Jimmy Wonka and the Big Ten Expansion Factory

It's everybody's favorite non-pollutionary, anti-institutionary, pro-confectionary conference conundrum...

Oompa.

Loompa.

Doopadee doo,

I've got a real good question for you:

If money is the driving force behind Big Ten expansion, and academics are the official sticking point, and the Big Ten Network makes this conference so attractive that almost any team would be in for joining, who is really a potential expansion candidate now?

This Has All Been Chewed Before

Gum chewing's fine when it's once in a while
It stops you from smoking and brightens your smile
But it's repulsive, revolting, and wrong
Chewing and chewing all day long

I realize I'm not exactly the first person to start talking about Big Ten Expansion. But this isn't just any old stick of gum: this gum has an entire meal in it. You probably won't learn anything new here, but you'll get some information to back up what we already know.

This diary is a look at current FBS (formerly Division I-A) teams that might be considered for Big Ten Expansion, and others that might fit the academic profile, even if there's no way they would join the Big Ten.

When expansion to 12 or 14 teams was the modus operandi, this blog reviewed the leading candidates. However, with even 24 teams having been mentioned by NCAA people (by which I mean "Just Tom Osborne"), the field has grown.

The question: are there that many schools out there that fit the conference's academic profile, or at least close enough the Big Ten can continue to claim itself the most academic FBS conference?

In reality, there is a clear cutoff: does the school match the criteria to join the American Association of Universities?* and the Big Ten's own little version of that, the CIC. There are currently 63 members, but I would imagine a Big Ten addition not already part of the AAU would be able to join, if it matches the academic criteria. Therefore, the lower bound of AAU membership is the functional lower bound of Big Ten expansion consideration.

To find out who has a golden ticket, follow me, overjoyed, enraptured, entranced. Are we ready? Yes, good. In we go.

-------------------------------

* If not, MaizeAndBlueWahoo is going to neg me.

-------------------------------

How I Did It

I created a spreadsheet (available http://www.sendspace.com/file/t42uo3" target=_blank>http://www.sendspace.com/file/t42uo3" target=_blank>http://www.sendspace.com/file/t42uo3" target=_blank>http://www.sendspace.com/file/t42uo3" target=_blank>http://www.sendspace.com/file/t42uo3" target=_blank>here) out of the U.S. Academic Rankings from both U.S. News & World Report and The Academic Ranking of World Universities for the years 2007, 2008 and 2009.** Each school was ranked on an average of those six included rankings.

Many schools did not make the rankings. For these, I declared a tie at the bottom (so if the last two schools ranked were tied at 130, all of the unranked were given a 132). This means the rankings become less accurate past 100 or so. This mostly affected mid-major programs who would be well outside the Big Ten's consideration. Among BCS conferences, the SEC was the only one with any schools not consistently ranked, meaning they probably look a little better than they really are against the other BCS conferences, yet a lot closer to the mid-majors than they really should be.

Everything make sense? Good, on we go.

-------------------------------

** U.S. News & World Report titles their rankings a year in advance, a la EA Sports video games. I bumped them back a year, so, e.g., the 2009 dataset is from their 2010 Rankings.

-------------------------------

I Want the World

Who do you blame when your kid is a brat?
Pampered and spoiled like a Siamese cat
Blaming the kids is a lie and a shame
You know exactly who's to blame.
(Delany and NCAA?)

We got the data, so let's start out with an idea of what kind of academic level we're talking about when we describe a Big Ten school. Here's the average rankings for the 11 current members of the Big Ten:

So Big Ten teams ranged from about the 17th- to 62nd-best schools in the country. Your "average" Big Ten team is about the 42nd-best school, academically, in the United States. Preferably, additions to the conference would be in the top 65 or so. By the way:

The Pac Ten, just so you know, is top and bottom-heavy. They have two schools (Cal and Stanford) who are better than anyone in the Big Ten, but five schools (Zona, ASU, Oregon State, WSU and Oregon) worse.

This is a big consideration: if the Big Ten lets its standards drop too much, the Pac Ten is not far away. Their latest additions could well have meant the difference between which academic power conference now calls itself the most academic-y.

Anyway, we're getting off track. We wanted the Top 65, right? Well here's the top 65:

From here, we can whittle.

For one, teams in the SEC and Pac 10 are probably happy being where they are. Same, most likely, for the ACC. The low-hanging fruit are the Big East, since that conference is facing an uncertain future in football, and the Big XII big boys, who hate that they get the same exact piddling share as Baylor and Kansas State.

Thus:

Chart?

Actually I'm a bit sick of charts. Got any maps?

Map.

Among all of the schools out there available for plucking, only two would be better than an average Big Ten team academically, and those two are in Texas. Just five more are within the Big Ten's current academic range, of which two are within the Big Ten's geographical footprint.

This is harder than it looks.

What Do You Get When You Add Ten and Eight?

While more conservative expansion models have focused on harvesting the remaining useful programs from a dying Big East (or perhaps just terminating their "it's complicated" relationship with Notre Dame), the grand schemes where the Big Ten truly makes its fortune share a theme: Go West.

What do you get from a glut of TV?
A pain in the neck and an IQ of three
Why don't you try simply reading a book?
Or can you just not bear to look?

Oh, things get exciting in the Old West, especially when we start talking about adding perennial powerhouse football school (and big-ticket television draw) Nebraska.

Getting Nebraska in seems like more of a possibility (and Osborne has been doing a bit of jumping up and down and yelling "Pick me!") but any scenario where we annex Nebraska, I think, includes a wholesale invasion into the old Big Eight. This is because Nebraska seems like the kind of dude who the second you invite him to a party, he asks if he can bring his mates.

Go back to the Top 65-ish table above, where the academic candidates were listed. Notice anyone absent?

• Uconn (73.83)
• Iowa State (79.17)
• Syracuse (79.67)
• NEBRASKA (83.33)
• Utah (83.50)
• KANSAS (90.17)
• MISSOURI (94.00)
• Cincy (95.83)
• Colorado State (94.17)
• BYU (99.33)
• Every SEC team except Vandy, Florida, and Georgia.

The low Missouri ranking thing is no fluke. Their best ranking was in the 2007 ARWU, and that was 89. Financially, Missouri makes a lot of sense, since it opens up the St. Louis market, and Nebraska makes even more sense because it's Nebraska. Brian's take on the academic viability of Mizzou:

"Good, not great, state school that would be the worst-ranked school in the league but not by much, especially after a post-CIC bump."

That's a thing I hadn't considered: membership in the CIC helps boost your rating. The bad news is that Missouri is currently seen by academic ranking gurus as about on par with Cincinnati, which is below our academic feasibility line.

And Missouri, I remind you, is our gateway to the West.

They're the ones with St. Louis. They're the ones with Big Ten ties, being border rivals with Illinois.

They're probably the ones causing the most consternation, because if the presidents are all okay taking the conference down to Missouri level academics-wise, that opens up the big ideas. If they're not, we're back to trimming the list above. Unless, of course, unless Herbie Husker and his buddies bring those really really hot chicks they know....

I Don't Like the Look of It

What do you get when you guzzle down sweets?
Eating as much as an elephant eats
What are you at getting terribly fat?
What do you think will come of that?

If we're advancing deep into Big XII territory, why not right to the heart of the empire? If Missouri is the Big Ten's new lower bound, that means Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado, Texas, and Texas A&M all fit. Maybe Rice, although a private school, can come along too to keep the academic average a bit higher.

Oklahoma, at 109.33, though a big national name, academically isn't close. It's a non-starter. They simply can't come.

Strictly academically, adding these six schools gives the Big Ten an overall average rating of 50.96, still well above the Pac 10, but an average of 10 schools lower than we currently stand. It's feasible.

It just looks wrong. Oklahoma and Texas Tech are left without their two biggest rivals, and for the Sooners that means something. And geographically, it's a disaster (won't somebody think of the poor field hockey team?!?). While Missouri and Nebraska border Big Ten country, Texas is a long ways away from Penn State. Their money and their fanbase and their research would be a coup. But to do it, to bring in all of these schools to make an 18- or 20-team league, we either lose touch with a lot of current rivals, or else split it into two conferences who barely ever see each other.

It's greedy.

On the Bubble

Old ginger ale, ginger pop, ginger beer, beer bubbles, bubbleade, bubblecola, double cola, double-bubble-burp-a-cola and all the crazy carbonated stuff that tickles your nose. Few people realize what tremendous power there is in one of those things.

All the other kids by this point have gone into chocolate chute, been thrown out as a rotten egg, shrunk down to TV size, or turned into a blueberry. What's left? Well, the Big East of course.

Pittsburgh has seemed like the most obvious choice, other than that other guy in the room, since the beginning of the movie. They're a natural rival with Penn State. They fit the academic profile. The fit the endowment profile.

And while it doesn't open up markets, the TV value is huge. What they would be leaving is a rivalry with West Virginia, and whatever remains of Big East solidarity. It's almost a no-brainer.

If the Big Ten thinks the TV audience bump is worth the extra team and the hassle of expansion, Pitt probably gets an invite.

This academic exercise also illuminates why Rutgers is getting tossed around as another potential addition. Against Big Ten schools, true, they're really nothing to write home about. But against the rest of the country, they are one of the very very few expansion options who at least fall within the Big Ten's academic footprint.

This is just wondering aloud here: the Big Ten is rolling in dough, more so than any other conference, but this is most likely a temporary thing: it's not like the SEC, once they get their network off the ground, is going to stay behind for long. The enormous Big XII teams know that this is an opportunity to push their conference into a less socialistic split. But what is the Big Ten really thinking?

1. We are in a unique position right now in that the BTN's success gives the conference extraordinary latitude in expansion.
2. A conference championship game needs an even number of teams, 12 minimum.
3. Expanding BTN to certain markets makes a lot of sense.
4. But NSFMF: all the presidents just got together and all they're talking about is academics, academics, academics!

Hence, Rutgers.

After talk of 20-team conferences that pick off the best of the Big XII and Big East then take over Zoltan's dominion, just Pittsburgh and maybe Rutgers and Missouri is a bit of a letdown, no?

That's why I think there's one more twist:

Hey, Wonka, Why Not the Guy Standing Next to You?

Ha ha, see that man you thought was the Evil Mr. Slugworth set to reap all of the rewards of Mr. Wonka's hard work without putting in the effort?

He's Mr. Wilkinson.

And if you're looking for someone with experience who knows the company and plans to be around anyway and knows what he's doing and is really the perfect fit, why are you going with some sweet kid off the street? Why not the man who's already in your company?

Which, maybe this is all a ploy to turn the recent cachet of BTN into consummating that marriage that's spent the better part of a century walking down the aisle. Has anyone thought of just sending them a Facebook status change?