Big Ten Expansion

[NeedMoreFans]

This was briefly talked about on LambeauLeap, but it encompasses so much more than just college football (and not many people will be taking the Leap now that football is over), so let's talk about it here.

 

So the Big Ten wants to expand to 12 teams (and have heard rumors they may not even stop there). Today, there was a report on Madison.com about the Big Ten possibly courting Texas.

 

Link to story

 

The rumors didn't originate in WI, or in Big Ten country, rather from Kansas. I'm not sure what to think about Texas. It would be great for athletics and they would more than fit the academic mold, but man...if we're tired of OSU winning the Big Ten every year, just imagine how we'd feel about Texas. Plus, it would be a pain for non-revenue teams.

[owbc]

The Pac 10 has also begun the expansion process, and the Big 12 will almost certainly follow if the B10 and P10 expand.

The expansion is certainly becoming a problem. The main problem for football is that all the good teams will be in the top conferences. This will make it harder for mid-majors to get BCS births, since they will play even weaker conference schedules with their top competition gone. For the Big 10 in particular, a 2-division conference will damage rivalries and possibly be unbalanced.

The main problem for basketball is that too many bad teams will be in the top conferences. This year, Wisconsin had to play OSU, Purdue, and MSU twice and will probably play one or two of them a third time. A giant basketball league like the Big East no longer brings competition like that. Instead, the top teams get additional games against DePaul and South Florida (yes, I know South Florida beat Georgetown, but when will that ever happen again?). Conference USA was a great basketball league that got wiped off the map--leaving poor Memphis in the dust. I do not see any benefit for the bottom Big East teams either--unless they like to consistently lose 10 conference games per year. It would be better to move DePaul and South Florida back to CUSA and let them battle with teams that have similar recruiting abilities.

[T B0NE 10]

But why would the Big 12 expand (unless the Big Ten grabs Texas)? They already have 12 teams. Part of the reason the Big Ten and the Pac 10 want to expand is so they can play a football conference championship game.

[JJHardy7]

The main problem for basketball is that too many bad teams will be in the top conferences. This year, Wisconsin had to play OSU, Purdue, and MSU twice and will probably play one or two of them a third time. A giant basketball league like the Big East no longer brings competition like that. Instead, the top teams get additional games against DePaul and South Florida (yes, I know South Florida beat Georgetown, but when will that ever happen again?). Conference USA was a great basketball league that got wiped off the map--leaving poor Memphis in the dust. I do not see any benefit for the bottom Big East teams either--unless they like to consistently lose 10 conference games per year. It would be better to move DePaul and South Florida back to CUSA and let them battle with teams that have similar recruiting abilities.

 

I don't know if playing DePaul and South Florida makes up for the rest of the Big East. I know that it changes year to year, but the Big East was a dominate conference last year. I'd rather play in the Big 10 recently than the Big East.

 

Anyways...like most know in order to have a conference football championship you need to have 12 teams in the conference. The Big Ten I'm sure would like to have some spotlight/revenue between the end of the regular season and the bowl games. The SEC Championship is a big deal every year and I'm sure the Big 10 wants to get in on some of that revenue. To me, it makes a lot of sense to add a 12th team. I'd be shocked it was Texas though...

[paul253]

The entire reason this is happening is because of the BCS. When the Big 10 football season is over the SEC, Big 12, and ACC still usually have two more weeks. This allows voters to see SEC teams two more times and obviously when an SEC (or ACC or Big 12) team wins a conference championship game it makes them look really good and people tend to forget about the Big 10. A perfect example of this is a few years ago when #2 Michigan went into Columbus to face #1 Ohio St the last game of the season and lost by a mere field goal. Well here comes big bad Florida who wins the SEC, then Coach Urban Whiner....I mean Meyer.....goes off saying how his team should be playing in the title game and Michigan should not be even though Michigan's loss was much more "impressive" than Florida's. Forget what happened in the actual title game because it's a moot point. Personally I think USC was the best team that year. Anyway, that and obviously money are the reasons the Big 10 wants to expand. I wish Notre Dame would get over themselves and join because it would benefit them on multiple levels, but Texas to me is the next best choice. It would rake in HUGE profits every year and put the Big 10 on even keel with the SEC (who is constantly overrated) in football and add another power team for basketball. Plus it opens up a huge recruiting base for football as the state of Texas is without a doubt one of the top three states in terms of high school football talent. I'd absolutely love to see Texas join the Big 10.

 

As far as the other expansion goes, I hear Colorado may bolt for the Pac 10, which then would obviously add a second team, possibly Utah or Boise St. The Big 12's natural choice to replace them would be TCU, though depending on how many teams they lose they'd have to add another (Utah? Arkansas?) It'll definitely be an interesting next few years. Maybe Notre Dame should join the Big East. It would give the conference some legitimacy in football and Notre Dame would immediately be the cream of the conference. I'd also be curious if Villanova would join the Big East in a similar way UConn did. Villanova just won the 1AA title. Either way, whatever happens, I'll admit I am a homer and I hope the Big 10 comes out ahead.

[JJHardy7]

I really don't think this has all that much to do about the BCS...if you lose late in the season you likely aren't going to the championship game.

 

I mean look at this year...Big 10 had two teams in the BCS without a conference championship game. The way that rankings and such are structured Ohio State and Michigan playing their game the last game of the regular season will be bad no matter what. I'm going to guess that if they do have 12 teams Michigan and OSU would be in the same division...so again whoever loses the last game of the season is likely going to drop in the BCS rankings. And to be honest, the way Michigan has been the past few years that point is moot.

 

Texas to the Big 10 is bad for the competitive balance IMO. Texas and OSU would dominate year in and year out. The chances of the Badgers winning the conference would become much smaller. I still think a team like Pittsburgh makes sense. You would have a natural rivalry with Penn State and it seems to be more 'Big 10 style' of football. I don't see why Texas would even think about leaving the Big 12.

 

I also don't get why Notre Dame would be the cream of the Big East...they've struggled a bit lately...

[paul253]

I think the main reason the Big 10 got a second team in the BCS was money. They travel really well. Iowa could have very easily been kept out and maybe would have if Oklahoma St didnt lose right at the end of the season. I think if the Michigan-Ohio St game gets moved to the beginning of the season like Miami-Florida St did when those two teams were actually good it would benefit them both. But then again, with a conference championship game it wouldn't happen anyway that they'd ever meet in the BCS title game.

Texas to the Big 10 is bad for the competitive balance IMO. Texas and OSU would dominate year in and year out.

 

I don't think that is necessarily true. Those two have definitely been up the last few years, but things tend to cycle a bit. Penn St is always good and could easily give those two schools a loss. Michigan is on its way up (hopefully) and Wisconsin and Iowa are solid programs. Northwestern has even been surprisingly competitive. Beside, the competitive balance thing hasn't hurt the SEC. The last few years its been all Florida and Alabama. LSU was vastly overrated last year (they played four good teams and lost to all of them), as was Ole Miss. I think adding a good program like Texas can only help.

I also don't get why Notre Dame would be the cream of the Big East...they've struggled a bit lately...

 

They have, but they've always recruited well and will continue to do so. Now that they got rid of that dud Weis and picked up a coach who brought Cincinnati to the BCS back to back years, I think they're going to be ok again real soon. Beside the Big East doesn't really have any football juggernauts. West Virginia and Cincinnati are the two closest things. Popularity wise too though I was referring too. They have no real competitors as far as football history in the Big East whereas Michigan and Ohio St, and even Penn St, can compete with them in that category in the Big 10.

[craigharmann]

I would love love love UT in the Big Ten. That way, when Wisconsin comes to Austin, I can drive the hour to watch the games! I just have a hard time seeing why Texas would actually consider it. They're one of the top teams in the Big 12.

[JoeHova]

I just have a hard time seeing why Texas would actually consider it. They're one of the top teams in the Big 12.

Academics. Texas wants to be taken seriously as an academic institution and it's easier to have that happen when you're in a conference with Michigan, Northwestern and Wisconsin than it is when you're in one with Kansas State, Texas Tech and Oklahoma. That doesn't mean they'd move if the Big Ten offered, but I think it does mean they would consider it.

[logan82]

I would like the Big Ten to stick with midwest teams. Of course getting a team like Texas or a team in New York state would make the Big Ten a media powerhouse. Even bigger than they are now. That was something put forward by Homer on 100.5 this afternoon. I believe he mentioned Rutgers and Missouri. Think of the media markets we would be in with those 2 teams added.

[TracyThom]

I thought I read a quote that said the Big Ten wishes to expand into states that already border current Big Ten states. That puts Texas out of the equation.

 

Like most of you, I've heard Pitt, Rutgers, Louisville, and Missouri. Of those 4, I'd choose Louisville. Can we kick out Northwestern and take both Louisville and Pitt?

 

 

 

EDIT: After reading some articles, perhaps I am mistaken about the Big Ten only wanting to expand into states that border a current Big Ten state. I also forgot to mention Syracuse, which is another school rumored to join the Big Ten.

[phxMILWfan]

I'd love to see the big ten add another team and just call themselves the Big North. They could even use part of the "N" and the "O" in their logo to make a 10 if it made some people feel better. My first pick would be Notre Dame but that isn't happening. Texas would be great. After that I don't know how excited I would be about Rutgers, Missouri, Louisville or any other rumored team. I think they could then divide into East and West divisions.

 

West-Minnesota, Wisconsion, Northwestern, Iowa, Illinois, Texas

 

East-Indiana, Purdue, Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio St, Penn St

 

I think the divisions are fair for football and basketball. I know Texas would make it hard for Wisconsin to win the division every year but it would be fair. The football schedule would be against every team in your own division every year and three teams from the other division each year and three games from out of conference.

[berniebrewer4life]

Can we kick out Northwestern and take both Louisville and Pitt?

No. Charter Members can't be kicked out, they can only leave of their own volition. The only teams that can be kicked out are MSU and PSU.

[JJHardy7]

I don't think that is necessarily true. Those two have definitely been up the last few years, but things tend to cycle a bit. Penn St is always good and could easily give those two schools a loss. Michigan is on its way up (hopefully) and Wisconsin and Iowa are solid programs. Northwestern has even been surprisingly competitive. Beside, the competitive balance thing hasn't hurt the SEC. The last few years its been all Florida and Alabama. LSU was vastly overrated last year (they played four good teams and lost to all of them), as was Ole Miss. I think adding a good program like Texas can only help.

 

The SEC though isn't adding another team. I know it won't be a popular opinion here, but scouts have said the past few years players have tended to go to schools in the south. That includes the SEC and some of the Big 12. You are dead on that the SEC is very competitive. I just don't think there are too many schools in the Big 10 that would year in and year out compete with Texas.

 

And again...I just don't see why Texas would make this move. The past few years the Big 12 has been one of the better conferences and Texas has been in the national championship game 2 of the past 5 years and I believe they won the Rose Bowl last year. They also just had a top 2 recruiting class.

 

Academics. Texas wants to be taken seriously as an academic institution and it's easier to have that happen when you're in a conference with Michigan, Northwestern and Wisconsin than it is when you're in one with Kansas State, Texas Tech and Oklahoma. That doesn't mean they'd move if the Big Ten offered, but I think it does mean they would consider it.

 

This might be true about some schools, but it's not like every Big 10 school is an Ivy league school. I think if anything it would come down to $$$. I have a question for maybe some people older than I am. I've been told that before UW was consistently a good football team UW was just as easy to get into as other UW schools. I honestly don't know if that's true, but if it is that would kind of tell me that academics and athletics are somewhat related. I went to UW-M and I know on a much smaller scale there seemed to be more applications after we went to the Sweet 16. In other words, if Texas is receiving more applications they will be able to set the bar higher for admissions. Again, just a guess.

[Invader3K]

Is there any possibility of adding Notre Dame at all? I've heard they don't want to give up their independent status, but some say there could be some big benefits if they join the Big Ten. Seems like that would be the dream scenario, though.

[hawing]

I've been told that before UW was consistently a good football team UW was just as easy to get into as other UW schools. I honestly don't know if that's true, but if it is that would kind of tell me that academics and athletics are somewhat related. I went to UW-M and I know on a much smaller scale there seemed to be more applications after we went to the Sweet 16. In other words, if Texas is receiving more applications they will be able to set the bar higher for admissions. Again, just a guess.

It's a reasonable guess. High-profile athletic success (Rose Bowls, Final Four, etc. - sadly, not so much cross country titles or even Frozen Fours) has contributed to a visibility that you could argue Wisconsin never had before the 1990s. Donna Shalala came on board as chancellor, the upgrade of the athletic department began, and the snowball effect began (not to mention, the internets got popular).

I'd like to think athletics isn't the only reason that being accepted as a UW-Madison freshman has become akin to winning the lottery, but it's surely one of the reasons.

 

Steering back toward the topic, I'd rather see Pitt join the Big Ten than Texas. Badger volleyball doesn't need two studs in the conference; Penn State is more than enough.

[paul253]

I just don't think there are too many schools in the Big 10 that would year in and year out compete with Texas.

 

I think Ohio St and Penn St could compete with them year in and year out. Not necessarily beat them every year, but compete with them. Heck Ohio St beat them a few years ago in Austin and probably should have beat them in Columbus a year later. And recruiting classes are more or less meaningless. Can you guess what Boise St and TCU have been ranked the past few years? Plus the Big 10 has a winning record vs the SEC recently, which is supposed to have all these great teams, which nobody in the South wants to mention, despite the majority of the games being played in the South. That shows Big 10 teams can compete against solid non conference opponents.

 

As far as why they would join? My assumption is money. The Big 10 has its own channel and as far as I know the Big 12 doesn't so they would get some more money out of that. Football wise it would put the Big 10 either near or very likely at the top of the football world, ahead of the SEC. Just think, last year compare the two conferences top five with Texas in the Big 10

 

Texas-Alabama (they played but UT was of course without its QB)

Ohio St.-Florida (Florida played three teams that could be considered good, got hammered by the best one, and beat the other two)

Iowa-LSU

Penn St-Ole Miss??? (Big drop off after LSU)

Wisconsin-Auburn??? Arkansas???

 

I think the Big 10 could easily win the last three and could arguably win all five.

Basketball wise they'd still be a notch below the Big East and maybe the ACC but it would definitely close the gap.

 

I think it would be a good move for Texas, logistics aside.

[JJHardy7]

I'd like to think athletics isn't the only reason that being accepted as a UW-Madison freshman has become akin to winning the lottery, but it's surely one of the reasons.

 

Oh I do agree. I just think that exposure from athletics can help the amount of applicants and potentially increase the admission standards.

 

Steering back toward the topic, I'd rather see Pitt join the Big Ten than Texas. Badger volleyball doesn't need two studs in the conference; Penn State is more than enough.

 

I also agree with this. I think it makes a lot of sense given the region the Big 10 is located in. I don't know as much about Pitt, but would there be a reason why they wouldn't want to do it? Would they see it as a step up? I'm sure for football they would.

[MJLiverock]

Money is the reason why Texas would make the switch. I read somewhere that the Big10 teams (which split TV money equallly) each rake in somewhere between $20 Million and $24 Million in TV revenues. The Big 12 shares their TV money unequally, giving Texas, more than an equal amount, but it still only pull in something like $11 Million to $13 Million for Texas. It makes sense given the population area covered by the Big10 is probably higher than the Big 12 with fairly empty states like Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and sharing Iowa (and actually having the much less popular team).

 

Texas has two rivals, Oklahoma and Texas A&M, they could easily make them their two non conference games and schedule a cupcake for the third. They really don't have big historic rivalry with anyone else in the Big 12.

 

Texas is large land grant research institution much like the Big 10 schools, it fits academically very well. This is important, because the voting on who to let into the Big 10 isn't up to the AD's, but the University Presidents who will want some academic criteria to fit. This is why schools like Louisville and Cincinnati have no real shot. They don't have the academics to satisfy that side of the equation, nor really doing much for the TV exposure side of the ledger.

 

To me the only schools that really make any sense are Texas, ND, Pitt, Missouri, and Rutgers. And probably in that order for my tastes. ND is smack in the middle of Big 10 country but they supposedly have a big national following that could increase TV revs, Pitt is sort of already in the area but would probably do almost as much as Missouri for TV rev since St. Louis is already on the edge of Big 10 country anyway. Rutgers brings more NJ and NY marekts but I just don't know how popular Rutgers is in the NY market.

[JJHardy7]

I read somewhere that the Big10 teams (which split TV money equallly) each rake in somewhere between $20 Million and $24 Million in TV revenues.

 

I'm not accusing you of making something up, but do you have a link or anything? If that is true, that would obviously be why Texas would want to make the switch.

 

EDIT: I found this link that states $20 million a year:

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/ct-spt-0212-big-ten-expansion--20100211,0,4739233.column

 

I haven't been able to find a solid number for what Texas receives each year for its television revenue (it does look like the Big 12 receives substantially less than the Big 10), but it looks like they don't have any problems generating revenue:

 

http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2009/06/15/texas-is-tops-in-sports-revenue/

 

Again, I still don't know if it makes complete sense from Texas' view, but there could be additional revenue from the television deal and also BCS appearances. I 'd also wonder how the figures will change based on who (if anyone) joins the Big 10.

[PlayerHader]

JJHardy7 wrote:

 

Academics. Texas wants to be taken seriously as an academic institution and it's easier to have that happen when you're in a conference with Michigan, Northwestern and Wisconsin than it is when you're in one with Kansas State, Texas Tech and Oklahoma. That doesn't mean they'd move if the Big Ten offered, but I think it does mean they would consider it.

 

This might be true about some schools, but it's not like every Big 10 school is an Ivy league school. I think if anything it would come down to $$$. I have a question for maybe some people older than I am. I've been told that before UW was consistently a good football team UW was just as easy to get into as other UW schools. I honestly don't know if that's true, but if it is that would kind of tell me that academics and athletics are somewhat related. I went to UW-M and I know on a much smaller scale there seemed to be more applications after we went to the Sweet 16. In other words, if Texas is receiving more applications they will be able to set the bar higher for admissions. Again, just a guess.

You are vastly underestimating the importance of academics and research to the Big Ten.

Remember that each of the Big Ten schools plus the University of Chicago make up the CIC. These schools co-op on billions of dollars of research and pool many resources that are beyond the reach of other public research universities. Joining the Big Ten would provide Texas with millions of dollars based on athletics alone, but it would allow it to jump into the truly elite of public university research.

 

[JJHardy7]

You are vastly underestimating the importance of academics and research to the Big Ten.

 

Remember that each of the Big Ten schools plus the University of Chicago make up the CIC. These schools co-op on billions of dollars of research and pool many resources that are beyond the reach of other public research universities. Joining the Big Ten would provide Texas with millions of dollars based on athletics alone, but it would allow it to jump into the truly elite of public university research.

 

I might be, but where would the dollars come from? I guess that is my point. If the pure switch to the Big 10 brings in a ton more money compared to their current situation...that would make sense. I know I'm just looking at the football team right now, but they're one of the highest revenue generating teams in the game.

 

I guess it depends on where Texas is now (and some of the information isn't readily available) and where it would be with the switch. If there's a lot of money involved, sure it makes sense. And I guess we will see how much sense it does or doesn't make based on if they leave the conference.

 

I think in terms of pure sports...I don't think the revenue generated would significantly change for Texas. Texas does fine there and adding a team to the Big 10 may reduce the football revenue. In terms of the research, I don't exactly know how that works. If it is a lot more money, than it would make sense. I just don't know where Texas is at now with that and where it would be.

[MJLiverock]

I read somewhere that the Big10 teams (which split TV money equallly) each rake in somewhere between $20 Million and $24 Million in TV revenues.

 

I'm not accusing you of making something up, but do you have a link or anything? If that is true, that would obviously be why Texas would want to make the switch.

 

EDIT: I found this link that states $20 million a year:

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/ct-spt-0212-big-ten-expansion--20100211,0,4739233.column

 

I haven't been able to find a solid number for what Texas receives each year for its television revenue (it does look like the Big 12 receives substantially less than the Big 10), but it looks like they don't have any problems generating revenue:

 

http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2009/06/15/texas-is-tops-in-sports-revenue/

 

Again, I still don't know if it makes complete sense from Texas' view, but there could be additional revenue from the television deal and also BCS appearances. I 'd also wonder how the figures will change based on who (if anyone) joins the Big 10.

It was in a blog somewhere about the TV revenues but it does make a lot of sense that the TV revs for the Big 10 schools would be much higher than what Texas gets, even with them getting a more than equal share. They blog's numbers do make inherent sense, espicallly if you found the $20MM reference for the Big 10 schools. Think of it this way, the Big 12 TV contract probably generates its ad rates based on the populations of states like:

 

Kansas: 2.8MM

Nebraska: 1.8MM

Oklahoma: 3.6MM

Colorado: 4.8MM

Missouri: 5.9MM

Iowa: 3.0MMM

Non Texas population = 21.9MM

 

Texas: 24.0MM

 

Now the Big 10 (besides owning its own Network) generates its TV money or ad rates based on states with populations of

 

Michigan: 10MM

Ohio: 11.5MM

Pennsylvaina: 12.5MM

Illinois: 12.9MM

WI: 5.6MM

Minnesota: 5.2MM

Indiana: 6.4MM

Iowa: 3.0MM with the Hawkeyes being much more popular than the Cyclones

 

67 Million potential viewers

 

Without Texas, the Big 12 covers a bunch of states that have populations much much smaller than the TV audiences a Big Ten team can reach. Obviously not everyone in the big states watch but a lot do, and even if every person in the non Texas Big 12 states watch football and basketball, the Big 10 states can match those numbers with only 30% of people watching. No wonder they have to pay Texas more than an equal share since the population of Texas is larger than all the other states combined.

 

As far as not having problems generating revenues goes, I would think that would still be the case. They will sell just as much apparel and tickets. They would just stand to make another $10MM or so from TV than they already do.

 

I don't know how the Big 12 shares bowl revenues, a lot of conferences, the Big 10 included just divy up all the Bowl money between the teams after expenses are deducted. This would probably mean even more money for Texas since the Big10 would add a championship game adding a few million more to the TV money to split amongst the teams and the Big 10 Bowl divy would be at least as big as the Big 12 payouts.

 

The BCS money is hit or miss, depending on if two teams from one conferencemake it to the BCS but the Big 10 also has a tie in to the CapOne bowl which has the highest payout of non BCS games. Not to mention the historical tie in to the Rose Bowl which has beeen the highest payout BCS game other than possibly the Championship Game.

 

 

 

[JJHardy7]

Good information MJLiverock. The population is a factor. I just wonder what big-time Texas fans would feel about the move? I only know a few people who went there and they enjoy being in the Big 12.

 

As it is structured now, the Big 12 is receiving less money than the Big 10 via the BCS Championship Series. I agree the BCS money is hit or miss.

 

And the Texas fans I know like the Big 12 and they like winning. Mack Brown has it going on there now and I still would be surprised (if the non-athletic money isn't a major swing) if Texas left the Big 12. They've been to a BCS game four of the past six years and like I mentioned before just had a number 2 recruiting class. That's impressive.

 

I'm not a huge Badger fan, but what would Badger fans think about Texas going to the Big 10? I don't think I'd be a huge fan of that...I know these things go in cycles, but Texas has a major advantage in recruiting compared to almost any other school in the nation...

[PlayerHader]

Check out this link. http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2009/12/27/the-big-ten-expansion-index-a-different-shade-of-orange/ I think it really makes it clear how important academics (and the rest of the $) will be to this. Very interesting read.