College Football '10 - Conference switching chaos!!

[Imran Siddiqui]

Oh my, Dan is far more addled than I thought possible

[DanS]

If that's what you think, then Suh didn't deserve the Heisman.

Go watch the Heisman telecast again and see how often the nominated players say that the Heisman is a "team award". They're absolutely right, as none of them would've been there without a great team around them.

1) They say that because it's seen as immodest to take the lion's share of the credit for the award, even if it is an individual award.

2) While true that it takes a team to succeed, individual players often have an outsized impact on the game of college football. The Heisman is there to recognize this impact.

[Drake Tungsten]

If great players on crappy teams had any chance at the Heisman, Jimmy Clausen would have at least broke the top ten.

[Drake Tungsten]

It's time for Nebraska and Missouri to play hardball with the Big 12 and for Notre Dame to finally pull its head out of its ass...

Big Ten to explore expansion

The Big Ten might be getting bigger.

Commissioner Jim Delany said Tuesday the conference is going to explore options over the next 12 to 18 months for expanding the league. The league's presidents and chancellors decided this month that the timing is right to study adding a 12th school.

The Big Ten said in a statement it also looked at expansion in 1993, 1998 and 2003. Penn State joined in 1990, and Notre Dame rejected an offer in 1999.

The league said no action on expansion is expected soon. It said it hopes to gather information before engaging in formal discussions with any schools.

The conference actually has 11 football teams, despite its name.

Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez last week told the university's board that he thinks the conference is serious about adding a 12th team, though Delany as recently as March called expansion a "back-burner" issue.

When Penn State came aboard, it was the first addition to the conference since Michigan State in 1949.

Notre Dame, with its campus in South Bend, Ind., and a football independent with a lucrative and exclusive TV contract, rejected an offer 10 years ago. Most of the school's other athletic teams compete in the Big East.

Earlier this year, Penn State coach Joe Paterno said he'd like to see Rutgers, Pittsburgh or Syracuse join the league. He was not in favor of extending another offer to Notre Dame.

"There's some pressure, I would suppose, to maybe go back to Notre Dame and ask again, which I would not be happy with," Paterno said then. "I think they've had their chance."

Paterno said a 12th team could ease scheduling difficulties and clear the way for a lucrative conference championship football game with maximum end-of-the season exposure -- like the ones now held by the SEC and the Big 12.

If expansion seems likely, Delany will report to Michigan State president Lou Anna K. Simon, the chairperson of the league's council of presidents and chancellors.

"This process will allow the Big Ten to evaluate options, while respecting peer conferences and their member institutions," the Big Ten said, adding the league would not comment until the council receives Delany's recommendations and determines whether to proceed.

University of Missouri spokeswoman Mary Jo Banken said the school hasn't been contacted by the Big Ten.

"Should there be an official inquiry or invitation, we would evaluate it based on what is in the best interest of MU, athletically and academically," she said in an e-mail.

Don Walsworth, a major donor to Missouri's sports programs who was a member of the board that governs the university until earlier this year, said that, aside from a Big Ten television contract that allows more revenue sharing than the Big 12 deal, it makes little sense for Missouri to jump conferences.

The school's position in the geographic middle of the conference allows easy, relatively inexpensive travel, Walsworth said. Leaving behind rivals such as Kansas and big-time opponents like Texas would upset fans.

"I think that they would be a little bit miffed if we had to start those traditions over again," Walsworth said. "I like to play Oklahoma, I like to play Texas."

The closest thing Missouri has to a Big Ten rival is Illinois, which the Tigers play every year in football and basketball.

But the schools have said their annual football game in St. Louis will end after 2010, and many fans from both schools -- Walsworth among them -- say the rivalry doesn't amount to much.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/ncaa/12/15/bigten-expansion.ap/index.html#ixzz0ZnfxagOK

[Drake Tungsten]

The more I think about this, the more I think Nebraska should actually join the Big Ten as opposed to just using the threat of a move to wring concessions out of the Big 12.

[SlowwHand]

Nebraska and Missouri would only go because it's an easier field of competition.
Personally, I think they have more pride.

[Drake Tungsten]

If Delany really wants to think outside the box, he should consider adding Nebraska, Missouri and Kansas all at once. You get one of the best football programs in the country, one of the best basketball programs in the country and the St. Louis/KC TV markets all in one fell swoop. It would also make it more likely that any of NU/MU/KU would move, as they could retain their traditional rivalries while escaping a Big 12 conference that has treated them badly.

[SlowwHand]

I don't see how you figure that they've been treated badly. Sounds like whining over nothing to me.

[Lord Avalon]

It's called equal revenue sharing, Sloww. For example, a bowl payout gets split among all the Big Ten teams and the league office.

[SlowwHand]

I see. Big 10 is like communist football. OK.

[David Floyd]

My beginning of season predictions. Let's see how I did:

I agree that OSU is way overrated, but so is Alabama and Penn St. I'd be surprised if 2 of those 3 ended up in the Top 10 at the end of the year.

Almost correct. OSU belongs nowhere near the Top 10, but they're there anyway. I was wrong about Alabama, but right about Penn St.

However, if OSU can pull off a miracle and beat USC, then they have a clear road to running the table and playing either Florida or Texas in the National Title Game. Barring that miracle, I think we are headed for a 1 loss Florida (they lose to LSU) against an undefeated Texas, whose only tough game will be Oklahoma St in Stillwater. Oklahoma just gave us an clear road, otherwise.

OSU didn't beat USC, so I hit that one. Florida is not in the title game, nor was LSU in the SEC game, however, Texas is in the title game as an undefeated team. So, maybe 1/3 here?

USC almost has to lose 1 game this year, and no way will a 1 loss Pac-10 team, even USC, get ranked above a 1 loss Florida or (at worst) a 1 loss Texas team.

Big up check on this prediction

I do think that we will see a Mountain West team in the BCS this year, probably either TCU or Boise State.

Yup!

LSU will finish in the top 10, after losing to Florida in the SEC Title Game. Texas will beat Kansas in the Big 12 Title Game. USC will win the Pac-10. FSU will bounce back after their loss yesterday to Miami and make, at least, their conference title game. As for the Big 10, they all suck, although I do agree that Michigan will have a somewhat better year this year (Notre Dame is going down hard - **** you Charlie Weis). When your best two teams are the consistently overrated OSU and Penn St, your conference has problems.

Well, I was wrong on LSU, FSU, and Kansas, but right about Texas and Notre Dame. 2/5.

And thus ends my likely wildly inaccurate college football predictions.

Not THAT wildly inaccurate

[SlowwHand]

What are the contractual agreements concerning conference teams? I doubt that they can just get their panties in a twist and leave.

[ColdWizard]

Tell that to Miami, BC, and Virginia Tech

[SlowwHand]

So it's at will only?

[Guynemer]

The problem with the Big 10 adding another school, ANY other school, is that it is hard to imagine any reasonable geographically aligned divisions that do not stack the conferences Big Three schools (OSU, UM, PSU) all in the same division.


Lots of different schools have been suggested: Notre Dame, Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers, Iowa State, Nebraska, Missouri, Cincinnati, Louisville; I've even seen mention of Kentucky or Miami (OH).

The problem is that few of those schools fit the Big Ten both in athletics and academics. The lowest ranked schools in the Big Ten as far as academics goes are MSU, Indiana, and Iowa, all coming in at #71 in the latest US News & World Report rankings. This makes the Big Ten, by far, the strongest conference in Div I-A when it comes to academics. Only a handful of the named schools would fit in. Four of the suggested expansion partners would fit in above #71 (Notre Dame, Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers), and only three would be above #100 (Miami (OH), Iowa State, Nebraska). Mizzou is #102, Kentucky #128. Cincy and Louisville don't even make the list.

The other problem is that some of the schools--Nebraska, Mizzou, Rutgers--would cause markedly increased travel times, without expanding traditional Big Ten recruiting grounds very much. Others (Miami, ISU) bring little to the table as far as athletic revenue goes, while Syracuse would be marginally better thanks to basketball.

Really, the obvious choice would be Notre Dame (which will never happen), or Pitt. Pitt would pretty much give the Big Ten a stranglehold on Pennsylvania recruiting, doesn't add any additional travel, gives Penn State a true rival (instead of this made-up Michigan State "Land Grant Trophy" nonsense), and has the added benefit of being a great big respected research institution, just like the rest of the conference. They also regularly field competitive teams in both football and basketball.

The biggest drawback with choosing Pitt would, again, be the divisional alignment. Pitt would immediately be, arguably, the fourth-most prestigious program in the conference, and would again likely be put in with UM, OSU, and PSU in any geographic alignment. The Big Ten would have to get creative, and put UM/OSU in one division, PSU/Pitt in another.