Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Only problem I see is the fact that OU and UT aren’t in the Big 10. Soooo yeah.What do you guys think of this? This is about as balanced as possible:
EAST - Rut, MD, PSU, OSU
CENTRAL - UM, MSU, IN, Pur
NORTH - WI, MN, Neb, Iowa
SOUTH - UT, OU, IL, NW
Annual crossover games for OSU-UM and Neb-OU.
Only problem I see is the fact that OU and UT aren’t in the Big 10. Soooo yeah.
AND, as we know, Michigan and Ohio State rule the B1G, they cannot be ignored.
No. Boot the stds that are maryland and rutgers.Can the B1G just boot Purdue and Illinois so we can build a cooler conference and make more money.
No. Boot the stds that are maryland and rutgers.
I dont blame you but You're thinking statically and using the same old excuses that dont hold water. Rutgers through week 7 last year wasnt even averaging 1 million viewers for their games. It wasnt until they got well into the big ten season that their average went above a million because of the push from other big ten fanbases. They are consistently at the very bottom in viewership. Who cares if they have a big market when no one watches their games? Delaney got caught in expansion hype and had to out smart himself in this one. Rutgers isnt big ten material, period. Its common sense.NY (#1) and DC (#6) markets. Necessary evil to make the cash register go cha-ching. Purdue and Illinois bring strong academics and some tradition in basketball, but what else? I don't even know what other sports they're generally good at, but I never get excited to play either school in anything.
Indiana and Northwestern already deliver Indianapolis and Chicago. You could swap Illinois and Northwestern, but I'd rather keep the school in a much better location with the best academics in the conference. Higher profile alumni too.
Of course, this is all just fantasy realignment speculation. I don't think you'll ever see the B1G boot a school that wants to stay, but those are two schools Delany would never add today if they weren't already in place.
Can the B1G just boot Purdue and Illinois so we can build a cooler conference and make more money.
Purdue and Illinois are both charter members of the Big Ten and Purdue is the founding member. Actually, Purdue President James Smart invented the concept of college conferences. Before he convened a few colleges in 1895 to form a conference, there were none.Of course, this is all just fantasy realignment speculation. I don't think you'll ever see the B1G boot a school that wants to stay, but those are two schools Delany would never add today if they weren't already in place.
I dont blame you but You're thinking statically and using the same old excuses that dont hold water. Rutgers through week 7 last year wasnt even averaging 1 million viewers for their games. It wasnt until they got well into the big ten season that their average went above a million because of the push from other big ten fanbases. They are consistently at the very bottom in viewership. Who cares if they have a big market when no one watches their games? Delaney got caught in expansion hype and had to out smart himself in this one. Rutgers isnt big ten material, period. Its common sense.
Maryland is also consistently in the bottom 3 or 4 teams. When you factor in the inferior play from both schools, it cheapens the conference. The only beneficiaries are teams like indiana who miht get a chance at another win. Maryland at least used to have a good basketball team even though I dont think that justifies it. Rutgers? Ugh its just awful.
Oh, but new york market!!!
Purdue and Illinois are both charter members of the Big Ten and Purdue is the founding member. Actually, Purdue President James Smart invented the concept of college conferences. Before he convened a few colleges in 1895 to form a conference, there were none.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Ten_Conference
I dont blame you but You're thinking statically and using the same old excuses that dont hold water. Rutgers through week 7 last year wasnt even averaging 1 million viewers for their games. It wasnt until they got well into the big ten season that their average went above a million because of the push from other big ten fanbases. They are consistently at the very bottom in viewership. Who cares if they have a big market when no one watches their games? Delaney got caught in expansion hype and had to out smart himself in this one. Rutgers isnt big ten material, period. Its common sense.
Maryland is also consistently in the bottom 3 or 4 teams. When you factor in the inferior play from both schools, it cheapens the conference. The only beneficiaries are teams like indiana who miht get a chance at another win. Maryland at least used to have a good basketball team even though I dont think that justifies it. Rutgers? Ugh its just awful.
Oh, but new york market!!!
Except viewership only matters to sponsors. Yes it matters but the reason the B1G chose those schools was because of the monthly subscriber fees.
You simply can’t have 14 powers in one league because no one would ever win anything, especially in football. There has to be a few sisters of the poor. There has to be balance. Missouri wasn’t brought into the SEC because they were necessarily great at sports. They have the 16 or 17 highest population, so they bring more subscribers to the SEC network
Wall Street Journal/London Times academic ranking has Purdue one of the top five public universities in the US. Purdue and Illinois are also ranked among the top ten engineering schools in the nation. If Purdue and Illinois started another conference, Nebraska wouldn't be in it.If Purdue is so great at starting conferences, perhaps they can start another one.
Wall Street Journal/London Times academic ranking has Purdue one of the top five public universities in the US. Purdue and Illinois are also ranked among the top ten engineering schools in the nation. If Purdue and Illinois started another conference, Nebraska wouldn't be in it.
https://www.timeshighereducation.co...sities/best-public-universities-united-states
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/engineering-doctorate
It's not about viewership. The fact that Rutgers was a member of the B1G allowed Delany to get BTN packaged with the YES Network in NY. In other words, if you want to watch Yankee games as a New Yorker, you have to have YES. And if you have YES, you have to have BTN.
That's a metric shit-ton of BTN subscribers, whether they give two shits about Rutgers or not (I agree with you that the vast majority don't). That wouldn't have happened without Delany being a master at this stuff. You also wouldn't see conference members raking in north of $50M/year if the guy didn't know what he's doing.
Not every school the B1G adds will be for football reasons. Penn State and Nebraska were great additions on the field. Maryland and Rutgers were not, but markets matter and matter greatly. Continue to ignore that if you want, but I'm glad Delany is on top of it.
Except viewership only matters to sponsors. Yes it matters but the reason the B1G chose those schools was because of the monthly subscriber fees.
You simply can’t have 14 powers in one league because no one would ever win anything, especially in football. There has to be a few sisters of the poor. There has to be balance. Missouri wasn’t brought into the SEC because they were necessarily great at sports. They have the 16 or 17 highest population, so they bring more subscribers to the SEC network
Oh, I've got a pretty thick hide about little jabs like that. Point is, the academic prowess of the B1G is probably the most appealing feature of the conference to schools like Oklahoma and Texas.It seems I rankled your feathers on this topic. That wasn't my intent. I was just having some fun in a thread that proposed a reorganization of divisions/pods/playgroups based on the presumed additions of UT and OU. We were already living in fantasyland when the thread started so in that context, I don't see how my posts were somehow out of bounds.
No one is saying that Purdue and Illinois aren't great academic schools. If they want to leave the B1G to start Ivy League Light and leave poor Nebraska out, they're more than welcome. Clearly NU wouldn't be a candidate for an academics-first conference but then that's not what we're talking about.
I realize message boards are serious business, but to be clear, I'm not actually advocating for the removal of Purdue, Illinois or any current B1G member. I don't want Nebraska to reside in a conference that would boot members based on a what-have-you-done-for-me-lately mindset. We could have stayed with Texas if we wanted a foundation built on shifting sands.
My first post on the subject was terse and flippant. That's not usually my style but I was in a mood. My whole point is that, if you evaluated the current members of the conference based on the criteria used to identify expansion candidates, those two would stand out because they're redundant in terms of market and don't bring a brand name when it comes to football. That's it. There's really no arguing that regardless of their historic and academic credentials.
The same could be said of their proximity peers, Indiana and Northwestern. The same could also be said of Michigan State to a lesser extent despite their recent gridiron prowess. But none of those schools are going anywhere. I thought the "fantasy conference realignment speculation" disclaimer was enough but apparently the mere suggestion of contraction is upsetting to some.
Anyway, back to threads about off-season S&C, whether we're taking reaches in recruiting and how much Iowa sucks.
It seems I rankled your feathers on this topic. That wasn't my intent. I was just having some fun in a thread that proposed a reorganization of divisions/pods/playgroups based on the presumed additions of UT and OU. We were already living in fantasyland when the thread started so in that context, I don't see how my posts were somehow out of bounds.
No one is saying that Purdue and Illinois aren't great academic schools. If they want to leave the B1G to start Ivy League Light and leave poor Nebraska out, they're more than welcome. Clearly NU wouldn't be a candidate for an academics-first conference but then that's not what we're talking about.
I realize message boards are serious business, but to be clear, I'm not actually advocating for the removal of Purdue, Illinois or any current B1G member. I don't want Nebraska to reside in a conference that would boot members based on a what-have-you-done-for-me-lately mindset. We could have stayed with Texas if we wanted a foundation built on shifting sands.
My first post on the subject was terse and flippant. That's not usually my style but I was in a mood. My whole point is that, if you evaluated the current members of the conference based on the criteria used to identify expansion candidates, those two would stand out because they're redundant in terms of market and don't bring a brand name when it comes to football. That's it. There's really no arguing that regardless of their historic and academic credentials.
The same could be said of their proximity peers, Indiana and Northwestern. The same could also be said of Michigan State to a lesser extent despite their recent gridiron prowess. But none of those schools are going anywhere. I thought the "fantasy conference realignment speculation" disclaimer was enough but apparently the mere suggestion of contraction is upsetting to some.
Anyway, back to threads about off-season S&C, whether we're taking reaches in recruiting and how much Iowa sucks.
Should have just put an asterisk by that post. Seems to work well up here.
They look good, but if the Big Ten expands with Oklahoma and either Texas or Kansas I think they'll keep the west/east format. It would be easy to move Purdue to the east and add the two new additions to the west. That would put all the west teams in the central time zone and all the east teams in the eastern time zone.What do you guys think of this? This is about as balanced as possible:
EAST - Rut, MD, PSU, OSU
CENTRAL - UM, MSU, IN, Pur
NORTH - WI, MN, Neb, Iowa
SOUTH - UT, OU, IL, NW
Annual crossover games for OSU-UM and Neb-OU.
Oh, I've got a pretty thick hide about little jabs like that. Point is, the academic prowess of the B1G is probably the most appealing feature of the conference to schools like Oklahoma and Texas.
They look good, but if the Big Ten expands with Oklahoma and either Texas or Kansas I think they'll keep the west/east format. It would be easy to move Purdue to the east and add the two new additions to the west. That would put all the west teams in the central time zone and all the east teams in the eastern time zone.
Indeed, if the other boxes are to be checked. Those boxes include: academics + athletics (85% football) + TV market aka brand + expansion of BTN footprint (not the same as TV market) + AAU membership + resurrecting/maintaining classic rivalries + geographic proximity + state flagship.Possibly. It probably depends on whether you ask a university president or an AD. But it's not what makes the conference attractive to the schools; it's the other way around. The B1G certainly wouldn't add OU for its academics, but their athletic prowess and brand would make them attractive anyway similar to NU's appeal in 2010. And conversely, OU would be happy to join for both reasons just like we were.
And that's the whole point I was making. Academics still matter to the B1G, they have to and should, but even for them, that really hasn't been the driving force in conference expansion. It's basically a prerequisite if the other boxes are checked. And even then, academics can be seriously overlooked if the other benefits are too good to be ignored.
That's why I argued that a few current schools probably wouldn't make the cut if they were free agents today, fair or unfair. Or they would make the cut only for certain sports (i.e., Johns Hopkins). Or they would simply be a member of the CIC without any athletic affiliation (i.e., University of Chicago).
Indeed, if the other boxes are to be checked. Those boxes include: academics + athletics (85% football) + TV market aka brand + expansion of BTN footprint (not the same as TV market) + AAU membership + resurrecting/maintaining classic rivalries + geographic proximity + state flagship.
No school brings all of that to the table for the B1G but the top three, in alphabetical order, are Notre Dame, Oklahoma and Texas. ND hears a different drummer so the B1G's top realistic options are UT and OU. The fact that both refuse to extend the B12 GOR beyond 2025 suggests both are looking around.
Myself, I'd also be happy with any combination of ND, UT, OU, Colorado, GT, Mizzou, UVA or UNC.
Jim Delany was a double grad of UNC (undergrad and law school), his wife was a UNC grad and both of their kids graduated from UNC while the family was living in metro Chicago. I'm sure UNC is on Delany's short list for the B1G.You know Delany would love to have UNC join for many of the reasons you listed above, not to mention it's his alma mater.
Jim Delany was a double grad of UNC (undergrad and law school), his wife was a UNC grad and both of their kids graduated from UNC while the family was living in metro Chicago. I'm sure UNC is on Delany's short list for the B1G.
That doesn't mean North Carolina would leave the ACC for the B1G....
You’re getting way ahead of yourself with this expansion stuff.
Go to a 20 team super conference. 2 ten team divisions. You play everyone in your division with no crossover games. East champ vs west champ is the conference champ and moves on to the Playoff. You have 4 of the super conferences and the conference championship is the first round of playoffs. You play 3 non conference games that dont count towards your national title hopes. You would then get some awesome non conference games against top opponents. Get rid of the biased poll systems.
It's not about viewership. The fact that Rutgers was a member of the B1G allowed Delany to get BTN packaged with the YES Network in NY. In other words, if you want to watch Yankee games as a New Yorker, you have to have YES. And if you have YES, you have to have BTN.
That's a metric shit-ton of BTN subscribers, whether they give two shits about Rutgers or not (I agree with you that the vast majority don't). That wouldn't have happened without Delany being a master at this stuff. You also wouldn't see conference members raking in north of $50M/year if the guy didn't know what he's doing.
Not every school the B1G adds will be for football reasons. Penn State and Nebraska were great additions on the field. Maryland and Rutgers were not, but markets matter and matter greatly. Continue to ignore that if you want, but I'm glad Delany is on top of it.
Except viewership only matters to sponsors. Yes it matters but the reason the B1G chose those schools was because of the monthly subscriber fees.
You simply can’t have 14 powers in one league because no one would ever win anything, especially in football. There has to be a few sisters of the poor. There has to be balance. Missouri wasn’t brought into the SEC because they were necessarily great at sports. They have the 16 or 17 highest population, so they bring more subscribers to the SEC network
I agree that it's ok to talk about the possibility. I also think that considering all the current speculation and hype, it would be totally fitting that absolutely nothing changes over the next ten years precisely because everyone expects it toNo one said they would. No one said any of these teams would. How are we getting ahead of ourselves by simply talking about the possibility?
But you better believe Delany has a short list of expansion candidates and UNC is most certainly on it.