Texas and Texas A&M commit to a 10-member Big 12.
Tennessee is not recruiting well just because they got 18 dudes
Texas and Texas A&M commit to a 10-member Big 12.
1. I thought the B10 was halting the expansion bits for a while (as per this http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/big10-pausing-expansion-12-18-months). Are they just saying that because they're not as aggressive as Pac10-Big12 moves at this point?
2. Would the B10 ever expand into an odd number of teams again? I don't really see that happening, but I guess it's possible. It seems like the conference would want to expand by twos from here on out.
They aren't halting. They just setup another timeline to continue investigating expansion.
All of this talk is making my head spin. Every five minutes there is a new "angle" on what is going to happen and who is involved. I've probaby heard 25 different scenarios so far on who will join the big ten. I just want this shit to happen so then I can plan on what edition of NCAA 20XX will have the new conference alignments. Because that's all that matters.
Why would A&M want to stay in the Big 12 and be UT's bitch with a SEC invite on the table?
Being UT's bitch or the whole SEC's bitch?
Dominated on the field and dominated in the TV revenue streams are two different things. Doesn't the SEC share the TV proceeds equally, or at least more equally than B12?
SEC has revenue sharing. Big XII remnants have UTexas and everybody else's pie.
The fact that the Big Ten is starting to perhaps look East-ward to the ACC is intriguing and very interesting. In fact, I'm not sure that Boston College or Georgia Tech might be the biggest fish the Big Ten could land. I know there's also been talk about potential interest in Maryland, but I'm thinking further South.
Why wouldn't the Big Ten have potential interest in offering, as a pair, UNC and Duke? Outstanding academics and research at both universities. Outstanding basketball at both. Still upcoming but potential perennial Top 25 football program at UNC. And Duke football has the chance to turn it around, as more and more recruits are starting to consider playing under Cutcliffe. If these two show interest in accepting, then as the 16th member, the Big Ten could set up for the spot to be left to Maryland, Notre Dame OR Texas -- taking the best application that offers the least problems/give-backs.
Of course, there could be hurdles in this, namely, for instance: (1) whether the NC legislature would get involved for NC State, (2) whether Duke/UNC would be willing to give up on an ACC that they've largely helped to define (via basketball), (3) whether Duke's lousy (though potentially improving) football program would be attractive enough, or (4) whether there's any marketshare that can be gained for the Big Ten by expanding via entry through two North Carolina schools.
But here are things to consider with respect to these types of issues: (1) NC State would still be left with an ACC that has not (yet) collapsed, and may be attractive, anyway, to include in any new Big East/ACC combo, and the various state legislatures may be less involved than folks have been thinking in this process so far; (2) NCAA basketball schedules allow for more opportunity than football, obviously, to keep up traditional rivalries through game play during the season and the UNC/Duke rivalry is the most important one for those two schools, anyway, and these two schools have ready-made rivalries in the Big Ten (what UM fan DOESN'T despise Duke?); (3) Duke's football program provides an opportunity for growth (like a stock you're buying low) and nevertheless will make for good natural rivalries (and models for Duke to improve) with schools like Northwestern; and (4) perhaps most importantly, while the state for these schools -- particularly for UNC -- has loyal fanbases in two fast growing US cities (Charlotte is in the top 25 population-wise in the nation, and Raleigh is among the top 10 fastest growing cities), their alumni are everywhere and, much like the Big Ten schools, their alumni often move out of the state, making their tentacles reach quite a bit farther; moreover, by adding these two schools, the Big Ten Network could potentially creat a very lucrative basketball compliment to its football coverage. And all of this is not even taking into account the national academic prestige that these two universities have.
With that, I will finally end this post, and look forward to your thoughts!
Academically, GT is as good as or better than any school in the BCS (or any other level of compettition for that matter). In the big 3 sports of baseball, basketball, and football GT won 2 regular season ACC championships, and was 30 seconds away from the basketball title.
Also in what sense is Charlotte more desireable than Atlanta?
And yes Duke's football program has no other direction to go than up, but GT is also on the upswing from a much loftier starting point.
First, along with UVa (and maybe Maryland), they are the ACC, really. I think that Duke and UNC were the only ones to vote against the last round of ACC expansion, and it was across the board as I recall. I don't recall if either were in favor of adding Florida State. If anything, I see them voting with the SEC to take Florida State and Miami off their hands.
And the ACC, acedemically is the best of BCS conferences. If they switch to the Big Ten, then, yeah, the Big Ten would probably be the best, but why do it when they are already in the best conference, and their power (institutionally, not on the field) is already set in the conference.
They make no sense, geography-wise. Their travelling goes from relatively benign (yeah, occasional trips to Miami, Tallahasse and Boston; but offset by trips to WInston-Salem, Raleigh, Charlottesville, and Clemson) to a real bear, across all sports, to the schools in the midwest.
Listen and believe me when I say this: the Big Ten will add Florida or Alabama before it adds Duke and UNC. The people at those schools think Duke and UNC are the ACC. And in a way they're right. The admin and alums at those schools are almost entirely made up of get-off-my-lawn types that haven't ever even considered a world with Duke and UNC outside the ACC because if they did consider it, they'd explode.
It is never, ever going to happen.
My son is at a Duke junior football camp which started yesterday. (We'll be driving up for the Michigan one next year when the field turf is back in the Big House.) The complex is next door to Cameron Indoor Stadium. A couple of observations:
1) The indoor practice facility is field turf, about 30 - 40 yards long, and from the hash mark to the sideline. The ceiling is probably 40 - 50 feet. The weight room is a dungeon compared to the photos of Barwis' gym. There is a training room with more machine next to the weight room but it is small as well.
2) Cutliffe's motivational posters all end with "defense"
3) Wallace Wade Stadium is a horse shoe, and is very small (33,941), and they still have to sell tickets for next to nothing to come close to filling it. The field is real grass. No box seats.
4) The practice field is field turf. The equipment I could see was pretty sparse.
Conclusion: no surprised here, basketball is king at Duke, and the football program is operating on bootstraps.
This must be very limiting in recruiting.
Anyway, since this is an ACC thread, I thought I'd post up my impressions.
P.S. I am all for raiding the ACC, but I think the raid should be adjacent territory. Unless we pulled say Syracuse, then BC is a bridge too far. (I don't recall who BC's rivals were in the Big East. Obviously BC vs. ND would be a huge gain for the Big Ten.)
GT is too far regardless. I think Maryland, UVA, Va Tech would be better fits, with Maryland the bridge to UVA and Va Tech. The ACC seems fairly strong to me though. Expansion news is fairly quiet down here as well, so maybe ripe for surprise pick offs.
Thanks for the info on the facilities there -- and cool that your son gets to participate in some junior camps! I think your insight into the facilities probably makes Duke a less likely candidate since football is king in the Big Ten, and the lack of focus/funds for football at Duke would be a downer. That said, I'd expect Duke would be able to fill its stadium when certain Big Ten football teams came to town! (Perhaps especially the newly-acquired Nebraksa fans who are notoriously rabid and willing to travel far distances).
All that said, I'm not sure that distance is as big a factor any-longer to the Big Ten, given that they've been seriously considering Texas. I don't think there's a need to make sure that we have a bridge school included in the region between PA and Massachusetts, for instance, in order to include BC. As the saying goes, it looks like the world is flat once again...
Ah, I love my son, but he is a tall uncoordinated (and therefore not very fast) kid for his age (6th grade).
He love's football though, so we send him to a camp or two before August practice. My concern now is he is tall but not projected to be too tall. In Pop Warner where the max weight is limited, he is usually right under the weight, and thus plays OL / DL (which is perfect given his skills).
When he moves on to middle school ball in a year, he'll no longer be the biggest. (This dawned on him yesterday at camp.) So somehow I've got to prepare him to play LB, or DE or something.
When Jake Long was drafted, I showed my son the interview where Jake recalled being in Pop Warner, and how Jake discovered pretty early he wasn't going to be a ball handler. That bought a lot for his self esteem (perfectly cool not to handle the ball, but to be known for tough blocking and tackling instead). It would be nice at this stage to have a couple of stories about transitioning from gangly boy, to athletic teen, and so on. [Besides me, he's had coaches and other dads tell him this, but nothing like pointing to a few guys he watches on Saturdays or Sundays as examples.]
So not some Lane Kiffen early D-1 prospect wunderkind, but passionate about football.
They own the DC market, a new footprint for the B10. It would put the B10 Network on basic cable in the area. (It is not now, despite a large presence of PSU and UM alumni.)
Maryland would be hard to get however. They fancy themselves as primarily as a basketball power (rightly so). They have built up a passionate burn-the-town rivalry with Duke. I don't know if they would want to give that up unless the ACC implodes around them.
UVA has some merit, but they don't command the attentiom that U-MD does. Perhaps not enough to get the B-10 Network on basic cable in DC, MD, N.VA combined. Plus they may have their own "Tech Problem" package deal (VA Tech). They drug VA Tech into the ACC when it last expanded, despite what the ACC really wanted.
Um, what? Since when does DC even remotely care about Maryland? And UMd is only a few miles down Rhode Island Ave.
I went to high school in Northern Virginia. At the time (pre Len Bias), Maryland football and hoops were pretty big in the DC market. The fall out destryed the following for a long time. (It may be rebuilding now, I do not know.)
The thing we keep underestimating is the combination of Team A or B being added in a specific market (i.e., the base case), combined with an increase in local interest because Team A or B football are now playing Big Ten teams, less (for the ACC or Big East) local interest because Team A or B basketball are no longer playing Duke, and UNC, or Georgetown, etc., combined with increased interest from the Big Ten alumni in that market.
It is a complex equation sure, but there is an underlying eyeball multiplier that may move the BTN up to basic tier.
There are a number of other schools that outdraw Maryland in College Park when they come calling. UMd can't get on local TV (i.e. MASN) when MASN comparatively picks up Big East games on the Big East "Network".
Maryland should own the DC market, but even when their football team went to the Orange Bowl, nobody here cared.
been regarding expansion. On each consideration (geography, acedemics, etc) they fit OK, but others fit much better, I think.
Before Penn State joined the Big Ten, they played Maryland fairly regularly in many sports. I wonder if they have had much to do with Maryland's being mentioned.
Save for my 4 years in Ann Arbor, my lifetime of living in DC convinces me that unless you are an alumnus or born and raised in Maryland, nobody around here really gives a hoot about the Terps. Sure people were on the bandwagon when they had their good couple years of football and bastketball, but otherwise the football games get no airtime and basketball only does for marquee games. Maryland's most consistantly successful sport is men's soccer, and their big time games are far more exciting than random midseason Terps football game.
And speaking of Duke/UMD basketball, they usually turn into couch burning and mildly East Lansing type activities (some of this police overuse of force inducded, but nonetheless).
To hell with Texas!
FIrst, if the Big Ten people were as pissed at UT as alleged (surprise, surprise), why would the Bloc of 4 be insisting on no non-UT schools? Wouldn't it make more sense that it would be UT itself that would be the target of their ire? Why, for example, would Missouri be automatically excluded, since they are in no way affiliated with Texas?
Second, what is the verifiable source for the assertion that the Big Ten has vetted BC and GT? Delaney is already on record as saying that membership of the AAU is a critical factor in Big Ten membership, but BC isn't a member. GT is, but their status as one of the founding members of the ACC and their location down in the heart of the South with no rivalry with any B10 program at all says to me this is just more blue-sky speculation.
This whole process is so interesting. I am guessing there is a lot of collusion and a lot of smoke being leaked to hide the real strategy. Delaney is a bloody evil genius - wonderful to have him on our side of the game.
academics than anything else. Maybe this was not absolutely clear in my post but the "bloc of 4" insisting on no non-UT B12 additions is not exactly the same set of schools as those not very keen on UT dictating terms to the B10 ( as in these folks see the enormous value of adding UT but would also like to keep them in their place).
As for things not making sense, does anything at all in this entire topic (of conference expansion in general ) make sense anymore? I have given up looking for logic a long time ago.
Oh, and as another poster pointed, this could absolutely be a case of ninja Delany disseminating misinformation to muddle up some of the truths out there. I dont know and never claimed to do so either.
they joined in 1979
ND would get to retain their "independent" status but would commit to playing 7 B10 opponents every year (3 of those being in SB). They would agree in principle to come under the B10 TV contract within a reasonable time frame (as in not immediately but within a given amount of years that is TBD).
Fuck you, Notre Dame. Either you're in or you're out. I wish the B10 would drop all talks with them. The conference is stronger having added Nebraska, and there are a couple teams out there still worthy of consideration. We don't need Notre Dame in the B10.
We'll let you keep Tom Hammond. That's enough.
The Big East has grown tired of ND being a primadnona, why would the Big Ten put up with it?
Not when ND wants a larger share than everyone else.
That's the first time I've heard of that. Do you have a link to support it?
It's been more of conventional wisdom for ND and Texas. I've seen articles but don't have any on-hand. Take it all with a grain of salt like anything else being thrown around.
Wow, that's kind of ridiculous. I really hope it doesn't come to that.
unless ND's back is against the wall the big ten will need to offer them a sweetheart deal to get them to join, whether you like it or not. I don't understand why ND wouldn't move all of its sports if it joined the big ten, that doesn't make sense at all to me and the writer doesn't really address that at all. So I am not sure if he is making it up or what
What do you think would happen if the Big10 took Pitt and Syracuse as 13 and 14?
losing Pitt would hurt ND if were to stay as they are, syracuse wouldn't much. Now Pitt and BC, you might have something more interesting to ND
Herbie was on ESPN talking about that unless ND makes a BCS bowl that BigTen teams out earn ND by 10 Million a year...If they make a bowl then the B10 still out paces them by 5 mil or so. How can ND look at their current deal and feel good that Indiana and Northwestern are making more in Football TV revenue? If a strong 14 or 16 team Big 10 can earn an estimated 30-40 Million then it seems that ND is not in a position to demand a sweet deal. If they had any leverage then NBC would be paying them Big Ten Network money and that isn't going to happen when you’re pulling 2.2 and 2.4 rating draws the last two years and that 2.4 represents the best ratings for ND in 10 years. Now ND is not desperate even with an outdated and terrible TV deal they still pull in a ton of Money for the football program (60 Million or so) but it still seems like better business to join the BigTen with or without a Sweet Deal.
Do you honestly think that Herbie knows what he is talking about? He probably is going on the same information that says the BTN brings $20 million to each team.
He has a fairly good opinion when it comes to the game, but as a fact reporter, I'm not sure he's ever been correct.
TV revenue isn't the only factor ND weighed in making their decision
the 8-0 trumping a 7-0 shouldn't ever be a problem to begin with if there is a championship game. The only issue I could see coming out would be a season with 2 8-0 teams and a 7-0 team but that doesn't really seem possible if the schedules were done right.
And if there are 2 bcs autobids why wouldn't the 2nd one go to the losing team in the championship game, who should it go to?
I think that UNC and Duke are great additions if you're putting together a Quiz Bowl team but this expansion is really about football (and the associated dollars).
I agree that UNC has the potential to put together a consisitent football program as long as Butch Davis is in town. Duke, on the other hand, is probably outside the Top 100 D1 football programs in the country. They've definitely been better under Cutcliffe but we don't know if this will be sustainable yet.
I've lived in Raleigh for 14 years and this really isn't football country. I remember not too long ago that the UNC vs NCSU game wasn't even on TV. I don't think that the NCSU vs. Duke game was televised last year. It's just unthinkable at this point in Big Ten country that two in-state rivals don't make it on TV.
If you're going for the basketball angle, I'd rather take Kansas and 'Cuse because they seem to be more geographically and culturally aligned with the Big Ten.
Don't get me wrong, from a personal standpoint, I'd love to see Big Ten teams coming down for football games in the Triangle. I just don't see it as a business fit.
Besides being the wrong fit there is a zero point zero percent chance either school would even consider a switch to the B10. UNCand Duke (right or wrong) view themselves AS THE ACC. ACC basketball is king down here and football is an after thought.
I am with you guys. From Triangle viewpoint, UNC, NC State, Duke and to some extent Wake Forest are the linked core of the ACC. Of those football is king only at NC State (and maybe Wake Forest). I'd sure love a Big Ten / ACC Challenge in football to drive some games through here on occasion, but I can't see how it would work moving one or two of thsoe to the Big Ten.
As I said above, realignment is barley on the radar here, and the press contains nothing on any of the local schools possible moving.
Of course, there could be hurdles in this, namely, for instance: (1) whether the NC legislature would get involved for NC State,
They would. And they would block it. Or....they would threaten to block it and everyone would run crying to mama.
BC has been a failure for the ACC (not just the championship game as we've discussed), why would the Big Ten repeat the same mistake?
... in the Big 12 "Lite":
The focus shifts to A&M, if they stay, then realignment slows down. Big Ten is now 12 and Big 12 is now 10.
Big Ten probably regroups; still like the add of Nebraska.
Update: ESPN says Pac-10 still in the mix:
joe schad says otherwise lol
We're on for 16-team super-conferences...
My guess would be:
SEC: Texas A&M, Florida State, Miami, Virginia Tech
ACC: UConn, Pittsburgh, West Virginia (this would only get them back to 12)
Big Ten: Notre Dame, Syracuse, Rutgers, Pittsburgh or Missouri
Left out: Cincinnati, Louisville, South Florida, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Missouri?, West Virginia?
Agree with your points except the ACC isn't going to take Cincinnati, Louisville, and USF. There's been a lot of debate about academics and Missouri, but Ohio State might as well be Oxford compared to those three.
especially after the way the governor did VPI a solid by even getting them into the ACC
The difference is, UVa would love to see VT leave.
that may be, im saying that the state govt is going to want to get both of their schools in on any sort of payday coming VPI's way
Depends on who you talk to at UVA. Living in Charlottesville, I don't see a lot of passion either way towards VT. Seems most of the venom comes from Blacksburg. I'm guessing the Academics at UVA may be the only anti-VT folks.
You don't hang out much on UVA message boards, obviously.
It just seems a little strange that Texas A & M would go to the SEC without any other B12 school. From a SEC perspective, it gives them a foothold in Texas (huge state) without costing them too much. However, now they're going to need another team to balance the conference with 14 teams. If everybody else is going to the PAC 10, where does that other team come from? The SEC has already said that they're not looking at Miami, FSU, GA Tech or Clemson.
Missouri is a natural geographic rival for Arkansas -- Fayetteville is not far from Columbia. Also, the state of Missouri borders on Tennessee and Kentucky.
Missouri isn't a bad choice. Yes, the northern half of the state is basically Iowa, but the bottom half is basically Tennessee. I'm just not sure Mizzou would want that unless it's a last resort.
Atlanta TV market would be a good footprint in the south east. BC would make sense for the northeast market.
While Georgia Tech would be a good add how many fans do they have in Georgia? I thought the vast majority of fans in Georgia were Georgia fans. I might be wrong but it would be nice if we got a team with a really big fanbase so we get more viewers.