College Football '10 - Conference switching chaos!!

[Imran Siddiqui]

So it's at will only?

Depends on the conference. As you said, contractual agreements dictate what is the "punishment". Some conferences will mandate a monetary fine for leaving. When Miami, Boston College, and Virginia Tech left the Big East (which btw, seems to be a bad move for Miami since they are making less money now, but better for BC which is making more money now), the BE didn't have a penalty clause in place. It does now (which may impact Rutgers, Pitt, or Syracuse if the B10 asks them to join).

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.

North and South? With a provision that Big 10 North Michigan ALWAYS plays Big 10 South Ohio State every year?

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.

Pitt likely isn't going anywhere without West Virginia.

[Imran Siddiqui]

This is how Big 10 N and S would work:

Big 10 North:

Michigan
Michigan State
Northwestern
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Iowa

Big 10 South:

Illinois
Purdue
Indiana
Ohio State
Penn State
Pitt/Rutgers

[Guynemer]

This is how Big 10 N and S would work:

Big 10 North:

Michigan
Michigan State
Northwestern
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Iowa

Big 10 South:

Illinois
Purdue
Indiana
Ohio State
Penn State
Pitt/Rutgers

The problem being those years where Michigan and Ohio State would end up playing each other on two consecutive weekends. I think, for that reason alone, UM and OSU have to be kept in the same division.

As for West Virginia, it falls under the same category as Cincy and Louisville, ie, just not competitive enough academically. Pitt could still play WV every year out of conference, as UM, MSU, and Purdue do with Notre Dame.

[Imran Siddiqui]

That's just something (consecutive weekends) that you are just going to have to deal with or else you get Penn State in the same divison and all 3. You can't have everything.

[Drake Tungsten]

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.

I don't think the geographic divisions will be as problematic as you think if the Big Ten can add a quality program to the future "Big Ten West". Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State obviously have more tradition than Wisconsin and Iowa, but they haven't actually been that much stronger over the last decade. Throw in a team like Notre Dame or Nebraska in the West and the divisions would seem to be relatively evenly matched.

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.

The USA Today rankings are of questionable validity and I don't think the academic presidents would look at them when trying to determine whether a 12th Big Ten team is up to snuff. The actual standard appears to be membership in the Association of American Universities, of which every school in the Big Ten is currently a member. Of possible Big Ten additions, Kansas, Iowa State, Missouri, Nebraska, Pitt and Rutgers are all members of the AAU while Cincinnati, Louisville, Notre Dame, Syracuse and West Virginia are not.

[Guynemer]

I don't think the geographic divisions will be as problematic as you think if the Big Ten can add a quality program to the future "Big Ten West". Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State obviously have more tradition than Wisconsin and Iowa, but they haven't actually been that much stronger over the last decade. Throw in a team like Notre Dame or Nebraska in the West and the divisions would seem to be relatively evenly matched.

If a west team is added, it would have to be Nebraska or Notre Dame, for exactly that reason. Any other candidate school, including Mizzou, just wouldn't bring enough power and prestige to balance things out.

The USA Today rankings are of questionable validity and I don't think the academic presidents would look at them when trying to determine whether a 12th Big Ten team is up to snuff. The actual standard appears to be membership in the Association of American Universities, of which every school in the Big Ten is currently a member. Of possible Big Ten additions, Kansas, Iowa State, Missouri, Nebraska, Pitt and Rutgers are all members of the AAU while Cincinnati, Louisville, Notre Dame, Syracuse and West Virginia are not.

Yes, the US News & World Report rankings aren't the end-all be-all, but they are the most widely accepted, and are generally well acknowledged, at least when it comes to academic reputation. Notre Dame and Syracuse are both excellent schools, despite their lack of AAU affiliation. And while Cincy lags in undergraduate education, it does have good to very good graduate and professional schools, the medical school being a particular standout.

Iowa State brings nothing to the table, since they already play Iowa every year. They are mediocre, at best, in football, and occasionally decent in basketball. They bring no new big markets, no new recruiting ground. Kansas is interesting, if only for their basketball prestige. Really, if we're gonna raid the Big 12, there's no great choice. Nebraska balances out the East/West nicely, but there's no big TV or recruiting market it would help with. Missouri, just the opposite.

The only perfect choice would be Notre Dame, but that dog won't hunt.

[Drake Tungsten]

If a west team is added, it would have to be Nebraska or Notre Dame, for exactly that reason. Any other candidate school, including Mizzou, just wouldn't bring enough power and prestige to balance things out.

Agreed.

The only perfect choice would be Notre Dame, but that dog won't hunt.

Also agreed, although the idea of Nebraska, Kansas and Missouri all joining the Big Ten excites me greatly.

Nebraska balances out the East/West nicely, but there's no big TV or recruiting market it would help with.

I don't know about that. Nebraska is pretty much equivalent to Notre Dame in terms of TV appeal, as it's a university in a podunk Midwestern town that also has a massive nationwide following.

edit:

While the state of Nebraska is not exactly a TV hotbed, the Huskers hold a strong national following that could possibly do wonders for Delany's network. Did you know that a group of Nebraska fans in Phoenix actually pay a radio station there to broadcast the Huskers' network on Saturdays? Think they wouldn't be calling their cable company? Granted, it's a pretty far-fetched idea, but nothing surprises me anymore in this business.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/stewart_mandel/08/01/cfb.bag/index.html

[Guynemer]

The only perfect choice would be Notre Dame, but that dog won't hunt.

Also agreed, although the idea of Nebraska, Kansas and Missouri all joining the Big Ten excites me greatly.

You, sir, are in dire need of getting laid.

[SlowwHand]

I don't see them leaving Big 12. Even Nebraska is smart enough to recognize "the grass is always greener" analogy.

[Drake Tungsten]

You, sir, are in dire need of getting laid.

Don't I know it.

[SlowwHand]

Going down that road, that's one particular instance where renting is cheaper than buying.

[Drake Tungsten]

Pac-10 will consider expansion

With potential conference expansion again all the rage, first-year Pac-10 commissioner Larry Scott knew the question would be coming.

What about Pac-10 expansion?

"Expansion is something we will take a look at," Scott said Wednesday.

For expansion enthusiasts that will sound like a more open-minded approach than long-time commissioner Tom Hansen, whom Scott replaced over the summer.

But don't make plans for a Pac-10 Championship Game just yet.

Yes, expansion is something Scott will look at with a "fresh set of eyes" -- his phrase -- and the timing makes sense because the conference television contracts expire after the 2011-12 academic year.

But this is nothing new -- he said the same in July before Pac-10 media day -- and the same reasoning and sentiments that school and conference administrators have used to resist calls for expansion in the past remain entrenched, so nothing is imminent.

"There's a pretty high hurdle for us, academically, athletically, geographically," Scott said. "We're hard-pressed to really see how you improve upon the structure of the Pac-10 as it is with five sets of natural rivals in four states." ...

Programs need to be an academic and athletic match. That means admission standards and research accreditation are issues. On the athletic side, it's not just about football. How strong is the entire athletic department? Recall the Pac-10 is the "Conference of Champions" and Olympic and women's sports are part of that foundation.

Then there's the biggest issue: Money. If the Pac-10 were to expand, it wants that expansion to mean more of it. There's widespread concern that a number of the potential candidates don't come from markets that will increase revenue.

Bringing in Utah and Colorado might be a winner (Salt Lake City and Denver markets), and at least one Pac-10 athletic director said that's the most likely scenario. Of course, prying Colorado away from the Big 12 might not be easy.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/6381/pac-10-will-consider-expansion

Colorado and Utah go to the Pac-10. Nebraska, Kansas and Missouri go to the Big Ten. The Big 12 is destroyed and Texas is free to craft a new and improved version of the Southwest Conference that will be totally under their control, which is what they've wanted all along. It's win-win-win.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I don't see them leaving Big 12. Even Nebraska is smart enough to recognize "the grass is always greener" analogy.

Each team in the Big 10 makes far more in TV revenue than each team in the Big 12. The Big 10 is only second to the SEC in TV revenue (after all, there is a reason there is a Big 10 Network and there isn't one for the Big 12).

[Tuberski]

Colorado and Utah go to the Pac-10. Nebraska, Kansas and Missouri go to the Big Ten. The Big 12 is destroyed and Texas is free to craft a new and improved version of the Southwest Conference that will be totally under their control, which is what they've wanted all along. It's win-win-win.

Won't happen. Utah won't go anywhere without BYU.

ACK!

[Guynemer]

Won't happen. Utah won't go anywhere without BYU.

ACK!

That's what I was thinking. In fact, I immediately thought of BYU, before Utah. Wouldn't BYU be a better fit? Utah won't go without BYU, but would BYU go without Utah?

Mountain West could go from imminent automatic BCS birth to oblivion in a domino effect. Big Ten takes Nebraska. Big 12 replaces with TCU. Pac 10 takes BYU & Utah. RIP, MWC.




ALSO: ML beast.