ESPN reporting A&M to SEC; likely Clemson, FSU, and Missouri as well

Submitted by FreddieMercuryHayes on
Well some of these were obvious, but Missouri? Can someone explain this? EDIT: ESPN now backing off the "likely", and now saying "may"

GunnersApe

August 13th, 2011 at 10:28 AM ^

This is going to be a fun season with expansion talk, lingering OSU troubles AND football season to boot. If the B1G goes to 14 hopefully this is the end if “Legends & Leaders” and M and OSU can be in the same division. So board what two are we getting?   

NOLA Blue

August 13th, 2011 at 12:26 PM ^

As the Big 12 crumbles, these are the best two pieces for the Big Ten.

Then, as the ACC starts pillaging the Big East we swoop in for Pitt and give Notre Dame one last chance to be a part of the 64-team non-NCAA conference.  If they don't don't join, no shot at the 64-team championship.  ND balks and gives up independence.

Logan88

August 13th, 2011 at 10:35 AM ^

Wasn't Missouri a slave state (Maine/Missouri Compromise)? I would say Missouri is a more natural fit for the SEC than the B1G, personally.

bigmc6000

August 13th, 2011 at 11:26 AM ^

I wouldn't worry about it and to be completely honest... Shit like that matters to southerners, not that they want to have slaves but they have this brotherhood of the south thing and if you were on their side in the Civil War you instantly gain Respect and if not you get hatred (no, really...)

NOLA Blue

August 13th, 2011 at 12:30 PM ^

There is no such thing as "The Civil War" down here, it is "The War of Northern Agression."

Also, you refer to this skirmish in past tense, below the Mason-Dixon line it has not yet ended.  I will send transmission of the enemy's movement when the bars empty out and muskets have been picked up for battle.

Hopefully my position has not been compromised with this piece of intel...

Kalamazoo Blue

August 13th, 2011 at 11:25 AM ^

Missouri sent troups to fight with the Union, but some towns also sent troups to fight with the Confederacy. Bizarre situation.

On a lesser note...I expect the B1G will keep its powder dry on expansion. I'm not convinced there's a pot of gold at the end of the expansion rainbow. ND would be the only exception, but that's not going to happen any time soon.

justingoblue

August 13th, 2011 at 4:17 PM ^

I don't understand BC's appeal. According to the link above, they're not in the top 50 for academic research expenditures, they don't have a good football program (in the modern era) and they're small religious school, even smaller than NU. BC seems like a poor mans ND to me.

MAgoBLUE

August 13th, 2011 at 11:46 PM ^

I've hated BC my whole life and can't believe I'm defending them but they are a prestigous academic school.  They probably aren't near the top of research expenditures because of their small size.  The football program has done pretty well since joining the ACC.  Better than I think you are giving them credit for.  You're right about the poor man's Notre Dame part though.  That drives them nuts.

justingoblue

August 14th, 2011 at 10:29 AM ^

They are a prestigious undergrad institution, but ND doesn't bring anything to the table with the academics the CIC wants either. They sell tickets and BTN subscriptions so that makes up for it (like Nebraska does). If there's a second tier football team added, I would bet the house it will be a research powerhouse.

IPFW_Wolverines

August 13th, 2011 at 10:36 AM ^

The Big Ten isn't known for following other conferences just for the sake of doing so. I don't think there will be more expansion in the Big Ten for awhile unless ND wants to join. 

GunnersApe

August 13th, 2011 at 12:55 PM ^

B1G shouldn’t expand for the sake of expansion. IF all the building crumble and Mega conferences are a must THEN we pick up ND/Maryland/Rutger(UGH!!)/Missouri.  All AAU schools except ND.

 

DC/NY/NJ/STL/KC TV markets =$$$$. 

Chippewa Blue

August 13th, 2011 at 10:36 AM ^

Am I the only one who thinks a 16 team "conference" is probably the dumbest idea ever? Who wants to see teams once or twice a decade when you play in the same conference as them? Just too big. I for one hope the Big Ten stays put at 12 or if we're so hell bent on adding teams only go to (also too many but more palatable) 14/

dahblue

August 13th, 2011 at 10:38 AM ^

We should just stay put.  The Big12 isn't going to attract anyone of note.  The ACC has no pull.  The BigEast is garbage.  The Pac10 is too far away.  We'll have our choice of whatever we schools we want...if we want any.  Fuck ND.  Let them stay on their island and bore the shit out of anyone watching NBC on a saturday afternoon.  

cigol

August 13th, 2011 at 10:38 AM ^

Doesn't this water everything down? More teams in a conference is bad for rivalries, and I don't understand the financial benefit. You split your bowl winnings evenly, so by the SEC adding 4 teams, it will be financially detrimental in the current system. There will never be a sec v sec championship since someone has to lose, and since most spots in the big bowls are allotted to conferences, I don't see there being an increase in big bowl births to counteract the growing number of hands reaching into the pot(no pun intended).

jmblue

August 13th, 2011 at 4:34 PM ^

Also, because the Big Ten has equal revenue sharing, adding more teams means each school gets a smaller slice of the pie.  Accordingly, it only makes sense to expand if you can add a school that clearly expands the revenue stream.  Given that we already get two teams in the BCS virtually every year (which is the maximum allowed), it's not that simple to find new schools that will bring in more money.

umfan323

August 13th, 2011 at 10:42 AM ^

I dont see the SEC takin Missouri it just way to far away teams flyin halfway across the country for a game and I  doubt fans travel that far... I could see possibly Georgia Tech instead

chrs5mr

August 13th, 2011 at 10:43 AM ^

they add 4 teams for 16 total.  You don't add 2 because you only have 7 per division and with the protected cross division game, 7 teams would be hard to manage per division.

I'd like to see:  Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Syracuse and Pittsburgh.

Notre Dame, in my opinion, is the trigger..though the most difficult trigger.  You get them into the fold and I think it becomes much easier to convince Oklahoma.  ND already has several built in rivalries and OU would get to renew their's with Nebraska.  Pitt is already renewing the rivalry with Penn St and Syracuse would be key, in terms of the NY TV market and for basketball purposes (ND and Pitt for basketball as well).

The Baughz

August 13th, 2011 at 10:46 AM ^

This is so stupid. I am all for expansion, but Im just not feelin these teams going to the SEC. It would also totally ruin college hoops. The only way Id be on board for these changes, is if it meant there'd be a playoff. Really doubt that will happen, but you never know.

Wolverine318

August 13th, 2011 at 10:50 AM ^

How about four of Maryland, UNC, Duke, Syracuse, Virginia, Va Tech?  Syracuse gets us the NY market. UNC/Duke gets us part of the triangle (although something needs to be done about Wake Forest). If we take VaTech, then we need to take Virginia, becuase there is no way the VA legislature will allow VaTech to leave without Virginia. UNC/Duke gets us two academic and basektball powerhouses. 

 

hart20

August 13th, 2011 at 11:03 AM ^

The only teams out of those that I think would ever be approved would be Duke and UNC and that would be a tough sell. UNC has that scandal going on right now in football and would hurt the B1G's image. Duke cares only about basketball and nothing about football. I think the B1G's basketball schedule works against us for them. The rest of the teams aren't dominant enough in either basketball or football to justify bringing them in with their academics.

The Barwis Effect

August 13th, 2011 at 11:17 AM ^

If we take VaTech, then we need to take Virginia, becuase there is no way the VA legislature will allow VaTech to leave without Virginia.
People were saying the same thing about Texas/Texas A&M back when Texas was rumored to be coming to the Big Ten, and yet, by all accounts, Texas A&M will now be leaving the Big XII without Texas.

Chicago Maize …

August 13th, 2011 at 12:05 PM ^

There is no way Duke, and UNC leave the ACC. Forget about football, the ACC is a basketball powerhouse. There is no way the state of North Carolina allows the break up of UNC, and Duke from NC State, and Wake Forrest.

I like your progressive thought process, but a more likely scenario would be to bring in teams from the Northeast, Mid Atlantic, and Midwest, not the Southeast.

umfan323

August 13th, 2011 at 10:55 AM ^

The odds of us getting ND are still going to be slim .... With that being said I wouldnt mind taking a Rutgers , Kansas , Missouri and Oklahoma