(07-21-2019 10:51 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  If the objective is to strengthen B1G West football, then I think Missouri has greater upside potential than Kansas. Under Gary Pinkel, Missouri was competitive in both the Big 12 and the SEC. And the new coach, Barry Odom, appears to have turned around the program, which suffered after the Missouri BLM protests.

Missouri maintained a rumor campaign that ripped apart the Big 12. They have horrific race problems. They are a strange animal. They look like a Midwest State while all the time at heart they long for Jim Crow. Do you really need that? I guarantee you with the awful racial problems at Missouri-Odom will be gone in 2 years. Oklahoma and Kansas would keep the Big 10 footprint without the nasty Race Problems. I guarantee you they have not left Mizzou.

(07-18-2019 08:56 PM)ICThawk Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 05:23 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(07-13-2019 10:14 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  I no longer have any interest in adding UConn, to give B1G a New England presence. UConn will eventually downgrade football to the FCS level.

Since there are no other east coast schools available, I'll throw my support behind Missouri and Oklahoma.

We have talked about this ad nauseam on the SEC board, but I still cannot understand the BIG's long term strategy of passing over Missouri when they had the chance. I understand the focus on the east coast for the last round of BIG Network negotiations, but Missouri combined with Nebraska was a natural bridge to Oklahoma, which would give a much better chance of leading into Texas. Kansas would be a shoe-in at that point if you wanted them. Sure, Mizzou would have been a negligible financial addition for the BIG this past decade, but there are not many contiguous AAU flagship schools with two major sport loving cities (Kansas City and St. Louis) going around.

Though I certainly have no "inside info", my guess is simply that the B1G felt that Missouri (and probably Kansas) would be available anytime the B1G wanted them (assuming they did). I don't think anyone thought of Missouri as a possible SEC team given their relative sports position vis-a-vie the SEC. It appears that when OU wouldn't commit without OSU, Missouri became the "default" (closest to what the SEC could use) team to pair with TA&M.
As to an OU/Missouri pairing, I can't see that in the B1G future. Given SEC payouts I can't see enough benefits to cause Missouri to leave the SEC, even for the B1G. If the B1G decides to expand to the west, think there is really only an OU and/or KU possibility, unless the B1G decides to "double up" with Iowa State. Some people think that Colorado is a possibility but given that their alumni seem concentrated in the P12 footprint that would be a longshot. Even with the problems the P12 has I don't hear any discontent with CU fans. Texas....just can't see them in the B1G. They have no "friends" (other teams with which they have a meaningful history), the distances for Olympic sports are significant, their sports lineup emphasis is different than most B1G lineups other than football and basketball, they aren't going to be able to "control" the B1G like they did the SWC or B12, they would have few games with other Texas schools, and they would lose the LHN. Additionally, with the Texas-ESPN ties, I think ESPN might do whatever they need to not to lose Texas to Fox (push them toward to ACC or SEC, or even facilitate them as an independent (at least for football).
But, these are just my "thoughts"...no special knowledge claimed!

You let Mizzou in your Conference-you will lose at least 3 Universities who have consistently refused to schedule Missouri due to obvious problems. Nobody wants to be associated with a Jim Crow School.

(05-11-2016 02:04 PM)TerpsNPhoenix Wrote:  I think there would still be some talk about Texas and Notre Dame. Maybe also some combo of UNC, UVA, Duke, GT but going to 18 or even 20 is going to make it hard to keep the money the same for existing members.

You can believe me- Texas would ruin the Big 10. As strong as they are, you would do better taking your chances with Iowa State and Kansas. New AD, Championship Coach and $315 Million in Stadium rebuild money. Give us a chance in a GOOD Conference with similar Academic and Cultural values and watch us go up in 3-5 years to 8 win seasons without affecting Our Basketball at all.

(07-22-2019 06:29 AM)HulaHawk Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 08:56 PM)ICThawk Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 05:23 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(07-13-2019 10:14 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  I no longer have any interest in adding UConn, to give B1G a New England presence. UConn will eventually downgrade football to the FCS level.

Since there are no other east coast schools available, I'll throw my support behind Missouri and Oklahoma.

We have talked about this ad nauseam on the SEC board, but I still cannot understand the BIG's long term strategy of passing over Missouri when they had the chance. I understand the focus on the east coast for the last round of BIG Network negotiations, but Missouri combined with Nebraska was a natural bridge to Oklahoma, which would give a much better chance of leading into Texas. Kansas would be a shoe-in at that point if you wanted them. Sure, Mizzou would have been a negligible financial addition for the BIG this past decade, but there are not many contiguous AAU flagship schools with two major sport loving cities (Kansas City and St. Louis) going around.

Though I certainly have no "inside info", my guess is simply that the B1G felt that Missouri (and probably Kansas) would be available anytime the B1G wanted them (assuming they did). I don't think anyone thought of Missouri as a possible SEC team given their relative sports position vis-a-vie the SEC. It appears that when OU wouldn't commit without OSU, Missouri became the "default" (closest to what the SEC could use) team to pair with TA&M.
As to an OU/Missouri pairing, I can't see that in the B1G future. Given SEC payouts I can't see enough benefits to cause Missouri to leave the SEC, even for the B1G. If the B1G decides to expand to the west, think there is really only an OU and/or KU possibility, unless the B1G decides to "double up" with Iowa State. Some people think that Colorado is a possibility but given that their alumni seem concentrated in the P12 footprint that would be a longshot. Even with the problems the P12 has I don't hear any discontent with CU fans. Texas....just can't see them in the B1G. They have no "friends" (other teams with which they have a meaningful history), the distances for Olympic sports are significant, their sports lineup emphasis is different than most B1G lineups other than football and basketball, they aren't going to be able to "control" the B1G like they did the SWC or B12, they would have few games with other Texas schools, and they would lose the LHN. Additionally, with the Texas-ESPN ties, I think ESPN might do whatever they need to not to lose Texas to Fox (push them toward to ACC or SEC, or even facilitate them as an independent (at least for football).
But, these are just my "thoughts"...no special knowledge claimed!

You let Mizzou in your Conference-you will lose Nebraska, Iowa, and probably Illinois. Nobody wants to be associated with a School that longs for the days of Segregation. The most direct way to maintain the Big 10 Culture is to take in ONLY AAU-Midwest Universities. Nobody wants to be associated with a University with violent Race Problems and whose most famous Grad is Rush Limbaugh!

Give me Oklahoma and Kansas and I'm fine with that.

Football:
Ohio State
Oklahoma
Michigan
Penn State
Nebraska
Michigan State
Wisconsin
Iowa

Basketball:
Indiana
Maryland
Michigan State
Ohio State
Kansas
Michigan
Wisconsin

That's quite a bit of power and value in the two major sports all in one conference.

And get rid of the stupid divisions in college football. The argument of "well the NFL uses divisions" is apples to oranges. The NFL has 2 conferences and basically runs pods within each conference. You have enough power teams in a conference, you want them playing one another more often.

(07-22-2019 11:11 AM)cubucks Wrote:  And get rid of the stupid divisions in college football. The argument of "well the NFL uses divisions" is apples to oranges. The NFL has 2 conferences and basically runs pods within each conference. You have enough power teams in a conference, you want them playing one another more often.

I am in favor of getting rid of divisions as long as Penn State continues to play Ohio State, Maryland, and Rutgers annually. This will allow the conference to add Oklahoma without a partner.

What if Oklahoma decides to remain in the Big 12 with Texas? Does B1G move forward with expansion? If so, who will be the leading candidates?

(07-22-2019 07:09 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  What if Oklahoma decides to remain in the Big 12 with Texas? Does B1G move forward with expansion? If so, who will be the leading candidates?

I dont think they do for another 15 years or whenever the ACC deal is up? If I'm in charge and it's determined we are headed east again? It's Virginia Tech, NC State, Georgia Tech and Florida State. A lot depends on the health of the ACC at that time along with the position of college football in general.

Fans need to realize it's not a knock on the ACC if people say they will get raided in the future. It will just be large mergers of conferences under names like the BIG 10, SEC etc... or hell, those names may not even exist in the near future. I'm not a numbers guy that can sit here and give you my calculated thoughts like many others are. I appreciate their effort and time in doing so. My health doesn't really allow me to sit or stand long enough to put this together. Plus, I'm usually in pain and frustrated so such things are the last thing on my mind.

Just read what others are saying about tech companies "FAANG" or even networks and their thoughts on what these companies are thinking. These companies will decide the future of college football and the alignment of the institutions. It will be very interesting in the next ~2-15 years. Money talks! And maybe that's not always a great thing!?!

(07-22-2019 06:11 AM)HulaHawk Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 06:37 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 10:51 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  If the objective is to strengthen B1G West football, then I think Missouri has greater upside potential than Kansas. Under Gary Pinkel, Missouri was competitive in both the Big 12 and the SEC. And the new coach, Barry Odom, appears to have turned around the program, which suffered after the Missouri BLM protests.

I agree that Missouri football shows more promise than Kansas football. I assume it is like this most years, if not all, but the state of Missouri is much better for recruiting than Kansas so they have a more natural advantage which would help the Big Ten if they were added. Though I don't think it would be a big advantage, just not a negative like Kansas.

I guess the rub comes in at when you look at Kansas basketball. Are they good enough to make up the awful football? http://www.winsipedia.com/kansas/vs/missouri Winsipedia shows a clear but not dominant advantage to Missouri football. Missouri is likely the more valuable school as they were invited to the SEC while Kansas wasn't. I would rather have Kansas as Missouri doesn't have anything dominant or prestigeous the way Kansas has men's basketball. If you aren't going to be an asset in football or help land a whale (Texas, Oklahoma, etc.) then you better have something dominant to improve the conference with the most useful being men's basketball.

Can't agree there. We now have Les Miles at the helm, a new Athletic Director that seems to know what he is doing and $315 Million in donations to gut the inside of our Stadium and bring the seating up to modern standards-and increase the seating to 70,000. I believe this year you will see some drastic changes in KUs Football Program. Within 3 years I believe you will be seeing a new Stadium and a record of at least 8 wins. And Texas would take any Conference out. They belong in the SEC. I also want to adress the lie that the Legislature and Board of Regents have tied KU and Silo Tech together. That is a baldface lie made up by K-State Grads.

Kansas can build whatever size stadium they want and pump as much money in as they can while hiring whoever but until they fill their seats, win a bunch of games, regularly finish ranked, and are an asset for the conference, not a liability. Kansas needs at least a decade of great performance before anyone can say they turned a corner and are building tradition. They have such a long way to go. I am in a "believe it when I see it" situation with them.

(07-22-2019 06:11 AM)HulaHawk Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 06:37 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 10:51 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  If the objective is to strengthen B1G West football, then I think Missouri has greater upside potential than Kansas. Under Gary Pinkel, Missouri was competitive in both the Big 12 and the SEC. And the new coach, Barry Odom, appears to have turned around the program, which suffered after the Missouri BLM protests.

I agree that Missouri football shows more promise than Kansas football. I assume it is like this most years, if not all, but the state of Missouri is much better for recruiting than Kansas so they have a more natural advantage which would help the Big Ten if they were added. Though I don't think it would be a big advantage, just not a negative like Kansas.

I guess the rub comes in at when you look at Kansas basketball. Are they good enough to make up the awful football? http://www.winsipedia.com/kansas/vs/missouri Winsipedia shows a clear but not dominant advantage to Missouri football. Missouri is likely the more valuable school as they were invited to the SEC while Kansas wasn't. I would rather have Kansas as Missouri doesn't have anything dominant or prestigeous the way Kansas has men's basketball. If you aren't going to be an asset in football or help land a whale (Texas, Oklahoma, etc.) then you better have something dominant to improve the conference with the most useful being men's basketball.

Can't agree there. We now have Les Miles at the helm, a new Athletic Director that seems to know what he is doing and $315 Million in donations to gut the inside of our Stadium and bring the seating up to modern standards-and increase the seating to 70,000. I believe this year you will see some drastic changes in KUs Football Program. Within 3 years I believe you will be seeing a new Stadium and a record of at least 8 wins. And Texas would take any Conference out. They belong in the SEC. I also want to adress the lie that the Legislature and Board of Regents have tied KU and Silo Tech together. That is a baldface lie made up by K-State Grads.

I know he is a name, but we watched Miles do less with more for so many years in the SEC. His greatest strength was hiring exceptional defensive staffs, so that is something to hope for. His peculiarities were humorous for the first several years, but it got to where he truly couldn't articulate a complete thought in his last couple of years at LSU. I was listening to Mandel and Feldman the other day, and I tend to agree with them; I worry that Les may actually make things worse at Kansas before they give up on the experiment.

(07-22-2019 06:43 AM)HulaHawk Wrote:  

(07-22-2019 06:29 AM)HulaHawk Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 08:56 PM)ICThawk Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 05:23 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(07-13-2019 10:14 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  I no longer have any interest in adding UConn, to give B1G a New England presence. UConn will eventually downgrade football to the FCS level.

Since there are no other east coast schools available, I'll throw my support behind Missouri and Oklahoma.

We have talked about this ad nauseam on the SEC board, but I still cannot understand the BIG's long term strategy of passing over Missouri when they had the chance. I understand the focus on the east coast for the last round of BIG Network negotiations, but Missouri combined with Nebraska was a natural bridge to Oklahoma, which would give a much better chance of leading into Texas. Kansas would be a shoe-in at that point if you wanted them. Sure, Mizzou would have been a negligible financial addition for the BIG this past decade, but there are not many contiguous AAU flagship schools with two major sport loving cities (Kansas City and St. Louis) going around.

Though I certainly have no "inside info", my guess is simply that the B1G felt that Missouri (and probably Kansas) would be available anytime the B1G wanted them (assuming they did). I don't think anyone thought of Missouri as a possible SEC team given their relative sports position vis-a-vie the SEC. It appears that when OU wouldn't commit without OSU, Missouri became the "default" (closest to what the SEC could use) team to pair with TA&M.
As to an OU/Missouri pairing, I can't see that in the B1G future. Given SEC payouts I can't see enough benefits to cause Missouri to leave the SEC, even for the B1G. If the B1G decides to expand to the west, think there is really only an OU and/or KU possibility, unless the B1G decides to "double up" with Iowa State. Some people think that Colorado is a possibility but given that their alumni seem concentrated in the P12 footprint that would be a longshot. Even with the problems the P12 has I don't hear any discontent with CU fans. Texas....just can't see them in the B1G. They have no "friends" (other teams with which they have a meaningful history), the distances for Olympic sports are significant, their sports lineup emphasis is different than most B1G lineups other than football and basketball, they aren't going to be able to "control" the B1G like they did the SWC or B12, they would have few games with other Texas schools, and they would lose the LHN. Additionally, with the Texas-ESPN ties, I think ESPN might do whatever they need to not to lose Texas to Fox (push them toward to ACC or SEC, or even facilitate them as an independent (at least for football).
But, these are just my "thoughts"...no special knowledge claimed!

You let Mizzou in your Conference-you will lose Nebraska, Iowa, and probably Illinois. Nobody wants to be associated with a School that longs for the days of Segregation. The most direct way to maintain the Big 10 Culture is to take in ONLY AAU-Midwest Universities. Nobody wants to be associated with a University with violent Race Problems and whose most famous Grad is Rush Limbaugh!

Hula, hated rivalries are fine, and I don't want to get in the weeds on the bolded statement above, but the assignment of a flagship school... not a person or small group, but a SCHOOL... longing for the days of segregation is a little much.

Rivalry Week in the New Big Ten West:

Wisc vs Minn
N’western vs Illinois
Nebraska vs Oklahoma

Iowa vs Iowa St (OOC)
Kansas vs Kansas St (OOC)

Just wait and see if the ACCN takes off or not.

If it falls flat, add Georgia Tech and FSU for 15 and 16

Check out these divisions:

North
Minnesota
Iowa
Wisconsin
Michigan
Michigan St.
Ohio St.
Northwestern
Rutgers

South
Penn St.
Florida St.
Nebraska
Georgia Tech
Illinois
Indiana
Purdue
Maryland

I think these divisions are much better balanced then what the Big 10 has now. There's actual history between FSU and Nebraska. FSU and Penn St. would counterbalance Michigan and Ohio State

Maybe Virginia could come into play

(12-13-2018 03:43 PM)Win5002 Wrote:  

(12-12-2018 10:47 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  

(12-08-2018 09:44 AM)GE and MTS Wrote:  If the Big Ten wants Texas, I think the conference will have to go to 18. Oklahoma would have to be one of the schools, leaving two vacancies for Texas to choose tagalongs. Who do you think would be acceptable partners?

In no particular order:
- Texas Tech
- TCU
- Baylor
- Houston
- Rice

UT likes playing games in the state of Texas. Assuming 9 conference games, they would have 5 annual conference games (4 home, 1 in Dallas against OU) in the state plus at least 2 non-conference for 7 total. Could the Big Ten swallow some pride and accept some small fish in order to land the biggest of them all?

I don't know if the Big Ten would be flexible enough to give in to such a demand but if they did at least they're going to give UT some parameters on what the two tagalongs would be:

1) It would have to be a P5 school
2) Preferably AAU but at worst Carnegie Classification R1: Doctoral Universities – Highest research activity
3) Preferably a state flagship school

Given those parameters I would think the two tagalongs would be: Texas Tech and Kansas

UT and KU are both academically-minded and both have a history in the Big XII.

Texas Tech due to state politics.

Also, UT might benefit by having less Texas programs in the power group, as well as OU and TT.

Speaking of Carnegie Classification, they're going to update their lists later this month. Should Texas Tech keep their place in the highest research activity category then maybe they have some staying power and should be more closely watched, regardless of Lubbock.

Kansas does nothing to bring UT to the B1G. How does KU fill UT's stadium when they come to town? Or help Texas recruit against A&M as an SEC conference member? here is a clue it doesn't.

Kansas would panic and join the AAC, thinking they were joining the ACC

(07-22-2019 07:09 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  What if Oklahoma decides to remain in the Big 12 with Texas? Does B1G move forward with expansion? If so, who will be the leading candidates?

nope

The conference would only benefit from adding a big-time football program OR getting into an area with a huge market that they already aren't in. Additionally they need to be very good academically, if not AAU, and not already locked up in a GOR. There simply aren't too many FBS candidates that fit this description, outside of like Rice, Houston, Tulane, UCF/USF - all of which would not be considered anyway unless say, Texas or Notre Dame wanted to come in with them.

I agree with the notion that the B1G probably assumed that both KU and Missouri would be available if and when they chose to expand there. But I also agree that even if many at Missouri would prefer the B1G, it's one thing to poach from the Big XII and something very different to poach from the SEC (and I do recognize and appreciate the strengths of the B1G). I think that short of some major changes taking place, Missouri is off the table.

KU and OU's complementary strengths make them an ideal pairing in some ways, not only for the B1G but for the SEC as well. Miles may not win any rings at KU, but I think that he has potential to put out the football dumpster fire, and as long as the program becomes respectable enough to win regulation non-conference games that would likely be enough given that conference play is a zero-sum situation. Existing mid-to-lower programs in any conference would probably prefer to limit potential losses unless they'd be to a program like Oklahoma that would add major value to the conference overall as a top brand.

(08-13-2019 08:50 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  Just wait and see if the ACCN takes off or not.

If it falls flat, add Georgia Tech and FSU for 15 and 16

Check out these divisions:

North
Minnesota
Iowa
Wisconsin
Michigan
Michigan St.
Ohio St.
Northwestern
Rutgers

South
Penn St.
Florida St.
Nebraska
Georgia Tech
Illinois
Indiana
Purdue
Maryland

I think these divisions are much better balanced then what the Big 10 has now. There's actual history between FSU and Nebraska. FSU and Penn St. would counterbalance Michigan and Ohio State

Maybe Virginia could come into play

I don't think it's likely but should the ACC ever open up again then I would not mind going to no divisions and increasing our presence down the Atlantic Coast to Florida.



Not my image but gives you an idea of how it would look like.

If the ACCN fails to deliver I could see schools that have options like Clemson and Florida State getting anxious and inquiring if there’s a conference interested in them. The Big Ten would probably prefer a combination of Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, Duke and possibly Miami; the SEC probably would prefer schools that are a cultural fit like Virginia Tech, NC State, Clemson and Florida State while the Big XII would get the rest. When it’s all said and done, I can see this happening:

B1G: Virginia and North Carolina
SEC: Virginia Tech and North Carolina State
XII: Clemson, Florida State, Georgia Tech and Miami

ACC
Pitt
Syracuse
Boston College
Duke
Wake Forest
Louisville

They would invite four to six of the following:
UConn
Temple
Cincinnati
Houston
Memphis
Central Florida
South Florida
Old Dominion
East Carolina
Navy