It’s no secret the SEC has gone off and made boatloads of money recently. In fact, now there are only about 5 schools that would even be worth adding to the SEC, financially speaking. Surely the B1G is feeling this somewhere.

Where does this leave the B1G? The B1G seems to have an academic constraint when considering new members that the SEC does not which really limits the options. If Texas insisted on Texas Tech, that seems like a deal breaker for the B1G but the SEC may be okay with it.

My questions are:

1) Does the B1G have any sort of game plan or desired outcome over the next 10-20 years as the XII and ACC contracts expire? What do the schools want and what has the conference said?

2) Does the AAU requirement (I’m unsure whether it’s memorialized anywhere) harm or help the conference? How much leeway is there really?

3) Does the B1G really consider itself in the running for Oklahoma and Texas when the XII contract expires? Will the conference make another play for Notre Dame? Or does the conference, as a whole, even care?

4) What do you, the fans, want? Does this align with the stated (or unstated) desires of the schools and conference?

5) What can we reasonably expect to happen?

1) Only the conference office truly knows and the fact that we have a new commissioner truly adds a level of uncertainty.

2) Depends on your philosophy. I like it. And let's be real, if Notre Dame wanted to join would the Big Ten really say no? Texas Tech and Oklahoma State aren't AAU schools but are also for the most part dead weight schools too assuming they are tag alongs to Texas and Oklahoma, respectively.

3) There's definitely been rumors about Texas to the Big Ten in the last realignment cycle. There haven't been as much about Oklahoma but that was before Oklahoma started to dominate the Big 12 (and Texas became mediocre). That also makes you wonder that if Oklahoma was mediocre in football how much value would they have? Obviously when the Big 12 signed the GOR talk died down as did Notre Dame and other ACC schools when they signed their GOR. Once it gets closer to the GOR expiring, I'm sure at least rumors will start again. Whether the conference office will take them seriously is a different question.

4) In terms of the Big 12, I would want Texas/Oklahoma, Texas/Kansas or nothing. As for the ACC, I definitely would want Notre Dame and Pittsburgh. I wouldn't mind Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, and even Florida State (or if I'm really dreaming Florida) but I actually like to see the ACC remain intact despite my posts of splitting up the ACC. I think it does align with the conference's academic views.

5) I'm not saying Texas and Oklahoma to the Big 10 is going to happen but I do think it is realistic. As for the ACC, I doubt anything will happen before 2037 (end of their GOR). Will anything happen then? I'm not even sure I'll be alive then, I'm not going to make any guesses then.

I usually don't participate in realignment, but I'll play.

For starters, if the BIG went to 20 teams, I would love the following 6 additions:
Oklahoma
Texas
Missouri
Tennessee
Georgia Tech
Florida State
With that said, it's never going to happen. SEC schools aren't leaving their conference and it's just fun to talk about...I guess?

As for AAU? I believe if Texas wanted to join and bring Tech along with them, it could be accommodated this time around.

My biggest concern is the BIG becoming too "Eastern", I don't like that at all.

At the end, I believe realignment may be dead.

I think all expansion scenarios went out the window when Jim Delaney retired.

(01-05-2021 01:46 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  I think all expansion scenarios went out the window when Jim Delaney retired.

I seriously can't imagine this current commissioner leading our presidents in a round of realignment.

For what schools would the “AAU requirement” be looked over? I presume Notre Dame, Oklahoma, and Florida St with perhaps Miami, Virginia Tech, North Carolina St, and Syracuse as long shots.

(01-05-2021 02:17 PM)cubucks Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 01:46 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  I think all expansion scenarios went out the window when Jim Delaney retired.

I seriously can't imagine this current commissioner leading our presidents in a round of realignment.

After the near Covid fiasco, I don't think he could lead anyone out of a paper bag.

(01-05-2021 02:44 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  For what schools would the “AAU requirement” be looked over? I presume Notre Dame, Oklahoma, and Florida St with perhaps Miami, Virginia Tech, North Carolina St, and Syracuse as long shots.

I would make an exception for Georgia.

(01-05-2021 04:52 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 02:44 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  For what schools would the “AAU requirement” be looked over? I presume Notre Dame, Oklahoma, and Florida St with perhaps Miami, Virginia Tech, North Carolina St, and Syracuse as long shots.

I would make an exception for Georgia.

Just go to the USN&WR rankings and/or any other respected academic rankings to see the top academic schools outside of the AAU.

As for schools that aren't the best in academics I would say Oklahoma and Alabama.

(01-05-2021 05:44 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 04:52 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 02:44 PM)BePcr07 Wrote:  For what schools would the “AAU requirement” be looked over? I presume Notre Dame, Oklahoma, and Florida St with perhaps Miami, Virginia Tech, North Carolina St, and Syracuse as long shots.

I would make an exception for Georgia.

Just go to the USN&WR rankings and/or any other respected academic rankings to see the top academic schools outside of the AAU.

As for schools that aren't the best in academics I would say Oklahoma and Alabama.

ARWU is where you need to go for academic rankings. USN&WR is based on the best values for an undergraduate education which means what hoity toity school has the cheapest remedial High School education available. Geez. I thought you knew something about academics. Graduate schools are what earn AAU status. ARWU at least ranks those.

(01-05-2021 01:53 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  My questions are:

1) Does the B1G have any sort of game plan or desired outcome over the next 10-20 years as the XII and ACC contracts expire? What do the schools want and what has the conference said?

2) Does the AAU requirement (I’m unsure whether it’s memorialized anywhere) harm or help the conference? How much leeway is there really?

3) Does the B1G really consider itself in the running for Oklahoma and Texas when the XII contract expires? Will the conference make another play for Notre Dame? Or does the conference, as a whole, even care?

4) What do you, the fans, want? Does this align with the stated (or unstated) desires of the schools and conference?

5) What can we reasonably expect to happen?

1) Currently the Big Ten has no immediate plans to expand. How would I know? The PAC schools are too far west for people's comfort. Texas is comfortable where it is. Oklahoma might not get the vote from certain presidents if they even show interest. It's an open question whether Oklahoma would move out or will they be convinced to stay.

2) AAU is preferred, although for the right program (like ND) they'll make an exception. The Big Ten schools have shown, time and time again, that they're willing to risk competitive disadvantage to maintain the current academic/athletic model.

3) See 1) and also waiting until 2037 for any potential adds would be moot as I think college sports would look pretty different by then.

4) Personally, I wouldn't mind an association of likeminded schools that aren't tied to conference by-laws. However, people are too familiar with regional competition and don't want to rock the boat. I wish more programs have a national mindset like ND does but they don't to give up certain advantages that come with regional competition. This is now starting to hurt the PAC, as interest in football in that region wanes. Programs like Washington, Oregon, Arizona State and UCLA need to go national to attract recruits.

5) I am expecting status quo in 2025.

(01-05-2021 01:53 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  It’s no secret the SEC has gone off and made boatloads of money recently. In fact, now there are only about 5 schools that would even be worth adding to the SEC, financially speaking. Surely the B1G is feeling this somewhere.

Where does this leave the B1G? The B1G seems to have an academic constraint when considering new members that the SEC does not which really limits the options. If Texas insisted on Texas Tech, that seems like a deal breaker for the B1G but the SEC may be okay with it.

My questions are:

1) Does the B1G have any sort of game plan or desired outcome over the next 10-20 years as the XII and ACC contracts expire? What do the schools want and what has the conference said?
I can't believe that anybody hanging out on a message board would have insider information about this. That said, I would be very surprised if the BIG or any other conference didn't have some sort of a war room and realignment contingency plans should an opportunity suddenly arise.

2) Does the AAU requirement (I’m unsure whether it’s memorialized anywhere) harm or help the conference? How much leeway is there really?
As I recall, at the time Nebraska was invited, there was at least very public rumor that Neb was going to loose its AAU status. If it was out in the public, all of the BIG presidents knew it was true. Yet they invited Neb anyway. That makes me think that if the right opportunity presented itself - Notre F'ing Dame - lack of AAU status would not prevent the conference from pulling the trigger.

3)Does the B1G really consider itself in the running for Oklahoma and Texas when the XII contract expires? Will the conference make another play for Notre Dame? Or does the conference, as a whole, even care?
I don't think the BIG considers itself in the running to get Oklahoma and Texas. I think the BIG thinks Oklahoma and Texas are in the running to get the BIG. Although IMO, it is the least likely scenario to happen. Ok needs Texas presence for recruiting, so is unlikely to jump without UT. UT, like ND is poison to a conference. UT would want all kinds of concessions and power that the BIG is not going to put up with.

4) What do you, the fans, want? Does this align with the stated (or unstated) desires of the schools and conference?
Old Rutgers fans would probably want Spitt and Sara Cuse. If it's not a bowl or tournament game, I want nothing to do with any of the old Big East schools. My first pick would be KU/Ok. Which is a long shot because, KU doesn't bring enough to the table to get invited solo and Ok is unlikely to make the move without Tx. That is where all of Ok's alumni and targeted recruits live. The true problem is all the desired BXII schools have baggage in the form of an unwanted little brother "State" university. Plus Tx/Ok are the big guys in the BXII and least likely to move. UNC/UVa is second pick. Same issues as Tx/Ok. My dark horse pick is KU/Mizzu. Hear my reasons; in border states, AAU, have wrestling, add to basketball power and fewest issues in changing conferences.

5) What can we reasonably expect to happen?
I think the BIG only expands if an opportunity too good to pass up presents itself, or some crazy mega-deal involving the SEC happens that forces us to act as a response. Otherwise the BIG stands pat. It has gone decades without expanding before while still remaining both very stable and highly profitable.

(01-05-2021 01:53 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  It’s no secret the SEC has gone off and made boatloads of money recently. In fact, now there are only about 5 schools that would even be worth adding to the SEC, financially speaking. Surely the B1G is feeling this somewhere.

Where does this leave the B1G? The B1G seems to have an academic constraint when considering new members that the SEC does not which really limits the options. If Texas insisted on Texas Tech, that seems like a deal breaker for the B1G but the SEC may be okay with it.

My questions are:

1) Does the B1G have any sort of game plan or desired outcome over the next 10-20 years as the XII and ACC contracts expire? What do the schools want and what has the conference said?

2) Does the AAU requirement (I’m unsure whether it’s memorialized anywhere) harm or help the conference? How much leeway is there really?

3) Does the B1G really consider itself in the running for Oklahoma and Texas when the XII contract expires? Will the conference make another play for Notre Dame? Or does the conference, as a whole, even care?

4) What do you, the fans, want? Does this align with the stated (or unstated) desires of the schools and conference?

5) What can we reasonably expect to happen?

1. As others have said, I'm sure the Big Ten has a "plan" but nothing has been said publicly. That would be a real PR issue if they named specific schools or even states/regions that they wanted to expand to. Remember the backlash when they mentioned they were going to expand to 12? Then there was NOTHING until it felt like the invitations to Maryland and Rutgers were out of nowhere. Due to the fact that there are only so many acceptable choices, I think the candidates are more obvious this round and they will be flirting with multiple conferences so it will be more like Nebraska's invitation than Maryland and Rutgers.

2. I think the AAU is a guideline more than a hard rule. The Big Ten members essentially voted Nebraska into the conference and simultaneously voted them out of the AAU. The top priority would be for the conference to make money and they won't add anyone who doesn't. Likewise, they have a certain threshold that must be met academically or else a school won't get a look and AAU isn't a requirement but looks sexy.

3. I think the Big Ten considers itself in the running for whoever it wants. We saw how important and influential they believe they are when they tried to cancel fall football and expected everyone to follow their lead. I think that hurt the conference more than anything. Notre Dame, Texas, and Oklahoma, the three expected main targets for everyone all played football from the start and could see how the Big Ten was quick to cancel. How can they not expect the Big Ten to do that in the future and would they want to be in a conference like that? If the Big Ten got its way, I think they would add Notre Dame and Texas and be done. I think the Big Ten thinks that Notre Dame joining is just a matter of time (I agree for the most part but I'll explain my reasoning in another post since this isn't about them). I don't think the Big Ten is as hot on Oklahoma as we are, but I do think they'd accept them but would likely need a strong academic partner to come with them for cover.

4. Personally, I would add as many of Texas, Notre Dame, and Oklahoma as I could without any tag alongs. Even getting one and staying at 15 would be great for me instead of adding a 16th school that we'd rather not have. If we somehow got one and went to 15, I think the conference should vote to deregulate the conference championship games like the ACC wanted so we could do three divisions of 5 or a divisionless structure that has 3 fixed opponents per year.

Personally, I think Oklahoma is the best combination of likely and useful to the conference and would be the best add if we could only get one. They make Nebraska feel more at home in the conference which I think has been a real struggle since they were added. It opens the conference up to Texas (the state) more which adds a strong recruiting territory that the conference needs. They are also a national brand that will significantly increase the payouts of media deals and ticket sales. I think Oklahoma would find annual games against Nebraska, Iowa and likely some combination of Wisconsin, Minnesota, and the Illinois schools to be similar to much of what they have now.

What I don't want is for a group of northeast schools which sounds crazy as a Penn State fan but they don't do anything for me. Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College, UConn, etc. don't have good football programs (and some aren't good basketball either), don't have good recruiting areas which would give the conference a competitive boost, and don't improve the media payout. Another thing that I would hate is for the conference to add two eastern schools (for example, Virginia and North Carolina) and we go to four pods of four and one pod is the two newbies plus Maryland and Rutgers. PSU would get less games against Maryland and Rutgers, the #1 and #4 Big Ten opponents they've played all-time plus two prime areas that Penn State recruits athletes and students.

The conference goals need to be adding an elite football brand (or more), expanding into better recruiting areas to benefit existing members, new member(s) should have

I have no idea what the conference wants to do besides land Notre Dame and Texas.

5. I don't have a clue what is reasonable. Would it surprise me if Texas and Oklahoma plus others leave the Big 12? Not really. It wouldn't really surprise me if nothing happened either.

My reasonable expectation is nothing will happen in the 2024 time period where the Big Ten, Big 12, etc. all need new contracts. I think Texas doesn't want to move away from the Big 12 and is fine making close to the same amount of money as the Big Ten and SEC due to their third tier rights. The Big 12 will get a new deal that keeps them solidly in third place in the P5 structure and will put the ACC and Pac-12 in a bind by being so far behind financially in the hopes of making them unstable.

If a move is made, I think Texas and Kansas to the SEC and Oklahoma to the Big Ten makes the most sense with the Big Ten holding out for Notre Dame once their grant of rights are up in 2037 or so. Kansas pairs well with Missouri and adds a desperately needed basketball program and poor football to the SEC while Texas reunites with Texas A&M and Arkansas, a better group than the Big Ten can potentially provide without adding too many more. Oklahoma makes Nebraska more comfortable while OU will feel like Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota will remind them of the Big 8. Notre Dame won't pass up the money allure of the Big Ten and get comfortable playing northeast-adjacent Penn State, Rutgers, and Maryland, national brands of Ohio State, Oklahoma, and Nebraska, and classic rivals of Michigan, Michigan State and Purdue. Until Notre Dame can free itself from the ACC GoR, the conference will push to deregulate conference championships which they previously opposed. The AAC with 11 members will want to approve it as well. If Notre Dame doesn't join, I think the Big Ten stays at 15 as they don't want to add just to add.

(01-14-2021 10:25 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(01-05-2021 01:53 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  It’s no secret the SEC has gone off and made boatloads of money recently. In fact, now there are only about 5 schools that would even be worth adding to the SEC, financially speaking. Surely the B1G is feeling this somewhere.

Where does this leave the B1G? The B1G seems to have an academic constraint when considering new members that the SEC does not which really limits the options. If Texas insisted on Texas Tech, that seems like a deal breaker for the B1G but the SEC may be okay with it.

My questions are:

1) Does the B1G have any sort of game plan or desired outcome over the next 10-20 years as the XII and ACC contracts expire? What do the schools want and what has the conference said?

2) Does the AAU requirement (I’m unsure whether it’s memorialized anywhere) harm or help the conference? How much leeway is there really?

3) Does the B1G really consider itself in the running for Oklahoma and Texas when the XII contract expires? Will the conference make another play for Notre Dame? Or does the conference, as a whole, even care?

4) What do you, the fans, want? Does this align with the stated (or unstated) desires of the schools and conference?

5) What can we reasonably expect to happen?

1. As others have said, I'm sure the Big Ten has a "plan" but nothing has been said publicly. That would be a real PR issue if they named specific schools or even states/regions that they wanted to expand to. Remember the backlash when they mentioned they were going to expand to 12? Then there was NOTHING until it felt like the invitations to Maryland and Rutgers were out of nowhere. Due to the fact that there are only so many acceptable choices, I think the candidates are more obvious this round and they will be flirting with multiple conferences so it will be more like Nebraska's invitation than Maryland and Rutgers.

2. I think the AAU is a guideline more than a hard rule. The Big Ten members essentially voted Nebraska into the conference and simultaneously voted them out of the AAU. The top priority would be for the conference to make money and they won't add anyone who doesn't. Likewise, they have a certain threshold that must be met academically or else a school won't get a look and AAU isn't a requirement but looks sexy.

3. I think the Big Ten considers itself in the running for whoever it wants. We saw how important and influential they believe they are when they tried to cancel fall football and expected everyone to follow their lead. I think that hurt the conference more than anything. Notre Dame, Texas, and Oklahoma, the three expected main targets for everyone all played football from the start and could see how the Big Ten was quick to cancel. How can they not expect the Big Ten to do that in the future and would they want to be in a conference like that? If the Big Ten got its way, I think they would add Notre Dame and Texas and be done. I think the Big Ten thinks that Notre Dame joining is just a matter of time (I agree for the most part but I'll explain my reasoning in another post since this isn't about them). I don't think the Big Ten is as hot on Oklahoma as we are, but I do think they'd accept them but would likely need a strong academic partner to come with them for cover.

4. Personally, I would add as many of Texas, Notre Dame, and Oklahoma as I could without any tag alongs. Even getting one and staying at 15 would be great for me instead of adding a 16th school that we'd rather not have. If we somehow got one and went to 15, I think the conference should vote to deregulate the conference championship games like the ACC wanted so we could do three divisions of 5 or a divisionless structure that has 3 fixed opponents per year.

Personally, I think Oklahoma is the best combination of likely and useful to the conference and would be the best add if we could only get one. They make Nebraska feel more at home in the conference which I think has been a real struggle since they were added. It opens the conference up to Texas (the state) more which adds a strong recruiting territory that the conference needs. They are also a national brand that will significantly increase the payouts of media deals and ticket sales. I think Oklahoma would find annual games against Nebraska, Iowa and likely some combination of Wisconsin, Minnesota, and the Illinois schools to be similar to much of what they have now.

What I don't want is for a group of northeast schools which sounds crazy as a Penn State fan but they don't do anything for me. Pittsburgh, Syracuse, Boston College, UConn, etc. don't have good football programs (and some aren't good basketball either), don't have good recruiting areas which would give the conference a competitive boost, and don't improve the media payout. Another thing that I would hate is for the conference to add two eastern schools (for example, Virginia and North Carolina) and we go to four pods of four and one pod is the two newbies plus Maryland and Rutgers. PSU would get less games against Maryland and Rutgers, the #1 and #4 Big Ten opponents they've played all-time plus two prime areas that Penn State recruits athletes and students.

The conference goals need to be adding an elite football brand (or more), expanding into better recruiting areas to benefit existing members, new member(s) should have

I have no idea what the conference wants to do besides land Notre Dame and Texas.

5. I don't have a clue what is reasonable. Would it surprise me if Texas and Oklahoma plus others leave the Big 12? Not really. It wouldn't really surprise me if nothing happened either.

My reasonable expectation is nothing will happen in the 2024 time period where the Big Ten, Big 12, etc. all need new contracts. I think Texas doesn't want to move away from the Big 12 and is fine making close to the same amount of money as the Big Ten and SEC due to their third tier rights. The Big 12 will get a new deal that keeps them solidly in third place in the P5 structure and will put the ACC and Pac-12 in a bind by being so far behind financially in the hopes of making them unstable.

If a move is made, I think Texas and Kansas to the SEC and Oklahoma to the Big Ten makes the most sense with the Big Ten holding out for Notre Dame once their grant of rights are up in 2037 or so. Kansas pairs well with Missouri and adds a desperately needed basketball program and poor football to the SEC while Texas reunites with Texas A&M and Arkansas, a better group than the Big Ten can potentially provide without adding too many more. Oklahoma makes Nebraska more comfortable while OU will feel like Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota will remind them of the Big 8. Notre Dame won't pass up the money allure of the Big Ten and get comfortable playing northeast-adjacent Penn State, Rutgers, and Maryland, national brands of Ohio State, Oklahoma, and Nebraska, and classic rivals of Michigan, Michigan State and Purdue. Until Notre Dame can free itself from the ACC GoR, the conference will push to deregulate conference championships which they previously opposed. The AAC with 11 members will want to approve it as well. If Notre Dame doesn't join, I think the Big Ten stays at 15 as they don't want to add just to add.

IMO, Notre Dame / Oklahoma to the Big 10 and Texas / Kansas to the SEC would be a grand slam for both conferences. Both would stop at 16 as nobody would be left that would add to the payouts. Both would be locked long term into positions of strength and the PAC and ACC would be in a position of having to make do. You know my stance on the buyout potential of the Irish so I don't think you have to wait until 2037. In fact if Duke, North Carolina, Virginia and Pitt want out they might show interest before 2037 as well. Especially if Clemson and Florida State are motivated to look around.

(01-05-2021 01:53 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  It’s no secret the SEC has gone off and made boatloads of money recently. In fact, now there are only about 5 schools that would even be worth adding to the SEC, financially speaking. Surely the B1G is feeling this somewhere.

Where does this leave the B1G? The B1G seems to have an academic constraint when considering new members that the SEC does not which really limits the options. If Texas insisted on Texas Tech, that seems like a deal breaker for the B1G but the SEC may be okay with it.

My questions are:

1) Does the B1G have any sort of game plan or desired outcome over the next 10-20 years as the XII and ACC contracts expire? What do the schools want and what has the conference said?

2) Does the AAU requirement (I’m unsure whether it’s memorialized anywhere) harm or help the conference? How much leeway is there really?

3) Does the B1G really consider itself in the running for Oklahoma and Texas when the XII contract expires? Will the conference make another play for Notre Dame? Or does the conference, as a whole, even care?

4) What do you, the fans, want? Does this align with the stated (or unstated) desires of the schools and conference?

5) What can we reasonably expect to happen?

My Opinions
Reply to #1 While the SEC is s super strong financially, the B1G is not minced meat. While I personally think we could engage in some addition by subtraction specifically losing Purdue & Northwestern (which offer horrible ratings in duplicate markets) then going after Flagships to get us back to 14 or 16 or whatever. The only schools in the Big12 to consider are UT, OU, & maybe KU. The others would all be on the East coast and in order to get any of them you may have to take all of them so they don't feel isolated (UVa, UNC, GT, FSU, Duke, NC St, Va Tech, & Clem)... The point is you would almost need to drop Purdue and Northwestern if you were going to make a push to the South East. That being said the Big 12s seem far more likely and less fraught with tangling alliances. But if we could cherry pick the East we'd undoubtedly take UVa, UNC, GT, & FSU.
#2. We are Academic Snobs. We pride ourselves on research dollars more than undergrad rankings although we do okay there too. The presidents ultimately choose who will and won't be invited to our country club and an AAU designation is like carrying a Harvard Law JD.
#3 Yes I believe they will push hard for UT and Oklahoma it would balance the power of East and West and provide valuable content and viewers in the SouthWest. Both OU and UT like the Academic Snobbery of the Big Ten and have seen Nebraska slowly climb the academic rankings so I think they believe (especially in Oklahoma) that it could be good for them). They other considerations would be geographic, cultural, and would it be easier to win the SEC West (with Bama, LSU, Auburn, & A&M) or the B1G West with Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, et al. Not liking either of those options I see UT and Oklahoma trying to hold the Big12 together and only leaving if the money is significantly below the SEC and B1G.
#3 part 2. Notre Dame ain't what they used to be. They don't seem to be able to recruit at an elite level which allows them to beat teams they are supposed to but lose badly to the elite recruiting teams. The Big Ten at present already has 2 teams in Indiana and I'm not sure how much they gain by adding another. They fancy themselves as a National brand but it's n today's landscape... Everyone on tv weekly is a national brand (which is to say everybody) I have a soft spot in my heart for Notre Dame but the hard true is that the model for the B1G is large Flagship Universities. I can't believe I'm saying this but I think the ACC would be a better fit for Notre Dame (and Vanderbilt) as the ACC already has (Miami, Wake, Duke, Syracuse, BC, & ND (except football) ) in the conference. The institutions are bound to be more aligned.

#4 What I want as a fan is leadership from the conference, I was bitterly disappointed by the bumblephuck job they did with fall football. That said I want things to stand pat for a while. I miss old rivalries like Arkansas and Texas A&M playing Texas Annually. Or Penn State v Pitt or Nebraska v the old Big 8 schools. I understand that there must be progress and someone has to pay for everything but I think that the more consolidation we have lessens the value of the regionality that made this sport great in the first place.

#5 Your guess is as good as mine. The primary driver will be how much money ESPN, Fox and any other participants are throwing around. All other criteria fall subordinate to that. Even Texas would have to consider the SEC or B1G if those conferences are raking in an additional 40-50 million per year per school. I thought that the ACC network would have been more profitable than it has been but since it has not been that may leave tobacco road open. Next thing you know ESPN or FOX or whoever may say it's cheaper to add these teams to the SEC or B1G than to pay 15 ACC schools. But again , I really have no idea and your guess is as good as mine.

I share similar concerns that Notre Dame will be ordinary once they join a conference. However, to call them anything but elite right now is crazy. They just made the playoffs for the second time and are a regular in the NY6 bowls.

(01-15-2021 05:29 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  I share similar concerns that Notre Dame will be ordinary once they join a conference. However, to call them anything but elite right now is crazy. They just made the playoffs for the second time and are a regular in the NY6 bowls.

I'm sure the Big 10 is interested in Notre Dame's branding, but that isn't the biggest reason the Big 10 would take them. Notre Dame is a backdoor for other networks to advertise in large Big 10 cities. If N.D. joined the Big 10 the leverage for the Big 10 to get higher ad rates in their own cities goes up.

Notre Dame is a back door into: New York City, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, and Detroit. And they have a following in Chicago. Taking the Irish simply makes the Big 10 more money in a a variety of ways. Notre Dame's leverage in remaining independent has been in being that backdoor marketing option. Hence why they don't want to give it up.

I just found out about this today. Buckeye Scoop had a show back in February that talked about expansion possibility and he interviewed an insider called NevadaBuck, who said that the B1G's expansion sub-committee held a meeting around that time and talked about what programs they were looking at:

- Mentioned that the main criterion for expansion would be new customers for this upcoming cycle

- Mentioned that they're looking at research institutions that are members of the Association of American Universities (no surprise there)

- Mentioned four possible candidates: Missouri, UNC, UVa and U. of Toronto (yes, that U. of Toronto - for some reason, they discussed how if that university can upgrade its sports that it would be a great addition, all considering)

- Mentioned about the desire to just go to 16, but the possibility of going to 20 was also discussed







Notes:

- Remember, this was from February, well before we've learned of plans to expand the postseason playoffs, which might change the thinking within the conference

- NevadaBuck thinks that within the next 18 to 24 months from the interview there will be major changes in college football

(07-20-2021 11:38 PM)Transic_nyc Wrote:  I just found out about this today. Buckeye Scoop had a show back in February that talked about expansion possibility and he interviewed an insider called NevadaBuck, who said that the B1G's expansion sub-committee held a meeting around that time and talked about what programs they were looking at:

- Mentioned that the main criterion for expansion would be new customers for this upcoming cycle

- Mentioned that they're looking at research institutions that are members of the Association of American Universities (no surprise there)

- Mentioned four possible candidates: Missouri, UNC, UVa and U. of Toronto (yes, that U. of Toronto - for some reason, they discussed how if that university can upgrade its sports that it would be a great addition, all considering)

- Mentioned about the desire to just go to 16, but the possibility of going to 20 was also discussed







Notes:

- Remember, this was from February, well before we've learned of plans to expand the postseason playoffs, which might change the thinking within the conference

- NevadaBuck thinks that within the next 18 to 24 months from the interview there will be major changes in college football

Sounds like this NevadaBuck is looking for views or attention. If the goal is new customers, I think those four proposed candidates lack the necessary fan support. University of Toronto? They aren't even in the NCAA, right? How long would it take them to be competitive? It took me a lot longer than it should to find their athletics website because they don't seem to care. I'm not even sure if I was looking at their varsity sports.

If new customers is the goal, why not Virginia Tech instead of Virginia? They show more support for athletics, right? And their academics are making good strides. Toronto sure would bring a new market but would anyone care? What's their support like? Could they thrive in the Big Ten, on an island? Why would Missouri leave the SEC?

This all feels like crap thrown against the wall to be different but thanks for sharing!

They're at it again with another new rumor...