Frankly, I agree. A 16-team conference might not be as awful as people may think, but there is no way that 5 teams can positively impact the conference. The three that you have are the best.
Expansion Another Look Another Opinion
I've been looking at the expansion scenario and all the different scenarios of 12, 14, 16, and all of the different candidates, and I just wanted to put my two cents in;
My first thought is that I have no desire to obtain any big east team at all. None of them will bring a powerful football program to add a perenial strength to the conference, and I have concerns about any of them adding any value to the TV markets. I lived in New England for three years (and by New England I mean all of New England Boston, Connecticut, and Rhode Island) and college football is not anywhere on the map. They don't follow it, don't care about it, and adding some local team will do nothing to sway them. I feel the same is true for the NY market, as I believe there are probably more Michigan and Penn State fans than any Rutgers fans.
My second thought is that 16 is too big. I've seen a lot of talk about 4 pods and whatnot, but I am big on rivalries and the mini rivalries that occur from two teams who happen to play some close or controversial games and want to have a chance at retribution. A 16 team super conference seemd to large to keep these types of rivalries and help create new ones.
So with that said, I move west for three teams to make a 14 team conference. And I feel the best 3 for the big ten would be Nebraska, Missouri, and Notre Dame. This allows for an easy geographical split with east and west conferences of 7 teams with 2 cross division games every year. The Divisions would be as follows;
East: Michigan, Ohio State, Michigan State, Penn State, Purdue, Indiana, and Notre Dame
West: Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern, Nebraska, and Missouri
This keeps the majority of the rivalries in-tact, and allows for some cross division games and makes sense geographically to help create new rivalries. Michigan and Ohio State would still play the last game of the year in the division, with the winner (Michigan) playing in the championship game, and the loser not having to worry about an extra loss keeping them out of the BCS.
There are two major complaints that I can see in my conference.
1. What the hell, are you an idiot, where's Texas?
2. Notre Dame is playing coy, thinking its fine for them to roll stag to this dance.
So, my response is as follows; Texas seems like a dream to any conference, with golden ticket like money, academics in-line, and it puts the big ten in some prime recruiting ground. The problem is, I feel like there is way to much baggage. Texas is used to getting its way and getting special treatment, and that just ain't gonna fly in the big ten. The other baggage is the texas schools that might be forced in as well, and I don't want the Big Ten to have to make concessions like adding schools that don't make sense to land the big fish.
The ND problem I really don't have an answer for. They make sense geographically, they are the team that I think could get us that NY market, they play 3 teams already, but we have no real leg to stand on to make them go. My only hope would be that we mae our move for Neb and MS, Pac-10 makes their 16 team conference and ND sees the writing on the wall and caves in.
Alright, I just had to get my thoughts out, and I needed the proper forum to do so, as noone I know in the non-virtual world cares or thinks about this stuff as much as I do. My hope is that fellow Mgobloggers can stomach the long read and my reasoning, and provide their feedback.
The East division seems much stronger than the West to me.
Historically, yes. Presently, not as much. Nebraska is elite and would compete with OSU for the top spot right now. Missouri is also very solid. Iowa and Wisconsin are doing well too.
Nebraska also likes that alignment.........
So I tried to quantify by how much. I took Jeff Sagarin's final rankings of each team for the last 10 years as a sample set (I know that his rankings aren't perfect, but his were the most complete I could think of to compile this data). I then averaged each divisions to determine the average ranking of the division for each year, as well as, the average ranking of the division over the last decade. It turns out the average ranking over the decade is 42.8 for the East and 47.8 for the West, so a 5 rank disparity in schedule toughness. Definately a difference, but maybe not as much as I was expecting.
I then took the highest ranking team from each division to determine who was the winner of the division, and then compared the two divisions highest ranking team to determine the winner of the conference game.
The results were not very suprising for the East division, as Michigan won the division 4 times, Ohio State 5 times, and Penn State 1. The West was a little more diverse with four teams representing (out of 7) with Iowa at 5 times, Nebraska with 2 times, Wisconsin with 2 times, and Missouri with 1.
The Conference Championship game winners over the decade were as follows;
Nebraska, Nebraska, Ohio State, Michigan, Iowa, Ohio State, Ohio State, Missouri, Penn State, Ohio State. Giving the East a 6-4 Advantage.
Obviously, this analysis is far from perfect, but it did show that although the East was the better division, the West was not nearly as far behind as anticipated. I would take this disparity in division strength, to keep the rivalries in tact, and create a geographically logical split.
16 team superconferences... They could all end up having the top 4 play in a playoff to determine the conference champion, then have another playoff to determine the national champion... Might as well blow up everything and start something new
i'm all for the playoff to finish things off, but it'd be a little sad to essentially declare that only 64 college football teams are relevant anymore. to some extent, we have a de facto version of that now, but there are still reasons to care about teams like TCU, BYU, and boise state, and they become completely irrelevant under this scenario. it would feel a little too much like professional sports for my tastes.
I say expansion by contraction. Widdle down the number of BCS teams to 1. That team is the national champion. No controversy can be had WHATSOEVER.
My first thought is that I have no desire to obtain any big east team at all. None of them will bring a powerful football program to add a perenial strength to the conference
I hear the Big East has some decent basketball schools.
Someone mentioned basketball teams -
What about taking Mizzou and Nebraska now, let the Pac-10 make their big move and see if ND changes it's tune...and if they don't, saving Kansas from oblivion?
... it's football, academics, demographics. Maybe even in that order.
(as an aside, any way things turn out, Kansas is SCREWED; in other news Mark Mangino goes on a revenge tour and EATS the rest of the remaining Big 12).
i like this set of teams, too. the conventional wisdom is that notre dame won't move unless sufficient damage is done to the big east, but i don't completely understand that logic. i might be missing something obvious, but how does taking rutgers and syracuse deal a fatal blow to the big east? it seems like it'd be just fine as a basketball conference without those two schools (or rutgers & pitt or whatever), and notre dame isn't in the football conference anyway.
is the thinking that this would lead to some kind of internal playoff among the four superconferences and ND couldn't weasel its way in?
I think Pitt, WVU, etc. would still appreciate being able to play football. 6 teams does not a conference make. If only one Big East team is taken, they would likely be able to replace it with a C-USA or MAC school, but if 2-3 are gone, they are no longer a football conference, and you can bet a lot of schools will be looking elsewhere (or I guess they could go (or bcak to) independents).
If ND joins, does the Big Ten NEED anybody else? It seems to me that ND by itself adds a significant chunk of revenue. With ND, you get a championship game and a national presence. Is it out of the question that ND is worth $75M alone? If ND gets the BTN on Cable Carriers throughout the Northeast, which it just might do, I think $75M is a lowball number. But going with $75M, that means each new team now has to generate $25M, rather than $20M. I'm not sure Missouri and Nebraska combined get the $50M needed to make each school whole again.
I think Nebraska by itself, plus the championship game $ easily surpasses the $20M necessary in a 12th school, but if it has to get to $25M out of just TV money, I'm not sure it happens.
If the Big Ten adds ND, the only way expansion makes sense beyond that is to add Texas.
I disagree. The Big Ten is in a position to again be the trend setters, to be ahead of the curve.with instant replay and our own network. But, We have been behind the SEC,ACC, and Big 12 when it comes to conf champ game . We have been standing by and watching them cash in on a Conf. Champ game. Now is not the time to simply catch up. We need to pass these confernces and possibly destroy some of them in the process. We need to take schools that will solidify us for years to come. If we only take ND, What happens to the big ten when every other conference goes to 16? If we choose to expand 10-15 years from now who do we take? The teams leftover?
As for BTN money heres what I think:
1) New York Doesnt care about college sports: The Big East has every team relevent to the New York market (besideds ND in Football), and the Big East is floundering so saying getting ND will get us the New York market and that will get us big bucks prob wont happen.
2) Nebraska has a cult following: I would be willing to bet that there are almost as many nebraska fans living in Colorado as Colorado fans living in Colorado. Getting Nebraska would get us more then just the state in viewership. were talking about a wide halo around the plains states.
3)Mizzou has a nice sized market-The St.Louis/Kansas City Market is big, not NY big but nothing to sneeze at either.
4)ND doesnt spread our footprint- Im all for brining in the Irsih but they are not nearly as nationally relevent as they think they are. Will we get more TV's with the addition of ND? Yes. Is it enough? No. Who would get more TV's ND going to BIG Ten or Texas in the Pac 10? So why stand by and let the PAC 10 get a huge payday as we settle with ND?
5) Revenu will go up more then expected- As we spread to new markets the rate we charge cable companies will go up as well as the rate we charge for commercials. How many houses already have the BTN that are ND fans? There is too much overlap, not enough new households. If we tell Rotel that their queso commercials will be shown all over the great plains they will pay more.
Why would anyone else go to 16? It's pretty clear that the SEC is happy and Texas is happy in the Big 12. As long as those two remain happy and the Big 12 doesn't crumble as we swipe Nebraska, there is no move to super conferences. The Pac-10 doesn't have six teams to add that make them more money without Texas. The ACC could, I guess, pick off four big east schools, but that hardly makes the ACC "super."
You claim we're behind the curve without a championship game, yet we still make more money than any other conference.
I guess I just don't see the rush. Adding ND adds immediate revenues. If, and I admit this is an if, there is one school that pushes the NYC market towards putting BTN on basic tier or rather the standard digital tier, it's not any school in the Big East, it's Notre Dame.
Adding Nebraska or Missouri obviously brings in more TV sets (though i had heard that much of St. Louis, the largest market in either state already is in the BTN footprint from Illinois), I'm not sure it guarantee's reveneus. Plus, they're, in all likelihood still going to be there if and when the move to super conferences takes place. If we take one now, however, it breaks up the Big 12 and pushes Texas into the Pac-10's arms.
I mean were a non factor after thanksgiving. We are forgotten by the football community until late december.
When will they ever end!!!!
you stop replying to every single post.......