CBS Sportsline article on Pac-10 & Big 10 expansion

[U2Gopher]

Decent article that examines future expansion, as the PAC-10 has announced they are looking to expand to 12 teams since their tv deal ends after 2011. Article says that the first two teams expected to move in expansion will most likely be Colorado to the Pac-10 and Missouri to the Big-10. It has a quote or two from Missouri's govenor, talking about how Mizzou would be a better academic fit with the Big 10. Also talks about how unhappy Mizzou is with the Big 12 regarding revenue sharing.

Nothing ground breaking in the article, but a decent read nonetheless.


http://new.cbssports.com/collegefoo...ould-boost-pac10-but-leave-wake-of-disruption

 

[mnboiler]

Thanks U2 it was a good read about the recent history of conference realignment and what drove it. After that not much. I will have to disagree with the writer on a couple of things though:

1. He seems to think that either Mizzou or Colorado is gone from the Big 12. I disagree. If Mizzou gets a B10 bid I think they are coming but I don't think they will get a bid. Personally I think Pitt is the best call, I know the big thing is that it doesn't add a tv market but I don't think Penn State basketball is watched in every house in western Penn.
2. If Pitt does come to the B10 look for the Big East to grab Memphis-good to great basketball, meh at best football, perfect fit.
3. If the B10 expands the Pac 10 WILL HAVE to expand to survive. I think BYU and Utah is the best choice. Could make a case for UNLV and Nevada as well, Both sets add another decent sized media market, keeps the pairs things going(Zona-ASU, USC-UCLA, etc.)
4. If BYU Utah run to the Pac 10 look for the Mountain West to steal Fresno State and Boise State out of the WAC. If its UNLV-Nevada look for Boise to move to the MWC.

But this isn't even close to the potenially biggest issue facings the BSC conferences and that is the fact that the B12 North is collectively pissed off about A) Revenue sharing and B) the amount of power Texas has in the B12. I think there is a small chance that the entire B12 North just say "@#$@ it" and goes and starts a new conference. Now that would make things fun. Think about all the sudden you go from 65 teams in BCS conferences that play football to alot more and some really marginal team too.

The new B12 North conference could look like
IA State, Mizzou, Kansas, K State, Nebraska, Colorado, Colorado State(the Buffs would get them in), Wyoming, Air Force, and I don't know who else it could pretty easily end the MWC.

The south is a little easier. But there would some absolutly terrible football game.
Texas, TTU, TAMU, Baylor, OU, OSU, Houston, TCU, SMU, Tulsa, Tulane, UTEP-that's 12 but there would be some terrible(and/or lopsided) football games played(basketball what's that, here in Texas there is only 2 season football and and spring football).

The new south would have some staying power. The north UNLESS they create there own network with a huge national base and get a nice little ESPN deal would be in some trouble really really quickly.

 

[station19]

Good Read. Thanks

Sounds like the author pretty much ruled out Notre Dame, saying they want to remain independent in football. I would think that with ND's TV contract running out soon they would have to seriously consider the Big Ten if offered.

I for one do like the idea of Missouri. I like the Midwest footprint. Call me provincial I guess. Missouri adds 2 TV markets and the academics seem to measure up. They also have expressed an interest.

Colorado to the Pac 10 seems like a stretch but you never know. If that were to happen and the Big Ten takes Missouri it would get interesting. No matter how these two work out it sounds like the future of the Big 12 is shaky. It will be interesting to follow.

 

[MrGopher]

Good read. Dodd, I think, has some personal reason to bring Texas to the Big10. I personally, am offended by the thought.

I am far less offended by the idea of Mizzou being #12. I dont really care if the folks in Michigan and Ohio dont care about Missouri. They already got their exciting new rival in Penn St. Now its our turn to bring in some new life to our part of the conference. If Missouri comes into the fold, then BigTen country will overlap 11 NFL cities (KC, StL, Mpls, GB, Chi, Ind, Cle, Cin, Det, Pit, Phi). Surely covering the same area as more than a third of the NFL markets is a sufficient base for raising revenue.

Having said that, Pitt would be an okay choice too. But I really hope its not Syracuse or Rutgers. That is not the Midwest by any stretch, and the BigTen has always been the Midwest's conference.

If I had my way this would be the new Big10 (or whatever they want to call it).

North: Minn, wisc, NU, Pur, Mich, MSU
South: Iowa, Mizz, ILL, Ind, OSU, PSU

Permanent (cross-division) rivalries:
Minn: Mizz, Iowa
wisc: Iowa, ILL
NU: ILL, Mizz
Pur: Ind, OSU
Mich: OSU, PSU
MSU: PSU, Ind

Mizz: Minn, NU
Iowa: wisc, Minn
ILL: NU, wisc
Ind: Pur, MSU
OSU: Mich, Pur
PSU: MSU, Mich

All major rivalries and trophy games are kept in check [except Minn-PSU (phony rivalry) and ILL-Pur (purdue cannon)], the divisions don't seem lopsided in football or basketball. And don't tell me that the OSU-Mich game will be dampened because they aren't in the same division. One of the basic facts of any true rivalry: Standings don't matter. All that matters is that the fans care, the players care, and the rivalries are renewed every single year.

I'm done rambling.

 

[RodentRampage]

If Missouri and Colorado were to leave, wouldn't that mean that the Big 12 would look to expand back to 12 teams to continue to have a championship game?

 

[GoAUpher]

Some thoughts:

1. He seems to think that either Mizzou or Colorado is gone from the Big 12. I disagree. If Mizzou gets a B10 bid I think they are coming but I don't think they will get a bid. Personally I think Pitt is the best call, I know the big thing is that it doesn't add a tv market but I don't think Penn State basketball is watched in every house in western Penn.

But PSU already has those markets locked in b/c of football. Getting them to watch BTN for basketball isn't important b/c the BTN already has the money from the cable companies for each subscriber in those markets thanks to football. Adding more TV markets is pretty much the #1 reason to expand because it is such a revenue raiser. Will that mean Pitt can't be added? I have no idea. But if the B10 adds only Pitt then they're probably making a mistake since adding a 12th team that doesn't add $$$ via subscriber fees in new markets will only lower the amount each school earns in TV payouts.

3. If the B10 expands the Pac 10 WILL HAVE to expand to survive. I think BYU and Utah is the best choice. Could make a case for UNLV and Nevada as well, Both sets add another decent sized media market, keeps the pairs things going(Zona-ASU, USC-UCLA, etc.)

Agreed. In fact, they may have to expand regardless because of how terrible their TV deal is. They need to do something to expand their TV markets so they can earn more $$$.

4. If BYU Utah run to the Pac 10 look for the Mountain West to steal Fresno State and Boise State out of the WAC. If its UNLV-Nevada look for Boise to move to the MWC.

I agree with you that Utah is a good fit. But I don't see BYU. First, because you don't get any additional TV markets with that pair (they share the same major market in Salt Lake City) Second, BYU might be out because of academics and the religion. An Illinois blogger made an interesting point in his series of posts discussing B10 expansion (and the effect it might have on conferences like the Pac-10). It's definitely worth reading all of them (Original Post, Update 1, Update 2, Update 3, Update 4, Update 5). Whether or not you agree with him, he put a lot of time and thought into it and it makes some interesting points. One of which was that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (which runs BYU) poured a ton of money into the anti gay-marriage effort in California. In the Pac-10, there must be a unanimous vote to accept new members. His argument is that Cal-Berkley (one of the most liberal schools in the country) would never vote to include BYU in the Pac-10 over issues like this one. I'd say its a pretty solid argument, especially when you can still get the Salt Lake City market with Utah (which is also a better academic fit).

 

[GoAUpher]

Good read. Dodd, I think, has some personal reason to bring Texas to the Big10. I personally, am offended by the thought.

I am far less offended by the idea of Mizzou being #12. I dont really care if the folks in Michigan and Ohio dont care about Missouri. They already got their exciting new rival in Penn St. Now its our turn to bring in some new life to our part of the conference. If Missouri comes into the fold, then BigTen country will overlap 11 NFL cities (KC, StL, Mpls, GB, Chi, Ind, Cle, Cin, Det, Pit, Phi). Surely covering the same area as more than a third of the NFL markets is a sufficient base for raising revenue.

If we had to add a B12 school I would also prefer Mizzou. But I understand why Texas would be better for the conference as a whole. Don't get me wrong, they wouldn't be my #1 choice mostly because they'd end up in our division and be the biggest roadblock to us getting into a championship game. That and I'm kinda traditional and adding them would be a little odd geographically. But on the whole it'd be a nice positive for the conference in terms of money, exposure, and competition. Plus, Austin is a great city and a fun road trip. So I guess I'd prefer not to add them but I wouldn't flip out if they did.

 

[jovs]

Missouri makes sense.

West
Missouri
Iowa
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Michigan State
Michigan

East
Penn State
Ohio State
Purdue
Indiana
Illinois
Northwestern

 

[GopherRock]

I agree with you that Utah is a good fit. But I don't see BYU. First, because you don't get any additional TV markets with that pair (they share the same major market in Salt Lake City) Second, BYU might be out because of academics and the religion. An Illinois blogger made an interesting point in his series of posts discussing B10 expansion (and the effect it might have on conferences like the Pac-10). It's definitely worth reading all of them (Original Post, Update 1, Update 2, Update 3, Update 4, Update 5). Whether or not you agree with him, he put a lot of time and thought into it and it makes some interesting points. One of which was that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (which runs BYU) poured a ton of money into the anti gay-marriage effort in California. In the Pac-10, there must be a unanimous vote to accept new members. His argument is that Cal-Berkley (one of the most liberal schools in the country) would never vote to include BYU in the Pac-10 over issues like this one. I'd say its a pretty solid argument, especially when you can still get the Salt Lake City market with Utah (which is also a better academic fit).

You've got the right idea on this one, but you've got the opposing school wrong. Based on my conversations with fans of the Northwest schools, it seems that Stanford would be the holdout against letting BYU in.

 

[JoeDirt]

Missouri makes sense.

West
Missouri
Iowa
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Michigan State
Michigan

East
Penn State
Ohio State
Purdue
Indiana
Illinois
Northwestern

I like any setup that has the U playing wisky, iowa, and michigan every year! I think it would be fun to have a new school like mizzou in our division.

 

[station19]

After reading every one's proposals for divisions I had a thought. I think the selection of the 12th school will be a well thought out decision and all in all maybe not too contentious. However the campaigning and posturing for division alignment might get real interesting and heated. Just a thought.

 

[GoAUpher]

You've got the right idea on this one, but you've got the opposing school wrong. Based on my conversations with fans of the Northwest schools, it seems that Stanford would be the holdout against letting BYU in.

Wish I could claim the idea, but I'll have to HT to Frank the Tank for this one. I could also see Stanford standing in the way since I think they were the ones who nuked Texas to the Pac-10 in the early 90's (after Texas approached the Big Ten as was turned down b/c of the self imposed expansion moratorium that was in place following PSU).

 

[MrGopher]

Is Texas to the SEC even an option? Geographically it would be a logical fit (more so than the big10 or pac10). Is there a school in the SEC who doesn't quite fit which Texas could replace??

SEC has a nice TV deal. Top notch competition. And (not that they need it) a very fertile region in terms of recruiting.

 

[magpie]

I like Missouri coming in. I also thought Pitt was a good choice (what ever happened to the 'so-called' post-signing day announcement?). Nebraska as the third choice, all three would be awesome.

 

[GoAUpher]

Is Texas to the SEC even an option? Geographically it would be a logical fit (more so than the big10 or pac10). Is there a school in the SEC who doesn't quite fit which Texas could replace??

SEC has a nice TV deal. Top notch competition. And (not that they need it) a very fertile region in terms of recruiting.

I suppose it would depend on what kind of votes would be required to move out a school for Texas. That or they'd need to go the super-conference (14+) team route.