/Ohio State (there will be a Protected Cross Over "B" game on the years that the protected cross over is in the same division cycle for that year.), to bring the total to 8 Conference games per year.

If the B16 TEN already has 15 and 16 lined up (which they do) and have back room commitments from them (which they probably do), then they may shove Michigan and Ohio State in the same division for 1 or 2 years, until 15 and 16 become full members... which I full anticipate to be either in 2015 or 2016.

Obviously the league wanted competitive fairness at the forefront the last time they set up divisions. It's no surprise that they intentionally split Nebraska/Michigan from Ohio State/Penn State. Same goes for the "B-list" schools, Wisconsin and Iowa.

I'd argue that over the last several years, Wisconsin and Michigan State have elevated their play while Nebraska, Michigan and Penn State are largely in a holding pattern. Also assuming that schools #15 and #16 are east coast teams, you could split the league east and west but carve up the two Michigan schools and ensure a protected Wolverine-Sparty game every year.

East: Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers, Team 15, Team 16.

West: Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Michigan State

No doubt some would say that this unbalances the "Big 4" by putting Nebraska by itself (and OSU, UM, PSU together), but I'd counter that Nebraska plus Wisconsin, MSU, Iowa and Northwestern makes just as equally a strong division as putting the "Other 3" in the east division. The only way this doesn't work is if Teams 15 and 16 are like Virginia Tech and Florida State, but I doubt that.

LOL @ Michigan and Michigan State. The B16 TEN is worried about THE RIVALRY... not other rivalries. They wouldn't put Michigan and Ohio State in the same division when they could easily flip flop Michigan State and Michigan, resulting in Michigan and Ohio State in separate divisions, with the protected cross over in tact.

I actually agree with that. I feel that the "Big 4" need to be split 2-and-2, but the old timey Big Ten fans will protest. You know, the same old farts who talk about Woody & Bo and act like Penn State still isn't part of the league. Hell, Nebraska might as well be on Mars to those guys.

The Big Ten announced that the new, 14-team divisional alignments (featuring MAryland and Rutgers) will be unveiled sometime in spring.

It's not exactly news, but they've at least committed to a time frame for announcing the layout. Here's hoping they go East-West, but it'll be a moot point once they go to 16 teams anyway.

I think it all depends on their time frame for adding the 15th and 16th schools. I believe their end game will have Michigan and Ohio State in separate divisions (as they rightfully should be), with a a divisional cycle. Each team plays the 3 teams in their division, plus all 4 teams from another division, and a protected cross over game i.e. Michigan/Ohio State (there will be a Protected Cross Over "B" game on the years that the protected cross over is in the same division cycle for that year.), to bring the total to 8 Conference games per year.

If the B16 TEN already has 15 and 16 lined up (which they do) and have back room commitments from them (which they probably do), then they may shove Michigan and Ohio State in the same division for 1 or 2 years, until 15 and 16 become full members... which I full anticipate to be either in 2015 or 2016.

Obviously the league wanted competitive fairness at the forefront the last time they set up divisions. It's no surprise that they intentionally split Nebraska/Michigan from Ohio State/Penn State. Same goes for the "B-list" schools, Wisconsin and Iowa.

I'd argue that over the last several years, Wisconsin and Michigan State have elevated their play while Nebraska, Michigan and Penn State are largely in a holding pattern. Also assuming that schools #15 and #16 are east coast teams, you could split the league east and west but carve up the two Michigan schools and ensure a protected Wolverine-Sparty game every year.

East: Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers, Team 15, Team 16.

West: Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Michigan State

No doubt some would say that this unbalances the "Big 4" by putting Nebraska by itself (and OSU, UM, PSU together), but I'd counter that Nebraska plus Wisconsin, MSU, Iowa and Northwestern makes just as equally a strong division as putting the "Other 3" in the east division. The only way this doesn't work is if Teams 15 and 16 are like Virginia Tech and Florida State, but I doubt that.