Speculation of Missouri to the Big 10 growing

Donate To GopherHole
rcpratt said:
Missouri is fine academically. Yes, they're slightly below the Big Ten in the US News & World Report rankings (#102), but that number would increase substantially if and when they joined the Big Ten and the CIC. They're already AAU members, so that's a fit.

And reposting what I said on the bball boards:


Pitt is an okay choice, but their athletic accomplishments don't really justify bringing them in.
Click to expand...

Pitt's athletic AND academic chops make them the only logical choice.

Please explain to me how a school like Missouri could be mediocre academically for a hundred years and would all of a sudden leap 30 places in the rankings (to still be last in the Big Ten mind you) because they joined a new athletic conference.
 

Handsome Pete said:
Pitt's athletic AND academic chops make them the only logical choice.

Please explain to me how a school like Missouri could be mediocre academically for a hundred years and would all of a sudden leap 30 places in the rankings (to still be last in the Big Ten mind you) because they joined a new athletic conference.
Click to expand...
If you think the Big Ten is just an athletic conference, you're sadly mistaken. Joining the Big Ten (read: CIC) would increase their academic opportunities tenfold. And calling them mediocre isn't quite accurate - they're not that far behind MSU, Indiana, and Iowa.

Meanwhile, overall athletic programs, as rated by NACDA:
Mizzou - #36
Pitt - #93

The problem here, of course, is that no school is perfect. Yes, Mizzou could be better academically. Personally, I'm a big fan of Virginia Tech, which is solid on both the academic and athletic fronts, but is just slightly too far outside the Big Ten's footprint to make sense (just about 10 miles beyond the far border of West Virginia). Plus, they recently joined the ACC and I'm not really sure how appealing the Big Ten would be to them.
 

Handsome Pete said:
Pretty sure he meant rebel slave states of the Civil War, and he is correct that Missouri is a slave state (PA and NJ were not).
Click to expand...

Missouri did not join the Confederacy. Slavery was legal in Missouri until the mid 1860's, it was legal in PA and NJ until the mid 1840's. That's not much difference. Plus nobody is calling for slavery to come back so I fail to see why it would be an issue.
 

rcpratt said:
If you think the Big Ten is just an athletic conference, you're sadly mistaken. Joining the Big Ten (read: CIC) would increase their academic opportunities tenfold. And calling them mediocre isn't quite accurate - they're not that far behind MSU, Indiana, and Iowa.

Meanwhile, overall athletic programs, as rated by NACDA:
Mizzou - #36
Pitt - #93

The problem here, of course, is that no school is perfect. Yes, Mizzou could be better academically. Personally, I'm a big fan of Virginia Tech, which is solid on both the academic and athletic fronts, but is just slightly too far outside the Big Ten's footprint to make sense (just about 10 miles beyond the far border of West Virginia). Plus, they recently joined the ACC and I'm not really sure how appealing the Big Ten would be to them.
Click to expand...

Missouri is 30 places behind the last Big Ten team in the academic rankings. The entire spread of Big Ten schools goes from #12 to #71, by far the highest-ranking spread of any major conference. Asking us to take #102 is not acceptable to me, and hopefully to Delaney and the eleven existing members.

I thought taking Rutgers was a complete joke, but that isn't sounding so bad all of a sudden.
 



No more co-champions

Just one in a playoff. And we've won a bunch of co-championships over the years. Another minus with a playoff is that teams often meet for the second time in the same season - as in the Big 12 You can see I'm not a big fan of a playoff - Gophers have a chance now to tie for the title, but getting to a playoff and winning lengthens the odds.
 

Good god. People say UVa and the ACC are academic snobs and we're talking about Missouri not being an option because they're marginally behind several Big 10 Schools? This is first and foremost about money and media access. Notre Dame is by far the best fit, but failing that, Missouri is clearly the second best option. It has a built in rivalry with Ilinois, is solid in more then just one sport and provides access to two major markets (St. Louis and KC).

I'm still against expansion. I don't want a championship game, or divisions. But if it's going to happen, Missouri is probably as good as it gets.
 

magpie said:
West:

Minnesota
Iowa
Wisconsin
Missouri
N'western
Illinois

East:

Michigan
Ohio St
Michigan St
Penn St
Purdue
Indiana

No question about it, this is the way to go.
Click to expand...

+100 With the caveat that the Lil' Brown Jug game is played every year. It's the oldest and coolest Trophy in college football.

Also, think of how much this would benefit Minnesota. The Gophers would have a realistic shot at winning the Big Ten West almost every single year. This is the plan! :clap:
 

howeda7 said:
Good god. People say UVa and the ACC are academic snobs and we're talking about Missouri not being an option because they're marginally behind several Big 10 Schools? This is first and foremost about money and media access. Notre Dame is by far the best fit, but failing that, Missouri is clearly the second best option. It has a built in rivalry with Ilinois, is solid in more then just one sport and provides access to two major markets (St. Louis and KC).

I'm still against expansion. I don't want a championship game, or divisions. But if it's going to happen, Missouri is probably as good as it gets.
Click to expand...
I'm okay with a little elitism as it pertains to the academics of schools that are being "considered" for Big Ten expansion. After all, we are the elite academic conference in the country. I wouldn't want that reputation, and the reputation of our schools, tarnished just because we want to have a conference championship game in football.

However, I do think that looking at one single ranking of the academic merit of a school is completely insufficient. I highly doubt Jim Delany is going to sit down with his cronies and say "Any school below #87.4 on the US News & World Report rankings will not be considered." Every school has unique contributions that they could bring to the table, and I'm sure the Big Ten will be interested in checking every single one out.

I don't know a lot about the University of Missouri, but I can bring one example to the table. Missouri is home to the most powerful university nuclear research reactor in the country. This is a tremendous opportunity. Yes, several current Big Ten schools have research reactors (Penn State, Ohio State, Purdue, Wisconsin, and Michigan) but none are nearly as powerful as Missouri's. This could open countless research opportunities in materials and medicine from schools across the conference, which just wouldn't be possible at other, smaller reactors. Again, this is just one example of the contributions that I could imagine the Big Ten academicians considering.

And now, I present everyone with some concrete news. According to a league official, the Big Ten will release a statement Tuesday saying the matter has moved to the front burner. This whole expansion thing is getting interesting, fast.
 



howeda7 said:
Good god. People say UVa and the ACC are academic snobs and we're talking about Missouri not being an option because they're marginally behind several Big 10 Schools? This is first and foremost about money and media access. Notre Dame is by far the best fit, but failing that, Missouri is clearly the second best option. It has a built in rivalry with Ilinois, is solid in more then just one sport and provides access to two major markets (St. Louis and KC).

I'm still against expansion. I don't want a championship game, or divisions. But if it's going to happen, Missouri is probably as good as it gets.
Click to expand...

You talk about it like athletics are the only consideration. How's the University of Chicago's football team doing these days??
 

howeda7 said:
Good god. People say UVa and the ACC are academic snobs and we're talking about Missouri not being an option because they're marginally behind several Big 10 Schools? This is first and foremost about money and media access. Notre Dame is by far the best fit, but failing that, Missouri is clearly the second best option. It has a built in rivalry with Ilinois, is solid in more then just one sport and provides access to two major markets (St. Louis and KC).

I'm still against expansion. I don't want a championship game, or divisions. But if it's going to happen, Missouri is probably as good as it gets.
Click to expand...

"Marginally behind several Big 10 schools"? I'm sorry, but that is called willful ignorance. Missouri is 31 spots behind the last Big Ten school in the academic rankings. That is totally unacceptable.

Pitt is the only possible choice, since Notre Dame will never join.

Why would we want some Big 12 cast-off dump school to join the first and most prestigious conference in the country?
 

Does anybody have any knowledge about what Penn State's academic standing was like pre-Big Ten? I ask this because I truly believe that if they joined the Big Ten, Missouri's academic ranking would improve and think it would be a non-issue.

Along with the above posted nuclear program, I do believe that Mizzou is one of the finest journalisim schools in the country. Would be natural for Mizzou & Northwestern to create a newspaper traveling trophy of some sorts.

In terms of divisions, I think you'd have to keep Ohio State & Michigan in the same division. It's how the SEC dealt with Alabama & Auburn. Keep the rivalry in tact, but don't diminish it by having them play a week later. I think it would increase the intensity of it since often times the winner would advance to the title game. In that case, you'd have to most likely move Penn State away from those three.
 

PlayHosea said:
I've stirred up quite a bit of controversy over at another site by even having the audacity to suggest that Michigan and OSU would be in separate divisions. There's no good way to split up the conference that isn't going to upset a rivalry.
Click to expand...

They don't need to be in the same division to maintain the rivalry. With six-team divisions, you play the other five teams every year. That leaves 3 more conference games with the current format, one of which is a rivalry game, and the others rotate.
 



I don't understand all this talk about Mizzou and Pitt.

Aside from Notre Dame, Rutgers is the best fit for a plethora of reasons, and it's not even close.
 

Handsome Pete said:
"Marginally behind several Big 10 schools"? I'm sorry, but that is called willful ignorance. Missouri is 31 spots behind the last Big Ten school in the academic rankings. That is totally unacceptable.

Pitt is the only possible choice, since Notre Dame will never join.

Why would we want some Big 12 cast-off dump school to join the first and most prestigious conference in the country?
Click to expand...

Most prestigious conference in the country? How about "one" of the most prestigious conferences in the country instead. I'm guessing the ACC might not agree with your claim that the BT is the most prestigious confernece in the country.

US News rankings
1. Duke (10) > Northwestern (12)
2. UVa (24) > Michigan (27)
3. North Carolina (28) > Illinois (39)
4. Wake Forest (28) > Wisconsin (39)
5. Boston College (34) > Penn St (47)
6. Georgia Tech (35) > Ohio St (53)
7. Miami (50) > Minnesota (61)
8. Maryland (53) > Purdue (61)
9. Clemson (61) > Indiana (71)
10. Virginia Tech (71) = Michigan St (71)
11. Iowa (71) > NC St (88)
12. FSU (102) - no 12th team to compare.

The Big Ten has no school lower than NC St or FSU (could if Mizzou joins) but at the same time, only 2 Big Ten schools are ranked in the top 35 while the ACC has 6.

The ACC is every bit the equal acedemically compared to the Big Ten and one could argue that the ACC has the leg up.
 

Pewterschmidt said:
Most prestigious conference in the country? How about "one" of the most prestigious conferences in the country instead. I'm guessing the ACC might not agree with your claim that the BT is the most prestigious confernece in the country.

US News rankings
1. Duke (10) > Northwestern (12)
2. UVa (24) > Michigan (27)
3. North Carolina (28) > Illinois (39)
4. Wake Forest (28) > Wisconsin (39)
5. Boston College (34) > Penn St (47)
6. Georgia Tech (35) > Ohio St (53)
7. Miami (50) > Minnesota (61)
8. Maryland (53) > Purdue (61)
9. Clemson (61) > Indiana (71)
10. Virginia Tech (71) = Michigan St (71)
11. Iowa (71) > NC St (88)
12. FSU (102) - no 12th team to compare.

The Big Ten has no school lower than NC St or FSU (could if Mizzou joins) but at the same time, only 2 Big Ten schools are ranked in the top 35 while the ACC has 6.

The ACC is every bit the equal acedemically compared to the Big Ten and one could argue that the ACC has the leg up.
Click to expand...

Everything you say is correct but I think some of what adds to the academic prestige if you want to call it that of the Big Ten is the number of huge public flagship universities that are leading research institutions. I know that is one of the focuses that the ACC doesn't consistently match.
 

Goldmember said:
Exactly. But I don't understand where these OSU-Mich defenders are coming from.

Ohio State-Michigan would go the way of Florida-Alabama, Nebraska-Oklahoma and Florida State-Miami.

That's the whole point of having the "6-team-division with conference championship" format. You try to forge a monster match-up at the end of the season that Dr. Pepper will pay millions to sponsor. You don't give away the good $%#@ for free.
Click to expand...

I guarantee that OSU and Michigan veto any plan that does not make it possible for their rivalry game to happen every season @ either the Big House or the Shoe. If they get put in different divisions but are given the protected rivalry game each year I'm sure that would be fine with them. But there is no way either school is going to settle for having to play each other in Indy, Minneapolis, or Detroit under a roof. I think Woody would rise from his grave and kick Delany in the nuts if that happened.
 


OSU and Michigan is going to be a sticky situation. Put them, along with PSU in the same division, and it that would be a really unbalanced conference. If you put them in different divisions, and they still play on the final weekend of the regular season, you could have an anti-climactic championship game. Put them in different divisions, stop the annual OSU-Mich game and have them only play when they play for the championship? I can't see them agreeing to that.

If we are to have a championship game, the divisions should not just be geographical, but should be balanced so that over the long term, they are competitive with each other.
 

Ski U Mah Gopher said:
I would go with east & west.

The schedule would be play your division & have the other division every year.

Assuming Mizzou joins the Big Ten, I would divide each division into 3 team pods. Us, Iowa & Wisconsin in West Pod 1, Mizzou, NU & Illinois in West Pod 2. MSU, Michigan & Indiana in East Pod 1, OSU, PSU & Purdue in East Pod 2.

You would play the pod 1 of the opposite division in odd years, pod 2 in even years. You would get a home game against the opposite division 1 time every 4 years. But unlike the Big 12, you would play every team over 2 years.
Click to expand...

Best idea I've heard yet.
 

magpie said:
West:

Minnesota
Iowa
Wisconsin
Missouri
N'western
Illinois

East:

Michigan
Ohio St
Michigan St
Penn St
Purdue
Indiana

No question about it, this is the way to go.
Click to expand...


I agree. Though the ACC has some pretty mixed up divisions, aligning geographically is the way to go. I'd call the West "Great Plains" and the East "Great Lakes".

As for the competative angle, let's look at the Big 12:

North Division
Colorado
Iowa State
Kansas
Kansas State
Missouri
Nebraska

South Division
Baylor
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Texas
Texas A&M
Texas Tech

Are you kidding me? The South is loaded. No one complains. ISU had a shot three years in a row to win the North and failed. But it was fun. 5 of the 6 in the South are competing up until the end, and Baylor's so slouch. Now, the south leads 10-4 in the Championship game, but they've won six straight. It was 4-4 after the first 8 years, with Neb (twice), Col, and KSU winning the game.

Whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

You still have to play 3 games outside the division to make up your 8 conference games, so you rotate 3 in and 3 out every two years. The out of the division games count in the standings, but not in the divisional tie-breakers. 4 year players see everyone out of the division twice, once at home.

Other than Michigan, none of our rivalries outside the division are as strong as the ones in--heck, even Missouri and Minnesota have a lot of history in football.
 

highwayman said:
Are you kidding me? The South is loaded. No one complains. ISU had a shot three years in a row to win the North and failed. But it was fun. 5 of the 6 in the South are competing up until the end, and Baylor's so slouch. Now, the south leads 10-4 in the Championship game, but they've won six straight. It was 4-4 after the first 8 years, with Neb (twice), Col, and KSU winning the game.
Click to expand...

You have stated the problem of trying to align the divisions competitively evenly. When they aligned the Big XII, it WAS even. Then things changed.
 

Let's just send Penn St to the Big East where they belong and call it a day.
 

Pewterschmidt said:
Most prestigious conference in the country? How about "one" of the most prestigious conferences in the country instead. I'm guessing the ACC might not agree with your claim that the BT is the most prestigious confernece in the country.

US News rankings
1. Duke (10) > Northwestern (12)
2. UVa (24) > Michigan (27)
3. North Carolina (28) > Illinois (39)
4. Wake Forest (28) > Wisconsin (39)
5. Boston College (34) > Penn St (47)
6. Georgia Tech (35) > Ohio St (53)
7. Miami (50) > Minnesota (61)
8. Maryland (53) > Purdue (61)
9. Clemson (61) > Indiana (71)
10. Virginia Tech (71) = Michigan St (71)
11. Iowa (71) > NC St (88)
12. FSU (102) - no 12th team to compare.

The Big Ten has no school lower than NC St or FSU (could if Mizzou joins) but at the same time, only 2 Big Ten schools are ranked in the top 35 while the ACC has 6.

The ACC is every bit the equal acedemically compared to the Big Ten and one could argue that the ACC has the leg up.
Click to expand...

I'm going to update the numbers a bit:

US News rankings
1. University of Chicago (8) > Duke (10)
2. Northwestern (12) > UVa (24)
3. Michigan (27) > North Carolina (28)
4. Wake Forest (28) > Illinois (39)
5. Boston College (34) > Wisconsin (39)
6. Georgia Tech (35) > Penn St (47)
7. Miami (50) > Ohio St (53)
8. Maryland (53) > Purdue (61)
9. Clemson (61) = Minnesota (61)
10. Virginia Tech (71) = Michigan St (71)
11. Iowa (71) > NC St (88)
12. Indiana (71) > FSU (102)

5 Big Ten Schools have higher rankings in this matchup, 5 ACC schools have higher rankings in this matchup, and two are ranked the same.

Median - ACC - 42.5, Big Ten - 50
Mean - ACC - 48.58333, Big Ten - 46.666
Std Dev - ACC - 27.7, Big Ten - 22.2
Range - ACC - 92, Big Ten - 63

Top 8 Schools: ACC - 0, Big 10 - 1
Top 10 Schools: ACC - 1, Big 10 - 1
Top 12 Schools: ACC - 1, Big 10 - 2
Top 24 Schools: ACC - 2, Big 10 - 2
Top 27 Schools: ACC - 2, Big 10 - 3
Top 28 Schools: ACC - 4, Big 10 - 3
Top 34 Schools: ACC - 5, Big 10 - 3
Top 35 Schools: ACC - 6, Big 10 - 3
Top 39 Schools: ACC - 6, Big 10 - 5
Top 47 Schools: ACC - 6, Big 10 - 6
Top 50 Schools: ACC - 7, Big 10 - 6
Top 53 Schools: ACC - 8, Big 10 - 7
Top 61 Schools: ACC - 9, Big 10 - 9
Top 71 Schools: ACC - 10, Big 10 - 12
Top 88 Schools: ACC - 11, Big 10 - 12
Top 102 Schools: ACC - 12, Big 10 - 12

Anyhow, you can make arguments going either direction with this information.
 


I really dont like the arguement that PSU, OSU and MI cant be in the same division. Why? Because they are good now? What about 10-20 years from now? The west may be overly stacked then. You cannot place teams based on how good they are today.
 

The Big Ten is highly ranked because of their research. Their undergraduate rankings are slightly lower than the ACC because the ACC schools admit less students.

This isn't complicated stuff folks.
 

Studwell55 said:
Agreed! You can't have a B10 state that touches the ocean!
Click to expand...

Can't touch an ocean. Can't have been a slave state 150 years ago. Got it. These requirements make sense. (I duly note your sarcasm on the Ocean one, but not the other.)
 

Here's one option: Bemidji State. US News and World Report ranks it as #71. Obviously, they would require a few upgrades. The existing stadium is slightly inadequate, as it only seats 4,000 on old wood benches. They would need to build a slightly larger stadium, at least 12 times larger. And they would need to fill it, which might be tricky given the population of the area. And they would have to move up from D-II all the way to the I-A. And they would need a basketball arena at least 4 times larger.

Aside from that, it's a perfect match. ;)
 

The phrase "it's not the end of the world, but you can see from there" fits Columbia, MO. It is a tired little town in the middle of nowhere. No thanks and no thanks.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom