Nebraska To Big Ten Official

Submitted by Brian on June 11th, 2010 at 2:33 PM

The Omaha News-Herald and Kansas City Star are reporting that Nebraska has officially applied to/accepted an invite from the Big Ten:

Late this morning, Nebraska officials contacted the Big Ten office, informing the league of the decision. Nebraska will become the 12th member of the Big Ten.

Meanwhile, University of Texas regents will meet next week to decide whether the Longhorns will remain in the Big 12 or switch to another conference.

Big 12 D-Day is Tuesday.

UPDATE: MSU AD Mark Hollis is tweeting it, so that's basically official. No more "anonymous sources."

UPDATE II: Showing the backbone we associate with true leadership, Hollis has deleted that tweet.

UPDATE III: From the Michigan AD:

Statement from Athletic Director Dave Brandon

I can confirm that Nebraska has applied to the Big Ten Conference for membership. I can also confirm that the Big Ten has done its due diligence as it relates to Nebraska. I expect that an announcement will be forthcoming from the Big Ten in regard to Nebraska’s membership very soon.

Here's a hint as to the outcome: The BTN is going to televise Nebraska's 6PM EST press conference.



June 11th, 2010 at 5:06 PM ^

At the present moment, Colorado's move to the Pac10 makes that Conference the Big11 . . . i.e, yesterday's Big10. Nebraska's move to the Big10 transforms our conference into . . . the Big12. And the flight of Nebraska and Colorado has changed the Big12 into the Big10.


June 11th, 2010 at 5:31 PM ^

Oklahoma and Colorado are sort of out of the picture now.

Can we perhaps donate to Nebraska some scarlet and gray Ohio State tackling dummies with Barry Switzer's head on them?  They'd should fire them up real good.


June 11th, 2010 at 7:02 PM ^

How would divisions line up if we cap at 12? I can't think of a way to create two balanced divisons that make geographic sense.

If we add the Oklahoma schools and go to 14, that would make things easier (albeit at the cost of losing geographic contiguity, since OK doesn't border NE or any current Big Ten state), but I haven't heard that possibility mentioned. Maybe Nebraska will lobby for them...


June 11th, 2010 at 11:13 PM ^

I am happy to add Nebraska into the fold, but I am trying to figure out how the divisions will work without completely hosing Penn State on travel.

I am assuming that Michigan/MSu/OSU will have to stay together. Indiana and Purdue will have to stay together. Minnesota and Wisconsin will have to stay together.Iowa and Minnesota may have to stay to gether (not sure on that one.). The pseudo rivalries that can definitely be split are Illinois/NW (Much like most of the rest of Big Ten can't get excited about playing one of these schools unless they lose to them, neither can Illinois or NW get too excited about each other in general), and the non-rivalry that is MSU and Penn State.

I am also assuming that Nebraska and Iowa will now be joined at the hip in a new alignment. So I guess that leaves:

Division 1:

Michigan, OSU, MSU, Purdue(??), Indiana (??), and either Illinois or NW (Leans toward NW if only to avoid a completely ridiculous basketball division)

Division 2:

Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Penn State (??), and either Illinois or NW (Leans toward Illinois for reasons above)

To balance the travel, you would have to sub in PSU for into the (Insert Team from Illinois slot here) positon in Division 1, but that would be awful for competitive balance in football.

Any suggestions?

Wide Open

June 13th, 2010 at 12:22 PM ^

With Nebraska coming in, that gives exactly 6 teams east of Chicago, and 6 teams from Chicago out west:

East Division
Ohio State
Penn State

West Division

Play a round-robin in division, plus a home and home with three teams from the other division every two years.

With the exception of the Brown Jug, all of the rivalries play out every year. And Penn State travels to the Central time zone at most twice every other year.

(Of course, anything they come up with that would screw PSU over I wouldn't cry about much).

c williams

June 13th, 2010 at 7:44 PM ^

I, too, think this is the most logical.

West has two tiers with UM, OSU and PSU in upper and MSU, IU, PU in lower, and east has two tiers with Neb, Iowa, and Wisc in upper and Minn, Ill and NW in lower.

We may have the tougher half, but just think of poor IU who has to play UM, OSU and PSU every year. 

Frankly, being less than 80 years old, I'm willing to play for brown jug every 2 years or whatever.


June 11th, 2010 at 7:22 PM ^

From all the viewpoints, analysis, etc I have read, this looks like a great fit.  I think the Big Ten is well positioned whether they stick at 12 or grow to as much as 16 some day.  Congrat's to Delany on what he and others have accomplished. Good day for the Big Ten.


June 12th, 2010 at 3:45 PM ^

Nebraska can go with black tops with red or white numbers.

Besides Wisconsin does not pass so much. When they do they throw interceptions.

I live in the state of Wisconsin, but I'm a Michigan fan/alumni. I'll root for Nebraska in those games. Wisconsin fans think they invented football because of the Packers, and the Lombardi Trophy. They are somewhat obnoxious and backward too. They are only aware of their teams. I have never seen such homers. They are knuckle dragging Neanderthals!

You have to live here to know how they are. I've been in Wisconsin since 1993. Every year I hope Michigan kicks Bucky's teeth out. If UM happens to lose in football or any other sport Badger fans are relentless poor sports with no class. They are such homer they even think that if you live in Wisconsin you should somehow "convert" to one of their "quadrennial" Michigan beating fan clubs.

Nebraska will lose to Michigan, and  kick the stuffing out of Bucky Badger.  

The only thing they have in common with The Green Bay Packer is they both are located in the cheese state. I guess I really hate the Badgers, uh?

I'm glad I got that out of my system. I need the season to start. First and foremost, I need an appetizer of NCAA 2011. July 14th can not get here soon enough.


June 11th, 2010 at 10:11 PM ^

This is nothing but good for the Big Ten. Nebraska is a quality university. It is a part of the Association of American Universities, and it has good atheletics. Once the other five schools are confirmed the conference alignment will take shape.


June 11th, 2010 at 11:08 PM ^

demanding a rilvary trophy ala the Little Brown Jug.

What it needs is the "Frost-Griese" trophy.

Take the 1997 AP National Championship trophy won by Michigan, and the 1997 Coaches crystal football trophy won by Nebraska, and bolt them together on a pedestal. 

Present the trophy to the winner of the Michigan-Nebraska game to keep for the full year, along with the right to claim the full 1997 National Championship for the whole year. 

Wiki will be edited accordingly. 


June 12th, 2010 at 4:39 PM ^

That's a great idea, love it!

FYI Nebraska doesn't have the "little copper spittoon" trophy type rivalries traditional in the Big Ten. Although many think of Oklahoma as our rival from the old Big 8 "Game of the Century" days, that ended with the BXII. 

Most Husker fans agree with our legendary coach Bob Devaney, who said about rivalries: “We have no rival. We are Nebraska.”

See my separate post on everything Nebraska

c williams

June 12th, 2010 at 2:26 AM ^

Why during this whole process do we continue to get stupid sound bites from MSU prez and AD?  Were they elected spokespeople for the Big 10 or can they just not keep a secret?


June 12th, 2010 at 2:16 PM ^

and predicted that Nebraska would be the 12th team, he would have gotten negbanged to infinity. Life is pretty bizarre these days.


June 13th, 2010 at 8:24 PM ^

I am sure this has been asked here before, but I can not find, nor do I recall, whether one of the NCAA requirements for holding a championship game is to have two divisions.

We have debated to death many possibilities of divisional splits, but could we simply expand our current rotating schedule to a 12th team without creating divisions?  It does not seem like there is a natural split for divisions, and I don't see why dividing up the conference is beneficial (unless, of course, it's an NCAA requirement).  We could simply put the top two teams into the championship game, using the basic tiebreakers (head-to-head would typically work).

Looking at recent years, I would have much rather seen the rematches of Penn St./Ohio St. in '05 and '08, Michigan/Ohio State in '06, and Iowa/Ohio St. in '09 than whatever alternative the divisional breakdown would spit out (which would typically also be a rematch)

One of the big disadvantages I see with the divisional breakdown is a situation like nearly occurred in the Big 12 last year - Nebraska winning the conference and earning the Big 12 automatic berth despite absolutely not being the best team in the conference...get rid of the divisions and Nebraska doesn't qualify for the championship game (no offense to our newest member - just the most relevant recent example)


June 14th, 2010 at 10:03 AM ^

Does anyone know how this will affect the 2011 schedule?  I assume that the B10 portion of the schedule, at a minimum, will have to be revised to make room for Nebraska. 


June 14th, 2010 at 5:14 PM ^

Biggest event in the big 10 this decade (and probably since Penn State joined) and all we get is a barebones, "yup, it happened" article on mgoblog?  Brian must like soccer a great deal more than I was previously aware.  Shouldn't we be discussing where this whole thing is going or something?  

To be clear: I'm not mad/flaming or anything, I just want to avoid serious work for another few days and said coverage would go a long way towards that end.  


June 14th, 2010 at 5:58 PM ^

I think it was pretty much covered in other threads on the board. What do you want Brian to say? How much he likes or dislikes this move? It's not like he has a lot of information to work with here.