Who and why?

Hawkfromnorwalk

Hawkfromnorwalk

Well-Known Member
I've seen a lot of posts lately regarding the conference expansion and everybody's thoughts onto who would be brought in. My question is, personally, which teams do you want to see brought in and why, and what teams do you not want to see and why? For this question lets assume the Big 10 will expand to 14 teams.

For me, I would definitely want to see Nebby and Mizzou brought in for sure. I think both schools fit the Big 10 geography and style of play. On a selfish level I would like to see these teams added just because it adds two more destinations that are within a stones throw away to travel to for away games. Plus it would be great to see Iowa/Nebby since I think both teams are on the same level and finally we could do battle with them on the field instead of on message boards and radio shows. For a third team just bring in a team from out east, like Pitt, Rutgers, Cuse, or UConn just so the eastern border doesn't feel left out.

As for teams I don't want to see added, one really sticks out to me...Texas. Why in the world would any self respecting Big 10 fan want Texas to join? Geographically, it's a horrible choice. To me, conferences need to have some geographical connection. The Pac-10 is all of the west coast, the SEC is the southeast corner of the US, the ACC is pretty much the Atlantic coastline. The one conference that does tick me off is the Big East, because there is no connection whatsoever. Florida, Kentucky, WV, New York, PA, Connecticut...it's like they took the four New England states and then glued on USF and Louisville. Makes no sense. Texas would be the same way to the Big 10. They don't belong.

On top of that, why would anybody want to bring in a team that will in all honesty, just be another bully in the conference? We already have trouble beating tOSU, why bring in a team that, in all honesty, would probably beat us most years? I know some say to be the best, you have to beat the best, but we already have enough of a problem making a identity for ourselves in this current configuration, let's not bring in another spotlight grabber.
 
Texas = $$$$$$$$$. Nebraska, not so much. I wouldn't want anyone brought in unless they are accretive to the Conference financially. Texas fans will force all cable companies in Texas to add BTN, which will bring in a huge chunk of cash to the Conference. Nebraska is a podunk, backwater inbred state full of mouthbreathers and their inclusion wouldn't really do a lot for TV revenue. Plus, that would just be one more venue where when Iowa went to play, the TV broadcast would include 6 minutes of combines driving through cornfields. Have you seen the Texas cheerleaders who would presumably fill up that 6 minutes of otherwise dead air time?
 
I've stated before, I don't know why but:

Pitt
Nebraska
Missouri

That is if Texas is not interested. The Big12 is going to get raided so I see at least Nebraska & Missery jumping ship to solidify a piece of the $$$. Just one team does not do anything for the Big 10 financially so I think will be 3. Only would be one team if Notre Lame or Texas. Notre Lame is out because they think their s--t doesn't stink & Texas may have too many demands. This leaves Pitt, Missery & Nebraska for a solid conference & to cover a nice TV market. Pitt would have a natural rivalry with Penn St & offeres a nice b-ball package. Missery has nice markets with St. Louis & Kansas City. Nebraska starting to look solid in f-ball which is the only thing they have to offer but they do have wrestling as well so that helps. These are my expansion teams. We will see if it comes to fruition.
 
kuhntz said:
None. 14 teams destroys the Big 10.
Click to expand...

News flash: Penn State already destroyed the Big 10. Hello.

Yes: Missouri, Notre Dame, and your Big East school of choice. Good academics, would bring tv $$.

No: Texas (you've all convinced me), Nebraska (let them wither--I don't care about their legacy, and I hate Husker fans).
 
I, too, would like a few things to stay the same. In all honesty is isn't going to happen so rather than digging in my heals if the b10 is going to do it I hope they do it up big time and right. Adding psu was a great choice even though they to this day still whine about it. I hope texas does get an invite and accepts. To not accept the fact it is about the money is to be just plain foolish. And just like psu is a quality team they in no way shape or form rule the league........and neither will texas. I sat in the stands in SA a couple years ago when we were 6-6 and they were significantly better and we went toe-to-toe with them. We will be no worse off if they join but the conference will take a major step backwards taking someone of Cinncinnati's ilk....now that would flat out be a disaster.
 
They wont add 2 midwestern teams.

I think they look at 2 east coast teams and add either mizzou or nebby. That gives them a true east/west format.
 
Texas and Nebraska for sure and maybe Missouri.
Colorado may go to the Pac 10.

That would destroy the Big 12. Teams would scramble and that would the clowns no where to go, which would be absolutely terrific. They would be relegated to some small time conference or some no-time conference where they belong, which would leave Iowa pretty much the ONLY BCS school in the state.
 
If I had my choice, I think I would probably go with Mizzou, ND, and Pitt/Rutgers.

Nothing would make me happier than clubbing the Kitties and the Fainting Irish like baby seals year in and year out.

I like both Pitt and Rutgers, so either would be a good add as far as I am concerned.

Texas would be cool as far as prestige (and it would destroy the Lil12 - that is a major plus), but the distance is a concern.
 
BA96MA99 said:
News flash: Penn State already destroyed the Big 10. Hello.

Yes: Missouri, Notre Dame, and your Big East school of choice. Good academics, would bring tv $$.

No: Texas (you've all convinced me), Nebraska (let them wither--I don't care about their legacy, and I hate Husker fans).
Click to expand...

News flash: Its not about having just 10. Its about tradition and rivals. This all goes out the window with 14 teams.

Do you realize Iowa would go 6 years without playing teams in the other division.....might as well be in seperate conferences and agree to a home and home once a decade.
 
IAHawkFan said:
If I had my choice, I think I would probably go with Mizzou, ND, and Pitt/Rutgers.

Nothing would make me happier than clubbing the Kitties and the Fainting Irish like baby seals year in and year out.

I like both Pitt and Rutgers, so either would be a good add as far as I am concerned.

Texas would be cool as far as prestige (and it would destroy the Lil12 - that is a major plus), but the distance is a concern.
Click to expand...

IC - state college 774 mi
IC - austin 1044 mi

too far to drive in either instance and if you're flying the 270 miles is insignificant

I'll take texas, the money, an even better pipeline into texas recruits, the snub to both nu and misery and the fun in watching some of those southern boys playing football in november up north.
 
tomhawk80907 said:
............ and the fun in watching some of those southern boys playing football in november up north.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm crazy but I think this is a significant reason that Texas would not want to join the big 10. The sort of weather a football team plays in has significant impact on their style of play plus if you live in a warm climate you would really have a hard time playing well in the cold. That being said I would LOVE to see an SEC team come to big 10 country in late Nov. Half of the team would be in a hypothermic coma before the end of the first quarter.
 
Add: 1) Kentucky--Why?: better than some B10 football teams, excellent basketball (d...bag coach), rivalry ready with Indiana and border wars with OSU, Illinois, and Purdue and ND (if added, also), gets into the South (somewhat); why not?: not sure, but academics seems like they would be lacking.
2) ND--Why?: duh. Why not?: They don't seem to have the desire.
3) Missouri--Why?: To see them have to play Iowa in FB and not be able to back out.

Don't add: 1) Nebraska--can't stand 'em.
2) Texas
 
Southernhawk said:
Add: 1) Kentucky--Why?: better than some B10 football teams, excellent basketball (d...bag coach), rivalry ready with Indiana and border wars with OSU, Illinois, and Purdue and ND (if added, also), gets into the South (somewhat); why not?: not sure, but academics seems like they would be lacking.
2) ND--Why?: duh. Why not?: They don't seem to have the desire.
3) Missouri--Why?: To see them have to play Iowa in FB and not be able to back out.

Don't add: 1) Nebraska--can't stand 'em.
2) Texas
Click to expand...

I would love to have Nebby just because I think we have jumped past them talent wise and win wise since the old Osbourne days and I would love to put a beating on them every year.
 
I like the Big Ten just the way it is. If we have to add a team, the ONLY team I would like to see join the Big Ten would be Missouri. Why Missouri? Because I am of the opinion that Missouri is the ONLY school that could be added to the Big Ten that would ACTUALLY IMPROVE Iowa's ability to win conference championships.

How would that work? Missouri, like Illinois, is a net exporter of BCS caliber high school talent. That is, looking at the population of Missouri and the number of BCS schools in the state, one can easily understand that the state of Missouri produces more athletic talent than there are BCS schools in the state to accommodate that talent. It has been awhile since I checked the numbers, but (on Rivals) Iowa has somewhere in the neighborhood of 6 three-star or higher football prospects this year and 2 BCS schools, while Missouri has in the neighborhood of 23 three-star or higher athletic prospects and 1 BCS school.

If you check out the rosters of other colleges, you can quickly see that the other Big 12 teams in neighboring states (Kansas, Kansas State, and Nebraska), are the chief beneficiaries of this annual talent surplus in the state of Missouri.

Outside the state of Iowa, where do the Hawks pull the most talent from? The state of Illinois. Why? Illinois is a neighboring state, that is a net exporter of BCS talent, and is a Big Ten state. If Missouri joined the Big Ten, it wouldn't be too long before kids growing up in that state were following Big Ten football, rather than Big 12 football and dreaming of playing in the Big Ten.

Iowa and Illinois are the two neighboring states to Missouri, but Illinois doesn't need to recruit out of state the same way that Iowa does as there is a ton of BCS talent in Illinois. Thus, over time Iowa would become the chief beneficiary of the BCS talent exported by the state of Missouri. Today, it looks like Iowa has about 19 kids from Illinois on our roster and 3 kids from Missouri on our roster. If Missouri joined the Big Ten, I would guess that it wouldn't be too long before Iowa would also have about 19 kids on our roster from Missouri.

Adding Missouri to the Big Ten would (for Iowa's recruiting efforts) be just like adding a brand new state of Illinois. That would, over time, greatly improve Iowa's prospects for athletics success.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top