Who should be the Big Ten's hypothetical 12th team?

Tier 3 school http://mgoblog.com/diaries/theoretical-12-team-big-ten-conference http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/big-10-amplify-its-search-12th-member

is Pitt. ND alumni have already vetoed Big 10 inclusion once. Pitt is well respected academically/

Gotta be Pitt

Pitt would be the best choice IMHE.

Would be the best choice, IMO. They would steal recruits from Notre Dame, Purdue and Indiana and make the Big Ten's football prowess even stronger. Just kidding.... We MUST add a team. I agree that Cincy's academics are too sketchy to let them in. For me, it's either Pitt or Notre Dame (preferably Notre Dame but Pitt's not a bad choice either.) Syracuse is my dark horse given what they would bring to the Basketball part of the argument.

Decent academics (not great), large public university, recently good football team, access to the NYC TV market, and access to the NYC/ NJ recruiting area.

I will give you the names of 3 possible choices. (not named ND) 1: Pitt. Good location. Fits well with other teams (former rivals with Penn St). Big East not exactly the best oppertunity for them to be relavent on a national scale. 2: Mizzou. Again good location. Again already rivals with a Big Ten team. Compensates well with Illinois. Alot about this team works. Kind of like Pitt west if you will. 3: Kentucky. I know what your thinking. What? But look at there location compared to a common choice (Cincinatti), the state is just south of Ohio. Plus, they have football oppurtunities in the Big Ten instead of just getting pounded in the SEC. Take time and think about the football aspect of it. (I do know basketball is different story, kind of like Pitt BBall.)

I wouldn't mind either Pitt or Mizzou. And it would be great to shut out ND. ND has been fattening its pockets and ratings off of the Big Ten for too long now without giving a lot back. Let them cherry-pick another conference.

ND Pitt Iowa State Missouri Syracuse ND won't join, Pitt would be a great addition. Iowa State makes sense geographically, as does Missouri to some degree. Syracuse is orange. Go Blue! *tend to agree with Marshmallow, though...why the heck can't we have a championship game even though we have 11 teams? Top two play each other once more for the money?

Those B12 teams would be great, but they won't move from the B12, because the B12 will then have a void. Regionally Cincy, Louisville, and Pitt. Louisville has great football and basketball programs but is ranked about 124th academically. It almost has to be Pitt or Cincy. I think Pitt still shares it's stadium with the Steeler's, so it will hold 80K or so.

I don't thing the B10 needs a 12th team, but if we are going to add one Texas would be the best. This may be just as much of a longshot as ND, because Texas seems to have a pretty sweet situation dominating the B12 in most sports (though I do not know the economics of the B12 conference or its media markets), but Texas is an elite program in many sports, they would expand the B10 footprint and both the B10 and Texas almost certainly would benefit financially. Texas would be a killer addition to the B10, with the only downside being slightly higher travel costs. By adding Texas, the B10 could have two divisions with Michigan and OSU in one and PSU and Texas in the other. And FWIW, the Big 12 was only formed in the 1990s; Texas (which was a SWC team) has no strong historical ties to the B12 other than a couple of rivalries they could easily continue as non-conference games. If not Texas, the only other team that is realistically possible and that would substantially add to the value of the B10 is ND. Nebraska or Pitt might work, but they are hardly earth-shattering additions. Cincinnati? Really? If we are going to add a team, it should be an elite level school not just a filler to get to twelve. Adding a 12th team to the B10 affects a lot more than football and if the only thing the B10 is trying to accomplish is a championship game in football (for financial and PR reasons), I am sure the conference could figure out a way to do that without adding a 12th team (e.g. have one division with 5 teams and one with 6 teams, or have the last place team each year float the following year into the division that the ADs expect to be the easier of the two).

Expanding to 12 teams is a one time deal. We only have one shot to pick the right team. Last thing we want is for the Big 10 to turn into the 16 team Big East! That said, the best option for the Big 10 is Notre Dame. Add Mizzou or Rutgers or Pitt now, and if ND comes knocking later on, we're stuck. It has to be the right fit, and there's no use rushing into a decision this early when its not a necessity.

I know, I know, you can't necessarily rely on the 100% accuracy of Wikipedia, but FWIW: "Due to a requirement of the Big Ten bylaws, any expansion must be within, or next to, current Big Ten territory (although, like all bylaws, this could be amended by conference vote).... It is likely academics will also play an important role in any potential 12th school being invited into the conference. One other requirement for Big Ten adoption is membership in the very exclusive Association of American Universities, an organization of the top doctoral research institutions of Canada and the United States." Notre Dame is not a member of the AAU, but supposedly was extended an offer to join the B10 a few years ago. Either Wikipedia is wrong, or the B10 is bypassing its own bylaws on a case-by-case basis.

This is EXACTLY why the B10 has to be very careful who (if anyone) they add to the conference. Once a team is in, they are almost impossible to remove. Removal is based on a vote of all teams in the conference. NU is protected because other schools in the conference (Minnesota? MSU? Indiana? Purdue?) do not want to set a precedent of kicking out laggard teams and then find themselves in a similar situation at some point down the line. So once we let a Cincy, Louisville, Rutgers, Missouri (or any other yawner of a school) into the conference, we will be stuck with them forever. Add to this the the fact that such a move will eliminate any chance of getting a Texas or ND down the line, and I would much rather the B10 keep the 12th spot available for a killer, elite school at some point in the future than let in a throw-away team just to reach the not-so-magic number of 12.

and it would be a COMPLETE win-win. I think it is clear that the Big Ten can only hold out so long on a conference championship game. I know, I know, The Game..., but as a level headed Michigan fan, to fall back on "well, that is the Big Ten Champioship game anyway" just cannot be sustained anymore. I think the Big Ten is interested, and I think that Notre Dame needs to join a conference to remain (or again become) relevant and believable. Notre Dame's independent status has gone from a kind of cool distinction between them and other programs to being considered a cop-out to an easy schedule. And the Big Ten, ehh, while not the shell of a conference that the national media wants to pronounce, does need some tuning up. Come on Irish, Notre Dame v. Ohio State, Notre Dame v. Penn State, Wisconsin, etc. Me likes it!!

or even Iowa St. Then move Boise St to the Big12 to take their place.

??? There's as much chance of Alabama leaving the SEC to join the B10 as there is of Texas leaving the B12 to join us.

I'm still in favor of bringing in a MAC team. I know it wouldn't help the major sports much, but... Miami (OH) has great academics and would make a B10 hockey league a better possibility. Simply being in the B10 would allow the major sports to eventually catch up. Central probably doesn't cut it academically, but they would have been 5th in the conference in football this season. They are like Cinci without the successful basketball program. Temple. Why not? Buffalo? I don't know much about Buffalo, except they would expand the footprint a bit, and the football program had some relative success under Turner Gill. As soon as the B10 adds a MAC team, then GVSU makes the jump to D1 and starts winning MAC championships!

Rumored and suggested by people making out their I-want-a-pony Christmas lists, and floated by Texas people just to keep the rest of the Big 12 in line. The idea that Texas would leave behind its identity as the big cheese in southern/southwestern football, and join a conference composed entirely of northern teams, and in the process give up some football rivalries lasting over a century, and having to share the conference spotlight with three other big-time programs to boot, is ludicrous. I don't know why Texas would be unhappy in the Big 12; when those few Missouri fans who are in favor of leaving the Big 12 for the Big 10 give their reasons why, the primary reason is the unequal revenue situation in the B12. And guess who benefits from that? If Texas were to leave and join the B10 with its revenue sharing, they'd lose that advantage. At the moment, Texas is top dog in the entire Big 12—why would they want to throw that away to join a conference almost a thousand miles away? This is not to mention the Big Ten bylaw which states that expansion has to occur within the existing footprint or in an area immediately adjacent. Texas isn't in either spot. Geographically, academically, and in terms of conference affiliation, I think Pitt is the most logical choice (totally aside from whether Pitt wants to leave the Big East, which I have no clue about). It's well within the footprint, is a member of the AAU, and its conference affiliation with the BEast dates only back to 1991; prior to that it had been an independent. Pitt doesn't require any longer trips than are already necessary; whereas the increase in travel costs to a place like Texas or USF (another rumored fantasy candidate) would be huge.