A suggestion for B1G expansion: Kansas and Colorado

Donate To GopherHole
Some guy said:
There is a large difference between what I want and what is likely.



Would love it if the conference expanded enough so we ended with 2 11 team divisions and ours was the original big 10 with a 10 game division schedule plus a crossover matched on where you finish.

Big ten division / coasts division
Michigan / oregon
Ohio state / Pitt
Iowa / UCLA
Michigan state / North Carolina
Minnesota / Maryland
Wisconsin / rutgers
Purdue / USC
Penn state / Virginia
Illinois / Colorado
Indiana / Washington
Northwestern / nebraska

But that’s not happening
Click to expand...
So you saying an 11 game schedule? Or 10 game schedule and don't play one of the 10 division opponents in exchange for the cross-over?

I also thought something very similar as what you said, but with two 10 team divisions. Play everyone in the division and one crossover based on previous year finish.

West:
Kansas Neb Iowa Iowa St Minn Wisc NW ILL Purdue Ind

East:
Mich Mich St Ohio St Penn St Mary Rutgers Virgina VT UNC GT


VT is because of Virginia politics. Of course not a lock. I'd prefer to take Virginia without VT, if possible. Also one could argue they (NC politics) might try to pigeonhole NC State or Duke the same way with UNC. Would not mind at all about taking Pitt instead of VT, for example. I like Pitt a lot as a school and athletic program and I don't think Penn St "owns" the city. Have been there twice and didn't get that feeling either time. For whatever that is worth.
 


highwayman said:
never, and
never.

B1G gains absolutely nothing adding these two schools. Iowa would never allow ISU to join, and the 5 TV sets in Kansas are not enough ...
Click to expand...

I think Kansas is more about Kansas City and western Missouri market than just Kansas. I don't know if that's enough to make a dent for the BG10.

Iowa State? No way.
 

I really don’t want to see the B1G go over 16 teams. 16 is easier to have balanced schedules and assures football can play all division teams each year. More than 16 and might as well be two conferences. The SEC did the right thing and grabbed Texas and Oklahoma, both elite schools that bring in the revenue.
 

Panthadad2 said:
I think Kansas is more about Kansas City and western Missouri market than just Kansas. I don't know if that's enough to make a dent for the BG10.

Iowa State? No way.
Click to expand...
I'd love Kansas and Missouri in the big ten. ISU no thanks.
 


I really don't think we need anymore schools, but if we do Notre Dame has to be one (tough chance). The other one is tough but, in my thinking it should be, (and obviously its selfish) Colorado. The way this state is growing, and HS football is improving, the market provides a great deal of recruiting opportunities. No one from the PAC 12 is recruiting here, so you're only battling the Mountain West.
 

Panthadad2 said:
I think Kansas is more about Kansas City and western Missouri market than just Kansas. I don't know if that's enough to make a dent for the BG10.

Iowa State? No way.
Click to expand...
There are more husker fans than Kansas football fans there
 


Word said:
If we took Kansas it would be for basketball reasons.
Click to expand...
If we were expanding for basketball reasons we wouldn’t be expanding

But if we were the basketball targets would be North Carolina, Virginia, Duke, Syracuse


Kansas just makes no sense in any way. Football money 100% drives everything and Kansas is the worst power football program (IMO) And at a minimum bottom 5 from a small population state.
 



Some guy said:
If we were expanding for basketball reasons we wouldn’t be expanding

But if we were the basketball targets would be North Carolina, Virginia, Duke, Syracuse


Kansas just makes no sense in any way. Football money 100% drives everything and Kansas is the worst power football program (IMO) And at a minimum bottom 5 from a small population state.
Click to expand...
So, I think you're agreeing with me?

I was just saying in some hypothetical situation where we go after Kansas, the only reason to think of would be for basketball. Football is a disaster.
 



If they (Big Ten) would be assured of a massive new contract, including significant increases per school (say from $5X to $8X per school per year) -- which included a school that was mainly brought on for its basketball team -- then I absolutely think they would consider that.

They've got it all, already, as much as they're going to have in football. They're never going to get Notre Dame (I think). I'm not sure yet if USC is a realistic option, either. So, any of these schools we're talking about are for things like new markets/alumni/fanbases (primarily) and solid academic/research institutions (secondarily). None of them are going to be gamechangers in winning football bowls and titles. Virginia, Pitt, UNC, GT? Solid programs, not gamechagers.

So ... frankly, why not Kansas, if the assumption I stated above (about money increase) is satisfied?
 



You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom