Oklahoma but not Kansas or Vandy. Vandy has high standards like us and NW but probably not a good fit. Kansas is...errr...well Kansas is just Kansas, nothing to see...move along.
CBS: B1G did expansion homework on Oklahoma, Kansas & Vanderbilt
Wildcats wanted a friend, apparently.
No other explanation for Vandy.
How about a competitive football program? Not to mention more exposure in the southern recruiting markets.
Would rather have Vandy than Rutgers any day.
rutgers was one of the last BCS teams that I wanted to see in the B1G.
- Academically: not even close. Vandy is one of the tops in the nation; Rutgers is a fine school, but it will be in the lower half of the B1G (which has many good to great schools).
- Research dollars: Vandy gets about $100 million more a year
- Sports: Vanderbilt traditionally was the dregs of the SEC in football, but has been coming on with James Franklin and has been better than Rutgers the last couple of years. In basketball, Vandy, while not great, has at least made same NCAA tourney about every other year for the past 15 years; Rutgers hasn't made it since 1991 (not mention the Mike Rice scandal).
- Cites: Nashville is, outside of Atlanta, the city you'd want to be in the south (Florida's a world of its own). Rutgers is central NJ - it has no more claim to the NYC market than UM does.
If the B1G HAD to expand, we definitely should gotten Vanderbilt over Rutgers (if that was an option). It's not even close.
As well as probably a whole bunch of other schools. Why anyone thinks it's news that the Big Ten looked at schools other than the ones they actually ended up with is beyond me. When the ACC media rights thing came out, this was used as "proof" that it wouldn't stop any potential poachers. Actually, it seemed to work, considering Oklahoma and Kansas aren't in the Big Ten.
Would have loved to bring Oklahoma with Nebraska. Kansas is meh to me, but at least Vandy would have the academic fit.
so many people seem to completely dismiss in expansion, Kansas and Vanderbilt are at least plausible because both are members of the Association of American Universities. OK is not. Yes, Nebraska is not now a member, but they were when they were admitted, and their departure from the AAU stemmed from a dispute how research dollars were counted.
So what you're saying is Nebraska needs to get their shit together and get back in the AAU. I agree with you on that one.
In their defense, the reason they got booted (and Michigan was one of the schools who voted against them, if memory serves) was pretty convoluted at best. They got shafted. IMO, it's not necessarily fair to take a shot at them and say they "need to get their shit together" when they pretty much do.
Nebraska was at a disadvantage because it doesn't have an on-campus medical school; the University of Nebraska Medical Center is in Omaha. One of the prime criteria for AAU membership is the amount of research dollars an institution brings in, and it's a fact that university medical schools are major recipients of research dollars.
In addition, the AAU's policies meant that it refused to count Nebraska research that is funded by the US Dept. of Agriculture, which is a significant source of Nebraska's overall research funding. Why the AAU would dismiss funding from the USDA while allowing billions of dollars from the Department of Defense, Education, Health and Human Services, and a whole host of other federal agencies is bizarre to me. I think Nebraska got screwed.
I went to grad school at Nebraska, and they'll never get back into the AAU. As the two posters above mentioned, the medical school being a seperate campus is the primary reason they lost their membership. But UNMC had been in Omaha for years and the AAU still allowed Nebraska to stay a member. In fact, the AAU was simply willing to look the other way after they discounted the use of USDA research funds; that is, until one member school started to throw a hissy fit about it after Nebraska decided to leave the Big 12 for the Big Ten. The school that threw the fit, to no one's surprise, was Texas. UT led the internal AAU charge to get Nebraska kicked out, and they were ultimately successful. Needless to say, it validated Nebraska's choice to leave the Big 12 in order to get away from UT's domineering attitude. The blood between the two schools is bad, and even if Nebraska is able to increase its non-USDA research funding to the point that it once again qualifies for AAU membership, I think Texas would do everything it could to block Nebraska's re-admission were UNL to re-apply (which I don't think they would).
being a great choice to join the Big Ten was delusionally misguided. Bringing that wealthy and good-looking but ridiculously high-maintenance and nut-kickingly obnoxious sorority girl into the conference would be a decision that everybody would soon regret. It's too bad that Nebraska got screwed, but it just points out how cutthroat high academia can be.
The best part is that Texas wanted everyone in the Big 12 to sign a mutual pledge to not leave the conference, but it had no penalties for actually leaving. Nebraska countered by suggesting a renegotiated TV contract that would increase the revenue for everyone, even out the distribution (the Big 12 had an uneven model that largely benefitted Texas), and had a financial penalty for leaving the conference. Texas refused to consider it. Nebraska realized that Texas' motivation was to make everyone else stay put while they looked for a new conference to join, which is when Nebraska got serious about talking to the Big Ten. The AAU membership snafu was Texas' revenge for Nebraska jumping out of the Big 12 before they could.
And yes, higher education is really just high school cliques on a larger scale and with stuff that actually matters at stake.
when they made a concerted effort to get into the AAU. It was a massive fail, since OU's president at that time thought that all he really had to do was to focus on the small things such as changing the university radio from a college format to a classical format to get admittance into the AAU.
the current OU president is a boat load smarter, but it wiould be a challenge for him to get them in, but if they can, he is the dude to make it happen.
No Oklahoma. B1G has too much ugly-ass red already. Just added two more. No more red teams please.
Crimson and Cream and not Scarlet and f'ing Grey or just Red and White like three other teams in the Big Ten.
I also dislike their wagon. Teams that bring wagons and livestock onto the field should not be in the BIG. No Horns, no bufallos, no schooners.
And their fight song. After the first 800 times they play it, your ears start to bleed. And that's only in the first quarter.
the OU fight song is lame. it is a combination of both North Carolina's and Yale's, and out of the three versus, there are only 6 words in total and that is if you count O and U as separate words.
Verse 1. Sooner Boomer
Verse 2. Oklahoma
Verse 3. Go OU
I've been calling them all red this whole time! Soooo embarrassing!
and yes they are Crimson and cream.
Why ugh? I mean, I expect them to do homework on any number of big time programs that they hope to bring to the B1G even if they don't bring them. Would you have been happier if Jim Delaney just played eenie meenie miney mo with stuff animals that were assigned to schools? I'm glad they're doing their due diligence. I'm not a fan of conference expansion and realignment, but if you're going to do it, you better do your research.
Big Ten: We Love Our Research!
I agree up until you realize the research and process ultimately got us Rutgers... WTF?
I really hope they don't go west with further expansion. I'm kind of hoping that they go to 24 teams by pillaging the ACC. Then, we can have two divisions. In the West, we have the original Big Ten + Nebraska + Notre Dame. In the East, we have PSU + ACC/2 + Big East/2. The only time that teams play teams from the other division is in the championship game.
Oh, I like this. Or we could do this crazy thing and have a bunch of conferences all over the country, which include teams that make geographic sense. I'd call one on the West Coast the Pac-10 and have one or two minor conferences to handle the little teams out there. Then I'd have one called the Big 12 and it would take Texas / lower Midwest, then this one called the Big 10 that had the upper Midwest. I'd also put a mediocre conference up there and name it the Big East and have a conference for both the Atlantic Coast and the Deep South. The champions of each conference would play eachother in the playoff, with maybe a few "at-large" bids given to the top performers from small conferences.
I know it sounds nuts...
What's the point of a conference if you never play each other outside of a championship game? Plus, there would be an imbalance in revenue generation, with West schools generating ~80% of the revenues.
I would love Oklahoma and Vandy to come to the B1G. Poaching the SEC's one top academic school would be a great score for the conference. Adding Oklahoma and shifting Purdue/Indiana both to the East would balance out the divisions.
The point would be that we get to stick with roughly our original conference and continue to play those teams. There's no going back right now, so moving forward in an approximate circle is the next best thing in my mind.
Plus, we'd add a lot of hockey and lacrosse schools, so the hockey conference gets better and we get a lacrosse conference out of it. The Big Ten - ACC Challenge essentially gets to stay around too. It just seems like a win all around to me.
How about we have one conference -- the 120 FBS schools. There will be 30 divisions of 4. I don't know how anything else will work.
Also, what happened with Vandy? Did they not want to leave or was it not a good fit from the Big 10's perspective? I'd much prefer them over Rutgers. FAR superior academics and athletics which are on par with, if not better than Rutgers. Plus, TN is a relatively fertile recruiting ground which I'd rather open up than further raid NJ for players like PSU already does. Speaking of which, I'd be interested to see over the next few years how Rutgers does recruiting their own state... my guess, they get cut out of the loop completely. Who wants to play for a bottom of the barrel Big 10 team when there are 3-4 other superior Big 10 teams within a 6 or so hour drive? Rutgers won't be a conference contender like they used to be.
vandy and OU. neither are in an existing b10 state, OU has an existing rivalry with neb and would give some power to the west. vandy would also go west, allowing purdue to slide east which at least puts another traditional B10 school in with UM. also, road trips to nashville would be pretty fun.
i don't think that vandy would go though, i think they see themselves as THE bastion of education in the south, whereas in the B10 they would be another good school.
kansas - puh-leez
Duke and Rice are other bastions of education in the South, to say nothing about public U's in the ACC which have excellent academics and solid athletics.
Vandy would be a great addition. In addition to its excellent academics, it is a beautiful school in a fun city with relatively easy access. With James Franklin at the helm,, their football program is starting to be worth noting. Ask the SEC schools whom they beat or almost beat last year.
Vandy would probably help us out a lot in baseball. Unfortunately, baseball means nothing in the era of the conference expansion money grab. Academically, I'm sure Vandy wouldn't mind getting out of the SEC getting into a group of schools that more reflect their standards...
Really would not mind these teams and a plus one. Like many others I have always been opposed to expansion. However, it seems inevitable that it will continue. I really do not mind Oklahoma, who i am sure is sick of Texas and its sheer footprint with the longhorn network. I think they have been looking for a way out, despite the rivalry, but it has to be an out that would generate real revenue for them. Despite the fact that Kansas is terrible in football, I really do not mind them either. I live in Kansas (for another month) and the fanbase here seems no different from Nebraska and Iowa. They would obviously be a bball pickup with a ton of tradition and enthusiasm. Ad like previously mentioned I would love to take the SEC's most well rounded academic institution. That university seems to be on the upswing and the territory and location are not ridiculously far, and frankly they are fun places to visit. I like these teams better than random big east and ACC foes outside of maybe VaTech or VIrgina.
We ended up with Rutgers, who's much worse academically and athletically than Vandy.
"Bu.... but.... NYC TV market! Everyone in NY loves the rich history and tradition of Rutgers athletics. No doubt that every television in the NY metro area will be tuned in to see Rutgers battle their traditional gridiron foe - Indiana! Also, we know that the traditional cable model, with packages of a 100 channels, will last forever. Just ignore Netflix, Apple TV, streaming online videos, and the fact that the most important demographic to television advertisers, the "just-out-of-college" group, is most comfortable with these platforms and probably won't pay $75 a month to get ESPN, CNN, BTN and 74 channels they'll never watch!"
$75 a month? I need your service provider!
I would personally rather have Vanderbilt over Rutgers or Maryland any day. At least then you get a prestiges academic universities and a southeast media market.
Vandy would have been alright with me. Great university, Tennessee market and recruiting grounds, and Franklin is really turning that program around. I doubt he'll stay there forever but they are not a doormat anymore.
The News-Herald article to which the CBS article links is short but does contain a few interesting tidbits.. As I am not terribly familiar with Lee Barfknecht's background, I am not sure how well-connected he is, but here is what he said in regards to expansion talk not being completely dead:
"These people — from conference offices and major-college athletic departments — all agreed that any number of lawyers would be delighted to challenge those deals in court."
He said in reference to some people to whom he spoke regarding the "Grant Of Rights" issue. As you will recall, the ACC's specific deal was outlined in a thread a few days ago. He broaches the possibility of conferences expanding based on future value even if claims on media rights were upheld, which is interesting to consider.
OU is not in the AAU, making them a non-starter in the eyes of the B1G. KU and Vandy are and I think together would make for a great 16-team league
Vandy and Missouri would be great additions, particularly now that the ACC has locked its doors. OU is meh in my mind, though it would make a nice rival for Nebraska. KU would be better, AAU and all and another Big 8 rival for Nebraska.
I'm biased since both my parents and my sister went to Mizzou and my grandfather was for many years a physics professor there. I know Missouri isn't highly regarded academically, but they've been an AAU member since 1908, and geographically they're a more logical member of the Big Ten than they are the SEC.
academically, only good at one revenue sport, but the less lucrative one, and what if someone gets a vendetta against them like with Nebraska in the AAU? Their research dollars are actually pretty low.
OK = NO AAU = No B1G
KU = B12 = GoR = No B1G
Vandy = SEC = NO GoR and no Exit Fee = Maybe B1G
Mizzou = SEC = NO GoR and no Exit Fee = Maybe B1G
It's just "homework". It's nothing more than that at this point.
I did my "homework" on dating Kate Upton, big deal. Then Spike stole it . . .
If I were Vandy, I would think I'd love to go to the B1G. Out of all the major conferences, I don't know if a single team fits in less with their conference brethren than Vanderbilt does.
Vandy is a prestigious academic university who is not very athletically gifted, playing amongst a whole bunch of deep south football schools. They just seem like such an odd man out there. Even the ACC would be a vastly better fit for them
I wonder why Stanford has never come up as a posdibility? I know travel would be far, but no further than maryland/rutgers. Especially with the new east/west breakdown. This would add another power to the big10 west, add an excellent academic school, increase CA recruiting and gain another tv market.
Palo Alto is approximately 4 times further from Ann Arbor than Newark and even more so for College Park. Even Nebraska has a longer trek to Stanford than to Rutgers or Maryland, and it's like a 300 mile swing.
probably hasn't come up as a possibility because why would Stanford want to do that? Every road trip in conference play would be end being at least a trek half way across the country.
Mad geographical skillz
So is it that you want Academics (Vandy pretty damn good, Oklahoma graduates less than half of their football team) or Athletics (Vandy meh, Oklahoma I see it.)
.. despite no real boost to football, we can take Vanderbilt. At least they're a good school. I don't want Oklahoma. The only reason to do it is football, and why should we add a program that is SEC-level in terms of academic standards and JuCo acceptance? As a Michigan fan, I don't want the Big 10 adding anyone like that. At least within our own conference we should be on a fairly level playing field.
Kansas is like Oklahoma except switch football to basketball. Oh, and neither of those two add much in the way of media markets. Missouri would have done more, and we skipped out on them.