|
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2012 9:19 PM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
"don’t be surprised if Delany and company don’t attempt to add four more schools, all from the ACC — Virginia, Georgia Tech, North Carolina and Duke."
Makes a guy wonder how long the B10 and SEC can maintain the appearance that it's not two big dogs, one bone.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2012 9:42 AM
RE: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
Would be amazing if delaney pulls this off !!!! Nc and duke in big basketball? Amazing!!!!
---------------------------------------------
--- TampaDave wrote:
If you go to www.mrsec.com, you will find that Mr. SEC posted Part #3 of his continuing article on super conference expansion. He addresses all the major conferences, but I've limited my post to the section addressing the B1G:
Big Ten Conference
Current Status: Maryland and Rutgers are scheduled to join the conference. The Big Ten — along with the SEC — remains in the strongest position of all the remaining “Big Five” conferences. No league boasts bigger schools and, therefore, bigger fanbases and alumni chapters. No league can match the Big Ten top-to-bottom in terms of academic reputation as all but one Big Ten member (Nebraska) is a member of the AAU, a collection of the continent’s biggest-spending research institutions. When Maryland and Rutgers enter, the Big Ten will feature 14 schools total.
Outlook/Goal: The Big Ten’s outlook is strong. Jim Delany’s league makes money hand over fist and most Big Ten schools have about 50,000 students. With that many grads, interest in the Big Ten will remain high for many years to come. However, as Delany himself has explained, population shifts are making it necessary for his league to try and reach farther south, to where state populations are still growing. The Big Ten wants to guarantee that it remains cash rich by adding cable households for its Big Ten Network and that it maintains it’s academic reputation by adding well-respected schools. (Nebraska was an AAU member, too, when the Big Ten lured them from the Big XII.)
Possible Moves/Rumored Interests:
* It has been rumored for more than a year now that both Georgia Tech and Virginia are on the Big Ten’s radar. Both are AAU schools. Both would provide more television markets and more cable households for the league’s network. Both would help the league extend its brand into the South. That kind of advertising — Big Ten football and basketball games getting more exposure and carrying more weight in Southern markets — should drive more students from the South to the league’s Midwestern schools. More than one source from inside the SEC and another source from inside the college athletics industry has told us that Virginia and Georgia Tech are believed to be done deals to the Big Ten, with the only hold-up being Maryland’s court battle to get out of the ACC. Reportedly, Virginia and Georgia Tech officials want to know the cost of switching leagues before actually doing so. Now, we’re not big on stories of “done deals,” because deals can fall through. Last year, a rumor that Florida State and Clemson were jumping to the Big XII never amounted to anything. So we want to make it clear — very clear — that we’re hearing from multiple sources that they believe Virginia and Georgia Tech will someday soon be the Big Ten’s 15th and 16 schools. That isn’t our view. We’re just passing along what we’ve heard from multiple sources.
* But even if those schools do move at some point, that does not mean that the Big Ten will slam the brakes on expansion. As we’ve discussed in previous pieces, leagues are making money off of their brand names and their content. The more good games to sell (content), the more television money to be made. For that reason, we firmly believe the rumblings we’ve heard about the Big Ten having an interest in Duke and North Carolina. Currently, the Big Ten’s schools are all located in contiguous states. If Georgia Tech is a target for the Big Ten and if form holds, the league will need to somehow connect the state of Virginia to the state of Georgia. We don’t expect an SEC school — Vanderbilt — to be on the Big Ten’s list of invitees, so that leaves the state of North Carolina as the other option. It just so happens that the crown jewels of the ACC in terms of name brands are located in the Tarheel State. While the Big Ten is rumored to be eyeballing Virginia and Georgia Tech, don’t be surprised if Delany and company don’t attempt to add four more schools, all from the ACC — Virginia, Georgia Tech, North Carolina and Duke. All are AAU members. The addition of all four would bring the league’s total number of schools to 18 and greatly increase the Big Ten’s area of influence. The Big Ten Network would stretch from Nebraska, Iowa and Minnesota all the way into New York and then down the Eastern seaboard and into the SEC’s biggest natural TV market: Atlanta. In addition, the more ACC schools the Big Ten goes after at once, the easier the sell might be for each school as it exits its old conference. The administrators and fans of Virginia, Georgia Tech, North Carolina and Duke might be more likely to move if they knew they’d still be seeing plenty of familiar faces in their new home. And Maryland would already be waiting for them.
**** I apologize if this was previously posted ****
---------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------
7 National Championships
7 Heisman Winners
35 Big Ten Championships
A Tradition of Excellence!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/28/2012 8:30 PM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
Interesting read from the WVU camo...
So I know Im gonna get flamed and mocked for this. I know some will call me a crazy conspiracy theorist. But I do not care. My job is to share the information I am given and that is what I shall do. By 2016, College football as we know it will forever change. I'm not talking rule and safety changes. I'm talking the very fabric of the sport and it's history with the NCAA. Deals have been made. Secret meetings attended. Illuminati-type cabal formed. The whole nine yards. Soon, very soon, 4 conferences will break away from the NCAA and govern themselves and have their own post-season structure. The bowl structure as we know it will be altered again and the haves will permanently separate from the have-nots. The following is a detailed view into the events that have set this all into motion. Parts have been omitted at the request of my source.
The Eastern Problem
Flash back to 2002. Too many teams were moving up to Division 1 (FBS) for a taste of the big football money. Too many bowls were being created killing the integrity and tradition of a bowl invite. And that upstart pesky Big East conference just kept on thriving. Swofford coveted Miami and the North-Eastern mega-markets. History was made. Fast forward to 2010. The ACC initial raid of the Big East should have killed the league but it did not. Inexplicably, WVU thrived, Rutgers awakened, Louisville and USF came out swinging, and Cincy changed coaches like underwear yet kept winning. And Basketball was laughable at how incredible it had become. Unarguably the ACC had been dethroned as the premier hoops league and was still competitively behind the Big East in football. With the addition of TCU looming, The Big East might even secure a TV contract that payed their member schools better than the ACC. The Big East might have gotten themselves in a position of power. BC and Md might have jumped ship for the bigger payday. ESPN couldn't allow those things to happen. They also couldn't risk losing the Big East to NBC giving them a cornerstone for rival content. So ESPN told the ACC to take Pitt and WVU and gut the BE. ACC balked at WVU so ESPN said take CUSE and told WVU they would get them in the SEC. Obviously that didn't go the way as planned but true to their word, ESPN helped us get a home with TCU in the B12. But now we have conferences with 14 teams. At this point in time the idea of 4 super conferences breaking away wasn't new by any means, but it was the first time that pressure was being put on the NCAA by certain individuals of power in College Football(Ironically, Swofford being one of them) to allow the dream to become a reality. The PAC10 and Larry Scott nearly sealed the deal on a 16 team league that would have locked up the west coast and mid-west but ESPN said “not so fast” and killed the deal. ESPN chose TX and OK over their own precious ACC(whom they own lock, stock, and barrel) that day and sealed the ACC's fate as the weakest BCS conference. ESPN now does not want the super-conference breakaway to come to fruition. They have too much money invested in the bowl season and the ACC now to see them both get (mostly) left behind. But guess what? FOX and CBS both want the schism to occur. They will be the main financing entities of the whole shebang.
Breakin Up is (not) Hard to Do
For years the main issue the NCAA had with allowing a breakaway was losing the bread and butter of their operating budget: the NCAA basketball tournament. But deals have been made with Emmert that will allow the conferences that break away to still participate in March Madness. The Schism will be in football only. NCAA will still get the Bball money. The Cabal of Four have conceded basketball money...for now. The sheer magnitude and frequency of scandels in college Football has taken it's toll on the NCAA and it's chairman. The Penn State ordeal was literally the straw that broke the camel's back. The NCAA was not intended to be a policing force. And more and more of their budget was being allocated to do just that. The (non)profits were slowly shrinking and the threat of anti-trust lawsuits from smaller schools and conferences seemed to be mounting weekly. Mark Emmert had had enough. He has informed the “cabal” that he will assist them in retaining tax-exempt status and allow the break-up to be a smooth transition as long as they didn't wreck the NCAA tourney. The Announcement of the Playoffs, the Sugar and Rose bowl deals, these materialized from the Cabal meetings. The final number of teams involved is unknown at present but the word is at least the SEC and The Big10 are interested in going as high as 20 if the money is there and with their network structure it may be. The Big12 and Pac12 may cap out at 12 teams but the preferred number is 16 because having 4 pods is crucial to the post-season structure that those two conferences may fall a little behind the other 2 in money per team just to get to 16 and get the lucrative semi-final games. The Big4 will probably take about 16 of the higher level bowl games with them that will be “consolation games” that will have teams selected after conference champs are determined. The Big10 has already weakened the ACC and the killing blows are coming from all sides very soon.
Picking up the pieces
What will the MWC, ACC, CUSA, MAC etc be left with? How attractive will these games even be to tv? What kind of mega-money will the split generate for the departing conferences? All these questions and more will be answered in time. I will keep you guys updated as I get the info.
Last tidbit: Miami has become the biggest fan of the Big12 in recent days. More so than even FSU in that Miami has no other suitors.
http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s...&t=11106927 |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 12:29 PM
RE: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
Some say that Delany is one of the driving forces behind this. He wants his conference cash rich, stable and powerful. Great business man with vision. After the recent meatings this past summer, he and Slive seem to be much more aligned.
Nevadabuck keeps saying no way to FSU to the B1G. I'm starting to think he is right but I also think it is a big mistake by the B1G.
It's starting to look like GT, Duke, UNC, Virginia, ND, and one more. Probably either Kansas or UConn.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/29/2012 2:34 PM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
20 teams, 4 pods of 5, 8 scheduled conference games +1 to be determined for each team. This may get the conference around any rule that prohibits semi-final conference matchups, while ensuring semi-final matchups. I think most fans would be in favor of permanent pods, and rotating schedules with other pods (as long as OSU and UM are in the same pod), and the cash train would keep on rolling. I see something like:
OSU, UM, MSU, Purdue, Indiana
PSU, Rutgers, Maryland, VA, UNC
Nebraska, Iowa, Missouri, Illinois, Kansas
ND, Wisconsin, NW, Minnesota, GT
If the conference is set on going to 20, I don't see any way that ND doesn't join. What remaining conference is going to offer them a home for their non-revenue sports? The B12 & SEC will grab VT, Clemson, NCSt, and FSU, and neither of those conferences, in my opinion, will agree to becoming a quasi-conference for them. ND will have to choose between the B10, B12, Pac10, and SEC, with the Big10 being the most "national" and profitable conference.
Last edited 12/29/2012 3:46 PM by rayb678
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2012 9:31 AM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
---------------------------------------------
--- rayb678 wrote:
20 teams, 4 pods of 5, 8 scheduled conference games +1 to be determined for each team. This may get the conference around any rule that prohibits semi-final conference matchups, while ensuring semi-final matchups. I think most fans would be in favor of permanent pods, and rotating schedules with other pods (as long as OSU and UM are in the same pod), and the cash train would keep on rolling. I see something like:
OSU, UM, MSU, Purdue, Indiana
PSU, Rutgers, Maryland, VA, UNC
Nebraska, Iowa, Missouri, Illinois, Kansas
ND, Wisconsin, NW, Minnesota, GT
If the conference is set on going to 20, I don't see any way that ND doesn't join. What remaining conference is going to offer them a home for their non-revenue sports? The B12 & SEC will grab VT, Clemson, NCSt, and FSU, and neither of those conferences, in my opinion, will agree to becoming a quasi-conference for them. ND will have to choose between the B10, B12, Pac10, and SEC, with the Big10 being the most "national" and profitable conference.
---------------------------------------------
If ND is included, they will be in a pod with Rutgers. Have to get them into NYC for the BTN.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2012 12:38 PM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
It seems that UNC's fan base has convinced itself that the B1G is a worst-case scenario. They're too "southern" and we don't understand them, apparently.  Their board, in a nutshell:  --- "We beelowng in the S-E-C" |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2012 12:52 PM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
CalBayBuckeye wrote:
there was some talk on the NCST board recently that could put a twist on the B1G expansion possibilities in terms of the schools of interest that have AAU status.
One point was that Kansas is expected to lose their AAU status.
Another point was on the next projected round of schools to be voted by AAU for membership. The poster had heard that NCST had lost their AAU membership bid on the last ballot by a single vote. The next batch of schools that they projected to be on the AAU membership ballots were North Carolina State, Virginia Tech, Cincy and Rennsler (who the hell is Rennsler?). With the AAU voting no more than 2 schools on the ballots can be approved each time.
The next membership vote is expected to be around 2017. The Big Ten schools control 13 votes. Only the Ivy league / NE independent schools has a comparatively sized voting block in the AAU.
If there is any merit to the info above, I could see a couple of additional scenarios for B1G expansion:
1. If expansion stalls until 2017 and either VT or NCST get AAU status, then obviously they become expansion candidates.
2. If Kansas is going to become a member of the B1G and they are at risk of imminently losing AAU status, then something would need to happen soon before their eligibility window closes (a la Nebraska from a few years ago). CalBayBuckeye, KU has taken a lot of steps recently to bolster our AAU status because it's been pretty clear in the Chancellor's messages that KU needed to act or lose that status. In 2012, KU just got NCI status for the KU Med Center, which is going to lead to a big influx of research dollars (opens up NIH money). Something like 5 or 6 of the last 8 cancer drugs have come from KU researchers. Academically, KU has always been hampered by the State of Kansas, which required that KU and every other school in the state take every in-state student that got a 2.0 GPA or 21 ACT or finished in the top 1/3 of their class. KU, just this month, was allowed to increase admissions standards. KU is also in the middle of a $1.2 billion capital campaign. One of our KU insiders has some Big 10 contacts and they're saying KU is one of the Big 10's top 2 choices, but they don't know that KU can get out of the Big 12. I doubt the Big 10 would have that much interest in KU if KU is going to lose AAU status in the next couple of years.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2012 1:40 PM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
WinchesterBUCK wrote:
---------------------------------------------
--- rayb678 wrote:
20 teams, 4 pods of 5, 8 scheduled conference games +1 to be determined for each team. This may get the conference around any rule that prohibits semi-final conference matchups, while ensuring semi-final matchups. I think most fans would be in favor of permanent pods, and rotating schedules with other pods (as long as OSU and UM are in the same pod), and the cash train would keep on rolling. I see something like:
OSU, UM, MSU, Purdue, Indiana
PSU, Rutgers, Maryland, VA, UNC
Nebraska, Iowa, Missouri, Illinois, Kansas
ND, Wisconsin, NW, Minnesota, GT
If the conference is set on going to 20, I don't see any way that ND doesn't join. What remaining conference is going to offer them a home for their non-revenue sports? The B12 & SEC will grab VT, Clemson, NCSt, and FSU, and neither of those conferences, in my opinion, will agree to becoming a quasi-conference for them. ND will have to choose between the B10, B12, Pac10, and SEC, with the Big10 being the most "national" and profitable conference.
---------------------------------------------
If ND is included, they will be in a pod with Rutgers. Have to get them into NYC for the BTN. Wouldn't GT also need to be in the pod with UNC, UVA, UMD, and, PSU?
Today is today tomorrow will be today tomorrow so tomorrow will never come it's always today. So drink up. - stech
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2012 1:48 PM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
ray its not as much a knock on the big ten as it is history and geography.
unc has played big ten teams a total of 20 games. they have played sec teams 171 times.
they border kentucky, tennessee, georgia and south carolina.
they are also a very good baseball program.
they would have kentucky in basketball.
not making a judgement on the school part but for unc FANS and where most of them actually live the big ten would be a worst case scenario of the three---best case the acc stays together, second best the sec, third best join the big ten.
if the state of north carolina was where kentucky is geographically and most of their grads were located in northern kentucky, ohio and indiana then it would be the exact opposite.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2012 1:54 PM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
Today is today tomorrow will be today tomorrow so tomorrow will never come it's always today. So drink up. - stech
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2012 1:57 PM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
rayb678 wrote: It seems that UNC's fan base has convinced itself that the B1G is a worst-case scenario. They're too "southern" and we don't understand them, apparently.
Their board, in a nutshell:
--- "We beelowng in the S-E-C" Culturally, they are a better fit for the SEC. Academically, the ACC is much more aligned with the B10. I think athletically, the coaches and fans prefer the SEC while the administration would pick the B10. I don't know where the majority of their athletes come from but B10 basketball and the olympic sports probably fit in better with the B10. Ideally if we could add UVA, GT and maybe one other ACC team, PSU and Maryland would make for a good transition to the B10. Arguing that a proposition is true because belief in it has good consequences, or that it is false because belief in it has bad consequences is often an irrelevancy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2012 1:58 PM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
rayb678 wrote: It seems that UNC's fan base has convinced itself that the B1G is a worst-case scenario. They're too "southern" and we don't understand them, apparently.
Their board, in a nutshell:
--- "We beelowng in the S-E-C" Their fans and grads prefer the SEC, but all is not lost. At least their pin headed nerdy bow tie wearing smug academic administrators prefer the big 10. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2012 4:03 PM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
BigMen wrote:
rayb678 wrote: It seems that UNC's fan base has convinced itself that the B1G is a worst-case scenario. They're too "southern" and we don't understand them, apparently.
Their board, in a nutshell:
--- "We beelowng in the S-E-C" Their fans and grads prefer the SEC, but all is not lost. At least their pin headed nerdy bow tie wearing smug academic administrators prefer the big 10. Ye fen' gads!!! Their not as fen' dumb as I though. But still rednecks and I still don't want em'  |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2012 5:38 PM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
Last edited 12/30/2012 5:39 PM by BigMen
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/30/2012 7:43 PM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
"To suspect your own mortality is to know the beginning of terror; to learn irrefutably that you are mortal is to know the end of terror." |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2012 12:20 AM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
WesternStormer wrote:
--- "We beelowng in the S-E-C" LOL...is that Honey Boo Boo? If so, thats hilarious. Honey boo boo can only be compared to one person ... ... Bret Beilema  |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2012 8:55 AM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
--------------------------------------------- --- WesternStormer wrote: WinchesterBUCK wrote:
---------------------------------------------
--- rayb678 wrote:
20 teams, 4 pods of 5, 8 scheduled conference games +1 to be determined for each team. This may get the conference around any rule that prohibits semi-final conference matchups, while ensuring semi-final matchups. I think most fans would be in favor of permanent pods, and rotating schedules with other pods (as long as OSU and UM are in the same pod), and the cash train would keep on rolling. I see something like:
OSU, UM, MSU, Purdue, Indiana
PSU, Rutgers, Maryland, VA, UNC
Nebraska, Iowa, Missouri, Illinois, Kansas
ND, Wisconsin, NW, Minnesota, GT
If the conference is set on going to 20, I don't see any way that ND doesn't join. What remaining conference is going to offer them a home for their non-revenue sports? The B12 & SEC will grab VT, Clemson, NCSt, and FSU, and neither of those conferences, in my opinion, will agree to becoming a quasi-conference for them. ND will have to choose between the B10, B12, Pac10, and SEC, with the Big10 being the most "national" and profitable conference.
---------------------------------------------
If ND is included, they will be in a pod with Rutgers. Have to get them into NYC for the BTN. Wouldn't GT also need to be in the pod with UNC, UVA, UMD, and, PSU? --------------------------------------------- Using the teams listed above but replace Mizzou with Duke: GT, UNC, Duke, Virginia, Maryland PSU, Rutgers, ND, Northwestern, Illinois OSU, Mich, MSU, Purdue, Indiana Wisky, Minn, Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas If the B1G goes to 20, these would be my predictions as of now and the probably pod arrangements. Pods would rotate and play each other every third year. 9 game conference schedule. Must get ND & PSU in with Rutgers. Also, ND would be in Chicago. These pods also keep rivalries together, bases on geography for the most part, and spread the national brands out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2012 9:02 AM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
that would be an interesting set up.
with the 3 northern groups and one southern i think delany will name them emperors, conquerors, supreme rulers and trailer trash.
man we will have some great threads on that one.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/31/2012 12:03 PM
Re: All New Expansion Discussion HERE (Part 2)
lowiq wrote: that would be an interesting set up.
with the 3 northern groups and one southern i think delany will name them emperors, conquerors, supreme rulers and trailer trash.
man we will have some great threads on that one.  _____________________________________________
Michigan is French for "I quit!" |
|
