Expansion stopping?
Is it just me, or is the expansion suddenly grinding to a stop? It seems as if the only piece left is Utah to the Pac 10, and then everyone else sits pat, what with Texas single-handedly saving the Big 12. Weird how it exploded into a huge orgy of news, rumor, and excitement, and now will die within the a day.
... it's us.
See the last paragraph here:
http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2010/06/14/the-big-12-ish-is-dead-long-live-the-big-12-ish/
...in that piece, Frank the Tank links back to In_Rod_I_Trust's MGoBoard post on the Big Ten's way ahead.
Big Ten Hopefuls Elsewhere – Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt, maybe Maryland? The latest rumored candidates of Boston College or Georgia Tech? What the Big Ten is going to do over the next 12-18 months is still up in the air. It is clear from all of the information that I’ve seen that Texas was the #1 target for the league, so it’s going to take some time to re-assess if and where it wants to expand to next. Rutgers may still become a Big Ten member eventually, but the fact that a superconference wasn’t formed on the West Coast and Texas isn’t part of Big Ten expansion is going to slow down the timeline drastically.
...point you to a very well reasoned comment by FtT user michaelC on the Big Ten's actionable knowledge about what Notre Dame's real decision points are.
Delaney and the Big Ten [now] know a great deal more about ND's parameters for a decision. It is highly probable this information has resulted in selection of a strategy and...alternative expansion scenarios...
...[T]here is nothing we have learned, apart from Texas coming off the table, that suggests the Big Ten stops here. [ed. In fact, Delaney's comments about a pause suggest the Big Ten is actively exploring further expansion opportunities.] We can infer that ND was in play (though perhaps only paired with Texas) and the analysis on this board suggests the BTN [carriage rates and advertising rates] benefits in a nonlinear fasion with new inventory and footprint.
slow down for this offseason and pick up in the next few years.
Delaney will sit back and see how the new conference is working, while waiting for ND to figure out if they will ever want to join the B10 and see how Texas/B12 TV network takes off.
If the Longhorn/B12 TV network are a flop, it could mean Texas is back on the market in a couple years.
Lost in the Big 12 hoopla is the fact that the demise of the Big East was somewhat exaggerated. The big winners here, besides the Big Ten, are ND and TX.
The Longhorns, of course, are now getting their butts kissed even more than they already were. ND still hasn't been frozen out of playing Big Ten teams, and the Big East hasn't collapsed because the "raid" never happened. Meanwhile, the Big East probably won't have the stones to give ND a "join or else" ultimatum. Since TX has what they want and is now out of expansion discussions, that makes ND the "belle of the ball."
Yuck.
Looking like the Pac-10 will add Utah then we will have a quiet couple years. I wouldn't be surprised in a couple years if Larry Scott tries to add more teams again though.
...the Denver CBS station is reporting this:
Sources close to C.U. have told CBS4 Sports the Buffs are projected to be in a 6 team division in the new Pac-10. The Buffs will be joined by USC, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State and probably Utah, which is expected to receive an invitation to join the Pac-10.
The remaining teams in the conference that will make up the Pac-10 North are:
- Cal-Berkeley
- Stanford
- Oregon
- Oregon State
- Washington
- Washington State
Do you have all of these bookmarked or something? It seems like you link to news articles in every response regarding expansion now.
...in the comments section of the TtT piece linked above. Like most everyone else, I typically eschew comments sections (especially A2.com, DetNews.com, MLive.com, and the WWL.com) but these comments are actually quite illuminating.
And yes, in my posts I tend to link to stories and other's analysis. I realize that reporters often get stuff wrong or are willing conduits of misinformation, but it's my epinion that it's a good thing to get some actual info into the discussion every now and then to tamp down some of the more wild speculation that goes on here.
So the Big 12 is losing their title game? Are they going to one 10-team division?
but i didn't get to post my proposed 20 team Big Ten four division conference re-alignment...
Delaney is on record as saying that AAU membership is very important to the Big Ten. BC is not an AAU member.
Others are asserting without any source or evidence whatsoever that the B10 has "vetted" BC for membership, implying that they're a legit conference target.
So on one hand we have an unequivocal public statement of principle, and on the other we have a completely unsourced rumor that contradicts the public statement.
Yes, ND is not an AAU member, and the Big Ten clearly wants them. However, nobody should equate ND's drawing power—and its apparent exemption from the AAU membership requirement—with that of Boston College.
While I'd say that BC is probably a remote candidate for a number of reasons, I wouldn't think that the lack of AAU membership completely removed them from consideration. BC has a strong academic reputation and with the influence of the other Big Ten schools probably would be able to obtain membership in the AAU somewhere down the road (just as ND would be able to).
BC made a commitment to stay with the Big East in 2004 after the ACC invited Miami and Virginia Tech. BC then promptly left the Big East and Notre Dame behind to go to the ACC.
Why would anyone think ND would stick their neck out for BC in conference expansion?
I don't think that ND would stick their neck out for BC and I didn't mean for my comment to be misconstrued that way. My only point was that I didn't think the lack of AAU membership was an insurmountable hurdle for BC, if they were the right team for the Big Ten to go after. Though, I would much rather take several other schools than BC.
From what I understand, both ND and BC have had no interest in joining the AAU since it's a secular educational institution. However, given what ND brings ($$$), the Big Ten would likely be more than willing to look the other way. BC has so many other things against it (including the evidence already of what adding BC brings to your conference... cough ACC cough) that I don't see them as a viable candidate.
That said, for those of us stuck in Big East football purgatory, I think our window has closed unless the SEC or ACC decide to get aggressive.
I agree that there is no way B10 takes BC on its own because of its non-AAU situation. However, this is the kind of exception B10 would make if it meant they could get ND or TX. if ND wanted BC and made it deal killer, I believe ND would win that one. Boston is a good media market and BC is a respectable enough team in football and other sports. They also have a hockey team that would look lovely on BTN (this could happen even if there is never a B10 hockey conference; they already show some higher profile CCHA games). The real question is whether ND cares at all about BC. I have no idea, but I believe the B10 would take BC if necessary to get ND.
I was sure they had the facts right this time. After all, they've been burned so many times before by going on rumors and guesses.
I'm shocked - shocked! - to find that gambling is going on in here!
Your winnings, sir.
The expansion may be slowing down for now but it certainly is far from over. IMO the Big 12 is a temporary league now and at some point more members will bolt, but most will stay because they have nowhere else to go (Iowa State, Kansas).
By next spring the expansion fever will heat up yet again.
fit-looking even at 36''. How would 37'' make things any worse. That would be like being dissapointed that you didnt go the motor city bowl.
It is not over. The Big East is sitting around congratulating itself for dodging a bullet (ND too, probably). I see them looking at expansion options for themselves to strengthen their position and try to avoid being the guy who gets picked on next time around. They also should look at starting a BTN-style Big East Network given that they have some of the best media markets in the country.
The BTN monster is still hungry. The primary impetus of B10 expansion was BTN and the economics behind this have not changed. Delany & Co. might not move quickly (do they ever?) to add any additional teams to B10, but there will be constant pressure to find ways to maximize the value of BTN by expanding the footprint beyond existing media markets. The most logical places to look are TX and the Northeast. B10 also will continue to eye ND as a 'home run" addition due to its potential incremental value to BTN. Stay tuned.
The Big East is untenable. It's less stable now than it even was yesterday. I look forward to the day that the football schools split with the basketball-onlies.
There are no compelling additions for the Big East. Memphis? East Carolina? Central Florida? Dear God no.
Our best hope is when the Big Ten or ACC decide they want to go after the New York market. If expansion continues, we'll have a home in either the Big Ten or ACC, but until that time... blech.
... which is inconceivable after the ACC raided them only a few years ago, but they were. Instead of working to make sure such a thing could not happen again, they added three lame replacement teams (S Fl, Cincy, L'ville) and called it a day. I do not see them letting this happen again. They also hired Tagliabue for a reason. It was not to stop B10 expansion because it was far too late for him to do that. It was to help them explore launching a BTN-style network. He was a genius at media/marketing for the NFL.
As for what teams the Big East might look to grab, logic suggests the first name on the list is ND. If the B10 really wants ND, they better not sit around for another 5-10 years before making the next move. By that time, it will be too late. The Big East will launch a network, give ND some special treatment allowing them to keep their NBC contract and ND will join the Big East for football while at the same time claiming they are still independent. They do this already now. They are in the Big East for every sport except football and hockey, yet they call themselves independent and everyone let's them get a way with it.
I can also see BC moving back from the ACC to the Big East if the conference can improve its profile a little and if a new Big East network can generate enough revenue to offset what BC would be leaving on the table in the ACC. BC's move to the ACC has been less successful than expected for both. It doesn't generate the excitement or ratings in BC's market that they had hoped and it is really an awkward geographic fit. Still, BC will never move back to the Big East so long as it is a crap conference making no money. On the other hand, if the Big East can add ND (even if this is more smoke and mirrors than reality) and launch a successful BTN-style network, BC's ears will perk up considerably. That gets the Big East to 10 teams, which means two more and they can have a conference championship game. How about Maryland and Virginia? Or Miami or Virginia Tech? Under the right circumstances, all of these teams could be in play. The fact that BC, Va Tech and Miami have jumped conferences before (from the Big East to the ACC no less) makes it clear they will do whatever is in their own best interests. It is the Big East's (and Paul Tagliabue's) job to find a way to enhance the profile and financial situation of the Big East sufficiently to make these things possible. I am not saying this is a slam dunk, but the other conferences should not assume the Big East is simply going to sit pat and live with the status quo. I highly doubt that is what the Big East is doing.
This all comes down to the football members telling the basketball-onlies to shove it. The Big East was caught flat-footed in 2004 because Tranghese cared more about protecting St. John's and Providence than keeping his eyes on the best interest of his cash cows: Miami, Syracuse, Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Pittsburgh, Boston College.
The ACC wanted the cream off the top: Miami, Syracuse, Boston College. The Virginia legislature forced UVa to only vote for VT being added and you got Miami and VT with SU and BC committing to the Big East. And then BC back-stabbed everyone.
The funny thing is that BC was not included in the first ACC expansion because the NCSU rep was holding out to add, you guessed it, ND (she had ties there). BC didn't commit to the Big East in '03; they only had 6 votes in favor (7 needed) from the ACC. So that characterization is garbage. Remember also that Boeheim was happy staying in the Big East, so his weight was clearly not behind a move to the ACC.
That said, what's your deal? You have got some kind of serious thing here against BC. Just so I understand better, do you support further expansion, and if so which (2 or 4) teams?