Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spot"
Author Message
lumberpack4 Offline
Banned

Posts: 4,336
Joined: Jun 2013
I Root For: ACC
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
(10-22-2013 09:10 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 09:03 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 08:22 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 08:17 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 07:38 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  UConn to the B1G wouldn't scathe the ACC.

The BigXII's likely to get poached over the ACC. Dissolving a 10 team conference is easier than dissolving a 14 team conference. How you guys don't see that, I'll never know. Not that logic flies around here anyhow.

1. There are 15 ACC members.
2. I find it curious that the AD used the term "academically excellent" rather than to say an "AAU" member. What does "academically excellent" mean? Can this be taken to mean on a par with or better than Nebraska? I

It means the likes of an Oklahoma or a Florida State. They have other aspects that would be considered "Very Desirable" by most of the Big Ten.

Notice how he said the vote would have to be a consensus vote not just a majority vote? Yeah, that means schools like UConn and Buffalo are just smokescreens. They have zero chance at getting everyone in the Big Ten to vote yes on them.

I loathe using US News Undergraduate Rankings for any purpose other than teaching students the worthlessness of canned data, but for the sake of ease I notice the following:

This year Nebraska is ranked 101, Indiana 75, Iowa and MSU are ranked at a tied 73. Now if the B10 considers these institutions academically excellent (and they are) that means the following schools with major athletic programs are also academically excellent at least at the undergrad level:

Tied at 101 - Kansas, Oklahoma, NC State, Tennessee
97 - Mizzou
Tied at 91 - Auburn, FSU
86 - Bama
75 - Baylor
69- Virginia Tech

Tied at 62 - Clemson and Syracuse
60 - UGA
57 - UConn
52 - Texas
47- Miami FL
36 - GT
30 - UNC
23 - UVA

18 - ND
17 - Vandy
7 - Duke


The bolded and italized schools are also graduate research intensive and on average have higher rankings in the various other rankings that rank for such things and the B10 is graduate research intensive. That's Kansas, NC State, Tennessee, Mizzou, VT, Texas, GT, UNC, UVa, Vandy, and Duke - that's not to say the others at 101 and above don't do graduate research, just that it's not as heavy an emphasis, meaning that these 11 are a little more like a B10 school, than the others, a little, not a lot, with the exception of Notre Dame, Miami, and Baylor, which if memory serves, are very undergraduate oriented.

Since the AAU only has 61 members in the US (Toronto and McGill are in Canada of course) if you dissect the statement and put it under a microscope, it seems that the B10 could be prepping itself in an attempt to lure one or two of the following non-AAU members - Oklahoma, NC State, Va Tech, and UConn.

OU is the most obvious.

Va Tech gives them the exact same thing as UVa in the Va/DC markets with a better football product than UVa, however, anything that involves VT, involves UVa, which involves UNC, which then involves NC State and Duke. Unlike VT, NC State is not at fan parity with UNC, however, they give the B10 a footprint in the NC market.

However any team that is added at the Southeast or Southwest boarder of the B10 will be on an almost West Va/B12 island.

I also don't think the B10 has a great ability to "poach" anyone. Nebraska left the B12 because they hated Texas. Maryland left the ACC because their new President was a B10 man and because Maryland fell into a financial hole that they hoped the B10 could fill. Competing against 8 professional teams between DC and Baltimore for the sale of tickets is difficult and the Nationals new facility really hurt MD (look at the cost of room and board at MD and that will tell you something if you know anything about this profession).

At the end of the day, I think OU and Kansas are the best the B10 can do, and to do that, they have to break up the B12 and to break up the B12, they probably need help.

Yep, I agree with all of the above except that the Big Ten might look at NC State. I do think Virginia Tech would get looked at but I couldn't say either way as to whether or not they could receive a consensus of votes from the Presidents.

I am of the mindset that the two targets are Oklahoma and Kansas.

Yes, that will require help. I think that help comes from ESPN mainly. They will provide the grease and the leverage to get the conferences to finish realignment in a way that best suits them. ESPN may not like realignment but if it has to happen in order to settle things down then they are likely to fashion a realignment scenario that is in their best interests.

If a conference has to go, which one do you think ESPN would care about the least?

It takes 75% to get into the B10 or 11 votes. Their entrance vote requirement is the same as the ACC and SEC unless they recently changed their bylaws. I take consensus to mean the same thing that consensus means in the SEC - that no one says "hell no". The larger you become, the more of a problem with consensus. Northwestern by itself is not going to veto an addition, but if only NW and say Michigan were against the addition, do you think it happens? I don't.
(This post was last modified: 10-22-2013 09:18 PM by lumberpack4.)
10-22-2013 09:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #42
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
(10-22-2013 09:13 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 09:10 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 09:03 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 08:22 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 08:17 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  1. There are 15 ACC members.
2. I find it curious that the AD used the term "academically excellent" rather than to say an "AAU" member. What does "academically excellent" mean? Can this be taken to mean on a par with or better than Nebraska? I

It means the likes of an Oklahoma or a Florida State. They have other aspects that would be considered "Very Desirable" by most of the Big Ten.

Notice how he said the vote would have to be a consensus vote not just a majority vote? Yeah, that means schools like UConn and Buffalo are just smokescreens. They have zero chance at getting everyone in the Big Ten to vote yes on them.

I loathe using US News Undergraduate Rankings for any purpose other than teaching students the worthlessness of canned data, but for the sake of ease I notice the following:

This year Nebraska is ranked 101, Indiana 75, Iowa and MSU are ranked at a tied 73. Now if the B10 considers these institutions academically excellent (and they are) that means the following schools with major athletic programs are also academically excellent at least at the undergrad level:

Tied at 101 - Kansas, Oklahoma, NC State, Tennessee
97 - Mizzou
Tied at 91 - Auburn, FSU
86 - Bama
75 - Baylor
69- Virginia Tech

Tied at 62 - Clemson and Syracuse
60 - UGA
57 - UConn
52 - Texas
47- Miami FL
36 - GT
30 - UNC
23 - UVA

18 - ND
17 - Vandy
7 - Duke


The bolded and italized schools are also graduate research intensive and on average have higher rankings in the various other rankings that rank for such things and the B10 is graduate research intensive. That's Kansas, NC State, Tennessee, Mizzou, VT, Texas, GT, UNC, UVa, Vandy, and Duke - that's not to say the others at 101 and above don't do graduate research, just that it's not as heavy an emphasis, meaning that these 11 are a little more like a B10 school, than the others, a little, not a lot, with the exception of Notre Dame, Miami, and Baylor, which if memory serves, are very undergraduate oriented.

Since the AAU only has 61 members in the US (Toronto and McGill are in Canada of course) if you dissect the statement and put it under a microscope, it seems that the B10 could be prepping itself in an attempt to lure one or two of the following non-AAU members - Oklahoma, NC State, Va Tech, and UConn.

OU is the most obvious.

Va Tech gives them the exact same thing as UVa in the Va/DC markets with a better football product than UVa, however, anything that involves VT, involves UVa, which involves UNC, which then involves NC State and Duke. Unlike VT, NC State is not at fan parity with UNC, however, they give the B10 a footprint in the NC market.

However any team that is added at the Southeast or Southwest boarder of the B10 will be on an almost West Va/B12 island.

I also don't think the B10 has a great ability to "poach" anyone. Nebraska left the B12 because they hated Texas. Maryland left the ACC because their new President was a B10 man and because Maryland fell into a financial hole that they hoped the B10 could fill. Competing against 8 professional teams between DC and Baltimore for the sale of tickets is difficult and the Nationals new facility really hurt MD (look at the cost of room and board at MD and that will tell you something if you know anything about this profession).

At the end of the day, I think OU and Kansas are the best the B10 can do, and to do that, they have to break up the B12 and to break up the B12, they probably need help.

Yep, I agree with all of the above except that the Big Ten might look at NC State. I do think Virginia Tech would get looked at but I couldn't say either way as to whether or not they could receive a consensus of votes from the Presidents.

I am of the mindset that the two targets are Oklahoma and Kansas.

Yes, that will require help. I think that help comes from ESPN mainly. They will provide the grease and the leverage to get the conferences to finish realignment in a way that best suits them. ESPN may not like realignment but if it has to happen in order to settle things down then they are likely to fashion a realignment scenario that is in their best interests.

If a conference has to go, which one do you think ESPN would care about the least?

It takes 75% to get into the B10 or 11 votes. Their entrance vote requirement is the same as the ACC and SEC unless they recently changed their bylaws.

The Indiana AD addressed this issue. I would say he has been hearing from Indiana Alumni that would be worried about the expanding Big Ten taking actions that Core Schools might be against due to being outvoted.

If the Big Ten schools insist on having more than just 75% on principle alone then it will take more than 75% to pass an expansion.
10-22-2013 09:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Dasville Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,796
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 246
I Root For: UofL
Location:
Post: #43
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
(10-22-2013 08:52 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 08:43 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Please, please, I've lost count. Lets do this alphabetically. Please name all the B1G ADs and Presidents that have stated that they will take whomever they want, from whatever conference they want. I'll begin....Barry Alvarez, from Wisconsin, in the Big Ten, with the microphone said.....we want Maryland and Rutgers cause we're scared Penn State will leave us..........


Now your turn!

No, that is not what he said, nice spin job.

What exactly is the point of this post?

All I want is an alphabetical list of big ten AD's and Presidents that have hinted at or leaked about or spoken to the press about expanding the big ten with universities currently in other conferences.

I'll begin again....

Alvarez, Barry....
school....Wisconsin....
Title.....AD.....
statement on record.......

Quote:Turns out, the move might have been a proactive step to retain the Nittany Lions.
That northeast corridor, all the way to the south, continues to grow…[Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany] felt that someday, if we didn’t have anyone else in that corridor, someday it wouldn’t make sense maybe for Penn State to be in our league," Alvarez told the Journal Sentinel.


source........ http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/182573751.html


your turn!
(This post was last modified: 10-22-2013 09:26 PM by Dasville.)
10-22-2013 09:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
lumberpack4 Offline
Banned

Posts: 4,336
Joined: Jun 2013
I Root For: ACC
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
11 votes are needed. If Rutgers, MD, and Nebraska are considered non core, then it takes 8 of the old core of 11 to vote anyone in, if my math is correct.

I really think consensus means no one saying "hell no". However, if you voted for Nebraska, you don't have a legitimate reason to vote against anyone at 101 or below. If you did vote against Nebraska, the B10's next bottom rung hits at 75 or so and OU is way outside that range. Kansas has a fig leaf until they get voted out of AAU and replaced with someone else.
10-22-2013 09:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bluesox Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,296
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 84
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #45
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spot"
I just don't believe UNC or UVA want to join the big 10. For it to happen, the big 10 would need to get very large and basically carve out eastern division for acc school's under the big 10 banner. Getting large could work but it much more difficult. IF the big 10 is sticking with the sweet spot of 16 according to IU AD, i agree with his take 16 is a sweet spot, than the big 10 should look west for 2 teams. I'd be surprised if texas fits into a 16 team big 10 setup, so your looking at 2 from KU, OU and missouri. I'd throw in arkansas since i think they pair well with missouri, a clean 2 team swipe from the sec and you don't deal with the GOR. Further down the road, the big 10 can target texas, than if they ever got them into the fold go for the expanded version and create and eastern flank of acc school's.
10-22-2013 09:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
lumberpack4 Offline
Banned

Posts: 4,336
Joined: Jun 2013
I Root For: ACC
Location:
Post: #46
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
(10-22-2013 09:24 PM)Dasville Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 08:52 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 08:43 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Please, please, I've lost count. Lets do this alphabetically. Please name all the B1G ADs and Presidents that have stated that they will take whomever they want, from whatever conference they want. I'll begin....Barry Alvarez, from Wisconsin, in the Big Ten, with the microphone said.....we want Maryland and Rutgers cause we're scared Penn State will leave us..........


Now your turn!

No, that is not what he said, nice spin job.

What exactly is the point of this post?

All I want is an alphabetical list of big ten AD's and Presidents that have hinted at or leaked about or spoken to the press about expanding the big ten with universities currently in other conferences.

I'll begin again....

Alvarez, Barry....
school....Wisconsin....
Title.....AD.....
statement on record.......

Quote:Turns out, the move might have been a proactive step to retain the Nittany Lions.
That northeast corridor, all the way to the south, continues to grow…[Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany] felt that someday, if we didn’t have anyone else in that corridor, someday it wouldn’t make sense maybe for Penn State to be in our league," Alvarez told the Journal Sentinel.


source........ http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/182573751.html


your turn!

Das - you are correct the B10 was very worried about losing PSU on the heels of losing ND to the ACC. The long term demographics for the B10 are very, VERY, VERY bad and they are looking 50-60-70 years down the road.
10-22-2013 09:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
lumberpack4 Offline
Banned

Posts: 4,336
Joined: Jun 2013
I Root For: ACC
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
(10-22-2013 09:26 PM)bluesox Wrote:  I just don't believe UNC or UVA want to join the big 10. For it to happen, the big 10 would need to get very large and basically carve out eastern division for acc school's under the big 10 banner. Getting large could work but it much more difficult. IF the big 10 is sticking with the sweet spot of 16 according to IU AD, i agree with his take 16 is a sweet spot, than the big 10 should look west for 2 teams. I'd be surprised if texas fits into a 16 team big 10 setup, so your looking at 2 from KU, OU and missouri. I'd throw in arkansas since i think they pair well with missouri, a clean 2 team swipe from the sec and you don't deal with the GOR. Further down the road, the big 10 can target texas, than if they ever got them into the fold go for the expanded version and create and eastern flank of acc school's.

Trust me, UNC and UVa do not want to join the B10. If they did, I would know. Every time the Southern Conference grew too large, it back unmanageable and broke up - it happened in 1933 and again in 1953 and this is why you have the SEC and the ACC. Once you do get to 16 you do have two defacto separate conferences, you can attempt to run pods of 4 and maybe that will work, but the more you have, the more the interests diverge.

I think it will take a great deal of illegal and secret collusion to grow the ACC, SEC, and B10 conferences to 16.
10-22-2013 09:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gosports1 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,847
Joined: Sep 2008
Reputation: 153
I Root For: providence
Location:
Post: #48
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
(10-22-2013 09:02 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 07:46 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 07:43 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 07:38 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  NEW YORK aka Buffalo. they could use all that cash to upgrade their athletics (are they really that much worse than rutgers? they did beat uconn as we know)
you heard it here 1st 03-shhhh

You can't really believe one FB game would determine a realignment decision, especially when UConn's all-time record against Buffalo is about 17-3.

UConn's record against ND is 1-0 (the Huskies won at South Bend in 2009). That was a blast, but it means less than nothing in the realignment game.

i was just teasing about the uconn win. however buffalo fits the BIG profile in every way (other than athletic history)
i dont think it will actually happen but crazier things have happened

The problem is UB isn't "The" Flagship in NY.

there isnt really a flagship in ny (no offense). buffalo is finally showing signs they want to take athletics a bit more sereiously. however they are IMO about 20-30 years late
10-22-2013 09:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #49
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
(10-22-2013 09:24 PM)Dasville Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 08:52 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 08:43 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Please, please, I've lost count. Lets do this alphabetically. Please name all the B1G ADs and Presidents that have stated that they will take whomever they want, from whatever conference they want. I'll begin....Barry Alvarez, from Wisconsin, in the Big Ten, with the microphone said.....we want Maryland and Rutgers cause we're scared Penn State will leave us..........


Now your turn!

No, that is not what he said, nice spin job.

What exactly is the point of this post?

All I want is an alphabetical list of big ten AD's and Presidents that have hinted at or leaked about or spoken to the press about expanding the big ten with universities currently in other conferences.

I'll begin again....

Alvarez, Barry....
school....Wisconsin....
Title.....AD.....
statement on record.......

Quote:Turns out, the move might have been a proactive step to retain the Nittany Lions.
That northeast corridor, all the way to the south, continues to grow…[Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany] felt that someday, if we didn’t have anyone else in that corridor, someday it wouldn’t make sense maybe for Penn State to be in our league," Alvarez told the Journal Sentinel.


source........ http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/182573751.html


your turn!

No thanks. Do your own research, I do.

When words like "might have been" and "someday" are used, it is a clue that these worries that you are trying to exacerbate aren't really an immediate pressing issue.

I consider it more of an additional selling point to push lingering Presidents into the vote because Delany saw the value of getting into the Mid Atlantic Beltway corridor.

If you really want to believe that Penn State was about to leave the Big Ten then go right ahead and believe that.

Do your own research though.
10-22-2013 09:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #50
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
(10-22-2013 09:33 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 09:26 PM)bluesox Wrote:  I just don't believe UNC or UVA want to join the big 10. For it to happen, the big 10 would need to get very large and basically carve out eastern division for acc school's under the big 10 banner. Getting large could work but it much more difficult. IF the big 10 is sticking with the sweet spot of 16 according to IU AD, i agree with his take 16 is a sweet spot, than the big 10 should look west for 2 teams. I'd be surprised if texas fits into a 16 team big 10 setup, so your looking at 2 from KU, OU and missouri. I'd throw in arkansas since i think they pair well with missouri, a clean 2 team swipe from the sec and you don't deal with the GOR. Further down the road, the big 10 can target texas, than if they ever got them into the fold go for the expanded version and create and eastern flank of acc school's.

Trust me, UNC and UVa do not want to join the B10. If they did, I would know. Every time the Southern Conference grew too large, it back unmanageable and broke up - it happened in 1933 and again in 1953 and this is why you have the SEC and the ACC. Once you do get to 16 you do have two defacto separate conferences, you can attempt to run pods of 4 and maybe that will work, but the more you have, the more the interests diverge.

I think it will take a great deal of illegal and secret collusion to grow the ACC, SEC, and B10 conferences to 16.

Nothing about it has to be illegal. Secret maybe, but not illegal.
10-22-2013 09:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Blackhawk-eye Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,643
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 36
I Root For: B&G Hawks
Location:
Post: #51
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
(10-22-2013 08:14 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 08:09 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 07:57 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  4 Conferences of 16+ is what's best for college Div1 football. It's good for the fans, TV, and schools. It'll be all or none, and right now the BigXII is the weakest link.

Man it amazes me how you forgot what it was like to be a have-not, considering Louisville has always been a have-not.

But no I guess we need 4 16 team conferences and nothing else. UCF doesn't deserve to play for the title, they aren't an elite program like Louisville... oh wait.

There will be something else and no, Houston won't be left out.

Are you thinking a rebuilt Big XII?

Maybe a combo or 4 pack (depending on who the Big XII loses) to include Houston, New Mexico, Colorado State, Cincinnati or Memphis?
10-22-2013 09:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
brista21 Offline
The Birthplace of College Football
*

Posts: 10,042
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 262
I Root For: Rutgers
Location: North Jersey

Donators
Post: #52
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
(10-22-2013 09:02 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 07:46 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 07:43 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 07:38 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  NEW YORK aka Buffalo. they could use all that cash to upgrade their athletics (are they really that much worse than rutgers? they did beat uconn as we know)
you heard it here 1st 03-shhhh

You can't really believe one FB game would determine a realignment decision, especially when UConn's all-time record against Buffalo is about 17-3.

UConn's record against ND is 1-0 (the Huskies won at South Bend in 2009). That was a blast, but it means less than nothing in the realignment game.

i was just teasing about the uconn win. however buffalo fits the BIG profile in every way (other than athletic history)
i dont think it will actually happen but crazier things have happened

The problem is UB isn't "The" Flagship in NY.

Agreed. They aren't even close to being the flagship school athletically. The flagship college athletic program is about 150 miles east of Buffalo...
10-22-2013 09:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ohio1317 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,675
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 358
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
Post: #53
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spot"
When looking at expansion, we often focus on the positives schools bring, but I think it's just as important to look at the factors against adding teams (or as many of these are, reasons against expansion in the next decade or so).

General Reasons:
1. The conference has already expanded from 11 to 14 in 3 years. This is a huge change already. ADs have to be looking at their schedules and wondering how many more teams they want on it who fans are not used to playing. I can tell you there is no excitement for playing Rutgers and Maryland in Ohio and those replace games that were at least familiar (have heard more than one comment about those game not feeling "Big Ten"). This doesn't mean new feelings can't develop, but we haven't even started integrating the last two yet.
2. The money must be split more and more ways and total attention a conference gets is limited. A lot fewer people are usually interested in middle of the pack teams than top teams and the number of top spots are limited and do not expand in relation to the number of teams added.
3. Related to #2, if you want a team to compete for the conference title, getting bigger is taking away years you'll do it.
4. All major conferences but the SEC have grant of rights and the cost of getting them out is probably going to make a move impossible for now. In 10 years that will be different, but for now, conference probably can only realistically look to long term options.

Specific teams:
Texas, Notre Dame, North Carolina: All would probably be accepted, but none seem interested.
Oklahoma: Big name and decent chance would be accepted (although remember the PAC-12 turned them down), but would probably have to bring Oklahoma State which the Big Ten would not accept. Also, not AAU
Kansas: Great basketball, but small added market.
Virginia: Likely would have been in last round over Rutgers if interested. Getting them into a northern conference over alumni and big donor reaction likely extremely difficult for foreseeable future.
UConn: Not AAU, little football tradition
All Southern teams: Regionalism is still big for conference pride. The Big Ten by going east is already trying to go from a Midwestern conference to a northern one. Go to one with no regional identity and conference loyalty will decline.

I know there are benefits to teams as well and will be the first to admit, I didn't think Maryland and Rutgers would have been invited. That said, I think most factors currently push against expansion for the reasons above.
(This post was last modified: 10-22-2013 09:51 PM by ohio1317.)
10-22-2013 09:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SeaBlue Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,190
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 43
I Root For: Michigan
Location: Indy
Post: #54
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
(10-22-2013 09:10 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I am of the mindset that the two targets are Oklahoma and Kansas.

Yup. Then you let Texas think about it. As much as Oklahoma fails some of the general qualifications, I keep on going back to them as I think about it.

East Coast looks unlikely now, but I suppose that could change. So the partner for Texas would be?
(This post was last modified: 10-22-2013 10:01 PM by SeaBlue.)
10-22-2013 09:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HeartOfDixie Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,689
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 945
I Root For: Alabama
Location: Huntsville AL
Post: #55
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spot"
Ohio bright up a good point, regionalism will play its part.
10-22-2013 10:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SeaBlue Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,190
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 43
I Root For: Michigan
Location: Indy
Post: #56
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
(10-22-2013 09:49 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Regionalism is still big for conference pride. The Big Ten by going east is already trying to go from a Midwestern conference to a northern one. Go to one with no regional identity and conference loyalty will decline.
Excellent thought. Makes sense. I wonder if that is something that the ADs and Presidents have discussed.
10-22-2013 10:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #57
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
(10-22-2013 09:44 PM)Blackhawk-eye Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 08:14 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 08:09 PM)CoogNellie Wrote:  
(10-22-2013 07:57 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  4 Conferences of 16+ is what's best for college Div1 football. It's good for the fans, TV, and schools. It'll be all or none, and right now the BigXII is the weakest link.

Man it amazes me how you forgot what it was like to be a have-not, considering Louisville has always been a have-not.

But no I guess we need 4 16 team conferences and nothing else. UCF doesn't deserve to play for the title, they aren't an elite program like Louisville... oh wait.

There will be something else and no, Houston won't be left out.

Are you thinking a rebuilt Big XII?

Maybe a combo or 4 pack (depending on who the Big XII loses) to include Houston, New Mexico, Colorado State, Cincinnati or Memphis?

I'm thinking of Houston as a possible for the PAC and if not that then they are a shoe in for what I believe will be a mid major conference that is "allowed" into the top division. There will be certain criteria for joining and those criteria are easily set forth so that the number of schools that can qualify is easily controlled and limited.

That will put the onus upon conferences to meet the criteria and thus no single school can say the Major's held them down because it will be that Mid-Major conference that will be denying them entry.
10-22-2013 10:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HeartOfDixie Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 24,689
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 945
I Root For: Alabama
Location: Huntsville AL
Post: #58
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spot"
I think you're ultimately going to have three premium conferences that are nothing but state flagships. The second one of these conferences takes a non flagship they take a serious hit in their prestige.
10-22-2013 10:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
He1nousOne Offline
The One you Love to Hate.
*

Posts: 13,285
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 215
I Root For: Iowa/ASU
Location: Arizona
Post: #59
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spo...
(10-22-2013 09:49 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  When looking at expansion, we often focus on the positives schools bring, but I think it's just as important to look at the factors against adding teams (or as many of these are, reasons against expansion in the next decade or so).

General Reasons:
1. The conference has already expanded from 11 to 14 in 3 years. This is a huge change already. ADs have to be looking at their schedules and wondering how many more teams they want on it who fans are not used to playing. I can tell you there is no excitement for playing Rutgers and Maryland in Ohio and those replace games that were at least familiar (have heard more than one comment about those game not feeling "Big Ten"). This doesn't mean new feelings can't develop, but we haven't even started integrating the last two yet.
2. The money must be split more and more ways and total attention a conference gets is limited. A lot fewer people are usually interested in middle of the pack teams than top teams and the number of top spots are limited and do not expand in relation to the number of teams added.
3. Related to #2, if you want a team to compete for the conference title, getting bigger is taking away years you'll do it.
4. All major conferences but the SEC have grant of rights and the cost of getting them out is probably going to make a move impossible for now. In 10 years that will be different, but for now, conference probably can only realistically look to long term options.

Specific teams:
Texas, Notre Dame, North Carolina: All would probably be accepted, but none seem interested.
Oklahoma: Big name and decent chance would be accepted (although remember the PAC-12 turned them down), but would probably have to bring Oklahoma State which the Big Ten would not accept. Also, not AAU
Kansas: Great basketball, but small added market.
Virginia: Likely would have been in last round over Rutgers if interested. Getting them into a northern conference over alumni and big donor reaction likely extremely difficult for foreseeable future.
UConn: Not AAU, little football tradition
All Southern teams: Regionalism is still big for conference pride. The Big Ten by going east is already trying to go from a Midwestern conference to a northern one. Go to one with no regional identity and conference loyalty will decline.

I know there are benefits to teams as well and will be the first to admit, I didn't think Maryland and Rutgers would have been invited. That said, I think most factors currently push against expansion for the reasons above.

Oklahoma doesn't have to bring Oklahoma State. OSU just has to be assured a spot at the Big Table in a comparable conference to the one Oklahoma moves to. There is no such thing as a State rule or law making sure that the two schools never part from each other in terms of conference membership. That is completely made up.

Kansas has Kansas City but even more than that they add even more value to BTN basketball advertising. They also add a lower team in the football hierarchy for that Western division that will spring up.

Pretty sure Ohio State fans will be more excited to have Kansas coming to Columbus every year to play basketball. Much more so than for Maryland or Rutgers. I am pretty sure Ohio State fans will be more excited to have Oklahoma coming to town for football than for either Rutgers or Maryland.

Considering how luke warm the reception has been so far, it might not be a bad idea to have another expansion that folks in the Midwest Culture Big Ten will be much more excited for.
10-22-2013 10:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bluesox Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,296
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 84
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #60
RE: Indiana AD Fred Glass hikes the B1G skirt and shows leg; 16 is the "sweet spot"
I would agree 16 is about as big as you want to get and still keep a conference. Yet, nothing wrong with getting bigger than 16 and having more of an alliance. In that case, the big 10 could jump to 32-40 or all the way up to 64 once the ball gets rolling. Basically, The big 10 would just replace the NCAA or it would be like the NFL than they can create divisions for the regionalism that makes college sports. Now just getting back to 16 for the big 10, i would agree the midwest culture thing is huge and makes uconn not really a contender. KU and Missouri fit best but the KU and OU combo brings the most punch. However, you got to deal with the GOR and than the greed factor which doomed the big 10 last time, i.e. they wanted texas, ND, and UNC. In this case, texas still the target. I think they should just aim for the fits. I'd go back to the missouri/arkansas combo as the sleeper.
(This post was last modified: 10-22-2013 10:19 PM by bluesox.)
10-22-2013 10:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.