B1G rumored to be looking at 6 more schools

psu00

Well-Known Member
Jan 4, 2010
24,172
12,026
1
There aren't many good candidates left for expansion. That's my take. Oregon, Washington, Notre Dame, Clemson, Florida State, what else? Not much.

I agree. I just find it odd people will say Miami or Washington don’t bring enough $$ and then in the next breath start talking about Stanford, Cal, or Virginia.

It’s getting to the point now (assuming $100 mil cutoff) that no team left can bring that value alone. However, there are plenty of teams left that bring more value than some current members of the Big Ten and SEC. When does the discussion start over dropping deadweights from the P2?

Oregon or Florida State may not bring $100 mil but they bring much more interest and TV $$ than Illinois, Purdue, Indiana, Rutgers, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, Missouri, etc.

If you add Oregon and FSU while dropping Rutgers and Indiana the conference ends up with more $$ per team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dmaw

LafayetteBear

Well-Known Member
Dec 1, 2009
48,344
21,602
1
I dont see how they can argue that Cal Berkeley must be included. What makes them more special the San Bernardino and the other campuses?
Wut?!

1. There IS NO U.C. San Bernardino. Doesn't exist. LOL.
2. No one would argue that Cal is any kind of football power. But the Golden Bears have had considerable success in the Olympic sports.
3. The reason the OP posted that UCLA and Cal "may be a package deal" is that they are both U.C. schools. Therefore, the U.C. Regents make the final decisions for BOTH schools, and some folks have speculated that the Regents may either quash UCLA's conference reaffiliation entirely or condition it on Cal being included.
4. What makes you think Cal would be interested in playing in the Big Ten? I'm a big PSU fan, but a Cal alum, and I don't see Cal moving to the Big Ten as any kind of plus. The TV money is certainly greater (credit that almost entirely to the difference in time zones the conferences play in), but so is the travel and inconvenience for student athletes, coaches, staff and fans. And this kind of reaffiliation would necessitate jettisoning a bunch of teams we have historically played in favor of some not too enticing matchups. Away games at Minnesota, Purdue, Rutgers or Michigan State in November? No thanks. Frankly, as I have mentioned before in other threads, I think the whole CFB system may well be restructured in the not too distant future, anyway.
 

Mile High Lion

Well-Known Member
Sep 3, 2001
5,052
1,381
1
I agree. I just find it odd people will say Miami or Washington don’t bring enough $$ and then in the next breath start talking about Stanford, Cal, or Virginia.

It’s getting to the point now (assuming $100 mil cutoff) that no team left can bring that value alone. However, there are plenty of teams left that bring more value than some current members of the Big Ten and SEC. When does the discussion start over dropping deadweights from the P2?

Oregon or Florida State may not bring $100 mil but they bring much more interest and TV $$ than Illinois, Purdue, Indiana, Rutgers, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, Missouri, etc.

If you add Oregon and FSU while dropping Rutgers and Indiana the conference ends up with more $$ per team.
I don't know. It's probably because they are AAU schools and the Big 10 likes to see itself as academically superior to other conferences. Then they can tell themselves the reason they lose so often to the SEC is because their academic standards are so high, like that has anything to do with the football team.

If I were king this is what I would do and I know there are TV agreements and other things getting the the way. The Big 10 and SEC each have 16 teams. They join forces to form their own league of 32 teams. That's four divisions of eight teams. All teams play a schedule exclusively of teams within this new superdivision. So there are twelve games, six within your own division, two each in the other three. Eight teams make the playoffs, four division champions and four wild cards determined by record and tie breakers like strength of schedule etc. No polls or Kirk Herbstreit eye test.

The winner of this league is clearly the champion of 'college' football. All the other teams aren't playing a quality schedule so they can claim what they want, it doesn't matter. This new league will get the majority of national interest, TV contracts and money. Everyone else fights for the leftovers.

So to get to your question about dropping deadweights after five years or so if there any teams not meeting some standard like they can't average more than some number of wins, say 2.5 a year, they are risk of being dropped. At that point we say hey Vanderbilt and Rutgers you guys aren't competitive so you are being dropped and we'll give a couple other teams, maybe Notre Dame and Washington, a chance to join.

See how easy that was? It's just all the politics getting in the way but I think the top level of 'college' football will look something like this eventually.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacNit07 and psu00

psu00

Well-Known Member
Jan 4, 2010
24,172
12,026
1
I like the relegation idea. You earn a spot in the league by performance, not being grandfathered in from joining 100 years ago. You don’t perform and you’re out with new teams taking your place until you work your way back in again.
 

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Sep 4, 2007
2,937
1,539
1
Multiple sites saying the Big has cooled on more Pac 12 teams.

I’d take any rumor with a massive grain of salt - even real reliable reporters since they are fed info that may be intentionally misleading - but IMHO it’s clear that if the Big Ten wanted any other PAC12 teams this timeframe they would have already been invited. They are waiting on Notre Dame and that’s about it at this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mdking001

ryoder1

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2007
2,038
1,510
1
This whole thing is starting to feel like trading baseball cards back in the day. The concept of the Big 10 being primarily large state schools plus Northwestern as the elite private is gone. The "fit" of the academic side plus all of the research benefits touted when we joined are irrelevant now.

USC and Miami are small private schools who overperform in major sports. I'd imagine that there is significant overlap amongst applicants at these two schools.

Stanford is the same but they are excellent at country club/Olympic sports and good at stick and ball sports. Note Dame is Notre Dame. Again, it is reasonable to think they share an application base as both are up the ladder from Da U and So Cal.

Cal, Washington, Oregon, Florida State and UCLA fit the old Big model and feel more like overall fits. But none of this matters anyway, as it is only about sports, revenue, and eye balls.

Geography plays a bit of a role, and the concept of being in FL and CA is intriguing. But it feels like the beginning of the end to me. While I don't like it I think we should just get 'em all...why not?
U$C enrollment is 44,000, hardly the small private school. They fit well with the B10 given their strong academics and research capabilities.
The principle that the B10 is a midwest conference went out the door in 1990 when PSU joined. Thirty plus years later it has very little to do with geography and all to do with money and maintaining a strong academic reputation.

As the B10 looks to expand they have to tack onto their two west coast schools. Makes no sense to only have U$C and UCLA on an island. I think Oregon, Washington, Stanford and Cal make the most sense. I wonder about Cal but it is arguably the #1 state school in the nation for academics and right there with Stanford. Better than any current B10 school with perhaps the exception of NW. The Big Ten presidents and chancellors and other administrative muckety mucks would trip all over themselves about getting Cal. I think that is it for the west. No to Utah, no to Colorado and no to both Arizona schools. Definetly a no to Oregon State and Washington State. All not up to the grade on academics although Colorado is worthy probably academically but not a good TV draw and we would have Cal so CU brings in nothing incrementally.

As for the east expansion and it will happen you follow the same strategy of good to excellent academics and solid sports programs while keeping rivalries. To me that means UVA, Duke, UNC and Va Tech. I don't think Miami is a good fit nor FSU. Although I could see a play to entice ND with Stanford and Miami. Also you could imvite Miami to grab some of the Florida market but it seems like a bad fit. The shocker would be if the B10 could flip Florida to join as they are the best fit academically but that will never happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 84Lion

ryoder1

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2007
2,038
1,510
1
I’d take any rumor with a massive grain of salt - even real reliable reporters since they are fed info that may be intentionally misleading - but IMHO it’s clear that if the Big Ten wanted any other PAC12 teams this timeframe they would have already been invited. They are waiting on Notre Dame and that’s about it at this point.
If the B10 just sits around waiting for ND to call them while expansion happens around them then they will lose. Bigger is better to some degree. There is an academic component to this. No doubt. Do you think the jock ADs are sitting around calling all the shots? The presidents are their boss. Yes money is involved and they want to rival the SEC but you don't want some football factory conference. If that was the case then the B10 would have done everything possible to get Clemson. You have to look at differentiation versus the SEC and a bigger conference that crushes them academically and in non football sports is meaningful although not baseball but who cares about baseball. Yeah I know who cares about any other sport besides football and BBall. At the end of the day there is more to it then simply acquiring the best football schools.
 

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Sep 4, 2007
2,937
1,539
1
As the B10 looks to expand they have to tack onto their two west coast schools. Makes no sense to only have U$C and UCLA on an island.

I actually think USC/UCLA do not particularly want other PAC-12 schools. If so they probably would have pushed for them before joining. The scuttlebutt is that they didn’t want those schools recruiting SoCal as much (especially Oregon) and that taking the LA market away from the other PAC schools will benefit USC/UCLA in terms of enhancing their programs (especially now being in a “better” conference).

it’s not like having the likes of Oregon or Washington really help in terms of travel - that’s still a decent length flight for the LA teams.
 

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Sep 4, 2007
2,937
1,539
1
If the B10 just sits around waiting for ND to call them while expansion happens around them then they will lose.

“Lose” what exactly? Do you think the PAC-12 schools are going somewhere else in the meantime and won’t be available for the Big Ten? What would be the rush to add any other schools right now unless they can increase the payouts for each of the Big Ten schools? Outside of ND, I don’t see any other school that would increase revenue enough to raise the per team payouts.
 

ryoder1

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2007
2,038
1,510
1
“Lose” what exactly? Do you think the PAC-12 schools are going somewhere else in the meantime and won’t be available for the Big Ten? What would be the rush to add any other schools right now unless they can increase the payouts for each of the Big Ten schools? Outside of ND, I don’t see any other school that would increase revenue enough to raise the per team payouts.
Yes they could team up with B12 or or a revamped Pac 12. Those 4 schools are the best fit for the B10 so why not go after them now? Not sure U$C and UCLA maximized the per team revenue for the B10. They probably won't do anything and will wait for ND but they will be waiting a while and will most likely see all other high potential schools go elsewhere. It doesn't seem like where the B10 is now is the end game.
 

84Lion

Well-Known Member
Sep 19, 2010
1,513
1,174
1
I don't think Miami is a good fit nor FSU. Also you could imvite Miami to grab some of the Florida market but it seems like a bad fit. The shocker would be if the B10 could flip Florida to join as they are the best fit academically but that will never happen.
Ryoder, good call. Neither Miami nor FSU are AAU schools. Conversely, Florida is an AAU school and fits the profile of a flagship state university like the majority of the B1G schools. While Georgia is not AAU, they fit the B1G profile better than Georgia Tech. I believe I have read that Georgia is on the cusp of AAU eligibility. Joining the B1G, with membership in the Academic Alliance, would certainly raise the profile of both schools. Georgia and Florida would no longer have to go through Alabama to attain a conference championship. It would be a gut punch to the SEC and give the B1G the possibility of having the CCG in SEC country...how about the B1G CCG at Mercedes-Benz stadium in ATL with the SEC championship at Jerrah's World? Wow. Money? Tell me that a conference with USC, UCLA, Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Georgia, and Florida would not pull more money than the SEC. This would be a huge win for everyone and cement the B1G as a national conference. Imagine USC vs. Georgia for the B1G championship in ATL.
 

ryoder1

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2007
2,038
1,510
1
Ryoder, good call. Neither Miami nor FSU are AAU schools. Conversely, Florida is an AAU school and fits the profile of a flagship state university like the majority of the B1G schools. While Georgia is not AAU, they fit the B1G profile better than Georgia Tech. I believe I have read that Georgia is on the cusp of AAU eligibility. Joining the B1G, with membership in the Academic Alliance, would certainly raise the profile of both schools. Georgia and Florida would no longer have to go through Alabama to attain a conference championship. It would be a gut punch to the SEC and give the B1G the possibility of having the CCG in SEC country...how about the B1G CCG at Mercedes-Benz stadium in ATL with the SEC championship at Jerrah's World? Wow. Money? Tell me that a conference with USC, UCLA, Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Georgia, and Florida would not pull more money than the SEC. This would be a huge win for everyone and cement the B1G as a national conference. Imagine USC vs. Georgia for the B1G championship in ATL.
That would be awesome but don't see it happening. I think if the commissioners were reversed and the B10 had Sankey and the SEC had Warren then there would be a possibility that the B10 could pull off the bold move. With Warren at the helm, basically no shot. He is too conservative and too timid.

You brought up Ga Tech. Maybe they could fit like a NW but we don't need another NW. They are strong academically but a bit of a train wreck in football and BBall. In fact, are they any good in any sports?

As for UGA, I have never thought of them as a particularly strong academic school but I guess they have greatly improved and if they are on the cusp of AAU eligibility then they are a good school academically or at least good enough to make the B10 cut. Yes, they are the flagship state university and importantly carry the ATL TV market. Fla covers Jacksonville, Orlando and Tampa and to a lesser degree Miami so a no brainer with them.

Woud love to gut punch the SEC and swipe both FL and GA from them. They could counter with nabbing Clemson and FSU. Game on brother!
 

psu00

Well-Known Member
Jan 4, 2010
24,172
12,026
1
I’m not sure how Georgia and Florida got into the mix here. Neither of those schools are leaving the SEC.

Georgia Tech is a train wreck like Virginia, Cal, and Stanford. Neither of those 4 should be in the discussion IMO.

As for AAU, I know the Big Ten likes to talk that up but it’s hardly a deal breaker. Nebraska is not AAU. I wouldn’t rule out schools based solely on that.

Getting Florida State and Clemson or Miami would great for both matchup interest (tv $$) and to get the big Ten into the recruiting territory down south, especially in highly populated Florida.
 

ryoder1

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2007
2,038
1,510
1
I’m not sure how Georgia and Florida got into the mix here. Neither of those schools are leaving the SEC.

Georgia Tech is a train wreck like Virginia, Cal, and Stanford. Neither of those 4 should be in the discussion IMO.

As for AAU, I know the Big Ten likes to talk that up but it’s hardly a deal breaker. Nebraska is not AAU. I wouldn’t rule out schools based solely on that.

Getting Florida State and Clemson or Miami would great for both matchup interest (tv $$) and to get the big Ten into the recruiting territory down south, especially in highly populated Florida.
You never know about a FL or Ga leaving the SEC. Highly unlikely but not impossible and more likely if it makes sense financially for both of them.
FSU is nothing in football but who knows they could regain their swagger.

The point here is that I think it is more than just collecting the biggest football factory schools. You seem to think it is about that so we can disagree on that point. UCLA is meh when it comes to football but the B10 got them. Why? They are a package deal with U$C maybe U$C demanded it who knows.

I think there is more in play besides just football pedigree that is being considered by these school presidents. I do think academic reputation plays a role, how can it not when you have school presidents and chancellors involved?

Cal is a package deal with Stanford and the flagship university in the biggest state. Stanford is the B10's NW of the west. Duke would be it in the east.

Get the Mid Atlantic into the south markets with UVA, UNC, Duke and UNC. Trying to get all the way to the south east and into Florida via FSU is not necessary and not a great fit. Miami is not a big draw, in 90's yes but not now. I don't think the B10 needs Clemson. Yeah they are a football power but beyond that their profile is weak. Decent academics but again is it all about just getting every football factory school?
 

LafayetteBear

Well-Known Member
Dec 1, 2009
48,344
21,602
1
You never know about a FL or Ga leaving the SEC. Highly unlikely but not impossible and more likely if it makes sense financially for both of them.
FSU is nothing in football but who knows they could regain their swagger.

The point here is that I think it is more than just collecting the biggest football factory schools. You seem to think it is about that so we can disagree on that point. UCLA is meh when it comes to football but the B10 got them. Why? They are a package deal with U$C maybe U$C demanded it who knows.

I think there is more in play besides just football pedigree that is being considered by these school presidents. I do think academic reputation plays a role, how can it not when you have school presidents and chancellors involved?

Cal is a package deal with Stanford and the flagship university in the biggest state. Stanford is the B10's NW of the west. Duke would be it in the east.

Get the Mid Atlantic into the south markets with UVA, UNC, Duke and UNC. Trying to get all the way to the south east and into Florida via FSU is not necessary and not a great fit. Miami is not a big draw, in 90's yes but not now. I don't think the B10 needs Clemson. Yeah they are a football power but beyond that their profile is weak. Decent academics but again is it all about just getting every football factory school?
Dude: I gotta say that I LOVE your imagination and creativity. Your ambitions for the B1G are quite grandiose. ("Hey, let's just cherry pick the top schools from every conference in the nation. Surely, Florida and Georgia would prefer the B1G to the SEC. They are ALL itching to be a part of the greatness that is the B1G, no?")

Just a matter of months ago, and for years before that, a TON of posters on this Board were complaining about how crappy the B1G was, how bad a fit it was for PSU, and how poorly it was run. A bunch of them wanted PSU to move to the ACC. Amazing what a few short months can do. :cool:
 

psu00

Well-Known Member
Jan 4, 2010
24,172
12,026
1
It’s all about the money now and most of those schools will end in a loss of money.

USC and UCLA were taken to lock down the LA market (and who knows maybe SC demanded UCLA too? You could be right about that).

As for the academic side and not focusing on “football factories”- as of the latest US News Rankings (for what they’re worth) UCLA (#20), USC (#27), Florida (#28), Georgia (#48), Washington (#59), and even Florida State (#55) and Miami (#55) are all ranked ahead of Penn State (#63) now. FSU and Miami are currently ranked ahead of 7 current Big Ten members.

Even Clemson raked at #75 is still ahead of Michigan State (#83), Iowa (#83), and Nebraska (#136).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NedFromYork

ryoder1

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2007
2,038
1,510
1
Dude: I gotta say that I LOVE your imagination and creativity. Your ambitions for the B1G are quite grandiose. ("Hey, let's just cherry pick the top schools from every conference in the nation. Surely, Florida and Georgia would prefer the B1G to the SEC. They are ALL itching to be a part of the greatness that is the B1G, no?")

Just a matter of months ago, and for years before that, a TON of posters on this Board were complaining about how crappy the B1G was, how bad a fit it was for PSU, and how poorly it was run. A bunch of them wanted PSU to move to the ACC. Amazing what a few short months can do. :cool:
Gotta beat the SEC! I am not a fan of the old guard midwest, Big 2 little 8 Big Ten that still exists. But we are in the conference so let's get some good schools in it!
 

ryoder1

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2007
2,038
1,510
1
It’s all about the money now and most of those schools will end in a loss of money.

USC and UCLA were taken to lock down the LA market (and who knows maybe SC demanded UCLA too? You could be right about that).

As for the academic side and not focusing on “football factories”- as of the latest US News Rankings (for what they’re worth) UCLA (#20), USC (#27), Florida (#28), Georgia (#48), Washington (#59), and even Florida State (#55) and Miami (#55) are all ranked ahead of Penn State (#63) now. FSU and Miami are currently ranked ahead of 7 current Big Ten members.

Even Clemson raked at #75 is still ahead of Michigan State (#83), Iowa (#83), and Nebraska (#136).
Disappointed how far PSU has fallen in these rankings. Hard to believe FSU is considered a stronger school academically than PSU but it is what it is. Nevertheless back to the point at hand, if and it is admittedly a big if, the B10 wants to up its academic chops in the process then go for UVA, Duke, UNC and Va Tech while also constructing a killer hoops conference. With FSU that highly ranked then yeah they would be a good get along with Clemson but my first 4 in the east would be the others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacNit07

Wallace Breen

Well-Known Member
Mar 11, 2016
1,886
1,137
1
It’s all about the money now and most of those schools will end in a loss of money.

USC and UCLA were taken to lock down the LA market (and who knows maybe SC demanded UCLA too? You could be right about that).

As for the academic side and not focusing on “football factories”- as of the latest US News Rankings (for what they’re worth) UCLA (#20), USC (#27), Florida (#28), Georgia (#48), Washington (#59), and even Florida State (#55) and Miami (#55) are all ranked ahead of Penn State (#63) now. FSU and Miami are currently ranked ahead of 7 current Big Ten members.

Even Clemson raked at #75 is still ahead of Michigan State (#83), Iowa (#83), and Nebraska (#136).
US News Rankings are garbage. There is precisely one public school in the SEC that would rank ahead of the lowest rated Big Ten school, and that school is Missouri. Clemson would rank 15 in the current Big Ten as would Florida, FSU and Georgia. They don't call it the Cheaters League of Southern Junior Colleges for nothing.
 

Wallace Breen

Well-Known Member
Mar 11, 2016
1,886
1,137
1
Disappointed how far PSU has fallen in these rankings. Hard to believe FSU is considered a stronger school academically than PSU but it is what it is. Nevertheless back to the point at hand, if and it is admittedly a big if, the B10 wants to up its academic chops in the process then go for UVA, Duke, UNC and Va Tech while also constructing a killer hoops conference. With FSU that highly ranked then yeah they would be a good get along with Clemson but my first 4 in the east would be the others.
Penn State has fallen in the rankings no doubt but it really hasn't fallen very far. US News ranking are complete BS. Everyone knows that. If took the public schools from the Big Ten and the SEC and rated them, 13 of 14 schools would rank 15 or lower with Missouri barely beating Nebraska. If you added the ACC, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Virginia Tech, Virginia and Pitt would mostly fall within the Big Ten ranking ahead of any SEC school. Only Clemson would fall that low. More of the same with the Pac-10. This of course gets us back to the topic at hand. What is the Big Ten's end game? I think I know and most people here are not thinking nearly big enough. In my opinion, they are not looking to beat the SEC (they don't care to), they are looking to crush the SEC and they do it by forming a new, bigger league where academics matter and they crush them by not playing them. At all. Nobody outside the southeast gives a darn about SEC football. They are nothing if top Big Ten, ACC, BigXII, Pac Ten and Notre Dame don't play them, including the post season.
 

crm114psu

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
1,237
825
1
Dude: I gotta say that I LOVE your imagination and creativity. Your ambitions for the B1G are quite grandiose. ("Hey, let's just cherry pick the top schools from every conference in the nation. Surely, Florida and Georgia would prefer the B1G to the SEC. They are ALL itching to be a part of the greatness that is the B1G, no?")

Just a matter of months ago, and for years before that, a TON of posters on this Board were complaining about how crappy the B1G was, how bad a fit it was for PSU, and how poorly it was run. A bunch of them wanted PSU to move to the ACC. Amazing what a few short months can do. :cool:
Yeah, I seem to remember a lot of bitching and moaning about UNC not so long ago, some kind of academic scandal wasn't it? About how they were not getting punished for it by NCAA. Does that ring a bell? Yet now many here want to include UNC in their wet dreams about B1G expansion for their academic prowess. Interesting reversal.
 

LMTLION

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2008
2,803
2,924
1
Outside of being packaged with USC. I never would have thought UCLA brought much value to the conference. I think Wash and Oregon as a package bring the value the conference desires. I think we eventually go to 24 schools so it makes sense to add 4 more west coast schools for a pod out there along with ND and 3 from possibilities of VA, VT, UNC, Duke, a Florida school for access to that market, or even BC for access to the New England market.
 

Glen

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 2, 2001
2,278
951
1
Outside of being packaged with USC. I never would have thought UCLA brought much value to the conference. I think Wash and Oregon as a package bring the value the conference desires. I think we eventually go to 24 schools so it makes sense to add 4 more west coast schools for a pod out there along with ND and 3 from possibilities of VA, VT, UNC, Duke, a Florida school for access to that market, or even BC for access to the New England market.
I like the idea of 4 x 6 pods. Gives 5 games plus one from each pod for 8 conference games as a minimum. I would also like to see ND in an eastern pod. I think that may be their interest - an eastern school vs the Midwest. They sure have a lot of subway alumni in the east.
 

ryoder1

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2007
2,038
1,510
1
Yeah, I seem to remember a lot of bitching and moaning about UNC not so long ago, some kind of academic scandal wasn't it? About how they were not getting punished for it by NCAA. Does that ring a bell? Yet now many here want to include UNC in their wet dreams about B1G expansion for their academic prowess. Interesting reversal.
Whatever that was with their hoops program it has not affected their academic reputation. UNC is one of the top public universities in the country.


I would have no problem with UNC joining the B10 and think it would be an excellent addition. Football program that has vastly improved in recent years and a powerhouse blue blood BBall program.
 

LongJakk

Well-Known Member
Sep 19, 2001
1,390
907
1
Isn't a major component of PSU's academic drop related to its sky high tuition rates?
 

Katatonic

Well-Known Member
Oct 23, 2004
9,496
74
1
I'm also thinking about the oft rumored creation of a sports based Ivy League ll of similar universities. Money is a driver in everything, but once conferences have no geographic connection, how long do the elite privates stick in the mega conferences- especially if they are getting whipped in most sports?

Vandy, Northwestern, Duke, Wake will struggle mightily. Throw in Tulane, Rice and maybe Stanford plus others like BC and go their own way. Conference money matters but at what point for well endowed schools do they get out of the NIL leagues?

You brought up Ga Tech. Maybe they could fit like a NW but we don't need another NW. They are strong academically but a bit of a train wreck in football and BBall. In fact, are they any good in any sports?

Only Wisconsin has won more B1G West titles than NU, and NU has more wins agaimst Wisky than any other school since the Alvarez era.

There's a reason why the Iowa AD hoped to preserve 4 rivalries after USC/UCLA join - Wisky, Minny, Nebby and Northwestern.


There's no pressure. If they add schools now and go to 20 when ND finally stops being stubborn they'll go to 24. And if they're at 24 they'll go to 25-28. I don't know why people aren't realizing what's going on still.

Really tough to expand beyond 24 (quality programs/schools start to really thin out after that).

Right now, only the Domers would bring in the equivalent of what each school will get under the new broadcast/streaming contracts.

But if the B1G (and SEC) hollow out the ACC and what's left of the PAC, then all that $ broadcasters had tied up to those conferences can now redirect it to the even bigger B1G.
 
Last edited:

MacNit07

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2017
5,142
4,670
1
Penn State has fallen in the rankings no doubt but it really hasn't fallen very far. US News ranking are complete BS. Everyone knows that. If took the public schools from the Big Ten and the SEC and rated them, 13 of 14 schools would rank 15 or lower with Missouri barely beating Nebraska. If you added the ACC, Georgia Tech, North Carolina, NC State, Virginia Tech, Virginia and Pitt would mostly fall within the Big Ten ranking ahead of any SEC school. Only Clemson would fall that low. More of the same with the Pac-10. This of course gets us back to the topic at hand. What is the Big Ten's end game? I think I know and most people here are not thinking nearly big enough. In my opinion, they are not looking to beat the SEC (they don't care to), they are looking to crush the SEC and they do it by forming a new, bigger league where academics matter and they crush them by not playing them. At all. Nobody outside the southeast gives a darn about SEC football. They are nothing if top Big Ten, ACC, BigXII, Pac Ten and Notre Dame don't play them, including the post season.
Interesting. What criteria do you utilize that you feel is better than USN rankings? And why?
 

LMTLION

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2008
2,803
2,924
1
I like the idea of 4 x 6 pods. Gives 5 games plus one from each pod for 8 conference games as a minimum. I would also like to see ND in an eastern pod. I think that may be their interest - an eastern school vs the Midwest. They sure have a lot of subway alumni in the east.
An Eastern pod with ND would require 1 less eastern addition and 1 addition elsewhere in the middle of the country. In any case an eastern pod could look a bit like this - PSU, RU, MD, UNC, VA, ND. In addition to the 8 conference games you indicate perhaps a 9th permanent “rivalry” game could be created, such as PSU/OSU, ND/USC, etc.
 

PSUSignore

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
6,701
4,664
1
I’m not sure how Georgia and Florida got into the mix here. Neither of those schools are leaving the SEC.

Georgia Tech is a train wreck like Virginia, Cal, and Stanford. Neither of those 4 should be in the discussion IMO.

As for AAU, I know the Big Ten likes to talk that up but it’s hardly a deal breaker. Nebraska is not AAU. I wouldn’t rule out schools based solely on that.

Getting Florida State and Clemson or Miami would great for both matchup interest (tv $$) and to get the big Ten into the recruiting territory down south, especially in highly populated Florida.
Nebraska was in the AAU when initially invited to the Big 10. Agree that there's zero chance of Florida or Georgia, they have no reason to leave.
 

NedFromYork

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2001
5,912
2,543
1
I originally only wanted UVa and UNC, but I wouldn't be against VA Tech and NC St to make that happen. Those four plus the PAC12 four is 24. Still spots left for ND, Colorado, Utah, Arizona for 28 total.
 

RickinDayton

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
2,711
2,874
1
I originally only wanted UVa and UNC, but I wouldn't be against VA Tech and NC St to make that happen. Those four plus the PAC12 four is 24. Still spots left for ND, Colorado, Utah, Arizona for 28 total.
Twenty eight is a huge conference, even 24 is alot. Twenty might be a better # in my mind. Offer ND one final opportunity to fully join, no joint TV deals with them where they retain their independence. Get in completely or stay out and do not schedule them. If they refuse, go Oregon, Washington, Utah and Stanford. If ND accepts, then add Oregon, Washington and Stanford or Utah. I think Utah would be a solid addition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NedFromYork

sandiegohawk

Active Member
Oct 1, 2001
38
38
1
Twenty eight is a huge conference, even 24 is alot. Twenty might be a better # in my mind. Offer ND one final opportunity to fully join, no joint TV deals with them where they retain their independence. Get in completely or stay out and do not schedule them. If they refuse, go Oregon, Washington, Utah and Stanford. If ND accepts, then add Oregon, Washington and Stanford or Utah. I think Utah would be a solid addition.
Agreed that 20 is a much better number. Any more than that is too many schools and too many pieces of the pie to divey up. I realize this is all about football, but with 20 schools you can play everyone once in mens/women's bball.

20 allows 4 PODS of 5 schools. In that scenario you can keep 9 conference games and still play everyone either once every 3 years or twice every 6 depending how you set it up.

If I'm college football dictator I'd bring ND, Stanford, UNC and UVA to the B1G to get to 20. Guessing the SEC would match 20 with Clemson, FSU, VA Tech and ???... Miami seems to make the most sense but if the SEC is trying to expand their area possibly NC State or thinking out of the box a little, maybe even Arizona State as #20.
 
Last edited:

PAgeologist

Well-Known Member
Jan 8, 2017
3,787
5,226
1
Lilly, PA
The BIG and SEC should do a school draft. Agree on number of teams in each conference (20/24). Each conference can protect 2 or 3 teams (BAMA, GA, OSU, and Mich stay put). Everyone else is up for grabs. Get a list of outside teams (Big12, PAC12, ACC, etc) that want in either conference.

Flip a coin or rock-paper-scissors to determine who goes first.
 

LioninNC

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2016
228
297
1
I absolutely agree with what you are saying about Cal, Stanford and Virginia. This isn't the college quiz bowl. This is a football conference where the athletes are being paid to play, albeit in a backdoor creative accounting way. Any additions to the conference have to be willing to play that game and make enough of a commitment to be competitive. And when I say competitive I mean with on a SEC level because that is where 'college' football is going at least in the top division. The Big 10 needs to ask itself when considering adding a team does this make our conference stronger? Do they help us match up against the SEC? Just being bigger does not help. Face it, the SEC is the best conference. The Big Ten is number two forget the rest. If the Big Ten improves its quality of football they and the SEC can form their own division and a playoff system for a champion. They will get the prime TV contracts and money and everyone else loses.

There aren't many good candidates left for expansion. That's my take. Oregon, Washington, Notre Dame, Clemson, Florida State, what else? Not much.
The only thing the Big Ten cares about is whether or not adding a team will increase the overall media revenue for each school. If the result of adding a team means the existing schools will get less, the team won’t be added. Sadly, making the conference stronger football wise is not important.
 

ryoder1

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2007
2,038
1,510
1
The only thing the Big Ten cares about is whether or not adding a team will increase the overall media revenue for each school. If the result of adding a team means the existing schools will get less, the team won’t be added. Sadly, making the conference stronger football wise is not important.
I think U$C alone did that. UCLA then diluted the pool so it is not just a number. There is more at play then maxing TV revenue. Yes, revenue is hugely important but you make it seem like some spreadsheet jockey doing some revenue analysis is their sole criteria. There is a broader strategic plan going on with other factors weighing in.