Big 10 to amplify its search for a 12th member
According to Barry Alvarez, the Big 10 will rev up its search for a 12th member. It has to be Notre Dame doesn't it? I cant think of another team in the Midwest that would fit the bill. Thoughts?
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4735336
December 11th, 2009 at 7:22 PM ^
Bring em over for basketball too---would add a good market, $$$, fan following, decent academics, and be a geographical foil for PSU.
I'd divide divisions non geographically and no 2 team state can share division...as:
M
PSU
Northwestern
Purdue
Minnesota
Iowa
MSU
Pitt
Illinois
Indiana
Wisconsin
OSU
Scheduling would be 5 divisional teams, always 2 rivals from other division, plus rotating 2 teams based on other 4. So M would face 5 divisional foes, always OSU and MSU, and rotate 2 of the 4 in alternating years.
December 11th, 2009 at 8:24 PM ^
Michigan and OSU can't be in separate divisions. That would raise the possibility of playing them on back-to-back weeks if both teams make the conference title game. I don't think anyone involved would like that.
December 11th, 2009 at 8:31 PM ^
Or move the game up to mid season or something but, then the stakes wouldn't be as high. Same divisions would be the best answer.
December 11th, 2009 at 8:49 PM ^
why not just drop them from the regular season then? If OSU or UM almost always decide the big ten, wouldn't it make more sense to separate the 2 teams for the sake of even divisions?
December 11th, 2009 at 9:04 PM ^
That is sarcasm, right? That's like saying ND shouldn't schedule USC because they're going to meet up in the MNC/a BCS bowl anyway. While both programs have their runs at BCS bowls, there are always off years for either team.
December 11th, 2009 at 9:31 PM ^
No sarcasm. Until recently this was THE big game in the big 10, it decided the conference title and likely will once again in the future.
Take a look at the Bama UF rivalry, they don't always meet in the championship game, and sometimes play during the season, but when they do meet in the championship game it is a top 5 game of the year. You replace those two teams with UM and OSU at the end of the year when only a handful of teams are playing, you look better to recruits, better to the country and just plain stronger overall.
People were talking about taking a break from the ND rivalry for a season or two and there are some good points to it for both schools, those same points would apply here.
December 11th, 2009 at 10:12 PM ^
Bama/UF is hardly a rivalry in the traditional sense of the word, and certainly not a rivaly like Bama/Auburn, Florida/GA, or Michigan/OSU.
While it would be a huge game if they met up every year, and yes a big recruiting bonanza, I don't think there would be much support from two of the larger fan bases in the conference, or from television execs and advertisers (Martin, if you recall, squashed corporate sponsorship for this game a few years back, but that's the kind of draw it has).
Still, B12 did it to Oklahoma / Nebraska, though, so I guess it's not impossible.
Also, the Mich ND rivalry has had several breaks over the years. This is nothing new, and I think hence more palatable to michigan fans. With OSU, I think Michigan's played them every year since 1900. Any potential break in this series would freak people out.
December 12th, 2009 at 10:51 AM ^
those are good points
December 12th, 2009 at 2:23 AM ^
Have a good friend who is a huge Nebraska fan. Separating Oklahoma and Nebraska into different divisions and making them miss years has completely ruined the Oklahoma - Nebraska rivalry.
I would personally put OSU in our division and play them every year as the last regular season game. I am not sure that Michigan and Ohio State should play each other more than once a year.
December 12th, 2009 at 10:53 AM ^
Really? I guess thats not what I expected
December 12th, 2009 at 11:40 PM ^
Each game is such a war, even when one of the teams is struggling. To try to put that together twice in a season would be emotionally difficult for the fan bases and possibly the teams. In addition, it would de-value the actual rivalry game.
December 11th, 2009 at 9:11 PM ^
I think it's a possibility to continue even in separate divisions. You get 5 division games and 3 against the other division. If one is reserved for an inter-division rival, which most teams will probably have, it should be fine.
December 11th, 2009 at 9:27 PM ^
The problem with putting Ohio State in a different division is you either have to move the game so its not the last game of the year, or the two teams might possibly play 2 weeks in a row.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:05 PM ^
Keep them in the same division and have them play the last regular season game EVERY YEAR. You'd still have the possibility for UM/PSU or OSU/PSU in the conference championship which would be great games.
December 12th, 2009 at 9:47 AM ^
i think i'd rather see Mich and OSU on back to back weekends than i would Penn St. in the championship every year. if Mi,OSU, Mi.St were all in the same div. based on "most" years who would compete with Penn. although splitting Mi and OSU the reduces the aura of "the game" if both are already conf champs. i say get rid of 1 team go back to a traditional "10" teams and add in a bye week,like they did for 2010, and play "the game" 1-2 weeks after thanksgiving to match up with the rest of the country.
December 11th, 2009 at 11:51 PM ^
New:
"Midwest"
Michigan
Michigan State
Ohio State
Indiana
Purdue
Notre Dame
"North"
Penn State (can they go in with Michigan/Ohio State?) I Say NO.
Iowa
Wisconsin
Northwestern
Minnesota
Illinois
Any other names for divisions???
December 12th, 2009 at 12:07 AM ^
So you're going to divide a division based on East/West (Midwest) and North/South (North)? LOL, like that makes any sense.
It would have to be East and West, IMO and would look something like:
West
Wiscy
Iowa
Minnesota
Northwestern
Illinois
Purdue
East
Michigan
OSU
PSU
MSU
Indiana
(New team)
The East would dominate football and the West would have a slight edge in basketball (unless IU and Mich return to Final Four form).
December 12th, 2009 at 12:21 AM ^
This has been the issue of expansion that I've really been thinking hard about. How do we set up the two divisons? I think they pretty much have to be geographic. If the B10 adds a 12th team, it MUST be a western (relatively) school with a strong football program. UM, OSU, and PSU - the historical power programs - all have to be in the eastern division. If you have ND, Wisconsin, and Iowa in the west, then its probably ok. But if you add another strong eastern school like pitt, there is no balance between the divisons. I think these divisions keep the major rivalries intact, and are (relatively) comparable in football, though there is potential for it to be uneven like the Big 12 divisions have been recently.
Divisions:
UM
MSU
OSU
PSU
Ind
Purdue
ND
Wiscy
Minn
Ill
NW
Iowa
I'm very interested to see other people's possible divisions and explanations considering other potential additions. I think this is a pretty important consideration. If it isn't ND joining... UM and OSU need to be in the same division and play every year. MSU has to be in that division also. If you were thinking only of parity, Wisconsin, PSU, and Iowa would have to be in the other division, like Northern Fan says, but does that really make sense?
One last thing worth noting... if you add ND, then a B10 hockey conference becomes a reality: UM, MSU, OSU, Wiscy, Minn, ND. Sound fun? That is a whole other discussion though.
December 11th, 2009 at 7:25 PM ^
West Virginia?
Geographically,it makes as much sense as Pitt or Missouri, and they have a ready-made rivalry with Michigan for the foreseeable future.
December 11th, 2009 at 7:31 PM ^
WVU's not strong enough academically. Pitt has the academic reputation to make it work.
December 11th, 2009 at 7:38 PM ^
But they might make Sparty feel a little better...
December 11th, 2009 at 11:50 PM ^
Only 3 of the 12 SEC teams are ranked higher than MSU, the Big Ten's lowest ranked university.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:59 AM ^
In State's defense, Indiana is tied with them for last place.
What's shocking to me is that there are only 2 of the Big 12 teams ranked higher than State and Indiana--I figured that they would be better than the SEC. They're pretty comparable after those first couple but I thought the Big 12 would be dramatically better.
December 12th, 2009 at 9:53 AM ^
what about Miami(yes that Miami) or Fla St.? i know sounds crazy but IIRC didn't a Fla. team join the MAC for a few years? then we coild have the conf. championship at a neutral site in Fla. and not have to worry about snow like a lot of big 10 AD's.
December 11th, 2009 at 7:37 PM ^
NOBODY...or Texas
Even though ND started offering Mendoza Business Certificates online or supersized in the drive thru they still make the most sense academicaly. West Virginia fan is worse then Buckeye as he uses his cooler as a shitter both at home and the game. Buckeye and Mountaineer will go at it like Cro-Magnon and Neandretal in Quest For Fire. Flying into WV for a game will make Happy Valley seem international-no thanks. I would pilfer Mizzou or Iowa State from the B12 but they wont go. Cincinatti-too small a stadium, mediocre academics and ho history. Theres Texas-could they be bought? Do you want Texas? I mean really the bands white cowboy hats and fringe belong only on strippers. ND my first choice but Texas would make a fine runner up.
December 11th, 2009 at 7:56 PM ^
Living in Austin, I would obviously love to see UT in the Big Ten since Michigan would then actually play down here. Howeva, there's no way in hell UT is leaving the Big 12. It just makes no sense at all for them.
December 11th, 2009 at 8:09 PM ^
... the conference name with them? I mean, we'd have 12 and the conference formerly known as the Big 12 would have 11. Technically, they wouldn't have to change conferences we'd just change the other 11 teams.
December 11th, 2009 at 8:21 PM ^
We could call it the Big Cen (Big Central)
December 11th, 2009 at 8:25 PM ^
There was some talk of this a couple years back. Texas was unhappy with the Big 12 and actually was rumored to be listening to the Big 10. I mean hell, Texas has no real ties to the Big 12. The damn conference has only been around since 1996. They were members of the Southwest Conference. Not the Big 8, that is most of the Big 12.
I think Texas would be the best choice. But it would be hard for Olympic sports to travel
December 11th, 2009 at 8:46 PM ^
No ties to the Big12? OU and TAMU are quite the rivals that they aren't going to just give up, especially for that travel.
December 11th, 2009 at 9:10 PM ^
Big 12 as a conference. Those 2 are huge rivals yes. But Arkansas historically was a much bigger rival than Oklahoma and they took that away without thinking twice about it.
Also Oklahoma and Texas played in Dallas as members of different conferences for about 80 years.
December 11th, 2009 at 7:46 PM ^
NYC market (They light up the Empire State Building in Rutgers red for big games).
The Big 10 would span from sea to shining . . . river.
December 12th, 2009 at 11:11 AM ^
From my 20 years of living there, lower New York college football/basketball fans mainly consist of:
Alumni and their families
Bandwagonners.
People kind of almost wanted to get excited when Cuse beat ND and when Rutgers started improving... but that didn't last long. We have 2 teams in the MLB, 3 in the NFL, 3 in the NHL, and 2 in the NBA (counting the Nets), it's kind of saturated.
December 11th, 2009 at 7:53 PM ^
kick someone out and play a true round robin. Failing that, if they Add a 12th, I'd vote for Pitt first and either Rutgers or Syracuse second.
December 11th, 2009 at 8:34 PM ^
a true round robin with an odd number of teams in the league.
If there were still 10 teams - B10 could do a round robin like the pac ten.
December 11th, 2009 at 8:44 PM ^
that is why he said "kick somebody out" which would drop it to 10. I would prefer this over adding a team but if a team needed to be added I would like to see Pitt.
December 11th, 2009 at 8:48 PM ^
But there is no way a team will be kicked out of the conference. I think the only time that happened was with the Big East and Temple.
If Northwestern can stay in when the had a massive losing streak in the 1980's, no one is gonna get booted.
I could see Pitt leaving the Big East, Miami, BC and VT have already set the trend.
December 11th, 2009 at 8:59 PM ^
What if there was a vote and it was Michigan? You know they say everyone hates Michigan in the Big Ten conference.
December 11th, 2009 at 8:46 PM ^
Hence why he said "kick someone out." I've always been in favor of kicking Northwestern out. They make zero sense in our league. I mean, I realize that they help us out academically a ton, but in terms of athletics NWU is just plain terrible. They are the only major conference team to never go dancing in basketball, and they don't have a bowl win since the 1949 rose bowl. They are also the only private school in the big ten. I say kick them out, and do a full round robin. The Pac 10 absolutely have it right. No reason to have a conference championship and potentially force teams to beat each other more than once to earn a championship.
December 11th, 2009 at 8:51 PM ^
I agree with you that the Pac10 has it right, however I just don't think kicking someone out of the conference is gonna happen.
December 11th, 2009 at 9:00 PM ^
No, I agree that one getting kicked out is a pipe dream. Finding someone to add, or someone jumping ship to another conference for some odd reason, are both a thousand times more likely than the conference deciding to force someone out. I just wish it would be Northwestern, because I love the way the Pac 10 have it.
December 11th, 2009 at 9:22 PM ^
It's stupid to say that Northwestern is bad at football. They've had a better record over the past three years than several of the other teams in the Big Ten, including Minnesota, Indiana, Purdue, and yes, Michigan.
A ten-team conference would be a lot nicer, but there is no point in worrying about things that won't happen.
December 11th, 2009 at 7:55 PM ^
How about either Kentucky or Louisville?
Split the conference North and South
North:
Minny
Wisconsin
Michigan
Northwestern
Iowa
MSU
South:
Penn St.
O-H-A-O St.
Purdue
Indiana
Illinois
Kentucky or Louisville
December 11th, 2009 at 11:27 PM ^
Again the lack of AAU membership rears its ugly head.
P.S. - it's "O-U-A-O" ;)
December 11th, 2009 at 8:02 PM ^
Lets hope the Big Ten is as committed to adding a 12th as Tiger Woods was.
December 11th, 2009 at 8:19 PM ^
If the BT AD's got together and agreed to boycott ND until they join, they would almost have to. Right now, ND cherry-picks the BT, scheduling who they want to but not playing through the grind of the entire schedule. They raise their computer points without having to risk nearly as many upsets as they would if they were in the conference.
So, basically, ND is already getting the milk and sees no reason to marry the cow. They don't need the Big Ten because they are getting what they want. They take from the Big Ten and really don't give anything back.
Since ND has sucked in the AL (After Lou) era, this really hasn't been much of an issue. ND hasn't used the Big Ten as a steppingstone to the National Championship for years now. But there is always a chance that Brian Kelly really is as good as he looks to many, and this may very well be an issue soon, especially if USC hits a down cycle.
Someday, we could be looking at a ND who has been ranked number one after beating UM, MSU, and Purdue, and realize that they don't have any tough games left on their schedule.
I would love to see the Big Ten tell ND to either join or find three more service academies to play. No more fattening up their numbers on MSU and Purdue without playing PSU, Wisky, and OSU.
December 11th, 2009 at 9:16 PM ^
They have played Michigan State consistently since the 1950s and have played more games against Sparty then they have against Michigan.
The Michigan/Notre Dame game makes sense given the schools traditions and history together.
Purdue and Notre Dame are both located in northwestern Indiana, so geographically this makes sense as well.
That would be three of the first four weeks of the season, and typically after that, Big Ten play begins. I'm not familiar with a Big Ten school scheduling a BCS conference school or equivalent after the Big Ten play begins.
Notre Dame also had a long running series with Penn State that essentially ended in 1992 in a classic contest (they did play in 06-07 but that isn't a continuing series at this point). The contests above probably make more sense for Notre Dame.
December 12th, 2009 at 12:54 AM ^
There may be reasons for why they choose those teams, but the effect is cherry-picking. ND currently plays Michigan and nobody else of quality from the Big Ten. I give them a pass for Michigan not being good right now but they have had many chances to change opponents for the other games (or continue against Penn State) and they just choose to play the bad teams (again, with the exception of Michigan most years).
December 11th, 2009 at 8:24 PM ^
I'm a crusty type who never wanted to see a 12-team league with a championship game in some sterile pro football field dome like Lucas Field between two teams that already played each other and/or where one team was clearly better than the other in the first place.
But I've moved on. I'm ready for the 12th team, the championship game, and all that. Even if it does lessen the U-M/OSU rivalry.
My guess is that if it's not Notre Dame, the school would be a current member of the Association of American Universities (http://www.aau.edu/about/article.aspx?id=5476). While prodigal Chicago qualifies, other mentioned contenders do as well -- Pitt, Rutgers, Mizzou, Syracuse. ND is not a member, and neither is Kentucky or Louisville. As someone mentioned, ND faculty would LOVE to be part of the Big 10 because of the academic-sharing benefits.
My heart is with Pitt, but I understand that it doesn't add to the geographic footprint like Rutgers or Syracuse or Mizzou would. I also think this will happen sooner rather than later, because of the cash.
December 11th, 2009 at 8:27 PM ^
USF. This would be an upward move for them in football, give their basketball team a breather or two, and would be great for recruiting in Florida. It would give most of the basketball teams a trip to Florida in the middle of winter, too. The teams would like it and so would the fans. They already travel up and down the eastern seaboard, so it's not like travelling to Big Ten cities would be much different.