More Conference Talk

Donate To GopherHole
The Big Ten is going to need to join the super-conferences or be left in the dust. Just the way it is.
 

zambam said:
The Big Ten is going to need to join the super-conferences or be left in the dust. Just the way it is.
Click to expand...

I'm not convinced. The SEC and Pac16 would be viewed as far superior but is the ACC a stronger football conference with the addition of Pitt, Syracuse, UCONN and Rutgers? No way.

It seems they need 4 "super conferences" in order to get a defacto playoff. If the Big Ten holds, they are 1 conference short or would have to accept the Big Ten in their system and with "only" 12 schools it would be to our advantage. If they don't accept the Big Ten and keep a variant of the BCS system then the only way it is to our disadvantage is if the super-conferences are successful in each getting 2 automatic bids to our 1.
 

zambam said:
The Big Ten is going to need to join the super-conferences or be left in the dust. Just the way it is.
Click to expand...
Why? How does adding more mouths to feed strengthen the conference? How do you know a super-conference won't dilute the brand and weaken the conference?
 

Actually, KU is probably the stronger program over Mizzou in terms of the TV market in Kansas City. Every time I go to KC, I see a lot more people wearing KU stuff than Mizzou. K-State really doesn't bring anything to the table for anyone. I'd echo the earlier post that questions whether KU and KSU are actually linked via the legislature (which I believe OU and OSU actually are).

Syracuse to the ACC is good for hoops, and the ACC puts a lot more emphasis on hoops than anyone other than maybe the Big East (and many of their top basketball programs like Marquette don't even have football). Pitt really doesn't bring much of anything to anyone.

The other rumor is that along with A&M, West Virginia will be the other addition to the SEC. This makes no sense. If the whole point of all this is to gain TV markets (and it is), WVU brings almost nothing to the table for the SEC. Mizzou and KU would be better choices. Heck, Iowa State brings about as much to the table population and television-wise as does WVU.
 



KU and K-state are just as big in KC as Mizzou. We already took on a marginal academic institution in Nebraska and have some more in Iowa, Indiana, and MSU (you could even throw in tOSU or UMN if you want to get really snooty). Why not take a couple more? If you really want increase market coverage, you shore up the other half of StL with Mizzou and totally cover KC with Mizzou and the Kansas schools. Offer ND a crappy deal just to screw with the arrogant SOBs and take ISU to fill out your 16 if ND declines.

Booo Texas and east coast schools. Hooray geographic continuity and easy road trips down 35.
 

^I like that.

Offer KU, KSU, Mizzou, and Pitt. If Pitt declines (which I doubt it will), then throw an offer to Iowa State. Notre Dame has had its chances. And please steer clear of Texas and the east coast schools.
 

Hill_Murray said:
^I like that.

Offer KU, KSU, Mizzou, and Pitt. If Pitt declines (which I doubt it will), then throw an offer to Iowa State. Notre Dame has had its chances. And please steer clear of Texas and the east coast schools.
Click to expand...
Forgot about Pitt. Good call.
 

Pitt is joining the ACC, why would they join the Big Ten...
 



Tee09 said:
Forgot about Pitt. Good call.
Click to expand...

I think there is some good hooch going around this board that I have missed. There only way the B1G offers KSU, ISU, or any other school in that type of category is if they are forced to because they couldn't get the schools they want but need them to be included in some sort of new super conference playoff. This expansion is all about money. Marginal football teams in marginal markets offer nothing to the brand or financially to the other member schools.

With the likelihood of a Big Least disintegration in play, they will certainly try to get ND again, as they would be foolish not to with the money on the table with the national audience and brand they bring. They will then go after the best options available to balance it out, and those schools ain't it.
 

DarrenTheGreek said:
I'm not convinced. The SEC and Pac16 would be viewed as far superior but is the ACC a stronger football conference with the addition of Pitt, Syracuse, UCONN and Rutgers? No way.

It seems they need 4 "super conferences" in order to get a defacto playoff. If the Big Ten holds, they are 1 conference short or would have to accept the Big Ten in their system and with "only" 12 schools it would be to our advantage. If they don't accept the Big Ten and keep a variant of the BCS system then the only way it is to our disadvantage is if the super-conferences are successful in each getting 2 automatic bids to our 1.
Click to expand...
I'll second that. I remember seeing an article a few months back about the B1G basically holding the cards for the BCS/Playoff system. If the B1G doesn't go the superconference route it would be awfully hard to get the playoff system in place without the money the B1G would provide. It seems like the B1G has the BCS by the nuts despite what ESPN may think.

P.S. I'll try and find that article.
 

hendo59 said:
I think there is some good hooch going around this board that I have missed. There only way the B1G offers KSU, ISU, or any other school in that type of category is if they are forced to because they couldn't get the schools they want but need them to be included in some sort of new super conference playoff. This expansion is all about money. Marginal football teams in marginal markets offer nothing to the brand or financially to the other member schools.

With the likelihood of a Big Least disintegration in play, they will certainly try to get ND again, as they would be foolish not to with the money on the table with the national audience and brand they bring. They will then go after the best options available to balance it out, and those schools ain't it.
Click to expand...

KC is an interesting situation because it's a fairly evenly split market between KU, KSU, and Mizzou. In order to get in there solidly, you need all three, but the size of the market (2 million metro area population) isn't enough to pay for three more mouths for the conference to feed equally. More in StL may help some there, and you also get Wichita, which has a metro area of ~650,000. From a purely financial standpoint then, the B1G's options are down to what, ND and Texas? If you are trying to fill out a super conference, who are your four?
 

Tee09 said:
KC is an interesting situation because it's a fairly evenly split market between KU, KSU, and Mizzou. In order to get in there solidly, you need all three, but the size of the market (2 million metro area population) isn't enough to pay for three more mouths for the conference to feed equally. More in StL may help some there, and you also get Wichita, which has a metro area of ~650,000. From a purely financial standpoint then, the B1G's options are down to what, ND and Texas? If you are trying to fill out a super conference, who are your four?
Click to expand...

You don't need to cover the KC market solidly to get those tv sets. You only need one of the three. That one would be Mizzou. Also, Missouri as a state has more than twice as many people as Kansas.

And remember that its football that runs the show. When it comes to football in Kansas, here are the power rankings: 1. Chiefs 2. Huskers 3. Sooners 4. Dallas Cowboys 5. Jayhawks 6. Mizzou 7. KSU Wildcats
 



Add ND and Mizzou and move on. I don't think having 14 instead of 16 is going to change anything regarding being included in a play-off etc. I think ND combined with PSU is enough to get into NYC, so adding Rutgers or anyone else becomes redundent.
 


I wouldn't be opposed to Kansas, they have a very rabid following, there's not much else to do in Kansas but pull for the Jayhawks. Plus their basketball program is top notch. If the B1G is going to add 4, I wouldn't be opposed to ND, Texas, Kansas and Missouri.
 

Andy Katz is reporting Notre Dame prefers independence & Big East. If they are forced to join a conference for all sports they want the ACC over the Big Ten. Slap. Big Ten teams should end their rivalry games with Notre Dame. ;)
 

overpass said:
Andy Katz is reporting Notre Dame prefers independence & Big East. If they are forced to join a conference for all sports they want the ACC over the Big Ten. Slap. Big Ten teams should end their rivalry games with Notre Dame. ;)
Click to expand...

If that's true, it's clear Notre Dame is only interested in getting into a conference that isn't going to be overly difficult to win. Not that they'd win the ACC every year or anything, but it would be an easier hill to climb than B1G.
 

overpass said:
Andy Katz is reporting Notre Dame prefers independence & Big East. If they are forced to join a conference for all sports they want the ACC over the Big Ten. Slap. Big Ten teams should end their rivalry games with Notre Dame. ;)
Click to expand...
They aren't going to choose the ACC over the B1G; what a crock, I don't believe for a second that their alumni is going to choose the ACC over the rivalries surrounding South Bend. It's B1G or independence for Notre Dame.
 

"If the Irish decide they can't remain as a football independent then the choice would be to pursue the ACC before the Big Ten." per Andy Katz
Click to expand...
If this is true I agree we should indeed end all athletic interaction with Notre Dame. Notre Dame is so very pompous (Affectedly and irritatingly grand, solemn, or self-important)
 

I don't think it's their alumni necessarily, though they may feel that way. I think it's the administration that's been the roadblock to joining the Big Ten. I don't know what the hang up is - it may be historical, but it could definitely be that they want to be the top dog somewhere, and they won't be the top dog here.

It would help the (stupid) Big Ten hockey conference though to add a seventh team.
 

NoDakGopher said:
B1G really better get moving. If this continues we're going to be no better than the current Big East is. We'll be a complete joke. At this point you have to say screw tradition and find some good fits immediately.
Click to expand...

zambam said:
The Big Ten is going to need to join the super-conferences or be left in the dust. Just the way it is.
Click to expand...

Kidding, right? If the B1G does nothing, they are still stronger top to bottom, both academically and athletically, than any of these conferences. Plus, let's get serious here, any conference over 12 teams is no longer a college conference. Rivalries disappear and mean nothing.

DarrenTheGreek said:
If the Big Ten can't get ND then they need to hold. No sense in whoring yourself out to expand beyond the non-Midwest footprint. If they are able to get ND then they should add Mizzou since that would make geographic sense and get a solid foothold into 2 major markets (Stl & KC).

I don't like the super-conference race but part of me is glad that Pitt and Syracuse (and maybe Rutgers and UCONN) appear to be ACC bound as that would seem to stop the ridiculous talk about expanding the conference to states that border the Atlantic.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree.
 

discochris said:
I don't think it's their alumni necessarily, though they may feel that way. I think it's the administration that's been the roadblock to joining the Big Ten. I don't know what the hang up is - it may be historical, but it could definitely be that they want to be the top dog somewhere, and they won't be the top dog here.

It would help the (stupid) Big Ten hockey conference though to add a seventh team.
Click to expand...

The B1G Hockey Conference was a necessity after the WCHA expanded to places like Alaska, Bemidji, St. Cloud, and Mankato. Minnesota and Wisconsin never wanted it, and I'd rather play Michigan and MSU on a regular basis than those clowns.
 

Originally Posted by DarrenTheGreek
If the Big Ten can't get ND then they need to hold. No sense in whoring yourself out to expand beyond the non-Midwest footprint. If they are able to get ND then they should add Mizzou since that would make geographic sense and get a solid foothold into 2 major markets (Stl & KC).

I don't like the super-conference race but part of me is glad that Pitt and Syracuse (and maybe Rutgers and UCONN) appear to be ACC bound as that would seem to stop the ridiculous talk about expanding the conference to states that border the Atlantic.

Highwayman

Absolutely agree.

Same here. Adding Tx would be a total 'sell out'.

It would be interesting to know what the powers that be of the Big Ten are thinking right now
 

It's really got to be ND first, and the other team from Rutgers/Missou/Texas. Texas being ideal from a money standpoint, Missou being ideal from a "fit" standpoint, Rutgers being less-than-ideal in most standpoints but still do-able because of the NY market. They're the only teams that would add value to all teams in the league from their inclusion. Otherwise you're just adding another mouth to feed and not adding enough potential revenues.
 

overpass said:
Andy Katz is reporting Notre Dame prefers independence & Big East. If they are forced to join a conference for all sports they want the ACC over the Big Ten. Slap. Big Ten teams should end their rivalry games with Notre Dame. ;)
Click to expand...

If the Big 10 expands their conference games from 8 to 9 each year as planned, Michigan, Michigan State, and Purdue are going to need to think twice about playing Notre Dame every year
 

year of the gopher said:
If that's true, it's clear Notre Dame is only interested in getting into a conference that isn't going to be overly difficult to win. Not that they'd win the ACC every year or anything, but it would be an easier hill to climb than B1G.
Click to expand...

Spot on.

If the B1G expands any further I'd like it to be Notre Dame, but there's a reason ND is leery about joining the B1G. It knows darn well if it joins it'd be lucky to be considered in the top half. In my mind Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Nebraska, Ohio State, Penn State and Wisconsin all are as good or better football programs (combination of currently & traditionally) at this point. Conversely, the ACC in football. ... not so much.
 

Plus, I think ND cares most about keeping the east coast happy. They have a ton of fans in Boston and NY (and Chicago, but they're kinda the "local" team here so they wouldn't lose it anyhow). I imagine they are worried about joining the B1G and losing a foothold in those markets. Add Rutgers and ND, it might assuage their fears a bit.
 

Within the next 10-15 years, isn't it likely that the top 24-36 money producing college football programs may just leave the NCAA and form their own association? I can see these schools not wanting to share revenue with Vanderbilt, Washington State, Wake Forest, Indiana, or even Minnesota. The current super conference realignment may only be a temporary situation.
 

It COULD happen but given that most of these are state schools it's likely there would be, rightly or wrongly, some government intervention. When millions of dollars are involved with tax-exempt state entities, the government will be keeping a watching eye.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom