Do you want the Big Ten to expand with Maryland and Rutgers?

FWIW a lot of Terp people are also against the move. I think this is an interesting take/take-down of some of the issues brought up on the UMD side:

http://www.testudotimes.com/2012/11/18/3659926/marylands-probably-going-...

No, I don't want any expansion. And if we were to expand, not them. Then again, why would we want to play Wisconsin more than once every six years if it means we get to make road trips to Maryland?? /s

I'm not against expansion.

But only if its football powerhouses... Or a Virginia/VATech combo (for selfish reasons).

I voted no, but I'm not sure my reasons stand up to scrutiny. I like our usual slate of opponents--liked it better before Nebraska showed up--and it would take at least a decade or so for me to care about Maryland and Rutgers, or any other school from outside the Midwest for that matter. But if the monetary incentives are going to go to teams in conferences that dominate a very small number of inter-conference games and then take a cake walk through the bottom of their conference, it makes a lot of sense. Given that fans will eventually start caring about any team we play often enough, it's a good move if you're planning 30 years out. The thing that worries me is that I'm not sure anybody is planning 30 years out. It seems a lot more like these decisions are being driven by trend-chasing idiots with more money and power than foresight or wisdom.

I think it's a bad idea monetarily and from a prestige standpoint. However, as a native New Jerseyan, the prospect of Michigan potentially playing 30 minutes from my house every other year is intriguing. Outside of that personal upside I am not interested.

I am a Maryland fan- my brother went to Maryland, I grew up in the state, and I love that university.  However, they were a founding member of the ACC- they have long-standing rivalries with UVa, UNC, and Duke (I know, not primary rivals or anything).  They have no connection with the Big Ten and so much history with the East Coast.  Also, Maryland is not a powerful brand, even in the state, at least not at the level of the Big Ten public schools.  Maryland fans that I know are really not happy about this potential move- it isn't Nebraska, where there is a cultural connection or a style of play that matches with the conference.

This is such a transparently financial moves that doesn't just add an unnecessary extra pair of teams but also wrenches one from a lot of tradition, cultural connections, and longstanding rivalries.

Is the comment box showing up as outrageously wide for anyone else?

Definitely voted no. No need to dilute the brand and make the conference bigger and weaker at the same time. I just don't understand what the big wigs are thinking when they do this. 

I think college athletics (Especially the revenue sports) are in a bubble now. It won't be very long till that bubble pops and at this current rate I fear what college athletics will look like not even 5-7 years from now.

i say yes simply because it would force the big ten to adopt a 9 game conference schedule.

Can't really answer this question at this moment. If it causes some divisional realignment that gets UM out of screw job that favors every single one of our rivals, then a thousand times yes. Otherwise absolutely not

Neither school has any football credentials.  Maryland has some small basketball cred.  Either way, the B1G is weakened by this, not strengthened.  Adding two more teams means a 9-game conference schedule in football and most-likely a re-do of the divisions.  It will just add another weak sister game to schedule.  The only plus is maybe we can get rid of the division names and go with a simple North/South or East/West.

Getting a deal done with the Pac-12 in football was more important for the conference and now that is gone.  Delany hasn't done much to improve the conference in the last 6-10 months, except give OSU a trpophy for being on probation.  What's Delany's deal with the OSU luv???

I voted yes because I think the money is going to force conference realignment, and I want to see the Big Ten in a position to be one of the four superconferences in 10-15 years.  The path there is to pick up as many northern/eastern teams as possible - we can't pick up the ones we'd really want with Texas and so forth without mortgaging the future of the conference, and there's no other real avenue for expansion.

I suppose picking up the Mountain schools might work, but they seem fated for the Pac-20.

At least it will bring resolution to the "Big 10"/"Big 12" thing.

The addition of teams to the B1G seems pretty inevitable at this point. I feel MD and Rutgers are not the worst options possible. First and foremost, they are ACADEMICALLY sound universities, which is something the B1G is obviously set on maintaining (considering both schools' AAU credentials). MD obviously has potential to become a better football team and their basketball program helps the B1G in strength. This switch is not solely based on improving the football side of the conference. We have to take into account the entire athletic realm of our conference. MD also, historically, isn't a terrible football school. They have had bright moments in their history and the switch to the B1G may be the spark needed for that program to turn around. Rutgers has been strong the past half-decade or so and continue their strength into this year. You have to give credit where credit is due, Rutgers is 9-1 (5-0) in a BCS AQ conference. While I'm not saying they will come into the B1G and be a force, they also won't lay down. They will definitely be a decent, middle of the pack team that could alter some divisional races along the way. Both programs' recruiting will be positively impacted by the switch to the B1G as well. Entrance into the B1G gives these schools a conference prestige that they haven't had before. This strengthens their recruiting in the NE region of the US, while also improving established B1G schools recruiting in the same area. Delaney has seemed adamant in trying to break into the NY market and this is the perfect chance. While maintaining a connecting B1G state blueprint, our conference will establish ourselves (hopefully) in the biggest market on the east coast while reaching numerous other areas along the coast. This helps in terms of TV rights for the conference, leading to more money, and as I mentioned before, recruiting. Now, with the addition of these two teams, I feel realignment is completely necessary. Splitting these two teams into two different divisions would not make sense. A clear divisional line (in my opinion and many other from what I've read) should ideally be placed on the border of Ohio and Indiana. Geographic (east/west) divisions make the most sense to me. I also feel I speak for the majority of us that this is an easy way for Delaney to fix his mistake of splitting Michigan and Ohio State. I'm still repulsed by the thought this match-up could happen twice in a season (even in back to back games). Bottom line, the addition of Maryland and Rutgers isn't the worst thing that could happen.

I voted "Yes", because I like the idea of expanding past 12 teams, and while these aren't exactly the two I would choose, it is a step towards ones I would like... although I like the prospect of adding Rutgers much more than Maryland, especially since that means that Edsall would be a B1G coach... eugh!

Why would the conference invite these two schools instead of Pittsburgh, WVU, etc. 
It is not a prestigge standpoint or quality of programs. This decision is a money decision. WVU would have made more sense at this point also, but they probably would not leave the Big 12. I like the UVA and Va Tech idea.

to that question, in a vacuum, No.   

If expansion is inevitable and if the future is four 16-18 team superconferences, then it's quite a bit more complicated. Who knows what the behind-the-scenes machinations are.

No for various competitive and traditional reasons, yes for "current-state-of-college-football-today" reasons. With Maryland we could make the case (however flimsy) that this was a basketball move but the Rutgers move is purely a TV contract bargaining chip to grab us some more bling, which would be nice for the conference members' facilities and athletic departments. A year or so ago I would have supported Syracuse over Rutgers (cause obviously) but the last thing the B1G needs right now is another team on probation.

I'm okay with expansion, but it needs to be the right teams.  Neither of these teams excites me.  Rutgers is definitely higher on the list than Maryland tho; I'd actually be okay with them.  Would give us a footprint for recruiting in the east as well.  But Maryland?  We need to find an alternative...

Can we change the conference name to the Big 14?

To many teams.  Lame.

It's going to happen one way or the other, it just depends which schools join. It might also be worth pointing out that this is joining the conference as a whole, so while football is part of the equation it isn't all of it. 

I would expect it to end at 14-16 teams split into two (hopefully more logical) divisions. There will be a place for the Bit Ten champ in the playoff system, and the super conferences holding championship games essentially expand the playoff system which is a good thing. What would be really interesting is if Big Ten teams used their non-conference schedule to play out-of-division Big Ten teams.

I voted no because as a fan of football, the increase to 14 teams seems to have more downside than upside. I am glad, though, that the B1G considers academics along with athletics in considering schools for addition.  In the past two years I've heard people making arguments to add teams like West Virginia or Boise State.  I am glad the powers that be in the conference have more sense than that.  One of the most powerful brand elements the B1G has going for it is strong academics.  The other BCS conferences pale in comparison, and I don't want anything to water that down.

It's the B1G's Manifest Destiny.

No, but yes if it means they add Syracuse and VT.  Simply for selfish reasons.  I live in NY so it is a short drive to Syracuse.  They suck at football but I would be able scout some future opponents in person and very cheaply.  

My vote is based mostly off of my first reaction when I heard the news a few days ago. I'd like to see what the Big Ten's vision is behind this before judging completely. I know that there is a lot of potential for expanding the television market and if that makes BTN a regular part of the cable package (I'm in Boston, and it's not on Comcast), then I'll be less against it. I don't like realignment on the whole because it uproots rivalries, something which I believe are pivotal to the core of college sports. Additionally, this move seems more motivated by money than sporting reasons. That's another negative.

I don't have anything against Rutgers and Maryland personally. It's just that they don't excite me. With Nebraska, at least you knew they were going to be competitive in football. I'm not sure what to expect from these two programs, though there is some talent and Rutgers seems to have something of a program developing. If Rutgers can come and be a upper-mid level team, then this deal makes a lot more sense. If either of these schools start a hockey program, that's value added. Maryland will definitely add to the conference's basketball program. Lacrosse could be huge too all of a sudden.

Geographically, this deal finally gets the Big Ten to the East Coast. I mean, we'd have two teams genuinely on the coast instead of Penn State trying to reach out here. A road trip from Boston to Rutgers would be the shortest instantly. Boston to College Park is just as long as a trip to Penn State. For New Yorkers (the city folk), both Rutgers and Maryland are closer than State College. Same with DC. The brightside of this might be that it makes the East Coast cities stronger Big Ten hubs, rather than most centering around Chicago. One of the main ways people stay connected to the school is through sports, this would make it easier. 

Anyway, I think I just talked myself into hating this a lot less.

Abstain. But this is an interesting move. B1G seems trying to maintain its brand of academics and BBall. Question is, how good is this for football?

Looking at the SEC this year, there are about 3-4 good teams. Georgia has beaten one good team, and they are ranked 3rd. I think the lesson to take away is that depth of good teams in conference is not useful-- potentially harmful, in fact. Strategically, i think it makes sense. But i am ambivalent.

No if it is these two teams.  Rutgers I wouldnt mind seeing join the Big Ten, but I'm meh on Maryland.  If it was Rutgers and Virginia or Virginia Tech I'd be more enthused.

I like the move into the East Coast because I tend to think of the Big Ten and Pac Ten in tandem.  This would give them coast-to-coast reach with their own networks and the Rose Bowl as the perfect balancing point.  My hope is that someday they would also eventually shun the BCS or whatever goofy playoff arrangemnet that is now emerging in favor of keeping everything in-house, so to speak.  It's ballsy, but I do think it can work.

The real question is, what is the exact end game?  I expect the Pac10 will expand  also to match the Big Ten.  Do they go after some Big 12 teams again?  Is the goal 14, 16 or maybe even 18 or 20 teams?  Obviously both Pac 10 and Big Ten will now split into two near seperate divisions hopefully with round-robin scheduling and then winners playing conference championship games as play-ins to the Rose Bowl.  And if expansion is still in play then we can't rule out the possibility that these moves are part of a long term chess match to eventually land Notre Dame & Texas within the Pac Ten/Big Ten framework.  And at that point maybe they even dare raid the SEC for gems like Alabama & Florida who otherwise would be left out of the big party.  Sky is the limit...and people need to start looking at that way.

One that is certain, in terms of college sports branding, it is clearly the Big Ten & Pac Ten that are best positioned for true long term national dominance

1000000x NO. Average schools are average.

I hate the idea, but I voted yes. The Big Ten has been trying to get into the east coast markets for years. Expansion is going to happen one way or the other.  I guess you either embrace change or get run over by progress, so it is what it is. 

Can we drop Minnesota, Illinois, or Penn State (they are dead to me at this point) from the Big Ten while we're at it?  Everybody talks about conference expansion but what about conference contraction?

I voted yes, but then, I'm looking at the bigger picture, in several respects.

Sure Maryland and Rutgers are lesser football powers than most B1G schools, and sure there are better prospective members, football-wise, out there, BUT, this is what Maryland and Rutgers bring to the table;

-Both of them expand the BTN's viewership footprint, and in an area of the country that produces some pretty good talent for football. Granted, many of the B1G schools were pulling from that talent pool, dominating it certain years, but this gives an even greater incentive for those considering schools from other conferences to instead choose a current B1G school over the VT's, FSU's, and SEC schools.

                                           -The number 6,12,13,20,29,35,38,42,46,58,63,64,65,68,89, and 96 players in the current Rivals top 100 are from the MD, NJ, and VA area(I included VA as a market since Maryland borders VA and the DC and it's surrounding VA suburbs is a huge market in itself). That is 16 out of 100 ranked players. Not quite CA, TX and FL numbers, but huge in comparison to any other area in the country. And out of those 16 players, one is uncommitted and considering a B1G school with only four others committed to B1G schools. The rest have gone to the southern ACC, or VTech, out west to CA(USC and Stanford), and a couple to SEC schools.

-Both schools also excel in various other sports, including NCAAM and NCAAW basketball.

-Both schools, again for recruiting purposes, increase the footprint for the other major college sport, basketball, to the DC and NY areas, both fertile ground for top talent.

-Both schools are highly ranked, comparatively, to other major D1 universities academically, which would increase the available grant money from government and private sources given to the B1G and it's individual schools.

-If added, the B1G/BTN contract can be upped significantly, giving more $$$$ to each member school, resulting in even better facilities and athletic support institutions at the schools themselves, making them even more attractive choices for athletes to commit to.

So, yes, their football is less than stellar, but they bring enough other positives to the table that not having them become members doesn't make sense. Besides, Rutgers is currently on an upward trajectory, in football, and this year would probably compare competitively to the upper 1/2 of the B1G. Maryland might suck this year, but I'd imagine that their HC gig would become increasingly attractive to some better coaches, and that they would eventually become similar to NW, in that they field a competitive team that every now and then has a pretty good year. Just my opinion on that, of course.

In the wider view of this development, it makes sense, and will benefit the B1G overall.