Conference Expansion
- Thread starter DJL
- Start date
AlmaMaterIowa
Active Member
So, to recap, if conference expansion were to occur, and it might, but we're not sure, it could be Texas, or Notre Dame, or Virginia, or Georgia Tech, or Pittsburgh, or Oklahoma, or North Carolina, or someone else, of that we're pretty sure.
I only ask one thing, please don't call it the Big Ten. Call it the Super Sixteen, or the Enormous Eighteen, or the Tenacious Twenty - whatever number they settle on. Just let the "Big Ten" die in peace.
I only ask one thing, please don't call it the Big Ten. Call it the Super Sixteen, or the Enormous Eighteen, or the Tenacious Twenty - whatever number they settle on. Just let the "Big Ten" die in peace.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
I don't want anything to do with Texas. That school has ruined every conference it's ever been in.
If we're expanding anywhere, it's east and south. So I don't see any scenario where we pick up an Oklahoma (legislatively we'd have to bring along Okie St. as well I believe), a Kansas or any other Midwest/Southwest schools unless it's ND, which isn't happening.
So my guess is that we'd try as much as possible to gut the ACC....get a North Carolina, a Virginia, a Georgia Tech, or a Florida State. Whoever we didn't get, the SEC would get and that'd be the end of the ACC as we know it most likely.
If we're expanding anywhere, it's east and south. So I don't see any scenario where we pick up an Oklahoma (legislatively we'd have to bring along Okie St. as well I believe), a Kansas or any other Midwest/Southwest schools unless it's ND, which isn't happening.
So my guess is that we'd try as much as possible to gut the ACC....get a North Carolina, a Virginia, a Georgia Tech, or a Florida State. Whoever we didn't get, the SEC would get and that'd be the end of the ACC as we know it most likely.
The Big Ten survived adding Penn St and Nebraska. However when they let Maryland and Rutgers in, to me the Big 10 died then. They are the B1G now. As is B1G money.
I'm sure the Big 12 is cheering for this. Maybe they can slide in and take some leftover ACC schools and they can finally be on stable ground. It wasn't that long ago that the Big 12 was on life support ready to be buried.
I think you could still see the Big12 go by the wayside, but I don't think that leads to ISU getting left out in the cold like it once did. They were potentially one of the last four out in the 4 x 16 model, by pushing this to 18-20 teams, I'm thinking they don't get left out in the cold, unless we end up with 3 super conferences of 20 teams each, but I think you end up with the BIG, SEC, PAC and some hybrid ACC/Big12, which ISU would find a home.
DodgerHawki
Well-Known Member
I highly doubt the B12 is wishing Texas leaves. Were Texas to leave, you would see the rest of the conference teams flee as fast as they could. Oklahoma would leave, either to the SEC, B1G or Pac-12.
This whole thing is a bit crazy. The reason the B1G is pushing the expansion envelope is for self-preservation. With the demographic shifts in the country out of the traditional B1G footprint, the conference has to get footholds in in new population centers to remain viable beyond the next 10-15 years. People may not like to hear that, but it's just reality. States like Iowa and Nebraska have very little/no population growth, with the age of the population trending older.
If the B1G were to go to 18-20 teams, you would basically have 2 separate conferences that have a loose affiliation. In that setup, football you could play all the teams in your "division" every year, then perhaps 1-2 of the teams from the other division in "non-conference' games. Or they could go to a pod set up (4-5 teams in a pod), where you would play your pod every year and then rotate the other pods you play on an annual basis. Similar to how interleague baseball scheduling works.
Basketball you could basically just play one game against every team in the league for your conference slate, which would be an improvement over today where you play a few teams twice and the rest once.
Not sure everyone has thought through all the ramifications of conference expansion. Or perhaps they have, and just have determined that even with the drawbacks, expansion is preferable to standing pat.
This is an excellent point, but I think it's about being more than viable, I think they want to be #1.
I assume any expansion would be done as a way of increasing Big Ten Network revenues. While expanding into large markets is one way to increase subscriber fees (for example, Maryland & Rutgers), I hope they look to add more "marketable" teams to increase ratings which will increase actual viewership & advertising fees. So instead of adding Ga Tech, Virginia or North Carolina to bring in Atlanta and/or Charlotte markets, and creating matchups no one wants to see, I hope they target football powers such as Oklahoma or Notre Dame or maybe Florida State. Imagine the BTN ratings if you had a prime time Michigan vs. Oklahoma, or Florida State vs. Nebraska, etc.
mopkins
King Kong
I think the B1G sees that everything is heading towards four 16-team super conferences. The B1G, SEC, ACC, PAC-12. As a result the B1G is trying to get out ahead of the other conferences and trying to "woo" the bigger name schools before the domino's fall
Side note: the end result of the super conferences hilariously leaves out Iowa State in almost every imaginable scenario. Hopefully they enjoy the Mountain West
Side note: the end result of the super conferences hilariously leaves out Iowa State in almost every imaginable scenario. Hopefully they enjoy the Mountain West
trj
Well-Known Member
I found conference expansion fascinating and/or intriguing at first now I want Delaney to do what he has to do to be first in the clubhouse in regards to the 16 team super conference. I kinda feel bad for Iowa St. but i ain't losing sleep over it.
imported_ankle23
Well-Known Member
don't know if this has been mentioned, or if it is even relevant - but Notre Dame is joining the Big Ten in hockey:
http://www.bigten.org/sports/m-hockey/spec-rel/032316aaa.html
http://www.bigten.org/sports/m-hockey/spec-rel/032316aaa.html
your opinion is probably just as valid as most of the information as you see out on social media. I have also heard that the LHN is a total failure.I would bet on Texas and Oklahoma. Thought I read somewhere that the LHN is failing.
These of course are just guesses based on no info whatsoever. Just like all my opinions.
I saw that. The move seems logical; they might as well move all of their sports over. If I were the Big Ten I would not play them in football until they joined. As a matter of fact all major conferences should freeze them out until they join some conference. Enough of the special treatment.
ColumbusHawk
Well-Known Member
I would bet on Texas and Oklahoma. Thought I read somewhere that the LHN is failing.
These of course are just guesses based on no info whatsoever. Just like all my opinions.
Oklahoma has no chance. The demographics are against them. Georgia Tech & North Carolina are far better than Oklahoma. It has nothing with who you like. It's all about TV sets. Plus, Oklahoma is not a member of the AAU.
Subscriber revenue would be the driver for the BTN, moreso than marquee match-ups in that if Michigan vs. Oklahoma happens it's not going to fall to the BTN game. If it did, the BTN isn't in enough households nationally that they are going to be able to demand rates comparable to what ESPN charges...yet. But the more dma's like Atlanta, Dallas and Charlotte they get into, the more they can charge for ads. But the subscriber fees are reoccurring and monthly.
If the super conferences go beyond 16 teams, I think ISU would be fine. If the PAC adds 4 more teams, schools like Kansas and ISU would be pretty attractive/logical more so than a Idaho, Colorado or Utah State. If not the PAC, what ever hybrid of the ACC/Big12 would likely have a spot for them.
ColumbusHawk
Well-Known Member
There is talk that the B1G will not sign a TV contract after the 2016 season. The rumor is that the BTN will produce all the football games & sell them to the highest bidder. So in 2017 you may see the Hawks on ABC, CBS, ESPN, FOX, FS1, NBC, etc... If the BTN doesn't get enough money for a game, the BTN will televise the game.
AlmaMaterIowa
Active Member
Before that would happen, there would be some hare-brained legislation proposed by some ISU supporter assemblyman that would necessarily link ISU joining whatever superconference Iowa was scheduled to be in. Not saying it would ever pass, but I bet we'd see something.
