NCAA Conference Realignment

[tadowdaddy]

Old Style,

 

Which way is aTm leaning from what you are hearing?

In a week's time it went from probably 90% to Pac-10 to 60% to Pac-10 to we have the votes on the Board of Regents for the SEC. Now our insider says Don Beebe is making a huge push to keep the Big 12 afloat that is actually making everyone rethink their moves. Even still, I expect us to bolt to the SEC. If we don't, I will be pissed.

 

 

There's no way that if Texas commits to the Big 12 lite, the Texas Legislature will let aTm move anywhere.

[Old Style]

Old Style,

 

Which way is aTm leaning from what you are hearing?

Now our insider says Don Beebe is making a huge push to keep the Big 12 afloat that is actually making everyone rethink their moves. Even still, I expect us to bolt to the SEC. If we don't, I will be pissed.

 

Why?

Why would I be pissed? I am sick and tired of Texas bullying everyone else around. There is a reason this conference is a mess right now. They want everyone to bow down & kiss their ring and we have enough power to stand up to them once and for all. I'm sure Beebe has made plenty of concessions to convice the horns to stay that would give them an even bigger advantage than they already have.

[Old Style]

Old Style,

 

Which way is aTm leaning from what you are hearing?

In a week's time it went from probably 90% to Pac-10 to 60% to Pac-10 to we have the votes on the Board of Regents for the SEC. Now our insider says Don Beebe is making a huge push to keep the Big 12 afloat that is actually making everyone rethink their moves. Even still, I expect us to bolt to the SEC. If we don't, I will be pissed.

 

 

There's no way that if Texas commits to the Big 12 lite, the Texas Legislature will let aTm move anywhere.

It's not up to the legislature.

[tadowdaddy]

Old Style,

 

Which way is aTm leaning from what you are hearing?

In a week's time it went from probably 90% to Pac-10 to 60% to Pac-10 to we have the votes on the Board of Regents for the SEC. Now our insider says Don Beebe is making a huge push to keep the Big 12 afloat that is actually making everyone rethink their moves. Even still, I expect us to bolt to the SEC. If we don't, I will be pissed.

 

 

There's no way that if Texas commits to the Big 12 lite, the Texas Legislature will let aTm move anywhere.

It's not up to the legislature.

 

The state pours a TON of money into it's schools. It sure as hell will be up to them in the long run. They will threaten to pull money, etc. Look at how Baylor tagged along for the ride to the original Big 12. That was a 100% state government move. The 3 didn't want to take Baylor with them, and nobody in the Big 8 wanted to add Baylor. The state of Texas said it was a package deal, take it or leave it, and they HAD to take Baylor into the original Big 12.

[hawkeyecub]

Old Style,

 

Which way is aTm leaning from what you are hearing?

Now our insider says Don Beebe is making a huge push to keep the Big 12 afloat that is actually making everyone rethink their moves. Even still, I expect us to bolt to the SEC. If we don't, I will be pissed.

 

Why?

Why would I be pissed? I am sick and tired of Texas bullying everyone else around. There is a reason this conference is a mess right now. They want everyone to bow down & kiss their ring and we have enough power to stand up to them once and for all. I'm sure Beebe has made plenty of concessions to convice the horns to stay that would give them an even bigger advantage than they already have.

 

True. From an outside perspective, A&M is a better fit and has a better chance at competing in the 10-team Big 12 than the SEC.

[hawkeyecub]

What do Big Ten fans think of these divisions? I think they're the best suggestion I've seen yet.

 

 

Here are the schools, with their records over the past 10 years and their records over the past 25 years.

 

Big Ten Black

 

Ohio State, 102-25 (.803) -- 230-74-5 (.752)

Michigan, 81-43 (.653) -- 222-80-5 (.731)

Wisconsin, 86-43 (.667) -- 170-129-4 (.568)

Michigan State, 60-62 (.492) -- 153-141-4 (.520)

Purdue, 67-57 (.540) -- 133-156-4 (.461)

Indiana, 39-78 (.333) -- 118-167-3 (.415)

 

Totals 435-308 (.585) -- 1026-747-25 (.578)

 

Big Ten Blue

 

Nebraska, 84-44 (.656) -- 242-71-1 (.772)

Penn State, 77-46 (.626) --218-86-1 (.716)

Iowa, 80-45 (.640) -- 182-116-5 (.609)

Minnesota, 62-62 (.500) -- 129-162-2 (.444)

Illinois, 45-73 (.381) -- 124-162-5 (.435)

Northwestern, 61-61 (.500) -- 116-172-3 (.404)

 

Totals 409-331 (.553) -- 1011-769-17 (.567)

 

 

Here's the link with his rationale: http://www.cleveland.com/buckeyeblog/index.ssf/2010/06/big_ten_expansion_details_how.html

[Old Style]

Old Style,

 

Which way is aTm leaning from what you are hearing?

In a week's time it went from probably 90% to Pac-10 to 60% to Pac-10 to we have the votes on the Board of Regents for the SEC. Now our insider says Don Beebe is making a huge push to keep the Big 12 afloat that is actually making everyone rethink their moves. Even still, I expect us to bolt to the SEC. If we don't, I will be pissed.

 

 

There's no way that if Texas commits to the Big 12 lite, the Texas Legislature will let aTm move anywhere.

It's not up to the legislature.

 

The state pours a TON of money into it's schools. It sure as hell will be up to them in the long run. They will threaten to pull money, etc. Look at how Baylor tagged along for the ride to the original Big 12. That was a 100% state government move. The 3 didn't want to take Baylor with them, and nobody in the Big 8 wanted to add Baylor. The state of Texas said it was a package deal, take it or leave it, and they HAD to take Baylor into the original Big 12.

At that time, the governor was a Baylor grad and the lieutenant governor was a Baylor law grad. The governor now is an Aggie.

[TruffleShuffle]

i think virginia tech would make more sense in the sec because they've got a strong football program. miami would be a good choice too.

 

The SEC does have some interest in Va Tech. While Miami, Ga Tech, Clemson, and Florida State have also been mentioned, from what my booster friend told me he's heard, the SEC doesn't think they add anything to the conference as far as expanding viewerships. If they want to keep up with what the Big Ten and Pac-10 are doing, the SEC feels it needs to expand into areas where they don't already have a foothold. Florida is already covered as is Georgia and South Carolina. Adding aTm would be huge in expanding into Texas and Duke and UNC would add North Carolina in addition to making the SEC a more lucrative conference when it comes to basketball.

 

i understand the desire to expand into NC and texas. i don't know anything about the sec tv contract and whether it extends into south florida. gainesville is a long way from miami.

[tadowdaddy]

At that time, the governor was a Baylor grad and the lieutenant governor was a Baylor law grad. The governor now is an Aggie.

 

Doesn't matter. It's in the best interest of the state of Texas to keep Texas and aTm playing each other.

[hawkeyecub]

Chip Brown saying that UT will stay in the Big 12. If so and if A&M stays, the Pac-10 probably adds Utah and everyone stays at 12.

[bukie]

Chip Brown saying that UT will stay in the Big 12. If so and if A&M stays, the Pac-10 probably adds Utah and everyone stays at 12.

The Big 12 is still down Nebraska and Colorado.

[Old Style]

At that time, the governor was a Baylor grad and the lieutenant governor was a Baylor law grad. The governor now is an Aggie.

 

Doesn't matter. It's in the best interest of the state of Texas to keep Texas and aTm playing each other.

Where does it say that we have to be in the same conference to play each other?

[Jon]

Joe Schad:

The departure of Texas, Texas Tech, OU and OSU to Pac-10 is imminent, four Big 12 sources say

 

If Chip Brown's latest report is "true" (in the sense that Texas said they would seriously consider staying in a 10 team conference) and A&M decides to bolt, Texas will have played this really well.

[jersey cubs fan]

What do Big Ten fans think of these divisions? I think they're the best suggestion I've seen yet.

 

 

Here are the schools, with their records over the past 10 years and their records over the past 25 years.

 

Big Ten Black

 

Ohio State, 102-25 (.803) -- 230-74-5 (.752)

Michigan, 81-43 (.653) -- 222-80-5 (.731)

Wisconsin, 86-43 (.667) -- 170-129-4 (.568)

Michigan State, 60-62 (.492) -- 153-141-4 (.520)

Purdue, 67-57 (.540) -- 133-156-4 (.461)

Indiana, 39-78 (.333) -- 118-167-3 (.415)

 

Totals 435-308 (.585) -- 1026-747-25 (.578)

 

Big Ten Blue

 

Nebraska, 84-44 (.656) -- 242-71-1 (.772)

Penn State, 77-46 (.626) --218-86-1 (.716)

Iowa, 80-45 (.640) -- 182-116-5 (.609)

Minnesota, 62-62 (.500) -- 129-162-2 (.444)

Illinois, 45-73 (.381) -- 124-162-5 (.435)

Northwestern, 61-61 (.500) -- 116-172-3 (.404)

 

Totals 409-331 (.553) -- 1011-769-17 (.567)

 

 

Here's the link with his rationale: http://www.cleveland.com/buckeyeblog/index.ssf/2010/06/big_ten_expansion_details_how.html

 

I do not think you can realistically create divisions that takes Penn State away from all its nearest opponents, and puts them in with all of their furthest opponents.

[hawkeyecub]

Chip Brown saying that UT will stay in the Big 12. If so and if A&M stays, the Pac-10 probably adds Utah and everyone stays at 12.

The Big 12 is still down Nebraska and Colorado.

 

Right, I meant the conferences that were rumored to expand (Pac, Big 10, SEC) would stay at 12. It sounds like the short-term plan is for the Big 12 to stay at 10 if they can keep them all in the fold. Of course they would have the opportunity to add TCU and one more down the road to be able to have a championship game again.

[Tracer Bullet]

What do Big Ten fans think of these divisions? I think they're the best suggestion I've seen yet.

 

 

Here are the schools, with their records over the past 10 years and their records over the past 25 years.

 

Big Ten Black

 

Ohio State, 102-25 (.803) -- 230-74-5 (.752)

Michigan, 81-43 (.653) -- 222-80-5 (.731)

Wisconsin, 86-43 (.667) -- 170-129-4 (.568)

Michigan State, 60-62 (.492) -- 153-141-4 (.520)

Purdue, 67-57 (.540) -- 133-156-4 (.461)

Indiana, 39-78 (.333) -- 118-167-3 (.415)

 

Totals 435-308 (.585) -- 1026-747-25 (.578)

 

Big Ten Blue

 

Nebraska, 84-44 (.656) -- 242-71-1 (.772)

Penn State, 77-46 (.626) --218-86-1 (.716)

Iowa, 80-45 (.640) -- 182-116-5 (.609)

Minnesota, 62-62 (.500) -- 129-162-2 (.444)

Illinois, 45-73 (.381) -- 124-162-5 (.435)

Northwestern, 61-61 (.500) -- 116-172-3 (.404)

 

Totals 409-331 (.553) -- 1011-769-17 (.567)

 

 

Here's the link with his rationale: http://www.cleveland.com/buckeyeblog/index.ssf/2010/06/big_ten_expansion_details_how.html

 

I do not think you can realistically create divisions that takes Penn State away from all its nearest opponents, and puts them in with all of their furthest opponents.

 

no kidding. and why are we treating PSU the same as OSU? In the last 10 years, Wisconsin and Iowa have been better overall than PSU. Do we really care what these programs were like in 1980 if we're gunning for competitive balance in the future? I guess it's a consideration, but not nearly as much as the last 10-15 years.

 

Flip Wisconsin and PSU and I think you have a fairly realistic split.

[Jon]

why does it matter what football conference you are in as far as Academia is concerned? Would anyone actually go "well I don't want to go to Duke because they are in the same football conference as Arkansas." Is there some kind of financial incentive to being in a "smart" football conference that I'm missing? Why is this an issue

If Texas was to join the Pac-10, it's quite possible that in the near future they could form their own version of the CIC, which would have huge financial and academic implications. There's no chance of that in the SEC.

[TruffleShuffle]

Why would I be pissed? I am sick and tired of Texas bullying everyone else around. There is a reason this conference is a mess right now. They want everyone to bow down & kiss their ring and we have enough power to stand up to them once and for all. I'm sure Beebe has made plenty of concessions to convice the horns to stay that would give them an even bigger advantage than they already have.

 

the conference is a mess right now because the populations of the states involved is much smaller than other high-profile conferences, and the population that is there is heavily weighted toward the south. it's a patchwork organization with one good academic school, several decent schools and a few bad ones. texas is far and away the best school in the conference in both athletics and academics, so why shouldn't they hold more of the power?

[hawkeyecub]

What do Big Ten fans think of these divisions? I think they're the best suggestion I've seen yet.

 

 

Here are the schools, with their records over the past 10 years and their records over the past 25 years.

 

Big Ten Black

 

Ohio State, 102-25 (.803) -- 230-74-5 (.752)

Michigan, 81-43 (.653) -- 222-80-5 (.731)

Wisconsin, 86-43 (.667) -- 170-129-4 (.568)

Michigan State, 60-62 (.492) -- 153-141-4 (.520)

Purdue, 67-57 (.540) -- 133-156-4 (.461)

Indiana, 39-78 (.333) -- 118-167-3 (.415)

 

Totals 435-308 (.585) -- 1026-747-25 (.578)

 

Big Ten Blue

 

Nebraska, 84-44 (.656) -- 242-71-1 (.772)

Penn State, 77-46 (.626) --218-86-1 (.716)

Iowa, 80-45 (.640) -- 182-116-5 (.609)

Minnesota, 62-62 (.500) -- 129-162-2 (.444)

Illinois, 45-73 (.381) -- 124-162-5 (.435)

Northwestern, 61-61 (.500) -- 116-172-3 (.404)

 

Totals 409-331 (.553) -- 1011-769-17 (.567)

 

 

Here's the link with his rationale: http://www.cleveland.com/buckeyeblog/index.ssf/2010/06/big_ten_expansion_details_how.html

 

I do not think you can realistically create divisions that takes Penn State away from all its nearest opponents, and puts them in with all of their furthest opponents.

 

Why not? They fly to every opponent as it is and if divisions only really matter for football where you have only 4 road games per year I don't see it as a big deal. Having a top 3 of PSU/Nebraska/Iowa vs. a top 3 of OSU/Michigan/Wisconsin is as equal as you can find from a competitive balance standpoint. The rest of the league falls in line geographically and from a rivalry standpoint outside of Wisconsin.

Edited June 14, 2010 by hawkeyecub

[Old Style]

Why would I be pissed? I am sick and tired of Texas bullying everyone else around. There is a reason this conference is a mess right now. They want everyone to bow down & kiss their ring and we have enough power to stand up to them once and for all. I'm sure Beebe has made plenty of concessions to convice the horns to stay that would give them an even bigger advantage than they already have.

 

the conference is a mess right now because the populations of the states involved is much smaller than other high-profile conferences, and the population that is there is heavily weighted toward the south. it's a patchwork organization with one good academic school, several decent schools and a few bad ones. texas is far and away the best school in the conference in both athletics and academics, so why shouldn't they hold more of the power?

You highly underestimate the athletics and academics of Texas A&M. I realize that they are the tops in each category at the moment, but we aren't far behind in either area.

[TruffleShuffle]

 

I do not think you can realistically create divisions that takes Penn State away from all its nearest opponents, and puts them in with all of their furthest opponents.

 

i don't think it's a big deal if it only really affects football, but if it affects all sports (including non-revenue ones) then it would be a problem.

[hawkeyecub]

 

no kidding. and why are we treating PSU the same as OSU? In the last 10 years, Wisconsin and Iowa have been better overall than PSU. Do we really care what these programs were like in 1980 if we're gunning for competitive balance in the future? I guess it's a consideration, but not nearly as much as the last 10-15 years.

 

Flip Wisconsin and PSU and I think you have a fairly realistic split.

 

That was what most people originally proposed. From a national and tv standpoint I think it works better this way. Penn State is always going to be a good program or at least a threat to be very good with their tradition, resources and in-state talent base.

[jersey cubs fan]

What do Big Ten fans think of these divisions? I think they're the best suggestion I've seen yet.

 

 

Here are the schools, with their records over the past 10 years and their records over the past 25 years.

 

Big Ten Black

 

Ohio State, 102-25 (.803) -- 230-74-5 (.752)

Michigan, 81-43 (.653) -- 222-80-5 (.731)

Wisconsin, 86-43 (.667) -- 170-129-4 (.568)

Michigan State, 60-62 (.492) -- 153-141-4 (.520)

Purdue, 67-57 (.540) -- 133-156-4 (.461)

Indiana, 39-78 (.333) -- 118-167-3 (.415)

 

Totals 435-308 (.585) -- 1026-747-25 (.578)

 

Big Ten Blue

 

Nebraska, 84-44 (.656) -- 242-71-1 (.772)

Penn State, 77-46 (.626) --218-86-1 (.716)

Iowa, 80-45 (.640) -- 182-116-5 (.609)

Minnesota, 62-62 (.500) -- 129-162-2 (.444)

Illinois, 45-73 (.381) -- 124-162-5 (.435)

Northwestern, 61-61 (.500) -- 116-172-3 (.404)

 

Totals 409-331 (.553) -- 1011-769-17 (.567)

 

 

Here's the link with his rationale: http://www.cleveland.com/buckeyeblog/index.ssf/2010/06/big_ten_expansion_details_how.html

 

I do not think you can realistically create divisions that takes Penn State away from all its nearest opponents, and puts them in with all of their furthest opponents.

 

Why not? They fly to every opponent as it is. Having a top 3 of PSU/Nebraska/Iowa vs. a top 3 of OSU/Michigan/Wisconsin is as equal as you can find from a competitive balance standpoint. The rest of the league falls in line geographically and from a rivalry standpoint outside of Wisconsin.

 

Well first off it might not only affect football. And secondly, it will affect fans a great deal. The conference game road trip is quite popular. If Penn State is only playing Iowa, Minnesota and Nebraska, nobody is going to be driving out there, and it's going to piss off a lot of people. They've be isolated. Also, Penn State is the bigger brand, but they aren't that much better of a program (and who knows what happens when Joe goes). If they were head and shoulders and torso above Wisconsin, I could see the point in considering it, but they really aren't.

[Tracer Bullet]

 

no kidding. and why are we treating PSU the same as OSU? In the last 10 years, Wisconsin and Iowa have been better overall than PSU. Do we really care what these programs were like in 1980 if we're gunning for competitive balance in the future? I guess it's a consideration, but not nearly as much as the last 10-15 years.

 

Flip Wisconsin and PSU and I think you have a fairly realistic split.

 

That was what most people originally proposed. From a national and tv standpoint I think it works better this way. Penn State is always going to be a good program or at least a threat to be very good with their tradition, resources and in-state talent base.

 

what's going to be funny is when they truly split E/W and the West wins the first 3 conference titles.

[Jon]

The TV deal that Beebe is proposing is a long-term deal with Fox Sports Net. Obviously Texas would be okay since they'd also be able to create their own regional network as long as they don't start demanding national exposure, but I can't imagine that staying FSN would be attractive to anyone else. Another 15 years of only regional exposure isn't much of a plan.

 

To me, this would just be a band-aid.