dfwabel

Division 1 College Conference Realignment

Recommended Posts

Their goal is 16 teams... Notre Dame said they don't want to be the 12th or 13th or 14th... but the 16th team. They want to be the LAST domino. Honestly, I expect invitation to Mizzou, Rutgers, Maryland... and then Notre Dame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their goal is 16 teams... Notre Dame said they don't want to be the 12th or 13th or 14th... but the 16th team. They want to be the LAST domino. Honestly, I expect invitation to Mizzou, Rutgers, Maryland... and then Notre Dame.

You didn't read the article, did you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, I think the next stage of expansion belongs to the Big East and perhaps the Mountain West (to at least attempt to attain an AQ status). The casualties being the WAC (by far) and to an extent, Conference USA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wannstedt got fired! Now my stupid song is outdated.

Goodnight sweet 'stache. You'll be racing Cameros in heaven.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their goal is 16 teams... Notre Dame said they don't want to be the 12th or 13th or 14th... but the 16th team. They want to be the LAST domino. Honestly, I expect invitation to Mizzou, Rutgers, Maryland... and then Notre Dame.

You didn't read the article, did you?

Yes... I did. The Big 10 is going to go to 16 teams. Don't kid yourself. It may not happen in the next 6 months... but within 2 years, there will be a 16 team Big 10 - unless the SEC, Pac 10/2/4/6, Big East beat them to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their goal is 16 teams... Notre Dame said they don't want to be the 12th or 13th or 14th... but the 16th team. They want to be the LAST domino. Honestly, I expect invitation to Mizzou, Rutgers, Maryland... and then Notre Dame.

You didn't read the article, did you?

Yes... I did. The Big 10 is going to go to 16 teams. Don't kid yourself. It may not happen in the next 6 months... but within 2 years, there will be a 16 team Big 10 - unless the SEC, Pac 10/2/4/6, Big East beat them to it.

I'd lay money it isn't happening in two years either. This is a body that is very, very cautious and conservative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree whole-heartedly with Rams. It was the Pac-12 (with the possible expansion of UT, OU, Oklahoma State, A&M, and Texas Tech) that forced the Big 10's hand in bringing in Nebraska (even though Mizzou was at fault for saying the wrong thing at the wrong time to the Big 12). Yes, the Big 10 wanted to expand to 12 teams to have the cash cow of a championship game...but it was going to take a slow and grinding year or more for any statements to be made.

My thoughts: The Big Ten, the Big 12, SEC, PAC-12, and ACC are done or have been done expanding for the moment. The next expansion/division talk will be between the Big East football schools and the Big East basketball schools (perhaps led by Notre Dame?) breaking off into separate conferences. The Big East Football Conference will look at perhaps a Central Florida and East Carolina while waiting on Villanova's decision to make their 12 (or stick to just ten with TCU and 'Nova and play a round-robin schedule like the Big 12).

Out west, however, it'd be a little more touchy. I'm sure the Mountain West will still want to keep a presence in Texas and pursue SMU and Houston (along with Utah State, barring if or when Hawaii will want to jump ship and become a football-only member) to make it twelve. With this, the WAC will be considered an "unclassified" conference, appeal to the NCAA, or disintegrate altogether.

Like I said before, with this next round of conference movement, your main casualties will end up being the Conference USA and the WAC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Furthering the possible wrench in the Hawaii to MWC rumor:

Hawaii, Bakersfield, UC San Diego to Big West?

Well, the Big West is almost certainly the best option for Hawaii from a travel perspective, and can free up the football team to run an independent schedule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Furthering the possible wrench in the Hawaii to MWC rumor:

Hawaii, Bakersfield, UC San Diego to Big West?

What rams said about Hawaii makes a lot of sense. CS-Bakersfield has been waiting for an invite to the Big West ever since they completed the move to Division I athletics.

UC San Diego seems like the oddball here. Are they even ready for a possible jump to D-I?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Furthering the possible wrench in the Hawaii to MWC rumor:

Hawaii, Bakersfield, UC San Diego to Big West?

What rams said about Hawaii makes a lot of sense. CS-Bakersfield has been waiting for an invite to the Big West ever since they completed the move to Division I athletics.

UC San Diego seems like the oddball here. Are they even ready for a possible jump to D-I?

UCSD has 23,000 students and with no football to worry about, they can easily make the jump in terms of Title XI.

Remember, this is not USD (University of San Diego), which is private and has FCS football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn. With all of the movement in the Mountain West, it's a shame that Utah, TCU, and Brigham Young all jumped ship. A league with Utah, TCU, and Boise, as well as regularly competitive teams Nevada, Fresno State, Hawaii, BYU, and Air Force... that would be an incredibly competitive conference, certainly deserving of a BCS tie-in. And it would easily be better than the Big East and ACC most years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another shoe has dropped, officially.

Hawaii to MWC, Big West

I like this move. Hawaii in the WAC made little sense when they've also got a team in Louisiana. It'd be like the Big East having a team in Illinois Texas California.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their goal is 16 teams... Notre Dame said they don't want to be the 12th or 13th or 14th... but the 16th team. They want to be the LAST domino. Honestly, I expect invitation to Mizzou, Rutgers, Maryland... and then Notre Dame.

You didn't read the article, did you?

Yes... I did. The Big 10 is going to go to 16 teams. Don't kid yourself. It may not happen in the next 6 months... but within 2 years, there will be a 16 team Big 10 - unless the SEC, Pac 10/2/4/6, Big East beat them to it.

I'd lay money it isn't happening in two years either. This is a body that is very, very cautious and conservative.

You are dealing with a group that are using the obscene amounts of profit as leverage. You are dealing with a group that are ignoring athletic competitiveness and geographical proximity so seek teams like Texas, Georgia Tech, Maryland and Rutgers... why? To get the Big Ten Network in the Houston/Dallas market, the Atlanta market, the Washington DC/Baltimore Market and the New York market... why? To make an even more obscene profit.

If the Pac 12 has any sort of monetary success with the 12 members, even with poor competition inside the conference as well as inter-conference, the Big 10 will act. The Big 10 has been proactive with expansion thus far, and they aren't going to err on the side of caution when there is money to be made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their goal is 16 teams... Notre Dame said they don't want to be the 12th or 13th or 14th... but the 16th team. They want to be the LAST domino. Honestly, I expect invitation to Mizzou, Rutgers, Maryland... and then Notre Dame.

You didn't read the article, did you?

Yes... I did. The Big 10 is going to go to 16 teams. Don't kid yourself. It may not happen in the next 6 months... but within 2 years, there will be a 16 team Big 10 - unless the SEC, Pac 10/2/4/6, Big East beat them to it.

I'd lay money it isn't happening in two years either. This is a body that is very, very cautious and conservative.

You are dealing with a group that are using the obscene amounts of profit as leverage. You are dealing with a group that are ignoring athletic competitiveness and geographical proximity so seek teams like Texas, Georgia Tech, Maryland and Rutgers... why? To get the Big Ten Network in the Houston/Dallas market, the Atlanta market, the Washington DC/Baltimore Market and the New York market... why? To make an even more obscene profit.

If the Pac 12 has any sort of monetary success with the 12 members, even with poor competition inside the conference as well as inter-conference, the Big 10 will act. The Big 10 has been proactive with expansion thus far, and they aren't going to err on the side of caution when there is money to be made.

Note-I'm coming at this from a slightly longer term perspective than you (which is appropriate, since Jim Delaney has been on the job for more than 20 years) Here goes.

They sat on their ass with an incredibly awkward 11 teams for almost 20 years while watching the SEC and Big XII set up lucrative championship games with a full complement of 12 teams. (OK, they made kissy faces at Notre Dame for much of that period, but it was kind of like "the door's open if you want in," which isn't proactive at all really.) Shoot-they only added Nebraska when it looked like the entire Big XII was going to fly apart/be gutted by the Pac 10. That is opportunism, not proactivity.

Look, sweetie, let's pretend for five seconds that Frank the Tank doesn't have the inside track on the Big Ten's mindset. If the Big Ten was all about the almighty cable dollar, then they damn well would have pulled the trigger on Texas and their vassals A&M and Tech, or jumped into the New York market. Shoot, if it was all about the almighty cable dollar and locking down markets, Missouri IS a better get than Nebraska. But they didn't go for any of that, and to me that indicates one thing-the visions of Big Ten Manifest Destiny are confined solely to the fevered dreams of a few Midwestern bloggers. Now if the Big East or Big XII were to fly apart, then yes, opportunistic acquisitions of programs may follow. But until that point, the Big Ten is sticking with 12.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shoot, if it was all about the almighty cable dollar and locking down markets, Missouri IS a better get than Nebraska. But they didn't go for any of that, and to me that indicates one thing-the visions of Big Ten Manifest Destiny are confined solely to the fevered dreams of a few Midwestern bloggers. Now if the Big East or Big XII were to fly apart, then yes, opportunistic acquisitions of programs may follow. But until that point, the Big Ten is sticking with 12.

I heartily disagree. If your point is that Missouri generates more money than Nebraska, then you have not seen this article from Forbes that outlines the Most (Financially) Valuable Teams in the NCAA. Nebraska is #4, while Mizzou doesn't even make the list.

The report looks at the four following criteria, ranked in order of importance:

1. Money generated by football that goes to academic purposes.

2. Athletic Department profit.

3. Conference dividends (which includes television money).

4. Spending by local communities (buying team merchandise, etc).

According to the report, Nebraska's program is responsible for generating $93 million annually. Currently, Nebraska's population is 1.8 million, which further points to the fact that Nebraska has a national audience. If only the 1.8 million people within the state were solely responsible for $93 million in revenue, every single man, woman, and child would have to spend $50 on Cornhusker-related purchases. While $50/head doesn't seem like a large number, especially on an annual basis, consider that if this logic were applied to the State of Missouri, the Tigers would be making over $300 million per year, or nearly 3 times what Texas (#1 in this report) makes.

Jim Delaney wasn't just looking at states with a high population count, he was looking for national brands that will appeal to a wide audience. And before I get villified as a Husker Homer, I'm from Missouri. My family all lives there. And it's more of a pro-state anyway. Royals and Cardinals. Rams and Chiefs. And even on the college level, people are split between the Tigers and Jayhawks.

Those reasons, amongst others, are why Missouri didn't get the nod.

Now, that being said, from a purely selfish reason I would love to see Mizzou in the next wave of BigTen expansion. I've always enjoy playing them on the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shoot, if it was all about the almighty cable dollar and locking down markets, Missouri IS a better get than Nebraska. But they didn't go for any of that, and to me that indicates one thing-the visions of Big Ten Manifest Destiny are confined solely to the fevered dreams of a few Midwestern bloggers. Now if the Big East or Big XII were to fly apart, then yes, opportunistic acquisitions of programs may follow. But until that point, the Big Ten is sticking with 12.

I heartily disagree. If your point is that Missouri generates more money than Nebraska, then you have not seen this article from Forbes that outlines the Most (Financially) Valuable Teams in the NCAA. Nebraska is #4, while Mizzou doesn't even make the list.

The report looks at the four following criteria, ranked in order of importance:

1. Money generated by football that goes to academic purposes.

2. Athletic Department profit.

3. Conference dividends (which includes television money).

4. Spending by local communities (buying team merchandise, etc).

According to the report, Nebraska's program is responsible for generating $93 million annually. Currently, Nebraska's population is 1.8 million, which further points to the fact that Nebraska has a national audience. If only the 1.8 million people within the state were solely responsible for $93 million in revenue, every single man, woman, and child would have to spend $50 on Cornhusker-related purchases. While $50/head doesn't seem like a large number, especially on an annual basis, consider that if this logic were applied to the State of Missouri, the Tigers would be making over $300 million per year, or nearly 3 times what Texas (#1 in this report) makes.

Jim Delaney wasn't just looking at states with a high population count, he was looking for national brands that will appeal to a wide audience. And before I get villified as a Husker Homer, I'm from Missouri. My family all lives there. And it's more of a pro-state anyway. Royals and Cardinals. Rams and Chiefs. And even on the college level, people are split between the Tigers and Jayhawks.

Those reasons, amongst others, are why Missouri didn't get the nod.

Now, that being said, from a purely selfish reason I would love to see Mizzou in the next wave of BigTen expansion. I've always enjoy playing them on the field.

And you completely missed the point. The premise of ESTONE's argument is that Big Ten expansion is predicated on increasing revenues through subscription fees to the BTN, not other revenue sources. Missouri brings Kansas City and St. Louis to the table. Nebraska brings Omaha. You can do the math.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless it was mentioned somewhere else....the Big Ten has picked their divisional names.

Get this....a Legends Division and Leaders Division. I :censored: thee not. It's even more dumber than that "Atlantic" and "Coastal" thing the ACC has going on.

Leaders: Illinois, Indiana, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Wisconsin

Legends: Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Northwestern, Nebraska

It even comes with a new logo:

big-ten-p1.jpg

Oklahoma City Blunder!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.