Archive

Pitt to the Big 10?

  • rocket31
    ytownfootball wrote: not sure why you think they couldn't have done the leg work already and the last step is just a formality in essence.
    because i am not an idiot. if you believe that all member schools have approved of Pittsburgh joining the conference, than you are naive.
  • ytownfootball
    Oh but I'm an idiot because I think it is possible, why not Pitt?

    What member schools would have a problem with them that isn't just speculation? You assert there is some inherent problem with them. I suggest they've been in the discussion for years, thus the formality.

    and I agree thebleachereport is junk, generally speaking
  • rocket31
    ytownfootball wrote: Oh but I'm an idiot because I think it is possible, why not Pitt?

    What member schools would have a problem with them that isn't just speculation? You assert there is some inherent problem with them. I suggest they've been in the discussion for years, thus the formality.

    and I agree thebleachereport is junk, generally speaking
    naa, you are not an idiot, sorry if that is what i implied. that was not my intentions.

    pitt would *ok* although, i dont see how this benefits the big ten conference as much as it benefits pitt. for that reason alone i do not see why the conference would make such a hasty decision.

    and indeed, the bleacherreport is sketchy at best.
  • ytownfootball
    Pitt may be the one institution all involved agree on as being a good fit, I see this as likely. I don't think the expansion is done either, probably looking at 14 at the end of the day. If this is true then adding Pitt, at least short term, strengthens the conference in terms of overall competitveness (basketball included) and in football allows for a conference championship game (more revenue) and lengthening of the season (something they've had issue with for a long time) It does benefit the Big 10.

    Now, having added Pitt you extend your invitation to others seeking admittance. Who? ND? Mizzou? Point is there's a lot that remains to be seen.
  • 2kool4skool
    A report from an actual news source now says Pitt will be announced as the 12th Big Ten team Thursday.

    http://www.whp580.com/cc-common/mainheadlines3.html?feed=118645&article=6726825
  • gabuckeye
    This says it isn't true:

    http://blog.mlive.com/ganggreen/2010/02/pittsburgh_associate_athletic.htmlhttp://blog.mlive.com/ganggreen/2010/02/pittsburgh_associate_athletic.html

    Who to believe?
  • rocket31
    2kool4skool wrote: A report from an actual news source now says Pitt will be announced as the 12th Big Ten team Thursday.

    http://www.whp580.com/cc-common/mainheadlines3.html?feed=118645&article=6726825
    i guess someone should inform their athletic director eh?

    http://blog.mlive.com/ganggreen/2010/02/pittsburgh_associate_athletic.html
  • ytownfootball
    This is one hot search item on google...more against at this point
  • Writerbuckeye
    The Big Ten has now said this isn't true, if a real media's source is to be believed.

    Here's a link to the Chicago Tribune...

    http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/02/bogus-report-has-pittsburgh-set-to-join-big-ten.html
  • athlete37
    I am not sure why the Big Ten wants a conference championship game. I think that does more to hinder a conference than help. If the SEC doesn't have a championship game, FLA-ALA would've been for the NC. Think about how many conferences have lost NC participants due to losses in conference championships
  • Azubuike24
    It works both ways IMO, especially if you have a strong conference. Most years, you aren't going to have 2 teams at 12-0 playing in the championship game.

    However, for instance, in the SEC, it can usually bolster the resume of a 1-loss team enough to give them an extra push into the BCS title game. Look at LSU a few years ago, if they didn't have that game to win (at 10-2), they likely don't make the title game. There's something to be said about extending the season that extra week and giving the voters one more chance to bump you up a spot.
  • goosebumps
    Why would the Big Ten even want Pitt as a Football team? Most Big Ten fans like to talk about how bad the big east is and all that garbage, then they want to add Pittsburgh who's never won an outright BE Title? They only have one BE title and they shared it with 3 other teams. They've been in the league since 1991 and have Zero outright BE titles. If they can't even compete in the "Big Least" then why does the Big Ten want them?

    Also adding Pitt doesn't even open up a new market. It doesn't make since. Why add a team in Pennsylvania where you already have a team. Add in Mizzou or Rutgers and open up a new market.
  • Azubuike24
    goosebumps wrote: Why would the Big Ten even want Pitt as a Football team? Most Big Ten fans like to talk about how bad the big east is and all that garbage, then they want to add Pittsburgh who's never won an outright BE Title? They only have one BE title and they shared it with 3 other teams. They've been in the league since 1991 and have Zero outright BE titles. If they can't even compete in the "Big Least" then why does the Big Ten want them?

    Also adding Pitt doesn't even open up a new market. It doesn't make since. Why add a team in Pennsylvania where you already have a team. Add in Mizzou or Rutgers and open up a new market.
    The idea of a 12th team is what people want. I'd think most would justify whoever the selection was, because all the possible schools have some sort of positives to them.
  • goosebumps
    Just seems strange to me seeing all the BE bashing done on this forum then they open their arms for one of their teams.
  • ytownfootball
    Academically and athletically Pitt is a better fit for the Big 10 than any other Big East member.
  • goosebumps
    They're decent in Bball. Very overrated in Fball. They really don't add anything to the Big 10. Yes they're better than most of the Big Ten, but so are most other teams in the country.
  • ytownfootball
    I know you don't like Ohio State but that's just not true. Lol you know it.

    Tell me you wouldn't be all "goosebumpy" were UC getting the call...

    Yeah I thought so.
  • eersandbeers
    Writerbuckeye wrote: The Big Ten has now said this isn't true, if a real media's source is to be believed.

    Here's a link to the Chicago Tribune...

    http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/02/bogus-report-has-pittsburgh-set-to-join-big-ten.html
    Sounds like negotiations feel through. There were far too many rumors for it to just be false.

    A Pitt spokesperson also came out today and said it is 100% false.

    Who would be next on their radar though? Syracuse more than likely.
  • goosebumps
    UC wouldn't be a good fit in the Big Ten... too much speed. zing... haha kidding.

    But seriously. Do you really thinkn the Bottom half of the Big Ten is anything but worthless?
  • goosebumps
    The Worst team in the Big East (Syracuse) beat Northwestern and took Minnesota to OT. Both those teams made Bowl Games!!!

    And when have I ever dogged OSU?
  • ytownfootball
    I don't think the bottom half of the Big 10 is worse than a lot of conferences, not as good as a few, but not all that bad in comparison to most. Did you watch the Outback Bowl, Northwestern played admirably, actually could have won just as easily as they lost against Auburn. Minnesota also fumbled away their opportunity in their bowl game.

    You can pick and choose games every season to fit the argument. The fact that both those teams made bowl games out of the Big 10 is a testament to the quality of conference games they play (perceived or not).

    and you don't have to outwardly dog OSU, it oozes through every post you make on a subject concerning them :D and that's fine as long as you can discuss things civily when forced to. I know your beef is more with some of our fans than anything.
  • goosebumps
    You're very good at seeing through the posts haha. I watch OSU every saturday. Can't stand most fans. I really do find the big ten to be weak. Its carried by the top Three teams every year. Mostly OSU. Most other conferences have a little more parity. Pac 10 has no parity, so I see it as a weak conference.
  • Writerbuckeye
    eersandbeers wrote:
    Writerbuckeye wrote: The Big Ten has now said this isn't true, if a real media's source is to be believed.

    Here's a link to the Chicago Tribune...

    http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/02/bogus-report-has-pittsburgh-set-to-join-big-ten.html
    Sounds like negotiations feel through. There were far too many rumors for it to just be false.

    A Pitt spokesperson also came out today and said it is 100% false.

    Who would be next on their radar though? Syracuse more than likely.
    Syracuse adds less that Pitt would, in my view. I know some folks think Syracuse or Rutgers would mean the NYC market -- but the fact is the NYC market could care less about college sports. NYC is a pro town.

    I still say Missouri is the best choice, for all reasons, and the fact that they are in a contiguous state closer to the heart of the conference, have fine academics and bring in two major media markets.
  • jordo212000
    uggh I would rather stand pat. Syracuse and Rutgers would water the conference down even more.
  • Little Danny
    goosebumps wrote: Just seems strange to me seeing all the BE bashing done on this forum then they open their arms for one of their teams.
    Goosebumps,

    You know as good as I do it is acceptable to trash the Big East, its teams, its players, its coaches and it's schools academics. That is why everyone wants the teams (Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse, UCONN) and its former and current coaches (RichRod, Brian Kelly, Dantonio, Schiano, Edsall and soon to be Charlie Strong, Butch Jones).