Potential Big Ten Expansion
This comes up every once in a while, and I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts. Personally, I've always like Syracuse and Missouri. I remember Brian's post on the subject from a while back effectively called both "meh", but they're the closest things to perfect fits outside of Notre Dame.
December 5th, 2008 at 1:13 PM ^
There are no good candidates for Big 10 expansion besides Notre Shame. Incidentally, the thing that makes them a good candidate is the exact same thing that makes them not want to join, since joining a conference or switching conferences is mostly a zero sum game. In the case of Notre Shame, I think that it is even worse than that, since their identity as an independent status makes football for the Irish incredibly lucrative. Likewise, there is very little incentive to invite a team like Syracuse or Pitt into the conference when they won't deliver much in the way of a TV market and they won't travel well to bowl games. Missouri is probably the best choice since they are the closest thing to a major flagship state university in the Midwest that isn't already in the Big 10.
December 5th, 2008 at 1:21 PM ^
I've heard from several Nebraska alums that are clued into the Nebraska athletic department that there have been periodic talks between Nebraska and the Big 10. Both sides have expressed a modicum of interest and if expansion happens that may be where things wind up. The other school I've heard mentioned is Rutgers with the idea that it would bring in the NY media market. One issue with Rutgers is that even with its upcoming stadium expansion, it will only seat 57,000 fans and I wonder if that is a problem (although I don't think Northwestern's stadium or Minnesota's new stadium have huge capacities.
December 5th, 2008 at 3:31 PM ^
all about tradition. There are more "trophy" games in the B10 than any other conference. The rivalries in football are legendary as well local. The only thing that is a joke is the non-con schedule. I know it's all a $$$ grab, but if the YSU, Toledo, Coastal Carolina and School for the Blind non-con games go away and a true round robin schedule was introduced, a 12th team wouldn't destroy the tradition.
Despite what Dantonio, Jo Pa and Zook might think, the UM-OSU season closer is the B10 meal ticket. No matter how the conference fairs during the season, The Rivalry puts the B10 back on the map each season. You add a 12th team, divide the conference in two and add a championship game and you'll see more fiascos like the B12 has this year.
I guess I am a traditionalist, I want The Rivalry game to end the season and the big bowl games all on New Years' Day. If they added a plus-one NC game the following Saturday, I'd be OK with that to.
I think what the conference needs to do, is either keep 11 teams and make a true round robin or add ND and still have a round robin, but most importantly, have the final week of the season be Thanksgiving Saturday instead of the week before. As a conference, we get drilled on Jan. 1 because we haven't played in 14 days longer than the SEC, B12 and PAC-10.
December 5th, 2008 at 3:47 PM ^
I'd be a big fan of a 10-game conference schedule. We wouldn't be missing out on anything in the non-conference schedule since nobody plays more than one good OOC game nowadays.
December 5th, 2008 at 10:25 PM ^
oh wait, they are in the comment already.
December 5th, 2008 at 11:51 PM ^
I actually have a solution I have been floating.
Division A-M: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, and Minnesota
Division N-Z: Northwestern, Ohio State, Pitt/Notre Dame, Purdue, Penn State, Wisconsin.
You add a ninth conference game, and you guarantee the following cross divisional games each season:
Michigan-Ohio State
Michigan State-Penn State
Indiana-Purdue
Illinois-Northwestern
Minnesota-Wisconsin
Notre Dame/Pitt-Iowa (Make up a trophy, claim it's important)
Have all of those games played on the last weekend of the season, as they already are. Have Thanksgiving weekend off and then have the championship game on championship weekend. Even if there's a rematch, there's been a week between them. Also, with a ninth conference game, you never go more than two years without seeing a cross-divisional opponent. I could even make a case for having a second guaranteed cross-divisional game:
Michigan-Notre Dame or Penn State-Pitt
Iowa-Wisconsin
Illinois-Purdue
Michigan-Northwestern or Penn State-Minnesota
Minnesota-Northwestern
Michigan State-Ohio State.
It could work, I think.
December 6th, 2008 at 11:01 PM ^
Interesting idea. The only problem with a ninth game (and this is why it was dropped after a couple years in the 1980s) is that it means an uneven number of home and road games.
December 7th, 2008 at 9:50 AM ^
It won't happen because it will affect bowl eligibility. Right now each school has four non-conference games. That enables them to schedule three or four alleged patsies. That in turn helps them get to six or seven wins even in a down season. Bowl games mean money. Thus, no matter how much it makes sense from a competitive angle, it's not going to happen. Indeed, Lloyd Carr was asked exactly this question in May while speaking at an alumni event in DC and that was the answer he gave to the question of why not add conference games. Look, even Brian notes that he would like the fourth non-conference game to be someone like Coastal Carolina. Michigan wants to have at least a 3-1 non-conference record (rather than 2-1) every year. Even if you're not worried about bowl eligibility, 9-3 generally gets you a better bowl than 8-4.
December 7th, 2008 at 10:11 AM ^
I don't want to add just to add.
If we are going to add, it may as well be a great school that:
1) Has outstanding academics
2) Opens the BigTen to a new market
3) Has a nice revenue, so it doesn't drain our revenue sharing program
Programs like Iowa State and Pitt would be ruled out with this idea.
Ideally it would be Notre Dame or no one for me. If the unlikely chance to ever pick up a Texas or Virginia I would jump on it.
December 7th, 2008 at 11:10 AM ^
UofCinci or WV? Its a good idea to expand and get a team that fits geographically and as much as possible academically. Divisions would be a plus with OSU and Michigan and State in the N, PSU WI IL and Iowa headlining the S. There have been several names tossed out that I had not considered in other posts so now Delaney should hold a summit with leaders from these schools to hammer out a brave new landscape of midwestern collegiate sports.
1) ND (dislike)
2) Pitt (wahnstache included)
3) Cinci (kelley mafia)
4) Neb (loathe)
5) Rutgers (schiano wood chop)
6) WV (rafting trips-wooo)
7) U of Lou (pitino ugh)
December 7th, 2008 at 11:42 AM ^
Cinci and WV are even worse than Mizzou, Louisville also has questionable academics. I'm not sure about the Huskers, but the geography there seems off. Rutgers sucks at virtually everything, the geography is beyond dumb.
Pitt is okay if unspectacular. I honestly prefer Syracuse above all, but would be okay with Mizzou despite academics.
December 7th, 2008 at 1:09 PM ^
I don't want to add Cincinnati, but in all honesty that would be great for UofM. It would give Ohio State a legitimate in state rival to compete against for recruits and attention. Granted Ohio State is going to win the solid majority of battles head to head, but it would siphon off some of their in state dominance.
December 7th, 2008 at 1:10 PM ^
Wouldn't that sort of kill our Ohio recruiting?
December 7th, 2008 at 1:36 PM ^
Perhaps, but I don't think that it would kill our recruiting in that state. I bet that we'd still get guys in that state and it would hurt Ohio State more. Anyways we get more players nationally than Ohio State.
For some reason I think an instate rival for Ohio State would influence them more than us, but not significantly to either. Especially years when the Bearcats beat the Buckeyes.
All in all I wouldn't want to add Cincinnati anyways.
December 7th, 2008 at 2:33 PM ^
The geography is dumb for Rutgers? I'd say it's the best geographical option of all - it puts the Big Ten in the NY media market. It also gives PSU a real second rival (to replace its ridiculous "Land Grant" rivalry with MSU). I believe RU is a pretty good school as well.
December 7th, 2008 at 2:40 PM ^
Rutgers would be the most isolated school in the conference. And where does everyone get this idea that people in New York care about Rutgers football? They really, really don't... they couldn't sell out home games when they were good. Syracuse gets as much play as Rutgers in NYC and is closer to the rest of the conference.
December 7th, 2008 at 2:49 PM ^
Sure, they'd be isolated. So? PSU is isolated right now. Someone HAS to be at the geographical margins of the conference. It's worth it to Rutgers, from both an athletic and academic standpoint, so they should go along with it.
As for whether people in NY care about Rutgers, that doesn't even really matter. The bigger point is, once the Big Ten is in that media market, conference games will be broadcast there much more often than they currently are, and the local media will cover the conference more than it currently does. It makes far more sense from a business standpoint to add a NY-area team (and it could also be Syracuse or UConn, it doesn't have to be Rutgers) than a team from anywhere else.
December 7th, 2008 at 2:55 PM ^
And it makes a lot of business sense to put an NHL team in Mexico City because it's the biggest city in North America. Does it matter if nobody cares?
December 7th, 2008 at 4:38 PM ^
Yes someone HAS to be on the geographical margins, but if you add Rutgers you are adding almost four hours of drive time to that margin. If you add Syracuse you add almost nothing and that eastern margin effectively remains at the same distance as it is now with Penn State.
December 7th, 2008 at 5:25 PM ^
Syracuse would also be a fine choice, but as a private school with so-so grad programs, they aren't quite as good a fit as Rutgers, which is another large, research-oriented public university. While it is further away, realistically, most Big Ten teams would fly to either school, regardless.
Yes Brodie, there are people in the New York area that care about college football. And if Michigan, OSU and PSU were to start playing games in the area on a regular basis (as opposed to the crap from the Big East that visits Rutgers now), a lot more people in the area would start paying attention.
December 7th, 2008 at 5:42 PM ^
Sure the teams would fly, but most fans would then also be forced to fly. The second closest conference team to Rutgers would be Ohio State at about an hour drive. Now, that isn't a whole lot farther than Columbus, Ann Arbor, and East Lansing are from Syracuse, but the difference being that Syracuse would have one team kind of close (Penn State), three teams right at about the edge of reasonableness (Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State), and everyone else pretty far. While Rutgers would have one team kind of close (Penn State), one team right at about the edge of reasonableness (Ohio State), and everyon else pretty far. Also, I disagree with the academics; especially research. You're selling Syracuse short. The fact that Syracuse is private is irrelevant; so is Northwestern.
December 7th, 2008 at 5:51 PM ^
I think you're really overestimating the interest in college football in New York. The media doesn't report on it because there is no interest.
As for academics, Syracuse is ranked higher than both Rutgers and 6 Big Ten schools in the US News rankings.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:07 AM ^
Syracuse is a significantly better school academically than Rutgers. And, lest we forgert Rutgers does not equal NYC. It equals Jersey.
December 8th, 2008 at 11:15 AM ^
But you fail to take into account that NJ:NY::Canada:MI.
December 8th, 2008 at 11:46 AM ^
And that's why Michigan football dominates the Toronto media market. Right?
December 8th, 2008 at 11:55 AM ^
That was the point of the joke.
December 8th, 2008 at 9:41 AM ^
I'm not advocating Rutgers, but over the past half decade, it has far surpassed Syracuse in terms of local football coverage. The other thing to remember is that Rutgers plays its games in a stadium that's about 20 minutes from one of the largest airports in the United States. I know the teams fly in on charters, but media -- and fans -- do not. Have you ever tried to get to Syracuse? As I said in an earlier post, if there is expansion, I expect them to go to Nebraska, but Rutgers is probably ahead of most of the other schools that have been touted in this thread.
P.S. Rutgers can also agree to play some of its games in Giants Stadium and that's something Syracuse can't do.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:11 AM ^
What gives you the impression that this school would only be added for football? Syracuse, historically, is a much better football program than Rutgers, and in basketball it's not even marginally close. They also have elite teams in lacrosse, and mens soccer and are a significantly better school academically.
Further, Nebraska is an awful acedemic school and wouldn't be considered. Also, they wouldn't give up their traditional rivalries with Oklahoma and Texas and I REALLY doubt they'd be willing to schedule those two as non-conference opponents every year on top of playing in the Big 10.
The school that really makes the most sense is Pitt. They have a decent football program (this has been true for thirty years), a very strong basketball program, are barely further away than Penn State, are a strong school academically, and really only have one traditional rivalry that they'd have to schedule OOC (WVU).
December 8th, 2008 at 10:33 AM ^
FWIW, Pitt would be about 3 hours closer to Ann Arbor than Penn State.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:31 AM ^
Only because Syracuse has gone into a massive decline. 'Cuse is the safe school for all the preppy New Yorkers, the alumni base in the City is huge. If they wanted to play at Giants Stadium, they could.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:32 AM ^
Also, Rutgers actually used to play at Giants stadium, and stopped because they didn't fill half of it. I've been to Rutgers games at Giants stadium back in the day.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:38 AM ^
Why do we keep assuming NYC is this massive college football market just waiting to be tapped? There are too many alums from too many schools in that city to ever put together a decent fanbase... why do you think USC can't fill the Coliseum and UCLA can't fill the Rose Bowl?
December 8th, 2008 at 11:13 AM ^
That's a really good point. It's the same reason that the teams in Florida (where I live now) have historically had such a hard time drawing fans to the games: most people who live here are from somewhere else and are fans of teams from that somewhere else.
December 8th, 2008 at 4:57 PM ^
attendance figures, but does USC really struggle to fill their stadium? that surprises me somewhat.
December 8th, 2008 at 5:05 PM ^
The average attendance is 90,000 and it seats 93,000 roughly.
December 8th, 2008 at 5:08 PM ^
i would never have guessed that. I'm sure they aren't upset with getting 90,000 to each game though.
December 8th, 2008 at 5:10 PM ^
They used to pull in over 100,000 against Notre Dame and UCLA in the 50's, 60's and 70's.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:36 AM ^
Syracause is a pretty easy place to fly into actually. It's airport isn't huge, but it's convenient and is served by most every airline. There are also several other substantial airports within a couple hours' drive. You're also overlooking the fact that most fans don't fly; they drive.
December 8th, 2008 at 10:39 AM ^
Didn't Syracuse play at Ralph Wilson at one point? Or talk about it? That could help.