(07-31-2013 03:53 PM)nert Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 03:41 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 03:35 PM)nert Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 03:15 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 03:10 PM)nert Wrote:  I disagree. The Big10 said they were exploring expansion and we went through months and months of speculation and then the lobbying by schools like Missouri (and others - although Missouri's was the most overt) before they eventually added Nebraska. Other conferences reacted to the fact that the Big10 was even considering it (Pac10, ACC, SEC, Big12 etc) and added or invited schools before the Big10 actually invited anyone.

Everyone knew they were considering it again before the Maryland/Rutgers invites were accepted too.

Even the need for a lacrosse school (which turned out to be Johns Hopkins) was pretty well known, before anything went public about Johns Hopkins.

Some details (like who they are considering, who/if they will offer, the criteria, etc) seem to be less public - but the fact that they are considering expansion does not seem to be a secret the Big10 tries to keep under wraps.

im a b10 homer and i have no idea what you are talking about. the b10 never gave a hint towards expansion before any of those moves. you can say "well people knew they were looking into it".....well thanks captain obvious its conference realignment. what conference isnt? but the point is that you hear stuff about b10 expansion from bloggers & tv personalities not from delany & co. the b10 swooped in quickly on JH UNL & MD no one gave those moves serious thought until it was over. the b10 may have started it with joe pa, but they didnt hang around on single schools the way texas did with the pac/acc or aggie/osu with the sec. no one from the b10 ever said school x to the b10 until it actually happened.

That is simply not the case.

The Big10 each time mentioned that they were "considering expansion", and then took their sweet time before making any other announcements. It is true that they do not mention names, or timetables - but they do not hide it when they are considering expansion.

I have lived in and out of Big10 territory when they've made those statements (and outside of Big10 territory it gets a lot more press) - and the rest of division 1 goes into a whirlwind of activity because of it every time. I lived in SEC territory when they were talking with PennSt (although I don't remember if anyone knew it was PennSt at the time) - and the SEC expanded to 12 in anticipation of Big10 expansion.

Also, the NotreDame consideration in the 1990s was fairly public - although it was NotreDame that asked to be considered, then backed away when the invitation required all sports.

what happened with ND/texas in the 90s and be/acc in the early 2000s taught both conferences their lesson. thats why the acc did things so smoothly 2nd time around.

the b10 just straight up invited nebraska. it wasnt like texas a&m where we knew aggie was in talks about joining for over a week before it happened. maryland was fully committed to the acc one day, the next day the announced they were going to the b10 with no prior media reports in the weeks beforehand. sure people were talking about hypothetical realignments, but espn sure as heck wasnt talking about MD being added to the b10.

I agree - we don't get details from the Big10 about who, when etc - and I never said that we did. But if you look back, you'll see that the Big10 said they were considering expansion about a year before the Nebraska invite. The whole Missouri governor's public fiasco was based on the hype and anticipation of who the Big10 was considering (which they had said that they were doing). Look back to stories about the Colorado/Utah invites form the PAC10 - you will find references to the Big10's announcement.

what happened with colorado is not really the b10s fault. larry scott takes the blame on tat one. but the point is the b10 conducted themselves in the best way possible with the least amount of drama

Kansas and UConn.

(07-31-2013 04:33 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 03:53 PM)nert Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 03:41 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 03:35 PM)nert Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 03:15 PM)john01992 Wrote:  im a b10 homer and i have no idea what you are talking about. the b10 never gave a hint towards expansion before any of those moves. you can say "well people knew they were looking into it".....well thanks captain obvious its conference realignment. what conference isnt? but the point is that you hear stuff about b10 expansion from bloggers & tv personalities not from delany & co. the b10 swooped in quickly on JH UNL & MD no one gave those moves serious thought until it was over. the b10 may have started it with joe pa, but they didnt hang around on single schools the way texas did with the pac/acc or aggie/osu with the sec. no one from the b10 ever said school x to the b10 until it actually happened.

That is simply not the case.

The Big10 each time mentioned that they were "considering expansion", and then took their sweet time before making any other announcements. It is true that they do not mention names, or timetables - but they do not hide it when they are considering expansion.

I have lived in and out of Big10 territory when they've made those statements (and outside of Big10 territory it gets a lot more press) - and the rest of division 1 goes into a whirlwind of activity because of it every time. I lived in SEC territory when they were talking with PennSt (although I don't remember if anyone knew it was PennSt at the time) - and the SEC expanded to 12 in anticipation of Big10 expansion.

Also, the NotreDame consideration in the 1990s was fairly public - although it was NotreDame that asked to be considered, then backed away when the invitation required all sports.

what happened with ND/texas in the 90s and be/acc in the early 2000s taught both conferences their lesson. thats why the acc did things so smoothly 2nd time around.

the b10 just straight up invited nebraska. it wasnt like texas a&m where we knew aggie was in talks about joining for over a week before it happened. maryland was fully committed to the acc one day, the next day the announced they were going to the b10 with no prior media reports in the weeks beforehand. sure people were talking about hypothetical realignments, but espn sure as heck wasnt talking about MD being added to the b10.

I agree - we don't get details from the Big10 about who, when etc - and I never said that we did. But if you look back, you'll see that the Big10 said they were considering expansion about a year before the Nebraska invite. The whole Missouri governor's public fiasco was based on the hype and anticipation of who the Big10 was considering (which they had said that they were doing). Look back to stories about the Colorado/Utah invites form the PAC10 - you will find references to the Big10's announcement.

what happened with colorado is not really the b10s fault. larry scott takes the blame on tat one. but the point is the b10 conducted themselves in the best way possible with the least amount of drama

I think what he's referring to are the statements from CU's then-AD about the Pac. He said that he started reaching out to his Pac-12 contacts and asking if the Pac was interested in CU right after he heard about the Missouri governor groveling to the Big Ten.

(07-31-2013 03:45 PM)nert Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 03:31 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 03:23 PM)nert Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 02:32 PM)stever20 Wrote:  just kind of a crazy thought, but what about Kentucky leaving for the Big Ten? I know the football stinks, but it would be another feather in the cap for the Big Ten competiing with the ACC in basketball.

Why stop there? Get Kentucky (not AAU - but BB is top grade/contiguous state), Kansas (AAU and BB), Virginia (AAU, lacrosse and to bridge the gap to NC) and one of UNC/Duke (both AAU, lacrosse and BB).

Lacrosse goes to 8? Seriously improves BB (and injures ACC BB).

the best lax/fb/bb school is cuse hands down

NOTE: I'm not suggesting that those 4 would be invited/accept - just playing off of someone else's post about competing with the ACC in BB.

Concerning Syracuse:

Obviously, UNC and Duke are no slouch in either lacrosse or BB either - and of the three sports, FB is Syracuse's weakest argument. I think the three would be a push.

Syracuse's issue is that the Big10 doesn't seem to be interested. JoPa was their biggest cheerleader and it never gained much traction. I would have guessed the "private school issue" - but obviously, they are willing to take NotreDame, so who knows? I would also have thought that they were a much better add than Rutgers or Maryland as well (moves I still don't entirely get).

syracuse football is 15th all time wins. i think the biggest issue for cuse is that they are a private non research orientated school.

their lax is way better than duke/unc. their bb is a slight notch below. and their fb is a slight notch below currently, but from a historcial standpoint is much much better.

Unless the B1G's lawyers strongly believe that GOR's are a crock that can easily be broken, I don't see who they would invite thats worth it.

(07-31-2013 04:40 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Unless the B1G's lawyers strongly believe that GOR's are a crock that can easily be broken, I don't see who they would invite thats worth it.

Mizzou & UConn. Neither are bound by GOR's. UConn + Rutgers gets a bigger share of NYC. Mizzou clearly preferred the Big10 over the SEC.

(07-31-2013 04:29 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 04:24 PM)Theodoresdaddy Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 04:21 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  If the Gordan Gee speech was correct, then it will be Kansas and Missouri. He flat out said that if they knew Mizzou would go to the SEC, they would have taken those two to begin with.

But if the GOR is really rock-solid, then there's only two Midwestern teams without GOR's: Missouri and Cincinnati. It won't happen if OSU can help it, but they're only one vote. Other Big 10 teams want to play us; we have future games scheduled against Purdue, Illinois, Michigan, and Nebraska, and have also played Indiana, Penn State, and Wisconsin in the recent past. Other B10 teams NEED to play in Ohio because that's the only place in the Midwest where good football recruits come from anymore. (It's a long shot, but a man can dream, can't he?)

ignore the GOR for a minute-can Kansas leave K State behind or are they joined at the hip like Oklahoma and Okie State

KU and KSU are governed by the same state Board of Regents. The governor has a KSU bachelor's degree (and was student body president at KSU) and a KU law degree.

I believe KU's AD or president said they weren't necessarily conjoined. This was back in 2011. I think that's the reason you see KU and not Oklahoma on the target list as much as you do. Those words meant KU didn't have a "State problem."

also concerning syracuse, the truth is i think that syracuse just wasnt interested in the b10. i grew up in syracuse an know a lot of admins at that place. im not claiming to be an insider because that gets abused by people who are not insiders. but i talked to someone about why the chose the ACC over the b10. who said something along the lines of....

being in the b10 would have been nice, but culturally we fit in better with the ACC. We liked the ACC because we wanted the academic association of playing (with fellow private schools) duke miami & BC. In the b10 we saw ourselves as filling only a Northwestern like role and that wasnt good enough for us because we felt that we had a lot more potential than that.

the person also mentioned that the ACC being more lax & bb orientated was a factor as well.

again im not trying to act like someone with the inside scoop, but when i asked about the ACC move and the b10 that was the quote i got out of it.

If they expand it will be two in order to go to 16. Sounds like 2016.

Anyway, here it is ->

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...media-days

"Big Ten expansion: It isn't done. That's about all I can say. Hint: The conference will begin negotiating on a new TV deal next year. The current contract expires in 2016. Definitely stay tuned.'

colorado is the most underlooked school when talking b10 hypotheticals.

the b10 eats, sleeps, breaths, & ***** schools who have a high jump from the US news- ARWU ranking. (i dont know why but every school in the b10 except northwestern show that trend)
-colorado has the biggest jump of any school in those rankings

the b10 loves land grant aau flagship schools
-thats colorado in a nutshell

and schools that are near major markets
-denver is the biggest city in its region

plus they like schools with lots of history/tradition

-21st on the all time wins list (although they were 18th only 2 years ago)
a natty & heisman
one of the coolest football traditions (ralphies run)
and chartered one of the oldest conferences in the NCAA

(07-31-2013 04:53 PM)john01992 Wrote:  also concerning syracuse, the truth is i think that syracuse just wasnt interested in the b10. i grew up in syracuse an know a lot of admins at that place. im not claiming to be an insider because that gets abused by people who are not insiders. but i talked to someone about why the chose the ACC over the b10. who said something along the lines of....

being in the b10 would have been nice, but culturally we fit in better with the ACC. We liked the ACC because we wanted the academic association of playing (with fellow private schools) duke miami & BC. In the b10 we saw ourselves as filling only a Northwestern like role and that wasnt good enough for us because we felt that we had a lot more potential than that.

the person also mentioned that the ACC being more lax & bb orientated was a factor as well.

again im not trying to act like someone with the inside scoop, but when i asked about the ACC move and the b10 that was the quote i got out of it.

UNC nor UVa will leave the ACC. That's just not happening. They don't need the money. Their endowments are $2.5 billion and $8 billion respectively - they are eastern/southern schools, not Big 10 type schools. Anyone saying otherwise doesn't know those schools, don't know their alumn, don't know their administration, and don't know their trustees/bov/bog.

UNC and UVa bind Duke, NC State, and VT into the ACC due to politics that can't be untangled. UNC and UVa will not go to a conference where they can't expect to such hind teet in the adminstration of the conference and they will suck hind teet behind Michigan and OSU.

The exit fee to leave the ACC is 3x plus the GOR. By the time 2016 rolls around the ACC schools will be making $32 million or so - making the exit cost $96 million plus the GOR - UNC's and FSU's GOR is probably upwards of $100,000,000.

Missouri, Kansas, and Oklahoma make more sense although OU is not nor will it ever be AAU and Kansas will probably lose AAU standing before the decade is out. Vandy is not likely, but not out of the question as the current Vandy administration has a lot of ties to old Big 10 hands like ole Gordon Gee. The Colorado issue is possible, especially if the B10 can plug in most of the old Big 8 into the western half the B10.

Good luck UConn.

Rut Ro. Seriously--UConn and who? The ACC has a GOR. The Big12 has one. SEC teams?

This is the exact reason why the AAC was undervalued. Don't worry about the bad TV deal - we won't even get to the point where it becomes a factor.

UConn + any other defection effectively kills the league.

(07-31-2013 05:14 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  This is the exact reason why the AAC was undervalued. Don't worry about the bad TV deal - we won't even get to the point where it becomes a factor.

UConn + any other defection effectively kills the league.

At least we get a year of being an AQ team.

UNC and Ga Tech

(07-31-2013 05:04 PM)john01992 Wrote:  colorado is the most underlooked school when talking b10 hypotheticals.

the b10 eats, sleeps, breaths, & ***** schools who have a high jump from the US news- ARWU ranking. (i dont know why but every school in the b10 except northwestern show that trend)
-colorado has the biggest jump of any school in those rankings

the b10 loves land grant aau flagship schools
-thats colorado in a nutshell

and schools that are near major markets
-denver is the biggest city in its region

plus they like schools with lots of history/tradition

-21st on the all time wins list (although they were 18th only 2 years ago)
a natty & heisman
one of the coolest football traditions (ralphies run)
and chartered one of the oldest conferences in the NCAA

Well, CU certainly fits blunderbuss' criteria:

(07-31-2013 04:11 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  I heard they're looking for another broke ass athletic department like Rutgers or Maryland. You can never have enough of those.

(07-31-2013 05:16 PM)PurpleReigns2012 Wrote:  UNC and Ga Tech

This would trigger Cincy and Temple to the ACC. Rest in pizza, AAC.

I'm so upset about this, since I felt that the AAC had some serious potential.

(07-31-2013 05:09 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 04:53 PM)john01992 Wrote:  also concerning syracuse, the truth is i think that syracuse just wasnt interested in the b10. i grew up in syracuse an know a lot of admins at that place. im not claiming to be an insider because that gets abused by people who are not insiders. but i talked to someone about why the chose the ACC over the b10. who said something along the lines of....

being in the b10 would have been nice, but culturally we fit in better with the ACC. We liked the ACC because we wanted the academic association of playing (with fellow private schools) duke miami & BC. In the b10 we saw ourselves as filling only a Northwestern like role and that wasnt good enough for us because we felt that we had a lot more potential than that.

the person also mentioned that the ACC being more lax & bb orientated was a factor as well.

again im not trying to act like someone with the inside scoop, but when i asked about the ACC move and the b10 that was the quote i got out of it.

UNC nor UVa will leave the ACC. That's just not happening. They don't need the money. Their endowments are $2.5 billion and $8 billion respectively - they are eastern/southern schools, not Big 10 type schools. Anyone saying otherwise doesn't know those schools, don't know their alumn, don't know their administration, and don't know their trustees/bov/bog.

UNC and UVa bind Duke, NC State, and VT into the ACC due to politics that can't be untangled. UNC and UVa will not go to a conference where they can't expect to such hind teet in the adminstration of the conference and they will suck hind teet behind Michigan and OSU.

The exit fee to leave the ACC is 3x plus the GOR. By the time 2016 rolls around the ACC schools will be making $32 million or so - making the exit cost $96 million plus the GOR - UNC's and FSU's GOR is probably upwards of $100,000,000.

Missouri, Kansas, and Oklahoma make more sense although OU is not nor will it ever be AAU and Kansas will probably lose AAU standing before the decade is out. Vandy is not likely, but not out of the question as the current Vandy administration has a lot of ties to old Big 10 hands like ole Gordon Gee.

you said it perfectly. just one little mistake......

while kansas is a very weak aau school. UNL & cuse only lost theres due to weird grey area classification's with their med schools. unless kansas is gonna reclassify their medical division, i dont think they are in danger of losing aau

(07-31-2013 05:17 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-31-2013 05:04 PM)john01992 Wrote:  colorado is the most underlooked school when talking b10 hypotheticals.

the b10 eats, sleeps, breaths, & ***** schools who have a high jump from the US news- ARWU ranking. (i dont know why but every school in the b10 except northwestern show that trend)
-colorado has the biggest jump of any school in those rankings

the b10 loves land grant aau flagship schools
-thats colorado in a nutshell

and schools that are near major markets
-denver is the biggest city in its region

plus they like schools with lots of history/tradition

-21st on the all time wins list (although they were 18th only 2 years ago)
a natty & heisman
one of the coolest football traditions (ralphies run)
and chartered one of the oldest conferences in the NCAA

Well, CU certainly fits blunderbuss' criteria:

(07-31-2013 04:11 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  I heard they're looking for another broke ass athletic department like Rutgers or Maryland. You can never have enough of those.

touche.....