Big 14....we may be right, Tribune reports
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/chi-17-big-ten-brite-dec17…
"So if the Big Ten expands, what would it be named?
Don't discount this: the Big 14.
Seriously.
Multiple Big Ten sources told the Tribune Wednesday that 14 teams, even 16, could be in play as it relates to the Big Ten's potential expansion. "Anything is possible," one source said, beyond the conventional wisdom of simply adding a 12th school.
A conference statement spoke of an "evaluation of options for conference structure and expansion."
One option the Big Ten will not pursue is an odd number of schools -- again.
But don't be shocked if the conference of Bo and Woody adds three plates -- or more -- to the table."
December 17th, 2009 at 11:12 AM ^
i hope they decide to go to the big 20, then we could split into two ten team divisions.
just grab the entire football big east plus ND.
December 18th, 2009 at 4:01 PM ^
Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.
December 17th, 2009 at 11:16 AM ^
I love the idea of a 12th team. Adding three I can deal with, but adding 5? That would be pointless. I think it wouldnt give you an accurate assessment of the best teams in the conference. If we added five teams and played 9 conference games, that would still leave 6 teams unplayed. If that were to happen they should look into four divisions of 4. Then from there turn it into a "mini playoff." But even then it is not logical.
This expansion talk is starting to get out of control with too many pipe-dreams
December 17th, 2009 at 12:18 PM ^
The only way it's considered is if you have a few schools that you just can't turn down. For example, if Texas, Maryland, Notre Dame, Nebraska, and Kansas all want to join, who do you turn away? All of those are unlikely options IMO, but if you have five national schools that would also add five different strong local markets, the Big Ten might consider going to a mega sized conference.
In other words, I think the expansion number is largely dependent on the quality of schools that wish to join. I don't think we'll take 3-5 mediocre schools just to add size to the Big Ten.
December 17th, 2009 at 12:29 PM ^
I am thinking that if they were to go to 16, they would basically have a round robin in each division, then have the championship game between the two divisions. What would be interesting is if they had evenly ranked teams between the divisions all play on championship weekend to give an overall ranking in the conference. It would be a Merge Sort :)
December 18th, 2009 at 4:28 PM ^
+eleventy billion for mergesort
December 17th, 2009 at 11:19 AM ^
There aren't any obvious choices, much less 3 or 5...
December 17th, 2009 at 1:13 PM ^
Missouri and Pitt. After that, maybe you can convince ND. And if not someone will come out of the woodwork I'm sure...(maybe Nebraska)
December 17th, 2009 at 11:32 AM ^
16 has already failed on the smaller scale recently. The WAC tried a 16 team conference and it ended up causing the split to form the MWC. There is such a thing as too big.
December 17th, 2009 at 11:48 AM ^
Somebody should tell that to certain Michigan high school conferences.
December 17th, 2009 at 11:49 AM ^
aaaaand that's what she said
December 17th, 2009 at 11:53 AM ^
Frick....posted at the same time Bleeding....at least we think alike.
December 17th, 2009 at 12:31 PM ^
Is this my tailor posting?
December 17th, 2009 at 11:45 AM ^
I would not like the idea of so many teams crowding the conference. People would start complaining about how one team never faces the other and so on. If they add another school, I just hope they change the name to something more suitable.
December 17th, 2009 at 11:58 AM ^
The Chicago Tribune is more worthless than the Freep. How many times have they been linked here in the past month and been completely off base?? Stoops is coaching ND I think was their best call of many idiotic ones.
December 17th, 2009 at 12:15 PM ^
The Sun-Times was the newspaper pushing that Stoops was a serious candidate for the ND job. The Trib has an article in their archives on December 1 with this line:
...potential successors ranging from Oklahoma's Bob Stoops and ex- NFL coach Jon Gruden to a list of perhaps more attainable candidates such as Cincinnati's Brian Kelly and TCU's Gary Patterson.The key there is that the Trib identifies Kelly as "more attainable." In fact, I can't find a single article on the Trib site that indicates Stoops was ever interested in the ND job. The Sun-Times has a number of them. Let's not throw the Trib under the bus unfairly. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/chi-01-notre-dame-weis-chi… http://www.suntimes.com/sports/colleges/1908423,CST-SPT-nd28.article
December 17th, 2009 at 12:54 PM ^
This seems like a farfetched idea and when I clicked and saw a Chicago newspaper again reporting it, I quickly popped off assuming they were all from the same place. I guess my argument was a little strawman, but I it seems a lot of trash coming from the edge of Lake Michigan lately.
December 17th, 2009 at 12:15 PM ^
Wasn't that the Sun-Times?
December 17th, 2009 at 11:59 AM ^
I think 14 would be great.
This might allow you to bring in some schools that are not happy in their leagues but want to keep rivalries. I think the dream scenario in all of this would be...
Colorado
Nebraska
Missouri
All three of these school just seem like "Big Ten" type school. ie large state school great at academics and athletics. Much better "fits" in my opinion than Pitt Rutgers and Syracuse.
December 17th, 2009 at 12:07 PM ^
The Big 12 would shit a brick if that were to happen. I think you've got to take one from each conference if we expand to 14.
Pitt
Neb/Mizzou
Random third team.
However if it were Pitt/Neb/Mizzou... damn that would be awesome.
December 17th, 2009 at 12:58 PM ^
As I have posted before, I think the conference will go to 14. And the push will be into the huge media markets of the northeast. Therefore, think:
Maryland
Boston College
Rutgers
Flag this and see me in 18 months when this deal is done.
December 17th, 2009 at 1:26 PM ^
I live in ACC country and just don't see any way that Maryland would jump on the Big Ten bandwagon. Admittedly, I don't know the finances involved (football vs. basketball) and obviously that would play a hugh role. I just think that Maryland is way too entrenched in ACC basketball to give up playing UNC and Duke in hoops just to play PSU, OSU and/or UM in football. Boston College could be a different story since that don't have a lot of ACC history.
Does anybody really want Rutgers?
December 17th, 2009 at 4:36 PM ^
I did say "we" in the subject line. ;-)
December 17th, 2009 at 12:02 PM ^
would actually preserve many of the rivalries, instigate new ones, and keep the importance of The Game (in order to win that division) while adding a playoff game that may actually help the Big Ten-Four Teen in bowl games. This may not be the worst idea- each division would play a round-robin to determine a true champion for the playoff, while still leaving room for inter-sectional and OOC games. Hmmmm.......
December 17th, 2009 at 12:08 PM ^
But (puff-puff) the conference-expansion opium (puff-puff) is oh so addicting and pleasant (puff-puff-puff)... Navy... Colorado (puff)... Virginia Tech... South Florida (puff-puff)... Nebraska (puff)... Texas (puff-puff-puff)...
December 17th, 2009 at 1:13 PM ^
Haha thank you for the laugh. After listening to all the theories from the press and bloggers, I feel you may be on to something.
December 17th, 2009 at 12:36 PM ^
It should *still* be called the Big Ten.
Just to piss everybody off.
December 17th, 2009 at 1:34 PM ^
"Big Ten Plus 2." But maybe it should be slightly modified, to keep all our options open: "Big Ten Plus N."
December 18th, 2009 at 8:46 AM ^
They should just call it the BTC Conference to preserve the acronym. Then they can buy the Big East, have them make Mexican food, and call it BTC Cantina.
December 18th, 2009 at 4:41 PM ^
can't help but wonder what they do with the hidden 11 in the logo.
It'd be like FedEx having to change away from their hidden arrow.
December 17th, 2009 at 12:52 PM ^
I think we should add the remaining 108 schools to our conference and then we can have the Big 119. Sounds like a winner.
December 17th, 2009 at 1:56 PM ^
Stop at 12 teams!! We have the tradition, don't look desperate. Gamedays, fight songs, "HAIL TO THE VICTORS", Recruting, The Big House, Winged Helmets.....why make college football like Sunday's?
December 18th, 2009 at 4:39 PM ^
What happens to the Big East if Pitt joins? They would be down to 7 teams and likely steal from C-USA or the MAC (UCF? Temple?) to fill out an 8 team league. The 13-team MAC could afford to lose one, but if C-USA does, they drop to 11 teams and need to find a replacement (steal Troy from the Sun Belt?).
Now let's replay this in a scenario where Pitt and some combination of Big 12 or ACC teams boost us to the Big 14/16. This amounts to re-organizing the entire landscape of college football. The Pac-10 and SEC are likely to be unaffected, but otherwise FBS conferences would be significantly re-aligned.
In a world where a 16-team playoff decided what is now the "bowl subdivision", I could envision 8 massive 14-team conferences (112 teams, which assumes a minor contraction of the subdivision). Until I consider the possibility of expanding the "Big 10" beyond 12 is complete speculation and ridiculously implausible.
December 19th, 2009 at 1:00 AM ^
That's how the current Big East and ACC were formered. There was a flurry of movement after we added Penn State. The key is to be on the proactive end and causing the change, rather than reacting to it.
TCU going to the Big 12 to fill in, maybe sling with Boise if we were to steal 2,, Utah and BYU to the Pac 10, these are all possibilities and maybe eventualities. The small conferences can scramble desperately; I don't want my conference to do so.
December 19th, 2009 at 11:05 AM ^
Anything is possible can't be used to deem anything likely.
If anything is possible, we may just merge with the Ivy League....