If I understand this
That's not necessarily true.
That's not necessarily true. You can't really infer from what was posted how many conference games each team would be playing, and either way, it's unlikely there won't be some sort of provision for rivlary games.
Every time an MGoBoard poster complains about a thread topic, God kills a baby panda.
That wouldn't be the case
There is no way OSU wouldn't automatically be on our schedule. That's only 3 conference games in your division, so there are 5 others to be filled. I'd guess there would be one locked-in opponent for us and the other 4 would rotate. Not sure how it would work logistically, but I see no way that the B10 would ever do away with UM/OSU on an annual basis
.
"Anybody that comes up with a plan that says Michigan shouldn't play Ohio State should be institutionalized. That's one I can probably carve out and say, 'that's a deal stopper.'"
Dave Brandon - 26 April 2010
LSA '89 - MBB Natl Champions, Big 10/Rose Bowl Champions | @MGoShoe
"Coming up on today's episode of,
'Why Dave Brandon is a Bad-ass'..."
2 pretty competitive
2 pretty competitive divisions and 2 divisions dominated by 1 team (at least from a footabll standpoint). I don't like this configuration at all.
I don't see what the problem
I don't see what the problem is with a 12-team, 2-division conference with a conference championship game.
Why do we have to add 5 teams? Where's the value in that?
Every time an MGoBoard poster complains about a thread topic, God kills a baby panda.
Well
Well, being that it is the modern era, we have to make sure that we make everything as excessive and nonsensical as we can in order to generate more revenue. On the bright side, if the conference shares this added revenue, we might be able to stave off advertisements in the Big House a little longer.
"All I've had today is, like, six gummy bears and some scotch"
The Benjamins
$$$$$$$$$$ I can throw some zeros in there too if it helps.
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is never get involved in a land war in Asia - but only slightly less well-known is this: Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line!
But who benefits the most
But who benefits the most from those extra benjamins, and how great is that benefit?
The pie might get a little bigger, but don't forget that it will also get divided into a greater number of slices.
Every time an MGoBoard poster complains about a thread topic, God kills a baby panda.
Trust me, everybody who's
The pie might get a little bigger, but don't forget that it will also get divided into a greater number of slices.
Trust me, everybody who's been following expansion knows this by now.
Mmm... pie
Someone else posted that cake > pie, and I'm willing to go with that, in many cases. Well, except for Thanksgiving, when only pumpkin, apple and pecan really do it for me. Oh, and my birthday, because I really like peach pie and peach cobbler.
And I can get behind a bigger cake with room for more slices any day. The question is whether you'd like a bigger cake, but the same number of slices. That way, each slice is bigger. Kind of a Marie Calender's thing.
You have to keep in
You have to keep in mind that this whole thing is based on increasing revenue through BTN. Adding 5 more teams adds more games each week for the BTN to cover. Adding Missouri increases viewers in Kansas City and St. Louis. Adding Rutgers and Syracuse is aimed at getting the entire view base in NY, specifically NYC. Pitt doesn't add much in terms of viewers, but it adds another quality team, renews the rivalry between them and PSU and gets us to 16 teams.
OSU
Maybe it's just me, but I don't like the possibility if re-matching with OSU in the Big Ten title game. I realize it would mean a ton of revenue for the conference,but I really think it takes away a lot of the signifigance of the regular season meeting. If we both enter the last game of the year having locked up a title game berth, then who really cares about the game? We'll get a rematch in a week or two. I think UM and OSU need to be in the same division, like Texas and Oklahoma are in the Big 12. That kept their rivalry fresh and heated because they know they only have one crack at each other every year.
"All I've had today is, like, six gummy bears and some scotch"
I agree. The prospect of UM
I agree. The prospect of UM and OSU playing each other in a title game every so often, as cool as it sounds, does not outweigh keeping the rivaly "fresh and heated" by limiting the teams to 1-shot at each other every year.
On a related note, if through some strange course of events Notre Dame ends up joining the conference, then we're either going to have to leave open the possibility of playing 1 of our 3 rivals more than once a year, or they're going to have to put all 4 of us in the same division.
Every time an MGoBoard poster complains about a thread topic, God kills a baby panda.
Recruiting area
Any format that expands the geographic area will help make it easier to recruit the new areas. Rutgers and Syracuse might not help football a lot, but they would make it a lot easier to recruit the NY/NJ/Philly areas for basketball. Mizzou and Nebraska would help a little with football.
I would still rather see ND in there, though.
From Twitter:
"Big Ten
From Twitter:
"Big Ten expansion buzz" is the code phrase for "sh*t I just made up."
Proud To Be An American But Even Prouder To Be A Wolverine!
Just read that
Bruce Feldman said on the radio this morning that Mizzou to the B10 is pretty much a done deal. Apparently he said it on KOMC.
BHGP has a story about how
BHGP has a story about how that has pretty much been debunked.
More Expansion Buzz
There's a pretty good article on Big Ten expansion by the always awesome Austin Murphy in this week's Sports Illustrated. He throws out a few different possible scenarios, definitely worth a look.
"All I've had today is, like, six gummy bears and some scotch"
I agree
that expansion of the Big 10(16) Network into new states will have a positive effect on our recruiting. It will happen right as we are rising back to the top in college football. Everyone will want to be the next Denard Robinson after he goes ballistic on the conferece this year. Michigan will become a factory for dual threat QB's (it's already starting to happen).
Dual threat factory
I was talking with friends when RR came aboard and I pretty much said the same thing! I said wait until he turns over the roster with his kids...I actually said 2011 would be an outstanding yr to be a wolverine fan. All in for Michigan here in Roscoe Illinois. Dual threat QB's will line up to make a run for BCS bowls in the very near future.
sweet ass sweet is bad ass bad.
Dual Threat QB's
I don't think the dual-threat QB itself is anything new or fancy in the Big Ten (Darryl Clark, Troy Smith, Juice Williams, TP), I think it's the offense that Coach Rod runs. It just seems more creative and versatile than the other "spread" hybrids that PSU, OSU, and Illinois have run. I love that we have a spread offense that runs more than it throws and goes to a ton of short bubble screens and swing passes to keep everything open. I've always thought that in Rich Rod offenses, the system makes the players stars, not vice versa.
"All I've had today is, like, six gummy bears and some scotch"
If I understand this correctly, that means that we will not be playing Ohio State every year, only on a rotation with the other divisions? Yeah, that's not going to fly.