Pitt to the Big Ten?

Donate To GopherHole
at the bar said:
Have you watched Big East basketball? That's like saying high school boys basketball and high school girls basketball are equally exciting. I'm sorry but Big East basketball is much better than B11 basketball both for talent and for fan viewing. Purdue, MI St and Ohio St are the only teams that could be .500 in the Big East.
Click to expand...

If you can seriously compare Big Ten vs. Big East to Boys BB vs Girls BB than... there's no point in replying further.
 

I don't know where everybody thinks Missouri, and Neb. might come to the big ten. THEY HAVEN'T AND NEVER HAD ANY INTEREST INTHE BIG TEN!
 

RodentRampage said:
If you can seriously compare Big Ten vs. Big East to Boys BB vs Girls BB than... there's no point in replying further.
Click to expand...

Check out today's AP poll - 4 Big East teams in the top 7. I've watched each B11 team and Big East team play at least 4 times each (even Rutgers), it's not close. Duke & Texas just got crushed by Big East teams. I could go on.
 

If you go to the Pitt fan boards, you'll see them talking about the fact that zero news sources have reported anything and the local newspaper essentially calls it an internet rumor.

I'm not saying that Pitt isn't a possiblity in the future. But I am very skeptical that Pittsburgh has formally "applied for membership" or accepted any kind of a deal.
 

Pitt is a better choice than Texas, Syracuse, Rutgers, Cincy, Mizzou, ISU, etc.

It is not a better choice than Notre Dame (obviously)

About on par with and Nebraska.

Considering ND, Mizzou and Neb dont want to join, this is as good as its gonna get. Im not terribly disappointed if Pitt becomes #12.
 


at the bar said:
Check out today's AP poll - 4 Big East teams in the top 7. I've watched each B11 team and Big East team play at least 4 times each (even Rutgers), it's not close. Duke & Texas just got crushed by Big East teams. I could go on.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you could go on. And probably will. But if you're going to compare Big Ten vs Big East with Boys BB vs. Girls BB, then for all I know you could have been watching Spongebob and only thought it was basketball.
 

Game called by virtue of the mercy rule. Add an easy win to Rodent's list. Also accept my personal gratitude for calling into question a ludicrous comparison. Way too much of that around here.
 

I'm sorry to break to B11 fans that compared to SEC football and Big East basketball, B11 sports are very boring and average.

I can see why Pitt fans would not want to quickly jump into the B11. The basketball is much better in the Big East and Pitt has a much better chance of making the BCS in the Big East. Ever since Miami went to the ACC, their football program has gone downhill. $ may tell Pitt the B11 is better but fans know that $ isn't everything.
 





at the bar said:
I'm sorry to break to B11 fans that compared to SEC football and Big East basketball, B11 sports are very boring and average.

I can see why Pitt fans would not want to quickly jump into the B11. The basketball is much better in the Big East and Pitt has a much better chance of making the BCS in the Big East. Ever since Miami went to the ACC, their football program has gone downhill. $ may tell Pitt the B11 is better but fans know that $ isn't everything.
Click to expand...

You're just not getting it. No one is arguing that the Big Ten is better than the Big East.

The reason that your comparison is so absurd is because men's and women's basketball are on entirely different planes of existence. You could assemble the 12 best female basketball players on the planet, and they would get smoked 9 times out of 10 by even a mediocre college men's team.

By that logic, a "B11" (what a stupid acronym, by the way) team would be lucky to win a single conference game if they played in the Big East. If you truly believe the competition is that disparate, you are even dumber (and drunker) than I thought.
 

gophmeister said:
I don't think this configuration is gonna fly. The East is too stacked with powerhouses. I think they'll go with a North - South arrangement.

'South' Division
Illinois
Indiana
Ohio State
Penn State
Pittsburgh
Purdue

'North' Division

Iowa
Michigan
Michigan State
Minnesota
Northwestern
Wisconsin
Click to expand...

Every split conference is "stacked":

ACC Coastal, Big 12 South, SEC East (not this year, but normally), even the MAC East is usually better. The ACC is a random draw in a lot of ways, but I believe the Big Ten has already evolved into sort of E/W zones for football rivalries.

They are going to go E/W. It makes more sense rivalry-wise, and even economically--and as I said, NW-ILL and PUR-IND will be the tough calls. Notre Dame would foul that up even more.

You'll NEVER get away with splitting up MCH-OSU.
 

dpodoll68 said:
You're just not getting it. No one is arguing that the Big Ten is better than the Big East.

The reason that your comparison is so absurd is because men's and women's basketball are on entirely different planes of existence. You could assemble the 12 best female basketball players on the planet, and they would get smoked 9 times out of 10 by even a mediocre college men's team.

By that logic, a "B11" (what a stupid acronym, by the way) team would be lucky to win a single conference game if they played in the Big East. If you truly believe the competition is that disparate, you are even dumber (and drunker) than I thought.
Click to expand...

Damn right. If Pitt was asked, they wouldn't even think twice. Cincy or OSU? South Florida or Michigan? Louisville or MSU? It's not even close...
 



highwayman said:
Well if it's Pitt, here we go:

Great Lakes Division
Michigan
Michigan State
Northwestern
Ohio State
Penn State
Pittsburgh

Great Plains Division
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Minnesota
Purdue
Wisconsin
Click to expand...
This is most likely. As loaded as the East may be, it's financially more sound per travel arrangements, as well the fact that - although a Mich-OSU title game looks good - most people would rather see a yearly matchup with the winner going to a title game (essentially). Plus it's better for the West to allow Wisc, Iowa, and potentially Minn or Illinois to become powers. OSU, PSU, and Mich will be powers regardless. This divisional split allows further growth.
 

at the bar said:
I'm sorry to break to B11 fans that compared to SEC football and Big East basketball, B11 sports are very boring and average.

I can see why Pitt fans would not want to quickly jump into the B11. The basketball is much better in the Big East and Pitt has a much better chance of making the BCS in the Big East. Ever since Miami went to the ACC, their football program has gone downhill. $ may tell Pitt the B11 is better but fans know that $ isn't everything.
Click to expand...

Oh, now you're bringing in the SEC. Way to change the subject. If you had just said that the Big East was a better basketball conference than the Big Ten, there wouldn't have been much problem. But on top of comparisons to the MIAC, your comparison of Big Ten vs. Big East to Boys vs. Girls BB utterly destroyed any credibility that you might have had.

Your opinion of Big Ten sports isn't something you have to "break" to us. If there's a Big Ten game on, I may watch it. If it's some other conference, I'm probably not interested.
 

FYI - I wasn't comparing B11 hoops to SEC hoops. I brought in SEC to show how boring B11 football is. I thought BCS would signify football to the board but as MN fans some of us may not know what BCS stands for.

And while I can admit the comparison of boys to girls BB may be strenching it, I think the UConn girls could beat some men's teams.
 

at the bar said:
FYI - I wasn't comparing B11 hoops to SEC hoops. I brought in SEC to show how boring B11 football is.
Click to expand...

No one thought you were comparing Big Ten BB to SEC BB. We could read what you had written. It's just that you were changing the subject. We were talking about the Big Ten vs. the Big East. The SEC didn't have anything to do with it. It may come as a great surprise to you, but many people do not find Big Ten football to be at all boring.

I thought BCS would signify football to the board but as MN fans some of us may not know what BCS stands for.
Click to expand...

We understood you quite well. But the Big Ten has done quite well at getting two teams into BCS games.

And while I can admit the comparison of boys to girls BB may be strenching it, I think the UConn girls could beat some men's teams.
Click to expand...

"Stretching it" is generally not applied to comparisons that are utterly and completely without merit.
 

I shouldn't have mentioned girls playing sports and stuck with facts:

B11 is currently the 5th best hoops conference. even though the ACC and SEC are way down this year.

Rank Conference Avg. RPI
1 Big East 0.5961
2 Big 12 0.5946
3 Atlantic Coast 0.5857
4 Southeastern 0.5728
5 Big Ten 0.5615
 

at the bar said:
I shouldn't have mentioned girls playing sports and stuck with facts:

B11 is currently the 5th best hoops conference. even though the ACC and SEC are way down this year.

Rank Conference Avg. RPI
1 Big East 0.5961
2 Big 12 0.5946
3 Atlantic Coast 0.5857
4 Southeastern 0.5728
5 Big Ten 0.5615
Click to expand...

I suggest sticking with the facts if you want people to pay any attention to you.
 

at the bar said:
I shouldn't have mentioned girls playing sports and stuck with facts:

B11 is currently the 5th best hoops conference. even though the ACC and SEC are way down this year.

Rank Conference Avg. RPI
1 Big East 0.5961
2 Big 12 0.5946
3 Atlantic Coast 0.5857
4 Southeastern 0.5728
5 Big Ten 0.5615
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that the B10 basketball as good as Big East basketball-hell they play completely different styles. The is more of a B10 slower grind it out half court and great D (an idea that won't die mainly because of Bo Ryan) even though more and more teams are wanting to run more(See MSU, Purdue, Minn, OSU, Ill). While the Big East is up and down shot over me D if I decide to put a hand in your face. Same thing with B10 and SEC football you can't say either way is better its a matter of opinion.

And, if you haven't noticed, ESPN has had a personal vendetta against any and everything B10 since O$U sucked it up in the against the Gators which happens to be when the B10 launched the BTN. And because ESPN basically is the sports media in this country they decide what is good football and basketball. What incentive would they have to promote the B10 when it would most likely reduce there viewership.

Anyway, I think both Purdue and MSU would beat any team in the Big East more than 50% of the time. Also the worst Big East teams(i.e. DePaul) aren't any better than Iowa or IU. So don't you tell me that the B10 sucks at every turn, Digger.
 

Makes sense for them in football, but honestly not for basketball. If they join the big ten, they will miss out on the most important thing in the year for them, THe Big East Tournament. Playing those games in the Garden is a big deal for recruiting purposes. If they join with us, they will not be able to get those New York City point guards they way they have for the last decade.

That being said, I would gladly welcome them. Love to see them in TCF and the Barn.
 

at the bar said:
If the expansion is about $, Pitt doesn't do much. They don't add B11 network viewers because they are in the Penn St. footprint. The only reason to take Pitt is it brings the B11 to 12 teams for a football championship game.

If Pitt is the only school joining, that should mean that Notre Dame, Texas, Missouri, and Nebraska all said no.
Click to expand...

+1 Pitt is redundant due to Penn State. A new Big Ten team NEEDS to expand the reach of Big Ten Network with the goal to increase Big Ten visibility in a high revenue and fertile recruiting area. This is why Texas is far and away the best choice (and yes, I know Texas is NOT leaving the Big 12, just saying the Big Ten would be crazy not to have offered Texas the moon to make the switch).
 

The goal for expanding to 12 teams is the championship game, right?

Otherwise there isn't a need to add a team. Thus, the key point is to allow the championship game to be the most compelling game possible for most years. That means splitting up OSU and Michigan into different divisions to allow them to meet for the conference title. However, the Big Ten should follow the lead of the ACC and set designated rivalries across divisions.

Therefore, I think Michigan and OSU end up in different conferences but play each other EVERY YEAR as a designated rival.

I don't think the Big Ten would want to split Minnesota and Wisconsin into different divisions because maintaining that rivalry for a divisional title is pretty compelling.

The rest of the Big Ten is pretty much a crap shoot - other than Penn State and OSU.

Therefore, I could see the following split with the designated rival in parentheses.
Big Ten - Big Division
Michigan (Ohio State)
Michigan State (Wisconsin)
Indiana (Purdue)
Penn State (Pitt)
Iowa (Minnesota)
Northwestern

Big Ten - Ten Division
Ohio State (Michigan)
Pitt (Penn State)
Minnesota (Iowa)
Wisconsin (Wisconsin)
Illinois (Northwestern)
Purdue (Indiana)

That gives each Big Ten team six games against the same opponents each year. The Big Ten could then do the same rotation that the ACC has and play another two teams from the other division on a two-year back-to-back rotation schedule (i.e. in Year 1, Minnesota would play all of its divisional teams, Iowa (dedicated rivalry), and Michigan (home) and Indiana (away); in year 2, Minnesota would play all its divisional teams, Iowa, and Michigan (away) and Northwestern (home); year 3 would be all divisional teams, Iowa, and Northwestern (home) and Penn State (away).)

The payoff is that you create likely situations for big rivals to face each other for the Big 10 Championship. An Ohio State - Michigan Big Ten Championship would pull a huge TV number and would sell out any stadium within the geographic footprint. The SEC and ACC don't seem to care about having teams potentially play more than once - in fact, it adds a little something.
 

Gopherprof said:
And as far as the academics go, Pittsburgh is at least a tier two academic school for research. About on par with Iowa and Michigan State (these things vary wildly by field). Rutgers and Pitt were always my top two because they were the strongest academic schools.
Click to expand...

Agree, Pitt fits academically. They have been a member of the AAU since 1974, the same year that UCLA was recognized/admitted. I'm about to finish a book on polio and Jonas Salk did his work at Pitt (they have been doing top research for a long time).
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom