Archive

Mizzou to the Big 10 a done deal?

  • superman
    sjmvsfscs08 wrote: The ACC expands to 14 and adds Connecticut, Syracuse, and West Virginia.
    That would make for an insane basketball conference.
  • derek bomar
    sjmvsfscs08 wrote: The Pac-10 could always expand to 14 and add Boise State, Nevada, and BYU.
    that would make them the Pac-13
  • sjmvsfscs08
    Ah yes you are correct sir. I forget to list Fresno State.

    Personally I'd like to see the NCAA limit conference sizes to 12 teams, anything more is flirting with ridiculous. A sixteen-team conference is stupid, it's just two conferences at that point. The lack of a playoff format facilitates these larger conferences in my opinion and it's just wrong.
  • 3reppom
    sjmvsfscs08 wrote: Ah yes you are correct sir. I forget to list Fresno State.

    Personally I'd like to see the NCAA limit conference sizes to 12 teams, anything more is flirting with ridiculous. A sixteen-team conference is stupid, it's just two conferences at that point. The lack of a playoff format facilitates these larger conferences in my opinion and it's just wrong.
    The lack of playoff has nothing to do with the drive towards the era of the super conference. The next round of conference realignment is driven by three things: money, money and money. You could institute a playoff today and the Big 10, PAC 10, SEC and ACC would all still add multiple teams to their respective conferences in an effort to bolster their bottom lines.
  • krambman
    sportswizuhrd wrote: Mizzou to Big 10
    Arkansas to Big 12
    Miami, FL to SEC

    Just my guess.
    I would agree with you if the Big Ten was only looking to add one team. They aren't. They will be adding a minimum of 3 teams and more likely five teams to the conference. Then this happens the Pac-10 will raid the Big XII, the SEC will raid the ACC, and what's left of the ACC and Big East will come together to give us four super conferences. We're probably at least a year from any expansion actually being confirmed by any conference and at least another year or two before anyone actually moves. So we're looking at 5-7 years before we have these 4 super conferences.

    What will likely end up happening is Missouri, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Rutgers, and Pitt move to the Big Ten.

    Oklahoma, Texas, Colorado, Texas A&M, Nebraska, and Kansas move to the Pac-10 (although I could see Oklahoma State ending up here because of the T. Boone Pickens money).

    Miami, FSU, Georgia Tech, and Virgnia Tech move to the SEC.

    The five Big East school and eight ACC schools join together and add three of the remaining Big XII schools (Texas Tech, Kansas State, and Oklahoma State).

    This moves us from 66 teams with automatic BCS qualification possibilities to 64 teams. So at least two current BCS schools (Iowa State? Baylor?) will be left out in the cold.

    If the Big Ten goes to 16 teams and forms a super conference this is what will happen (the realignment may be different but you get the idea). The Big Ten would be bringing in SO much more money than the rest of the conferences if they were the only 16 teams conference (they already make more TV money than any conference). If they go to 16 every other BCS school out there will be scrambling for realignment to make sure that they aren't one of the two schools that get's left out when the four super-conferences are formed.
  • krambman
    3reppom wrote:
    sjmvsfscs08 wrote: Ah yes you are correct sir. I forget to list Fresno State.

    Personally I'd like to see the NCAA limit conference sizes to 12 teams, anything more is flirting with ridiculous. A sixteen-team conference is stupid, it's just two conferences at that point. The lack of a playoff format facilitates these larger conferences in my opinion and it's just wrong.
    The lack of playoff has nothing to do with the drive towards the era of the super conference. The next round of conference realignment is driven by three things: money, money and money. You could institute a playoff today and the Big 10, PAC 10, SEC and ACC would all still add multiple teams to their respective conferences in an effort to bolster their bottom lines.
    If you have these four super conferences you will have your playoff. It will be a four team playoff with the four super conference champions. It will feel more like an eight team playoff though, because you'll have your four conference championship games (quarter-finals), then your playoff games (semi-finals), then your championship game (finals). It won't be quite what everyone is hoping for, but it will be close. Once this happens I don't think we'll see a change in the football postseason format for a very long time.
  • 3reppom
    krambman wrote:
    3reppom wrote:
    sjmvsfscs08 wrote: Ah yes you are correct sir. I forget to list Fresno State.

    Personally I'd like to see the NCAA limit conference sizes to 12 teams, anything more is flirting with ridiculous. A sixteen-team conference is stupid, it's just two conferences at that point. The lack of a playoff format facilitates these larger conferences in my opinion and it's just wrong.
    The lack of playoff has nothing to do with the drive towards the era of the super conference. The next round of conference realignment is driven by three things: money, money and money. You could institute a playoff today and the Big 10, PAC 10, SEC and ACC would all still add multiple teams to their respective conferences in an effort to bolster their bottom lines.
    If you have these four super conferences you will have your playoff. It will be a four team playoff with the four super conference champions. It will feel more like an eight team playoff though, because you'll have your four conference championship games (quarter-finals), then your playoff games (semi-finals), then your championship game (finals). It won't be quite what everyone is hoping for, but it will be close. Once this happens I don't think we'll see a change in the football postseason format for a very long time.
    That won't be what anyone is asking for currently. Not even close. Most peoples argument for a playoff, and the genesis being the most recent calls for it is that the BCS is an illegal monopoly that denies opportunities to those schools which compete outside of the BCS conferences should they go undefeated. Most people want the boise states of the world to have a chance to compete for championships. If those 4 conferences go to 14 or 16 there will never be a playoff in the truest sense of the world. What will happen is four conferences will determine who the two combatants for the championship trophy will be; independent of all other conferences and schools. How is that any different from the current system. It will have a new name and a new face and will be sold to the public as being something better than the previous iterations. but it will be exactly the same in practice. If you want an a playoff between the top 8 or 16 teams selected by an independent body you don't want to see those super conferences formed because the minute they do they will take all that money, buy a bomb and destroy the playoff concept for good.
  • Sonofanump
    krambman wrote: What will likely end up happening is Missouri, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Rutgers, and Pitt move to the Big Ten.
    I've hear most likely Nebraska instead of ND if they go to 16.
    I've also heard maybe UConn instead of Syracuse, but it's 50/50 there.
  • krambman
    Sonofanump wrote:
    krambman wrote: What will likely end up happening is Missouri, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Rutgers, and Pitt move to the Big Ten.
    I've hear most likely Nebraska instead of ND if they go to 16.
    I've also heard maybe UConn instead of Syracuse, but it's 50/50 there.
    We've heard a lot of things. From those with intimate knowledge of the inside dealings, it now seems like the Pac-10 and Big XII and in conversation about merging, which is why Nebraska isn't likely, but Missouri still is because they've wanted in in the past. Last week on The Fan in Columbus Kirk Herbstreit said that he was talking with some NBC sports reps recently and they all seemed to think that Notre Dame was going to be in the Big Ten within a few years. ND is already losing out on a lot of money as an independent, and if we move to four 16 team conferences I have a hard time seeing them ending up anywhere but the Big Ten and ND is still too lucrative a program to end up on the outside. They can deny it all they want, but if the Big Ten is going to 16 teams, Notre Dame will be one of them.
  • wildcats20
    If Mizzou joins, it is a bigger get for the conference in terms of basketball than it is in football IMO.
  • Writerbuckeye
    I'd much prefer the Big Ten focus West in its expansion and forget the likes of Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt or UConn. Instead, take Nebraska and Missouri to start, then see if you can't persuade Texas and A&M (they will have to be a package deal) to join them. While I honestly would love to see Notre Dame's arrogance in all this leave them alone to rot -- I see them giving in and becoming the 16th member. If not, then go East for one more team and make it Rutgers or UConn (I honestly don't care at that point).
  • Writerbuckeye
    wildcats20 wrote: If Mizzou joins, it is a bigger get for the conference in terms of basketball than it is in football IMO.
    The biggest "get" is the St. Louis and Kansas City markets, and all those extra TVs and Big Ten Network revenue they'll bring in. Of all the prospective teams, Missouri will be one that more than pays for itself with additional markets.
  • wildcats20
    ^^Right.

    I was just talking in terms of Mizzou's teams. Basketball is bigger at Mizzou IMO and would be a great addition to the Big Ten. Of course Mizzou football has been good recently, hope they can continue it(joining the B10 should help) if this happens.