It seems that B1G will be looking into expanding to 16 after hearing the talks today, before this gets out of hand remember that any additions have to be AAU institutions, be in connecting states, and be is a feasible market place. This allows for these schools

• Mizzou (Have to convince to leave SEC and have Kansas as joining partner)
• Kansas (Would need to find loop hole out of B12 GoR)
• Virginia (Fits all 3 requirements)
• Pitt (Penn State would most likely block this)
• UNC (Not in a connecting state and would be hard to convince to leave ACC)
• G. Tech (Too far away, would hate this add)
• Stony Brook (Doubt B1G would take a move up, specially when Rutgers is in same market area)
  

I'm hoping for Mizzou and Kansas.

I don't care at this point. I'll worry about that later on. The news is still sinking in.

(11-20-2012 04:23 PM)brista21 Wrote:  I don't care at this point. I'll worry about that later on. The news is still sinking in.

Yeah, will have plenty of time to hash out this conversation on the Big Ten board. We are already having it on the Realignment board but as far as Big Ten is concerned, letting the Rutgers guys bask in this one for at least a day.

UVA and UNC would complete the ACC gutting and leave the B10 as the undisputed academic powerhouse.

Yeah, UVA and UNC are definitely our first choices. Been trying to get across to the folks over on the realignment board that Notre Dame could very well seal off the ACC to further acquisitions if they join fully though.

The question is whether they do or not though.

My preference has always been to stay in the Midwest (well it's been no expansion at all, but that's out) and if not that, at least the north (Maryland is historically south, although presently closer to a northern state).

With that said, going to 16, if that's ever done, should be done in a way that the pods can be done as to force no crossovers between pods and this probably means two more eastern schools.

(11-21-2012 12:36 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  My preference has always been to stay in the Midwest (well it's been no expansion at all, but that's out) and if not that, at least the north (Maryland is historically south, although presently closer to a northern state).

With that said, going to 16, if that's ever done, should be done in a way that the pods can be done as to force no crossovers between pods and this probably means two more eastern schools.

Wow, how would you form up those four divisions so that you dont have crossovers?

For me I would set it up so the divisions have some flexibility to either have crossovers with each other or decide that they do not need them.

So you might have crossovers with one division but not with the other two.

To be blunt, I do not see how Ohio State and Michigan end up in the same four team division.

In fact divisions work better if we take two from the west instead. It is not that they dont work well if we take all four from the East but that means Penn State will not end up in our Eastern division. They would end up with Ohio State and the Indiana schools.

I am assuming that with four team divisions that we finally go ahead and do it geographically.

if the B1G was smart and wanted Mizzou and Kansas they'd get their buddies in the west to pick up the Texacoma 4, let the B12 fall apart and the GoR become un-forcble then pick up Kansas and use Kansas and research money to lure Mizzou to the B1G then set up pods like this,
West; Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, Mizzou
North; Minnesota, Wisky, Michigan, Michigan State
South; Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern
East; Ohio State, Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers

Then talk to NCAA about setting up semi-finals, 1v4 2v3.
Way you setup scheduling is you have your 3 divisional games, you have 1 locked opponent from each of the other divisions, and then your last 3 conference games you face 1 team from each division

So I'll use Ohio State for this; Blue-Division, Red-Locked Games, Black-Last Three


[*]Penn State
[*]Maryland
[*]Rutgers


[*]Michigan
[*]Illinois
[*]Iowa


[*]Mizzou
[*]Michigan State
[*]Northwestern

[/list]

(11-21-2012 12:58 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  if the B1G was smart and wanted Mizzou and Kansas they'd get their buddies in the west to pick up the Texacoma 4, let the B12 fall apart and the GoR become un-forcble then pick up Kansas and use Kansas and research money to lure Mizzou to the B1G then set up pods like this,
West; Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, Mizzou
North; Minnesota, Wisky, Michigan, Michigan State
South; Indiana, Purdue, Illinois, Northwestern
East; Ohio State, Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers

Then talk to NCAA about setting up semi-finals, 1v4 2v3.
Way you setup scheduling is you have your 3 divisional games, you have 1 locked opponent from each of the other divisions, and then your last 3 conference games you face 1 team from each division

So I'll use Ohio State for this; Blue-Division, Red-Locked Games, Black-Last Three


[*]Penn State
[*]Maryland
[*]Rutgers


[*]Michigan
[*]Illinois
[*]Iowa


[*]Mizzou
[*]Michigan State
[*]Northwestern

[/list]

Interesting approach. I will have a shot at it because to be honest, that Southern division of yours is atrocious bro.

Tradition: Nebraska, Iowa, Missouri, Kansas
Excellence: Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Minnesota
Legends: Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue
Leaders: Ohio State, Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers

Now I will tackle the rest on a more individualized basis.

Between the Leaders and Legends OSU and Michigan would be cross rivals as would be MSU and PSU but the other two have no need to be paired up when there is no history. They can just keep swapping against each other while the other four remain locked. That is the kind of flexibility I wish we would exhibit.

Another example would be between the Tradition division and the Excellence and Legends divisions.

Between the Tradition and Excellence we would have four cross rivals. Nebraska and Wisky, Iowa and Minnesota, Missouri and Illinois and then Kansas and NU.

Between the Tradition and Legends there are no major rivalries so there is no point in making those two divisions lock up one of their two games. They can just pair up their four teams and go every other year from one pair to the other as far as scheduling goes. The same could be said of Tradition and Leaders. We would only need a cross rivals relationship with the Excellence division.

That will make sure our student athletes play in as many locations as possible during their time at the school. That is important in the Big Ten.


Oh..I know you love my division names!

(11-21-2012 01:11 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Tradition: Iowa, Nebraska, Mizzou, Kansas
Excellence: Illinois, Wisconsin, Northwestern, Minnesota
Legends: Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue
Leaders: Ohio State, Penn State, Rutgers, Maryland

I was just using an example, I like yours better. The order I set them in would decide their perma opponents, I'd been working on this idea for quite some time for the BE.

Yes I realize the last grouping for locked cross games is rather weak, and there is a reason behind that.

Tradition: Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Wisconsin
Excellence: Virginia, Maryland, Rutgers, UNC
Legends: Purdue, Michigan, Michigan State, Indiana
Leaders: Illinois, Ohio State, Penn State, Northwestern

Lined in order with locked cross opponents.

This is the UVA/UNC format I came up with.

(11-20-2012 04:14 PM)DexterDevil Wrote:  It seems that B1G will be looking into expanding to 16 after hearing the talks today, before this gets out of hand remember that any additions have to be AAU institutions, be in connecting states, and be is a feasible market place. This allows for these schools

• Mizzou (Have to convince to leave SEC and have Kansas as joining partner)
• Kansas (Would need to find loop hole out of B12 GoR)
• Virginia (Fits all 3 requirements)
• Pitt (Penn State would most likely block this)
• UNC (Not in a connecting state and would be hard to convince to leave ACC)
• G. Tech (Too far away, would hate this add)
• Stony Brook (Doubt B1G would take a move up, specially when Rutgers is in same market area)
  

I'm hoping for Mizzou and Kansas.

If you get Virginia, then UNC is a connecting state. So the Big 10 eastern expansion would have Pennsylvania (Pa St) connecting to both New Jersey (Rutgers) and Maryland who connects to Virginia who connects to North Carolina. All contiguous states from Ohio eastward. All new states and tv markets.

(11-24-2012 12:10 AM)RUfan03 Wrote:  

(11-20-2012 04:14 PM)DexterDevil Wrote:  It seems that B1G will be looking into expanding to 16 after hearing the talks today, before this gets out of hand remember that any additions have to be AAU institutions, be in connecting states, and be is a feasible market place. This allows for these schools

• Mizzou (Have to convince to leave SEC and have Kansas as joining partner)
• Kansas (Would need to find loop hole out of B12 GoR)
• Virginia (Fits all 3 requirements)
• Pitt (Penn State would most likely block this)
• UNC (Not in a connecting state and would be hard to convince to leave ACC)
• G. Tech (Too far away, would hate this add)
• Stony Brook (Doubt B1G would take a move up, specially when Rutgers is in same market area)
  

I'm hoping for Mizzou and Kansas.

If you get Virginia, then UNC is a connecting state. So the Big 10 eastern expansion would have Pennsylvania (Pa St) connecting to both New Jersey (Rutgers) and Maryland who connects to Virginia who connects to North Carolina. All contiguous states from Ohio eastward. All new states and tv markets.

Plus Virginia and North Carolina are very large states. Adding NC, VA, MD and NJ to the footprint go a long way towards securing the conference's footprint forever.

VA and UConn!

(11-26-2012 09:05 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  VA and UConn!

No Uconn.

Ever.

Anywhere.

I am not opposed to UConn by any means. But the Big Ten is clearly focused on high population states. So you're talking Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Georgia, Virginia, Texas. Their dream schools being UVA and UNC. Then national brands in football there aren't any left that aren't in high population states. Then national brands in basketball in adjacent states: UConn and Kansas.

Is UConn an AAU school? No. So pass.

(11-26-2012 11:17 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  Is UConn an AAU school? No. So pass.

They aren't yet. But I'd be surprised if they aren't one by the end of the decade.

(11-26-2012 02:25 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(11-26-2012 11:17 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  Is UConn an AAU school? No. So pass.

They aren't yet. But I'd be surprised if they aren't one by the end of the decade.

The AAU is getting smaller, not larger.

(11-26-2012 02:39 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(11-26-2012 02:25 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(11-26-2012 11:17 AM)DexterDevil Wrote:  Is UConn an AAU school? No. So pass.

They aren't yet. But I'd be surprised if they aren't one by the end of the decade.

The AAU is getting smaller, not larger.

Its decreased by what 3 members? (3 including Cuse voluntarily left, Nebraska was booted but Georgia Tech was added. If I'm not mistaken anyway.) I'd say the definition of what kinds of schools can be a member has changed. UConn is pretty close to those definitions now.