Big Ten Fast-Tracking Expansion Plans

[GoMuskies]

http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/04/big-ten-reps-to-talk-expansion-in-dc-on-sunday.html

Potentially good news for the Xavier basketball fan in me.

Potentially bad news for the Louisville football fan in me.

[jdm2000]

I was talking with a U of M guy at work (I'm an Ohio State football fan, as Guy can tell you). We are in agreement that Rutgers is a bad idea. If I had my way, I'd add either Pitt or Syracuse (I don't really care which) on the eastern end, and Mizzou and Nebraska on the western end. This is assuming that Texas is not interested. I am officially past caring about Notre Dame joining. Let them end up in some conference they don't fit geographically or academically.

[Juice]

I want to see the Big Ten expand just because it will hurt the Big East.

[GuyFawkes38]

Here's a really good analysis of the issue:

http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/the-value-of-expansion-candidates-to-the-big-ten-network/

I found the revenue value added by potential candidates list to be sort of shocking.


I hate to say it, but if the Big 10 does land some Big East schools, I believe SLU and perhaps even UD would be in a better position to join the Big East due to the Cincy market already being covered by UC. Butler could also be a potential candidate, but they definitely need to improve facilities and increase annual revenue.

[golfitup]

I'm getting really sick and tired of the "bigger is better" philosophy taking over sports. But money freaking talks...

[bigdiggins]

Here's a really good analysis of the issue:

http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/the-value-of-expansion-candidates-to-the-big-ten-network/

I found the revenue value added by potential candidates list to be sort of shocking.


I hate to say it, but if the Big 10 does land some Big East schools, I believe SLU and perhaps even UD would be in a better position to join the Big East due to the Cincy market already being covered by UC. Butler could also be a potential candidate, but they definitely need to improve facilities and increase annual revenue.

SLU perhaps (Majerus would love that travel), but UD? That would insinuate that Dayton is a market. The city has the Air Force base, Wright State, and UD, that's it. The city has already hit rock bottom and continues to dig. Not sure what they have to really offer the Big East.

Also, the Big East would not pick up basketball schools if football schools left, barring a split, at which point UC would stay with the football schools and would no longer have the Cincy market covered.

[GuyFawkes38]

I've heard lots of talk about a Big East basketball/football split. But there isn't really a precedent for that.

I don't understand why that would be a desired outcome for the Big East and its schools.

[Juice]

I've heard lots of talk about a Big East basketball/football split. But there isn't really a precedent for that.

I don't understand why that would be a desired outcome for the Big East and its schools.

I wonder what they would do with Notre Dame.

[xnatic03]

If the Big 10 poaches 2-4 Big East football schools (and Notre Dame), I can see the remaining members joining the ACC or SEC. If Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers, and/or Uconn leave the Big East, the 4 others will make the ACC 16 team super league there as well. I don't think there will ever be just 4 super conferences in football. I think there will be 5, with teams like Boise State, BYU, TCU, UNLV, New Mexico, San Diego St, etc joining the Big 12 or Pac 10 to make other super conferences. If this ever happens, Xavier will join the other basketball only Big East schools along with Dayton and some other top A-10 schools (and possibly Butler) in a basketball dominated Big East.

[GuyFawkes38]

I wonder what they would do with Notre Dame.

I really get the sense that all of the powerful forces at ND (boosters, alums, admin) don't want to be part of the Big 10. They look down on Big 10 schools as too big and research centered and believe entrance would hurt their undergraduate reputation (although I'm sure it would help their graduate schools rep....but they care about that a lot less).

I'm guessing ND football will always be independent and their other sports programs will be in some conference with like minded liberal arts institutions.

[Muskie73]

I really get the sense that all of the powerful forces at ND (boosters, alums, admin) don't want to be part of the Big 10. They look down on Big 10 schools as too big and research centered and believe entrance would hurt their undergraduate reputation (although I'm sure it would help their graduate schools rep....but they care about that a lot less).

I'm guessing ND football will always be independent and their other sports programs will be in some conference with like minded liberal arts institutions.

Guy, I generally agree with your post but would add that Northwestern has higher entrance standards than ND based on my sons' experience with both schools.

[GuyFawkes38]

Guy, I generally agree with your post but would add that Northwestern has higher entrance standards than ND based on my sons' experience with both schools.

yes, that's definitely true.

But I do think that there are some cultural forces at ND which lead them to believe that admission into the Big 10 will damage their undergraduate identity (NU is a great example why I think that line of thinking is wrong).

[jdm2000]

If UC keeps out X, I think they would certainly act to keep UD out as well. Dayton is right next door, and I don't think there's much qualitative difference there (especially when you factor in that UD is clearly a notch below X as a program).

But if they do take 3 teams from the BE, I don't see the other 5 BE Football teams being able to convince the remaining basketball schools to take on Memphis, East Carolina, or whoever. I think it more likely that at that point, the BE basketball schools say that it is time to split.

[LutherRackleyRulez]

Per NY Times...


College Conferences Ponder Expansion, and Their Extinction

With the 11 Football Bowl Subdivision conference commissioners gathering in Scottsdale, Ariz., on Tuesday for the annual Bowl Championship Series meetings, the prospect of significant change in the collegiate conference landscape is becoming increasingly likely.

The central player is the Big Ten, which, as The Chicago Tribune reported over the weekend, has moved up its timetable for expanding. Prominent conference and university officials met on Sunday in Washington to discuss the subject.

The scope of that expansion, along with Notre Dame’s decision whether to keep its football independence, will determine just how much the landscape shifts in college sports. This comes on top of the likelihood of a 96-team N.C.A.A. basketball tournament.

For universities, the talk is driven by a never-ending search for more revenue. For fans, a new alignment could mean not only the end of some longtime rivalries but also the creation of new annual matchups, some appealing and some not.

One thing is clear this week: the subject will dominate the B.C.S. meetings.

“I don’t know what else we’d be talking about,” said Louisville’s athletic director, Tom Jurich, who will attend on behalf of the Big East.

Jake Crouthamel, Syracuse’s former athletic director, articulated in a telephone interview Sunday night a dire future for the Big East. Crouthamel, who helped form the Big East as Syracuse’s athletic director from 1978 to 2005, said he did not see the conference’s surviving.

***Eventually, Crouthamel said he saw the Big Ten, the Atlantic Coast Conference, the Southeastern Conference and the Pacific-10 forming four 16-team superconferences and leaving the umbrella of the N.C.A.A. (Just imagine the fight between the SEC and the Pac-10 for Texas.) He said that those leagues would form their own basketball tournament to rival the N.C.A.A. tournament.




http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/20/sports/20colleges.html?ref=sports

[xudash]

The Big Ten Network is the key driver here and it is all about TV markets. The Big Ten is THE largest conference in terms of revenue at this point, thanks mainly to that network. It is the platform from which the Big Ten can even begin to make the economics of a 16 team league work. The net of it for me is that I believe the B10 has every intention of going to 16 teams now.

ND is in a real pickle with this deal. Most of its alumni want independence for football, and ND obviously has to solve all this primarily for what is best for football, but independence for football creates a very big problem for its Olympic sports. ND can remain independent and hope that Kelly can bring them back to a level that will keep NBC interested for some more years, assuming NBC can still afford to cut the checks at that point. ND's - Kelly's - problem is that the collegiate football landscape has fully caught up to it: many schools that were previously unheard of, such as Oregon, now have money and television access. ND is another fish in the water that happens to have extraordinary - and well deserved - tradition. But ND hasn't won a NC since 1988, and it got clobbered in the three BCS bowls in which it played since the inception of the BCS in 1998. Nonetheless, I look for ND to continue to make a run at remaining independent, with ND believing that it can join somewhere if and when it has to do that (but with a loss in leverage and value) down the road.

IF the B10 raids the BE football side to the degree that it causes the BE 'as is' to fracture, breaking the 7 BE hoops schools apart under the BE brand, then Xavier will join those schools. This is a Xavier board and I am a Xavier fan and bigot, but, let's be honest, Xavier has to be job one for those 7 schools at that point.

Though you wouldn't know it by what goes on between the fan bases in certain quarters, Xavier and UD share (enjoy) a strong alliance. If and when the BE hoops schools call Victory Parkway, we'll either accept and mention UD, or we'll inquire about UD, but still accept.

OVerall, the 7 probably will want to get to a strong-as-possible 12. Critical mass seems to be the key in all this. We won't have our own TV network (Captain Obvious) so going beyond 12 probably becomes dilutive. But an additional 5 schools creates room for Xavier plus 4 others from (I see Temple solving for football and Charlotte moving on as soon as possible after them):

- UD
- Richmond
- UMass
- SLU

Remember that the BE does not tolerate redundant markets, which hurts Rhode Island (Providence), the Philly schools (Nova) and GW (Gtown). Duquesne isn't fully developed enough and SBU will be overlooked due to size and location. Fordham requires no comment here on many levels, but St. Johns is in NY anyway.

All this will work out very well for us if we can migrate to those 7 with the BE brand. That alone is better than the A10 now. As long as Armageddon - 4 super conferences of 16 per breaking away from the NCAA at some point - doesn't happen, we should end up in the premier hoops-centric conference in the East in a world that has gone to a 96 team Dance format.

[SixFig]

Another question is whether this supposed "Totally Awesome Basketball Conference" will have to split off into a new conference or whether the Big East football schools will just dissolve elsewhere (Big 10, Conference USA). If there is a new conference...there will be no automatic bid for five years under the present rules. However, with the quality of teams in this league there would be no worry about getting teams in.

I love this hypothetical league...should get around 6-8 teams in under a 96 team format every year.

Xavier
Georgetown
Villanova
Marquette
Dayton
Depaul
Providence
Seton Hall
St. Johns
Richmond
Umass
SLU

[xavierj]

I love this hypothetical league...should get around 6-8 teams in under a 96 team format every year.

Xavier
Georgetown
Villanova
Marquette
Dayton
Depaul
Providence
Seton Hall
St. Johns
Richmond
Umass
SLU[/QUOTE]

I would take Butler and leave SLU to go to the Mountain West or the Valley. Just makes more sense logistically.

[xu95]

UMASS has not been good for some time and should not even be mentioned. Richmond will go back to being Richmond once Mooney leaves.

I say leave everyone but Xavier and Dayton out and make it a 9 team league. That is the perfect number for basketball anyhow.

xu95

[DC Muskie]

Dash-

are you saying that UC gets raided? Or is one of the leftovers?

[dc_x]

[color=darkgreen]***Eventually, Crouthamel said he saw the Big Ten, the Atlantic Coast Conference, the Southeastern Conference and the Pacific-10 forming four 16-team superconferences and leaving the umbrella of the N.C.A.A. (Just imagine the fight between the SEC and the Pac-10 for Texas.) He said that those leagues would form their own basketball tournament to rival the N.C.A.A. tournament.


Congress would never allow the "BCS leagues" to create their own basketball tournament for the same reasons that they can't technically exclude non-BCS teams from the BCS football championship. Congress can claim anti-trust and require that a championshio be open to all D1 schools. You can argue that the BCS championship is not really open to non-BCS teams, but technically they are eligible to play in the BCS title game.

I agree with the 1st premise that we probably end up seeing 4 mega conferences, each with its own TV network. Like any business, TV networks benefit from scale and having 16 teams in a conference adds subscribers and inventory without a huge increase in operating costs.

What will be interesting to see is how all of this revenue generating impacts the argument that "student-athletes" should get compensated. How much money can these schools make off collegiate sports before being required to share some of that money with the athletes?

[Xman95]

How much money can these schools make off collegiate sports before being required to share some of that money with the athletes?

Not to take this down another path, but this is one thing that has really started to annoy me. Why do people constantly act like the athletes don't get compensated? Last time I checked, it was pretty expensive to attend a college. Tuition, room, board, etc. all add up. When kids are on scholarship they don't pay for any of it. There are people out there working their asses off 40 hours/week and not making what a scholarship is valued at.

Hey, if they want to start compensating players by paying them, then let them start paying their way through school.

[LA Muskie]

Congress would never allow the "BCS leagues" to create their own basketball tournament for the same reasons that they can't technically exclude non-BCS teams from the BCS football championship. Congress can claim anti-trust and require that a championshio be open to all D1 schools. You can argue that the BCS championship is not really open to non-BCS teams, but technically they are eligible to play in the BCS title game.

I agree with the 1st premise that we probably end up seeing 4 mega conferences, each with its own TV network. Like any business, TV networks benefit from scale and having 16 teams in a conference adds subscribers and inventory without a huge increase in operating costs.

What will be interesting to see is how all of this revenue generating impacts the argument that "student-athletes" should get compensated. How much money can these schools make off collegiate sports before being required to share some of that money with the athletes?
Congresspeople like to huff and puff all the time. But as a lawyer, I've never really understood what the supposed "antitrust" violation is. Most people have no idea what the Sherman or Clayton Acts mean, and congresspeople know only marginally more. But perhaps it's just the "fear" of congressional action and the use of that nasty word that gets people all worked up...

Incidentally, I could see 4 "superconferences" doing exactly what Jake says. The BCS schools already feel like they essentially subsidize the athletic departments of all other schools through the NCAA. If money truly rules (and it seems to) then at some point they'll decide to keep it for themselves and let the others scrounge for their survival. True capitalism at work, I guess, but I'd hate it.

[dc_x]

Not to take this down another path, but this is one thing that has really started to annoy me. Why do people constantly act like the athletes don't get compensated? Last time I checked, it was pretty expensive to attend a college. Tuition, room, board, etc. all add up. When kids are on scholarship they don't pay for any of it. There are people out there working their asses off 40 hours/week and not making what a scholarship is valued at.

Sorry - I should have said "compensated fairly"


Hey, if they want to start compensating players by paying them, then let them start paying their way through school.

I'm sure Xavier's mens basketball players would be happy to make that exchange. The all-in cost to attend Xavier is $41,300 per year.

In the last report, X's mens basketball team generated $8.8 milion of revenue per year. NBA teams share 57% of revenue with their players.

Assuming that is a fair distribution, X's players should be paid $385,846 each -- meaning they are compensated about 11% of what they are worth.

[LA Muskie]

Not to take this down another path, but this is one thing that has really started to annoy me. Why do people constantly act like the athletes don't get compensated? Last time I checked, it was pretty expensive to attend a college. Tuition, room, board, etc. all add up. When kids are on scholarship they don't pay for any of it. There are people out there working their asses off 40 hours/week and not making what a scholarship is valued at.

Hey, if they want to start compensating players by paying them, then let them start paying their way through school.
Agreed. The no-comp thing is ridiculous. They can either be paid (like others who do "work-study") or they can keep their all-expense-paid scholarships, but let's not pretend they're not compensated. Is the comp proportionate to the value? My guess is that it varies significantly from school to school.

[LA Muskie]

I'm sure Xavier's mens basketball players would be happy to make that exchange. The all-in cost to attend Xavier is $41,300 per year.

In the last report, X's mens basketball team generated $8.8 milion of revenue per year. NBA teams share 57% of revenue with their players.

Assuming that is a fair distribution, X's players should be paid $385,846 each -- meaning they are compensated about 11% of what they are worth.

Market forces dictate the "comp." Nobody is forcing any of these kids to come play college basketball. If they are good enough, they can try to go play in Europe or in the D-League, or if there was enough interest someone else would start a league.

[GoMuskies]

Assuming that is a fair distribution, X's players should be paid $385,846 each -- meaning they are compensated about 11% of what they are worth.

Maybe on average. I don't want to give Crawford and Robinson the same piece of the pie!

[BandAid]

I like pie!

[SixFig]

Sorry - I should have said "compensated fairly"



I'm sure Xavier's mens basketball players would be happy to make that exchange. The all-in cost to attend Xavier is $41,300 per year.

In the last report, X's mens basketball team generated $8.8 milion of revenue per year. NBA teams share 57% of revenue with their players.

Assuming that is a fair distribution, X's players should be paid $385,846 each -- meaning they are compensated about 11% of what they are worth.

Then should the most valuable schools pay their athletes more? For instance Louisville had the highest revenue of 23.2 million in 2008. Their 13 players would stand to earn over 1.02 million a year! Compare that to the Iona's, the IUPUI's and the Montana's of the world and there is no comparison!

It may be a fraudulant facade but the notion of amateurism in the NCAA still stands for something. Right?

[Xman95]

I'm sure Xavier's mens basketball players would be happy to make that exchange. The all-in cost to attend Xavier is $41,300 per year.

In the last report, X's mens basketball team generated $8.8 milion of revenue per year. NBA teams share 57% of revenue with their players.

Assuming that is a fair distribution, X's players should be paid $385,846 each -- meaning they are compensated about 11% of what they are worth.

But that money also has to be distributed to the rest of the sports. Also, do you think Walsh and Robinson should make almost $400k just like Crawford and Love did? At schools where even more money is made, should they be able to pay players $1mil/year? Wonder where all the top players will go...

Look, these kids essentially get $40k to play basketball. Along with that is the opportunity for an education...something very important for those who won't be able to go on and play ball professionally. If kids don't want to play ball for and $40k+ and an education, they can give Europe a try. I think most 18-year-olds who may not have the opportunity to go to college would glady make $40k/year doing something they love.

dc_x, I hope you didn't think I was trying to just blast your statement. It was definitely not targeted at you, just the general "compensation" issue. I think it is overblown and people don't always realize what these kids are getting already.

[DoubleD86]

Here is my problem with the "lack of compensation." Yes, they get room, board, tuition, and books. But theoretically, they get ABSOLUTELY NOTHING outside of educational costs, some clothes/equipment with basketball, and things on trips for basketball paid for them. My question is, how do they do anything else that costs money? Most DI college basketball players tend to be from an underdeveloped area and don't have much money behind them. I understand on campus they have mostly everything paid for them. But what about everything else? I know when I was in school I needed money for lots of things (movies, going out to eat, entertainment, buying clothes and stuff to use). Theoretically, DI players have no way of paying for these things. Many other people earn scholarships (academic or achievement based) like basketball players do. Those kids also have the opportunity to work or do work-study and earn some spending cash for fun. Basketball players (and most athletes) do not have that opportunity, and in my opinion, athletes deserve an allowance/stipend that would give them the ability to do those things. I am not saying a ton of money by any means, but some money per month as an entertainment allowance should be given in my opinion.

Edit: I fully acknowledge the unlikelihood that the majority of these kids are having trouble with these expenses, but theoretically they can't pay for these things.

[xudash]

Congresspeople like to huff and puff all the time. But as a lawyer, I've never really understood what the supposed "antitrust" violation is. Most people have no idea what the Sherman or Clayton Acts mean, and congresspeople know only marginally more. But perhaps it's just the "fear" of congressional action and the use of that nasty word that gets people all worked up...

Incidentally, I could see 4 "superconferences" doing exactly what Jake says. The BCS schools already feel like they essentially subsidize the athletic departments of all other schools through the NCAA. If money truly rules (and it seems to) then at some point they'll decide to keep it for themselves and let the others scrounge for their survival. True capitalism at work, I guess, but I'd hate it.

Then they need to reconsider that stance, because the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament has at the core of its national ratings appeal the idea that big and small schools can earn a shot at the title, and this gives rise to the whole cinderella effect that the tournament generates.

If they break off to have their own 'private' tourney, they will have created collegiate basketball's version of the Edsel.

[SixFig]

Here is my problem with the "lack of compensation." Yes, they get room, board, tuition, and books. But theoretically, they get ABSOLUTELY NOTHING outside of educational costs, some clothes/equipment with basketball, and things on trips for basketball paid for them. My question is, how do they do anything else that costs money? Most DI college basketball players tend to be from an underdeveloped area and don't have much money behind them. I understand on campus they have mostly everything paid for them. But what about everything else? I know when I was in school I needed money for lots of things (movies, going out to eat, entertainment, buying clothes and stuff to use). Theoretically, DI players have no way of paying for these things. Many other people earn scholarships (academic or achievement based) like basketball players do. Those kids also have the opportunity to work or do work-study and earn some spending cash for fun. Basketball players (and most athletes) do not have that opportunity, and in my opinion, athletes deserve an allowance/stipend that would give them the ability to do those things. I am not saying a ton of money by any means, but some money per month as an entertainment allowance should be given in my opinion.

Edit: I fully acknowledge the unlikelihood that the majority of these kids are having trouble with these expenses, but theoretically they can't pay for these things.

I believe some get paid working at summer basketball camps and other such things over the summer.

Or if you go to USC you get paid in real money, houses and SUV's

[kmcrawfo]

Here is my problem with the "lack of compensation." Yes, they get room, board, tuition, and books. But theoretically, they get ABSOLUTELY NOTHING outside of educational costs, some clothes/equipment with basketball, and things on trips for basketball paid for them. My question is, how do they do anything else that costs money? Most DI college basketball players tend to be from an underdeveloped area and don't have much money behind them. I understand on campus they have mostly everything paid for them. But what about everything else? I know when I was in school I needed money for lots of things (movies, going out to eat, entertainment, buying clothes and stuff to use). Theoretically, DI players have no way of paying for these things. Many other people earn scholarships (academic or achievement based) like basketball players do. Those kids also have the opportunity to work or do work-study and earn some spending cash for fun. Basketball players (and most athletes) do not have that opportunity, and in my opinion, athletes deserve an allowance/stipend that would give them the ability to do those things. I am not saying a ton of money by any means, but some money per month as an entertainment allowance should be given in my opinion.

Edit: I fully acknowledge the unlikelihood that the majority of these kids are having trouble with these expenses, but theoretically they can't pay for these things.


When I first started at Xavier, the situation you described was a problem. At $$$ I earned were suppose to be deducted from my athletic scholarship. However, after my Freshman (or right before I started it, I don't remember) that rule was changed. At that point student-athletes with full scholarships were allowed to work and keep the $$$ as long as certain rules were followed.

I was not aware that the rule had been changed back. I assume student-athletes are still able to work in the summer and save up cash to enjoy during the school year. My sport was not a revenue generating one, such as basketball. However, I thought I was very fortunate to have my education paid for due to athletics + some academic dough. The thought I deserved something more never crossed my mind, not do I think it should. College athletes are students first, athletes second.

They are being given the priviledge and opportunity to attend school for free, or at a reduced cost due to their athletic prowess.

[dc_x]

Market forces dictate the "comp." Nobody is forcing any of these kids to come play college basketball. If they are good enough, they can try to go play in Europe or in the D-League, or if there was enough interest someone else would start a league.

But that's my point. When "value" is not equal to "comp", the market is obviously broken. The NCAA has a monopoly on amatuer athletics and is using its supply of cheap labor to generate huge profits. No other business could get away with this.


But that money also has to be distributed to the rest of the sports. Also, do you think Walsh and Robinson should make almost $400k just like Crawford and Love did? At schools where even more money is made, should they be able to pay players $1mil/year? Wonder where all the top players will go...

Look, these kids essentially get $40k to play basketball. Along with that is the opportunity for an education...something very important for those who won't be able to go on and play ball professionally. If kids don't want to play ball for and $40k+ and an education, they can give Europe a try. I think most 18-year-olds who may not have the opportunity to go to college would glady make $40k/year doing something they love.

dc_x, I hope you didn't think I was trying to just blast your statement. It was definitely not targeted at you, just the general "compensation" issue. I think it is overblown and people don't always realize what these kids are getting already.

My point isn't that these guys should be paid $X amount of dollars. It's just that these schools can't keep on generating these huge sums of revenue without compensating the athletes more fairly.

You already see people complaining about coach's salaries. Why does Calipari make $4 million per year and his players only get tuition, room, and boad? How is that equitable? If Cal is worth $4 million, isn't John Wall at least worth $2 million. Some NBA team will pay him more than that in a few months.

Texas football made $65 million in 2008 on football on $87 million of revenue. That's a 75% profit margin. The average corporation earns an 8% profit margin. Why is that? Because the average corporation isn't a monopoly that can get away with paying its employees 10% of their value.

College athletics is turning into BIG business and it's all being done on the backs of a huge pool of CHEAP labor.

[Muskie73]

The idea of super conferences pulling out of the NCAA leads me to question how these schools would administer their other sports? I don't see the NCAA accepting teams in other sports if the football and basketball teams are playing outside of the NCAA. That I think would cause a major blow-up especially if women's sports (read Title IX) comes into play.

If anyone has any real feel for this, I would appreciate their comments.

[kmcrawfo]

But that's my point. When "value" is not equal to "comp", the market is obviously broken. The NCAA has a monopoly on amatuer athletics and is using its supply of cheap labor to generate huge profits. No other business could get away with this.



My point isn't that these guys should be paid $X amount of dollars. It's just that these schools can't keep on generating these huge sums of revenue without compensating the athletes more fairly.

You already see people complaining about coach's salaries. Why does Calipari make $4 million per year and his players only get tuition, room, and boad? How is that equitable? If Cal is worth $4 million, isn't John Wall at least worth $2 million. Some NBA team will pay him more than that in a few months.

Texas football made $65 million in 2008 on football on $87 million of revenue. That's a 75% profit margin. The average corporation earns an 8% profit margin. Why is that? Because the average corporation isn't a monopoly that can get away with paying its employees 10% of their value.

College athletics is turning into BIG business and it's all being done on the backs of a huge pool of CHEAP labor.

How is the pool of CHEAP labor different than any number of other aspects of the labor force.

Nursing Students = cheap labor
Medical Students - cheap labor
News/TV Interns = cheap labor
Medical Residents = cheap labor
plumbing/electrical apprentice = cheap labor
P&G Summer Intern = cheap labor

People take on cheap labor positions in order to garner a skill set or minimum requirement to get to a higher paying/more successful position. That is life, that is how it works. Any successful / wealthy person has been cheap labor at some point. Usually, you are generating big bucks for someone else.

My technicians and assistants get paid $10-16/hour. They generate me around $1000/hr. Are they cheap labor. Yes. Could they get higher wages somewhere else, maybe...

This whole college athletes should get paid strikes me as silly. They are getting paid. Who cares if someone is making money off them. That is no different than any other job/position in the country. Unless you own the company, you are making money (sometimes a lot of money) for someone else. In exchange, you are being given an education/job/salary/etc.

If someone has a problem with it, they can go do something else.

[LA Muskie]

Then they need to reconsider that stance, because the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament has at the core of its national ratings appeal the idea that big and small schools can earn a shot at the title, and this gives rise to the whole cinderella effect that the tournament generates.

If they break off to have their own 'private' tourney, they will have created collegiate basketball's version of the Edsel.
Agreed.

[LA Muskie]

But that's my point. When "value" is not equal to "comp", the market is obviously broken. The NCAA has a monopoly on amatuer athletics and is using its supply of cheap labor to generate huge profits. No other business could get away with this.

1. Who ever said that "value" and "comp" have to be equal? The market generally pays what labor requires, and nothing more.

2. Unless I'm missing something, the cheap "labor" is not bound to the NCAA or its institutions. If they could be better compensated outside the NCAA there are myriad options available. Reference: Derrick Brown.

[dc_x]

How is the pool of CHEAP labor different than any number of other aspects of the labor force.

Nursing Students = cheap labor
Medical Students - cheap labor
News/TV Interns = cheap labor
Medical Residents = cheap labor
plumbing/electrical apprentice = cheap labor
P&G Summer Intern = cheap labor

People take on cheap labor positions in order to garner a skill set or minimum requirement to get to a higher paying/more successful position. That is life, that is how it works. Any successful / wealthy person has been cheap labor at some point. Usually, you are generating big bucks for someone else.

My technicians and assistants get paid $10-16/hour. They generate me around $1000/hr. Are they cheap labor. Yes. Could they get higher wages somewhere else, maybe...

This whole college athletes should get paid strikes me as silly. They are getting paid. Who cares if someone is making money off them. That is no different than any other job/position in the country. Unless you own the company, you are making money (sometimes a lot of money) for someone else. In exchange, you are being given an education/job/salary/etc.

If someone has a problem with it, they can go do something else.

But your business is not a monopoly. If you want to be a professional football player, what realistic choice do you have besides playing college football?

[LA Muskie]

But your business is not a monopoly. If you want to be a professional football player, what realistic choice do you have besides playing college football?
DC, you've bought into the myth. College sports are NOT a monopoly. First, the product they provide has any number of competitors, including the pro sports. Second, the employees (i.e., the labor) have choices.

[dc_x]

DC, you've bought into the myth. College sports are NOT a monopoly. First, the product they provide has any number of competitors, including the pro sports. Second, the employees (i.e., the labor) have choices.

Maybe you can argue that NCAA basketball is not a monopoly with the D-league and Euro leagues around, but NCAA football has no real competition.

Every single professional sport in this country has been found to be in violation of the antitrust laws. NCAA football is just as big of a monopoly.

It's not a question of whether players/employees have choices, it's a question of whether the NCAA/BCS have used monopoly powers to artificially restrict compensation.

Let me ask you this - if the NCAA lifted the ban on paying players, do you think players would still be compensated with nothing more than tuition, room, and board? No chance. Players would start getting paid what they are worth....just like their coaches.

[MADXSTER]

There's always Canada, eh!

[LA Muskie]

Maybe you can argue that NCAA basketball is not a monopoly with the D-league and Euro leagues around, but NCAA football has no real competition.

Every single professional sport in this country has been found to be in violation of the antitrust laws. NCAA football is just as big of a monopoly.

It's not a question of whether players/employees have choices, it's a question of whether the NCAA/BCS have used monopoly powers to artificially restrict compensation.

Let me ask you this - if the NCAA lifted the ban on paying players, do you think players would still be compensated with nothing more than tuition, room, and board? No chance. Players would start getting paid what they are worth....just like their coaches.
Student-athletes are not employees, and college sports are not minor leagues for the professional leagues. The kids are students and the fact that the rest of America seems to have a pre-occupation with their sporting endeavors doesn't change those facts.

Nobody is forced to go to college and get a degree while playing the sport that they love. If players with professional aspirations wish to be compensated at "market value" for their endeavors, they can go out into any number of professional leagues here and abroad. Methinks that the vast majority of them would soon learn that their market value is significantly less than they thought.

And yes, I believe that applies just as equally to football as any other sport. If there was a true market for non-NFL-ready players to play in a professional minor league, those options would exist. For now there is the CFL and some much-smaller international leagues. NFL Europe, as you may know, folded several years ago out of lack of interest.

[kmcrawfo]

But your business is not a monopoly. If you want to be a professional football player, what realistic choice do you have besides playing college football?

How is that any different than the vast majority of high-level jobs and careers.

If you want to be a doctor, what choice do you have than to work in hospitals free as a medical student for 4 years and then getting $4-8/hour as a intern/resident/fellow for 3-11 years. Even though you are making the hospital and physicians who are training you hundreds of thousands and in some specialities milliions of dollars. My internship was before the new work-hour limits that limit residents and interns to 100 hour work-weeks. I worked in excess of that per week. I once calculated my hourly wage to be $4-6/hour. Despite the fact I was generating hundreds of thousands of dollars for the hospital, Is that fair? Sure it is because that is what it takes to get to where I wanted to be.

To get high-end positions a the top firms, lawyers must take internships or other low-paying positions. Then, they must perform in school and at those firms.

I have a friend who is a very successful radio talk show host. He worked for free or virtually nothing for many years in order to get where he is now.

The college vs. pro sports pathway is no different than other high-paying careers in this country. You work/train for little or no pay for years in order to cash in down the road. It is called delayed gratification.

[dc_x]

I think we have completely hijacked this thread. We'll have to agree to disagree on the monopoly issue.

But let me ask you guys this - does the fact that the Big Ten Network is 49% owned by News Corp make you feel a bit uneasy? 51% of the profits from the network get returned to the schools to fund athletics, build buildings, and support financial aid, but the other 49% go to News Corp stockholders.

In 2008 News Corp shareholders made a $112 million profit from their 49% interest in the Big Ten Network.

When ESPN televises college sports, they have to pay a fair market rights fee. The Big Ten Network gets its content for free. I think you will see more deals like this because they make a lot of financial sense. Conferences have a huge source of cheap content, but need a partner that knows how to run a TV network.

My main point on this is that we are getting closer and closer to the line where it gets very hard to call all of this amateur athletics.

[dc_x]

How is that any different than the vast majority of high-level jobs and careers.

If you want to be a doctor, what choice do you have than to work in hospitals free as a medical student for 4 years and then getting $4-8/hour as a intern/resident/fellow for 3-11 years. Even though you are making the hospital and physicians who are training you hundreds of thousands and in some specialities milliions of dollars. My internship was before the new work-hour limits that limit residents and interns to 100 hour work-weeks. I worked in excess of that per week. I once calculated my hourly wage to be $4-6/hour. Despite the fact I was generating hundreds of thousands of dollars for the hospital, Is that fair? Sure it is because that is what it takes to get to where I wanted to be.

To get high-end positions a the top firms, lawyers must take internships or other low-paying positions. Then, they must perform in school and at those firms.

I have a friend who is a very successful radio talk show host. He worked for free or virtually nothing for many years in order to get where he is now.

The college vs. pro sports pathway is no different than other high-paying careers in this country. You work/train for little or no pay for years in order to cash in down the road. It is called delayed gratification.

I don't want to keep rehashing this, but there are markets for all those careers you are referring to. There are thousands of law firms that compete for law school graduates and pay those graduates a market rate. That rate might be very low, but at least the rate is set by a properly functioning market.

There is not properly functioning market for football players until they are eligible for the NFL.

[SM#24]

There is not properly functioning market for football players until they are eligible for the NFL.

That's why the NFL is a monoply.
College Football is no more a monopoly than college in general for most professions.

[jdm2000]

to contribute to the threadjack--new attorneys start out doing very well at big firms (above six figures in places like Cincy, and near $200k in places like NYC). They also get paid the prorated salaries of those positions during their internships.

[DoubleD86]

That's why the NFL is a monoply.

I don't think I agree with this. They have had and continue to have competition from other leagues (XFL, USFL, UFL, Arena, CFL). It is not due to their practices that those other leagues fail. It is due to the quality of their product and brand loyalty versus the others. Therefore they are not creating a monopoly, it is just market/consumer driven superiority.

Also, they are legally able to keep players out unless they meet certain requirements (i.e. 3 years out of high school) because this is a Union negotiated agreement in the CBA. A union is able to negotiate requirements that can exclude outsiders, it has been challenged in many labor suits including Clarett v. NFL.

Certain aspects of the NFL boarderline anti-trust, but most were challenged and have been pushed to just under the line. Right now, there is an antitrust suit by American Needle about the merchandise licensing being handled in a violation of Sherman and Clayton.

Way too many cases have been brought up and challenged that have eliminated most all of the monopolistic practices.

[danaandvictory]

to contribute to the threadjack--new attorneys start out doing very well at big firms (above six figures in places like Cincy, and near $200k in places like NYC). They also get paid the prorated salaries of those positions during their internships.

That's the assumption everyone goes into law school with but the stark reality is that there aren't that many big firm spots out there and the majority of new lawyers do not make a particularly high salary (especially when student loans are factored in). The median starting salary in law school is way lower than the mean, in other words.

LA is right, I think, when he talks about monopolistic practices. Just recently the MLS players tried to advance an antitrust argument against MLS -- which is an explicitly single-entity league, where the league and not the teams owns player contracts and rights -- and got smacked down.

[LA Muskie]

to contribute to the threadjack--new attorneys start out doing very well at big firms (above six figures in places like Cincy, and near $200k in places like NYC). They also get paid the prorated salaries of those positions during their internships.
I'm a lawyer and I did that (both as an intern and as an associate for 6 years). It applies to approximately 5% of the graduating law students each year. And very few people can live the life despite the pay -- by the time I left after 6 years, there was only 1 other person remaining at the firm from my starting class of 50.

[GoMuskies]

I'm a lawyer and I did that (both as an intern and as an associate for 6 years). It applies to approximately 5% of the graduating law students each year. And very few people can live the life despite the pay -- by the time I left after 6 years, there was only 1 other person remaining at the firm from my starting class of 50.

Down to five from my starting class of 35 six and a half years in. Can't wait to leave.

[GuyFawkes38]

I'm willing to bet a good chunk of the revenue earned by the basketball team goes back into it (in the form of coaches, medical and training personnel, facilities, etc).

I would love to look at the numbers. I bet basketball programs aren't really as profitable as most people think because a lot of the revenue they create goes back into the large expenses of maintaining the program.

Because a school can't pay players, a school must attract players by showing them that a lot of cash will go into their development (from education to facilities and coaching). It's not a perfect situation, but I don't think the players are being exploited as much as you might think.

[jdm2000]

(Just FYI --- I am a lawyer at a firm of 400 attorneys as well. Still here.) (Just so you guys don't think I'm talking out my a$$)

[GoMuskies]

(Just so you guys don't think I'm talking out my a$$)

If you're a lawyer, you're always talking out of your ass.

[LA Muskie]

If you're a lawyer, you're always talking out of your ass.
Except when we're lying between our teeth, right? :)

[danaandvictory]

(Just FYI --- I am a lawyer at a firm of 400 attorneys as well. Still here.) (Just so you guys don't think I'm talking out my a$$)

Yeah. I clerked, then went to one of those, got laid off after three years, and am just now getting back on my feet.

Bottom line: if you're going to go to law school, have a plan.

[STL_XUfan]

I'm willing to bet a good chunk of the revenue earned by the basketball team goes back into it (in the form of coaches, medical and training personnel, facilities, etc).

I would love to look at the numbers. I bet basketball programs aren't really as profitable as most people think because a lot of the revenue they create goes back into the large expenses of maintaining the program.

Because a school can't pay players, a school must attract players by showing them that a lot of cash will go into their development (from education to facilities and coaching). It's not a perfect situation, but I don't think the players are being exploited as much as you might think.

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/GetOneInstitutionData.aspx

All of the information can be found there. These numbers are self reported so I would take them with a grain of salt. It is easy to see what sports pay the bills, but also easy to see that those sports are taken care of. At Mizzou the cost per football player before scholarship is included is somewhere around $110,000.

[GuyFawkes38]

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/GetOneInstitutionData.aspx

All of the information can be found there. These numbers are self reported so I would take them with a grain of salt. It is easy to see what sports pay the bills, but also easy to see that those sports are taken care of. At Mizzou the cost per football player before scholarship is included is somewhere around $110,000.

Well, the margins are better than I expected for men's basketball and football. I was thinking that in the hyper competitive world of college basketball and football, a larger percentage of revenue would have to be put back in facilities, coaches, stadiums, etc...

Regardless, as you noted, the schools do attach a good chunk of money to the players (of course, not in cash). It certainly beats out compensation from the D league and rivals Euro leagues.

[Tardy Turtle]

If you're a lawyer, you're always talking out of your ass.


Except when we're lying between our teeth, right? :)

Ass to mouth... nice. Take it to the X Lounge.

[xubrew]

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/GetOneInstitutionData.aspx

All of the information can be found there. These numbers are self reported so I would take them with a grain of salt. It is easy to see what sports pay the bills, but also easy to see that those sports are taken care of. At Mizzou the cost per football player before scholarship is included is somewhere around $110,000.

those numbers are accurate, so they can be taken with much more than a grain of salt, but you have to know what you're looking at. for instance, scholarships are part of the overall expenses. they don't just go to school for free. the athletic department actually submits a check to the registrars office. it isn't as if they just get their tuition waved. also, money that is given to the athletic department by the university counts as generated revenue. so, if you see that football made $4 million at villanova, it could be that over $3 million of that could have been given to them by the university.


-as far as student-athletes working, any student-athlete can technically work whenever they want at whatever job that they want so long as they can demonstrate that none of their income is in any way generated by their status as a student-athlete. in other words, you have to show that you'd make the same amount of money and have the same duties as someone who isn't a student-athlete. student-athletes can even work as professional athletes so long as it isn't in the same sport and that they're not receiving corporate sponsorship. the issue is that there just isn't any time to do it. even in the offseason, there are summer leagues, workouts, and practices. the spring sports have a fall season and the fall sports have a spring season. my feeling about compensating student-athletes falls somewhere in the middle. i feel that their should be a set stipend that comes with the scholarship for general living expenses and spending money, but i don't think they should be paid a wage or salary. however a $1000 stipend for all student athletes every academic year doesn't seem like too much to ask. another thing is the twenty hour rule in regards to practice. if the ncaa isn't going to enforce that and/or define what does and doesn't count as practice time, they should either redefine it or get rid of it entirely. enforcing that would enable students a few more hours a week to earn a little more money. so, i feel they should either enforce it, or pay them a small stipend, just my opinion.



***Eventually, Crouthamel said he saw the Big Ten, the Atlantic Coast Conference, the Southeastern Conference and the Pacific-10 forming four 16-team superconferences and leaving the umbrella of the N.C.A.A. (Just imagine the fight between the SEC and the Pac-10 for Texas.) He said that those leagues would form their own basketball tournament to rival the N.C.A.A. tournament.


i don't think this is likely. i'm not saying it's impossible, but i don't see it as being very probable. for starters, no member of any of those conferences has expressed any interest in leaving the ncaa, much less the the entire league. i attribute this comment to hand-ringing from a big east official. there is probably a much better chance of the meac and swac leaving than their is four of the major conferences leaving.



The idea of super conferences pulling out of the NCAA leads me to question how these schools would administer their other sports? I don't see the NCAA accepting teams in other sports if the football and basketball teams are playing outside of the NCAA. That I think would cause a major blow-up especially if women's sports (read Title IX) comes into play.

i cannot think of any way title ix would come into play. if they leave in football and basketball, they'll probably leave in everything, and if the women's sports remained in tact it would not violate title ix. there also is no precedent that says the ncaa would not accept them in other sports if the football and basketball team are outside the ncaa. in fact i almost believe the opposite to be true. either way, though, title ix isn't violated so long as the women's sports are funded.



Congresspeople like to huff and puff all the time. But as a lawyer, I've never really understood what the supposed "antitrust" violation is.

the reason you don't understand the supposed antitrust violation is quite simple. the reason you don't understand it is because one doesn't exist. congress has been badgered every now and then for the past twenty years, and has not acted. it's my belief that they never will. i'd almost be willing to bet that people who believe in ufo cover ups have gotten more facetime with congress than the bcs antitrust conspirators have.

however, lets pretend that congress was actually going to pay some serious attention to this. (i'm not talking about the courtesy hearings to keep conspirators happy. i'm talking about them actually taking action). i'd love to hear that cross examination.


-did the bcs directly prevent you from negotiating a deal that would institute a big money bowl game?? no.

-did you ever attempt to negotiate a big money bowl game that would not be affiliated with the bcs?? no.

uhh, so why exactly are you here?? anyway, moving on...

-does the bcs include a no-compete clause with it's corporate sponsors in regards to sponsoring bowls that include non-bcs teams?? no.

-are there major corporate sponsors that are not involved with the bcs that could benefit from sponsoring a major bowl game?? yes.

did you approach any of them?? no.

did the bcs prevent you from approaching them?? no.

-what is it that the bcs has done that has directly prevented you from instituting your own major bowls?? uhh, i guess nothing.

-do you have your own bowl contracts?? yes. does the bcs prevent you from partakign in them or from growing them?? uhh, no, i guess not.

does the bcs limit the amount of money you can make off of your own bowls?? no.

does the bcs prevent you from generating revenue?? no.

has the bcs prevented you from negotiating with networks in regards to broadcasting and selling commercial times for your bowl games?? no.

are there games that you play in during the season that earn you 2X and 3X the amount that you would make playing in a bcs bowl game?? yes.

DISMISSED


if the pac ten, sec, acc and big ten were to form four superconferences and leave, congress couldn't stop them. really, nobody could stop them. having said that, though, i seriously doubt it is going to happen. there is no reason to think that it will. crouthamel is merely shouting from the mountain top because the big east may get shaken up. that doesn't mean everything else will. he's like my mother every flu season who is entirely convinced each and every year that this is the year the human race will be wiped out. not impossible, but also not probable.

[xudash]

Except when we're lying between our teeth, right? :)

I thought the profession relied on versions of the truth.

Beyond that, Tom Cruise recommends to avoid firms in Memphis.

[STL_XUfan]

those numbers are accurate, so they can be taken with much more than a grain of salt, but you have to know what you're looking at. for instance, scholarships are part of the overall expenses. they don't just go to school for free. the athletic department actually submits a check to the registrars office. it isn't as if they just get their tuition waved. also, money that is given to the athletic department by the university counts as generated revenue. so, if you see that football made $4 million at villanova, it could be that over $3 million of that could have been given to them by the university.


Sorry I wasn't clear on my post about the Mizzou comment, that number was based on different information (I already had it handy so I didn't feel like redownloading the EADA report and scholarship information and doing my math again).

Also, the reason I said to take it with a grain of salt is that the numbers are "accurate" but that doesn't mean schools don't play with them a little bit, especially when it comes to number of athletes (see the Quinnipiac scandal).

But you are correct that scholarships are not waived, they are paid and I should have been more clear about that in my original post.

[xubrew]

Also, the reason I said to take it with a grain of salt is that the numbers are "accurate" but that doesn't mean schools don't play with them a little bit, especially when it comes to number of athletes (see the Quinnipiac scandal).

agreed. the numbers are accurate, but that doesn't mean they're not misleading.

i didn't disagree with anything that you said. i just added my own $0.02.

[jdm2000]

Except when we're lying between our teeth, right? :)

Nice.

[xudash]

Head's Up:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/andy_staples/04/21/big.ten.expansion/index.html?xid=FanHouse

[XUglow]

Head's Up:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/andy_staples/04/21/big.ten.expansion/index.html?xid=FanHouse

Yes, and Slive isn't going to be talking to any C-USA teams. He is thinking Texas, Oklahoma, North Carolina, etc. He isn't going to expand geography just to expand georgraphy. He wants teams that offer compelling match-ups with existing SEC powers.

I haven't heard any credible rumors of pending moves, but Slive does have a long list of ACC teams that have told him, "Don't be afraid to ask us. We won't say no."

[xubrew]

from my estimation, super conferences don't benefit all of their members in a super way. i realize that with the big ten it isn't so much about making the league stronger as much as it is getting the big ten network in more living rooms. that's fine. however, i don't see how adding one, or three, or five teams will make the league any more imposing than what it already is. if anything, it seems like a super conference would be more prone to collapse under its own weight than anything else.

the sec, for instance, has won the last four ncaa titles. expanding to 14 or 16 won't make them any more competitive or any more successful. if you have 16 really good teams, are all 16 served better by being in one giant cluster of a league, or being in two seperate conferences of either eight or nine?? i'd definitely say the latter. i don't see what sixteen teams gives you that twelve teams doesn't. in fact, i think it's more suffocating in a lot of cases. i get why the big ten is doing it because they want the big ten network in more living rooms and in more parts of the country. however, i don't think it will result in them sucking the air out of everyone else. the big east and acc really haven't done that since they expanded. the big ten won't either. the only league that may get taken to the cleaners is the big east, but that doesn't concern me one bit.

[xu95]

Yes, and Slive isn't going to be talking to any C-USA teams. He is thinking Texas, Oklahoma, North Carolina, etc. He isn't going to expand geography just to expand georgraphy. He wants teams that offer compelling match-ups with existing SEC powers.

I haven't heard any credible rumors of pending moves, but Slive does have a long list of ACC teams that have told him, "Don't be afraid to ask us. We won't say no."

Why wouldn't a team from the ACC want to join the SEC. They have only won the last four national championships in football and don't show a sign of getting any weaker.

In the most prominent sport in college sports they have seperated themselves from the rest of the pack and the teams that the Big 10 is picking up will not close that gap.

xu95

[LA Muskie]

Interesting article. What really shocked me is that with all the talk of the BTN, the SEC may offer its schools an even better deal: $17mm PLUS control over local rights. It won't add up to $22mm, but it also lets the schools maintain some control, which shouldn't easily be dismissed.

The other thing that shocked me is that the Big East is just sitting by and being reactionary. I'd be aggressive as hell trying to shore up my support. The Big East has to take a stance right now: You're either with us or you're against us, and if you're against us you are the enemy.

And the "enemies" right now seem to be Syracuse, Pitt, and Rutgers (in that order, because I don't think anyone in the Big East cares all that much about losing Rutgers, which despite being in the biggest media market in the country nobody seems to care about).

On that note, I admit it when I'm wrong. And I was dead wrong. Syracuse is gone. That will most likely allow the Big East to essentially return to its roots: a bunch of basketball-playing Catholic schools. The

big question, now, is whether Xavier will be part of it. And that's where I start to get really worried. Because most of the talking heads don't seem to have us in that league, although they don't explain why. That's a problem.

[XUglow]

Interesting article. What really shocked me is that with all the talk of the BTN, the SEC may offer its schools an even better deal: $17mm PLUS control over local rights. It won't add up to $22mm, but it also lets the schools maintain some control, which shouldn't easily be dismissed.

The other thing that shocked me is that the Big East is just sitting by and being reactionary. I'd be aggressive as hell trying to shore up my support. The Big East has to take a stance right now: You're either with us or you're against us, and if you're against us you are the enemy.

And the "enemies" right now seem to be Syracuse, Pitt, and Rutgers (in that order, because I don't think anyone in the Big East cares all that much about losing Rutgers, which despite being in the biggest media market in the country nobody seems to care about).

On that note, I admit it when I'm wrong. And I was dead wrong. Syracuse is gone. That will most likely allow the Big East to essentially return to its roots: a bunch of basketball-playing Catholic schools. The

big question, now, is whether Xavier will be part of it. And that's where I start to get really worried. Because most of the talking heads don't seem to have us in that league, although they don't explain why. That's a problem.

I have see a couple of articles that have X going into the new basketball Big East.

The move to a 16-team SEC would make sense if it improves the quality of the match-ups that appear in the prime TV slots. If you add 4 marquee names to the mix with UF, LSU, Bama, Auburn, UGA, UT, etc., you are going to have several nationally relevant games every week, and the ratings for those games is going to make a very compelling advertising vehicle for the people that own those TV rights.

I think the SEC is happy with the teams they have now, but they are not going to sit back and let the Big Ten "grow" it alone and offer more compelling TV match-ups on a weekly basis.

[waggy]

That article takes the position that the B10 will expand by an even number of teams, but I think that only happens if Notre Dame is one of them. I think they expand by an odd number if Notre Dame isn't ready yet.

[waggy]

North Carolina

That's an interesting name to be dropped for the SEC.

A Big East school that could be in the mix would be Louisville.

[LA Muskie]

I have see a couple of articles that have X going into the new basketball Big East.
I have, too. But not universally which makes me nervous. I was glad to have Bobo around for the coaching search, but I'm much more glad that he's still around right now. College sports are about to have a cataclysmic shift and we can't be left holding the A-10 "bag." Thankfully with Bobo at the helm we can be confident that contingency plans are being put in place.

[cinskyline]

The big question, now, is whether Xavier will be part of it. And that's where I start to get really worried. Because most of the talking heads don't seem to have us in that league, although they don't explain why. That's a problem.

If Syracuse, Rutgers, and Pitt leave, can we assume that UC and the remaining football schools in the conference will go somewhere else? If UC stays, they WILL block X from becoming a Big East member.

[LA Muskie]

If Syracuse, Rutgers, and Pitt leave, can we assume that UC and the remaining football schools in the conference will go somewhere else? If UC stays, they WILL block X from becoming a Big East member.
I think that's the assumption, but who the hell knows. Also, I'm not sure how much say UC will have at that point...they'll all be fighting for their survival.

[SixFig]

I think that's the assumption, but who the hell knows. Also, I'm not sure how much say UC will have at that point...they'll all be fighting for their survival.

Plus why wouldn't UC want Xavier? Sure they'd lose 2 games a year, but they might actually sell out 5/3 Arena.

[GuyFawkes38]

I don't think UC would care if X entered the Big East (I've never understood it when posters here claimed UC would "block" it).

But the Big East would care. What purpose would it serve to have X in the Big East if you already have a much bigger school with a larger fan base in the same market.

Why not ask SLU to enter instead. It's a larger school in a large city without a Big East school. Even Butler seems like a more logical choice for the Big East than us.

I don't think we should take it personally if the Big East once again ignores us. It has nothing to do with the product on the court. It's all about TV ratings and markets (ha, or else why is the Big 10 on the brink of asking Rutgers to join their conference).

[danaandvictory]

I don't think UC would care if X entered the Big East (I've never understood it when posters here claimed UC would "block" it).

Because I'm pretty sure Q has mentioned that UC blocked consideration of Xavier for addition to the Great Midwest and Big East.

[GuyFawkes38]

Because I'm pretty sure Q has mentioned that UC blocked consideration of Xavier for addition to the Great Midwest and Big East.

I did not know that. Why would it hurt UC? And does the Big East really give veto power to its members?

I think it's understandable if the above conferences were more interested into expanding into new markets. That seems like the more central reason why a conference wouldn't be interested in having UC and XU in the same conference, even if UC didn't have blocking power.

[principal]

It now seems inevitable that the following three events will happen:

1. Big 10 will attempt to expand drastically and the invitees will not say no.
2. The SEC will follow suit.
3. The ACC will grab for the remaining desired BE football schools. Out of desperation the invitees will not say no.

This means that the "Basketball Only" schools will be left in the cold. Even if this does not happen this go 'round, it has to be all too clear it will happen eventually. Why don't the BO schools put their heads together and form a BO league? If you are eventually going to get screwed in a mixed football/basketball league, go out on your own terms, form your own league. A league made up of the BE bball schools, the best of the A10, and a couple of others could not be ignored by the likes of ESPN. It would garner substantially less money without the football component, but it will be a hello of a lot better than nothing.

[SixFig]

Why don't the BO schools put their heads together and form a BO league? .

BO League?

http://treatingbodyodor.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/persperation.jpg

[Masterofreality]

BO League?

http://treatingbodyodor.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/persperation.jpg

How could anyone not see that coming from 20 miles away?

Reps anyway.

[principal]

BO League?

http://treatingbodyodor.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/persperation.jpg

LOL. As in Basketball Only.

[xudash]

An interesting update:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/25/sports/ncaafootball/25bigeast.html

[DoubleD86]

Another update. The players seem to be becoming more clear.

http://www.annarbor.com/sports/um-football/report-nebraska-syracuse-pitt-rutgers-and-missouri-will-join-big-ten/

Edit: Article seems to make it sound like Missouri is almost a done deal.

[Xman95]

BO League?

http://treatingbodyodor.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/persperation.jpgHow could anyone not see that coming from 20 miles away?

Reps anyway.

They could smell it coming too!

[waggy]

Another update. The players seem to be becoming more clear.

http://www.annarbor.com/sports/um-football/report-nebraska-syracuse-pitt-rutgers-and-missouri-will-join-big-ten/

Edit: Article seems to make it sound like Missouri is almost a done deal.

That would leave the BE with just West Virginia, UConn, Cincy, Louisville & South Florida. If they tried to keep it together my guess is they would look to CUSA, and possibly Temple.

[GoMuskies]

I can't imagine Temple being an option. Been there, done that. ECU, Memphis and UCF would all be better options than Temple.

[waggy]

I can't imagine Temple being an option. Been there, done that. ECU, Memphis and UCF would all be better options than Temple.

Maybe they'll change the name to the Metro.

[SixFig]

Another update. The players seem to be becoming more clear.

http://www.annarbor.com/sports/um-football/report-nebraska-syracuse-pitt-rutgers-and-missouri-will-join-big-ten/

Edit: Article seems to make it sound like Missouri is almost a done deal.

Get ready people. Change is coming. And Xavier will be a factor in it. YES WE CAN.

In the words of Short Round "Hold on to your Potatoes!"

[STL_XUfan]

Another update. The players seem to be becoming more clear.

http://www.annarbor.com/sports/um-football/report-nebraska-syracuse-pitt-rutgers-and-missouri-will-join-big-ten/

Edit: Article seems to make it sound like Missouri is almost a done deal.


There has been a lot of buzz around Mizzou's campus in the past week that they are moving. Then again it is from students, so I assume it is just flamed by all the rumors that are on the internet.

[SixFig]

I don't know if this has been posted before but this CBS forum thread (http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/messages/chrono/20018783/0/1?tag=pageRow;pageContainer)from February suggests the Big 10 add Notre Dame just for Football and Xavier for basketball and the other sports.

It will never happen but it is worth reading. The posters on that forum (for the most part) had great respect for Xavier in terms of basketball and also academically as an insitution.

[X-band '01]

They saved the best for last in that thread - Kentucky as a Big 10 candidate?

[LA Muskie]

I don't know if this has been posted before but this CBS forum thread (http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/messages/chrono/20018783/0/1?tag=pageRow;pageContainer)from February suggests the Big 10 add Notre Dame just for Football and Xavier for basketball and the other sports.

It will never happen but it is worth reading. The posters on that forum (for the most part) had great respect for Xavier in terms of basketball and also academically as an insitution.
There is literally NO CHANCE IN HELL that Xavier becomes a Big 10 school for any number of reasons. Even if NDU would consider that (and it wouldn't...it wants to stay independent in football, but if that independence ceases you can be sure that they will end up in the Big 10 for everything), we don't remotely fit -- either institutionally or for the Big 10's stated reasons for expansion ($$$, largely defined by TV market and/or general marketability).

When this all goes down, we've probably got as little as 1 and at most 3 options, in various degrees of potential. In likelihood of order:

(i) Join the Catholic Basketball Conference (ie what's left of the Big East non-football schools).

(ii) Join the ACC, which would lose its major football-playing schools to the SEC and its minor football-playing schools to the remaining football-playing schools of the Big East.

(iii) Form our own basketball-centric with the cream of what remains of the A-10 and the top schools in the Horizon and MVC conferences (and perhaps C-USA).

While option #3 certainly is an extreme longshot, it wouldn't surprise me to see Bobinski orchestrate something like that.

No matter what, we will be in a conference dominated by basketball.

[SixFig]

(ii) Join the ACC, which would lose its major football-playing schools to the SEC and its minor football-playing schools to the remaining football-playing schools of the Big East.



The basketball fan in me would LOVE to see a conference in which Wake, Georgetown, Duke, Villanova, UNC, Marquette etc. battle every night.

[xubrew]

It has nothing to do with the product on the court. It's all about TV ratings and markets

it's also about fielding teams in all the other sports that the conference sanctions, which we don't. it's also about being a research university, which we aren't.

xavier was never actually a candidate for big east expansion the last time around. the only people who were saying that were media analysts who were basing it off nothing other than their own speculation. if you're looking at it from the sports media's point of view, xavier makes sense. if you're looking at it from a univesity president's point of view, they start to make less sense. for starters. we're not a research university. secondly, we don't field as many teams as the conference sanctions, and a lot of the ones that we do field don't offer the same amount of scholarships or have budgets that are at all comparable to the rest of the conference.

on top of that, i'm not at all convinced that the basketball only schools will look to add anybody. they already have eight. there really isn't any need to add any more. since there is no football, there is no need for two divisions to create a football conference championship. one division of eight is enough. i wouldn't be at all surprised if that's the way they end up going some day.


if i had to guess as to what i THINK will happen, i believe the big east will add three more teams and keep it's current format, but with a different line-up. like i said in a previous post, the big ten's expansion isn't about strengthening the league. it's about acquiring exclusive broadcast rights to more institutions, and getting the big ten network into markets that it is not currently in. none of the teams that are being poached from the big east have ever won the conference in football, and syracuse is actually downright terrible. there are teams out there that are actually better than the ones they're losing, or at the very least just as good. i believe east carolina outdraws all three of those teams, and generally fields a team that is as good or better.

in other words, this could end up impacting xavier, but not necessarily. in fact i'd say the prognosis is that it really won't.

[xudash]

brew, if the BE hoops schools break away or are made to break away, then I cannot imagine them not going after Xavier. That isn't even wishful thinking on my part. It just makes too much sense for them to right-size their league and for them to include Xavier - probably as the first team they would add.

[xubrew]

brew, if the BE hoops schools break away or are made to break away, then I cannot imagine them not going after Xavier. That isn't even wishful thinking on my part. It just makes too much sense for them to right-size their league and for them to include Xavier - probably as the first team they would add.

and what exactly is "right-sizing" their league?? considering that one of these schools has a football team that deems the right size of its conference to be one, what makes you think that the rest of them will think that anything higher than eight is the right size?? keep in mind that when it comes to revenue sharing, x/8 > x/9. what you bring better be substantially more than what they already have.

you can't even imagine it?? i'm not going to go so far to say that it's not possible, but at the very least i can IMAGINE an eight team league of the current big east non-football schools. eight teams can be the right size, especially if the ninth team doesn't field all the sports you do, and has far less resources for the rest the other sports that it does fund, and is of a different university classification.

it wasn't as if we were looked at and passed over the last time. it's that we were never even looked at at all by the university presidents and athletic departments. the media speculated that we were a candidate, but that's because they were only looking at men's basketball through the eyes of a men's basketball analyst. the brains of university presidents work a little differently than the brain of a men's basketball analyst. i'm not saying there is no chance, but i am saying it is very unlikely. i don't think anything you can say will change my opinion if for no other reason than you fall into the category of a "men's basketball analyst' and not a university president." however, you're free to try, especially since you probably feel the same way about me not being able to change your mind.

and ask yourself this question....if they feel we give them something that they don't already have, then why aren't at least a couple of those teams playing us now?? shouldn't they be playing us in at least a few sports, ESPECIALLY the revenue sports?? to my knowledge none of them really play us in anything, nor do they look to. if they don't feel they have anything to substantially gain by playing us, i don't think they'll feel that they have anything to gain by having us joing their league.

[DoubleD86]

None of the teams that are being poached from the big east have ever won the conference in football, and syracuse is actually downright terrible.

I may be incorrect, but isn't Pitt one of the best football schools in Big East? I would have to imagine with their history they haven't won the Big East once (don't know their history well so they may have not been in conference when it happened). However, I think you are downplaying Pitt's football ability a little too much in this post. While ECU has had a year or two better than Pitt, I think most years Pitt fields a superior team.

Edit: With a little research: Syracuse (Co-1991, co-1996, 1997, 1998, Co-2004), Pitt only co-won in 2004 but received the Bowl bid. However, Pitt did come in third last year and second the year before. And Pitt since 1997 or so has probably been better than ECU 90% of the time. For those that know, what conference was Pitt in in the Dorsett and Marino days?

[xubrew]

I may be incorrect, but isn't Pitt one of the best football schools in Big East? I would have to imagine with their history they haven't won the Big East once (don't know their history well so they may have not been in conference when it happened). However, I think you are downplaying Pitt's football ability a little too much in this post. While ECU has had a year or two better than Pitt, I think most years Pitt fields a superior team.

Edit: With a little research: Syracuse (Co-1991, co-1996, 1997, 1998, Co-2004), Pitt only co-won in 2004 but received the Bowl bid. However, Pitt did come in third last year and second the year before. And Pitt since 1997 or so has probably been better than ECU 90% of the time. For those that know, what conference was Pitt in in the Dorsett and Marino days?

i'll concede your point, and i'll rephrase...

none of the big east teams being poached have won a big east title IN ITS CURRENT FORMAT.

maybe i am downplaying pitt's football ability, i don't think i'm downplaying the point i was trying to make. collectively speaking, the three teams being poached are replaceable. the overall strength of big east football won't substantially decline. hell, it may even increase. when asking yourself what the current strength and realistic potential is, (pitt+rutgers+syracuse) is about the same as (ecu+ucf+memphis/temple). even if it's less, it still isn't THAT much less. it still doesn't collectively set them behind the other football conferences.


so, to be more precise on how i view this...

-do i think that these realignments will make the big east weaker than it is now?? yes. without a doubt.

-do i think it will break the big east to the point of not being the equivalent of a major conference?? no. well, at least not if they don't let it.

-do i HOPE xavier is in their plans?? yes, of course.

-do i THINK xavier is in their plans?? no, i don't. at no point do i think we will be.

i hope xudash is right. because of that it's hard to argue with him. i just don't think that he is. if anything, it's an argument i want to lose. having said that, though, if we can't join them then i want to beat them and i think we can. on top of that, if we do join them i want to beat them and i think we can. either way i want to beat them and i think we can. that's all that really matters.

beer me...

[GoMuskies]

There is an approximately 0% chance of the Big East staying together in its current format if Pitt, Syracuse and Rutgers get poached. The Division I-A football playing schools will have their own conference (with the additions 'brew is talking about), and the non-Division I-A football playing schools will have their own league. Georgetown, Seton Hall, Providence, St. John's, etc. never in a million years wanted to get tied up with Louisville, Cincinnati, and South Florida, and they'll be even less interested in having anything to do with Memphis, Central Florida and East Carolina. Those are all football moves and do nothing for the non-Division I-A football schools. So if you're arguing that the Big East will actually stick together as a whole, I can't imagine that you're right, brew.

I would be very, very surprised if when that break happens Xavier is not in the plans of the non I-A football schools.

[waggy]

The A10 is probably better than a BE without Syracuse and Pitt.

[xubrew]

There is an approximately 0% chance of the Big East staying together in its current format if Pitt, Syracuse and Rutgers get poached. The Division I-A football playing schools will have their own conference (with the additions 'brew is talking about), and the non-Division I-A football playing schools will have their own league. Georgetown, Seton Hall, Providence, St. John's, etc. never in a million years wanted to get tied up with Louisville, Cincinnati, and South Florida, and they'll be even less interested in having anything to do with Memphis, Central Florida and East Carolina. Those are all football moves and do nothing for the non-Division I-A football schools. So if you're arguing that the Big East will actually stick together as a whole, I can't imagine that you're right, brew.

I would be very, very surprised if when that break happens Xavier is not in the plans of the non I-A football schools.

even if the big east splits up, i don't see why the non-football schools would look to add anybody else. no one has stated why they they think the non-football schools would look to expand beyond the eight that they already have. if they look to expand, then xavier probably would be in the discussion, but what makes you so sure that they'll even look to expand?? a conference only needs six teams to be an automatic qualifier, and they already have two more than that.

[GoMuskies]

I doubt ND ends up with that group. And they're not going to stay with seven members.

[STL_XUfan]

even if the big east splits up, i don't see why the non-football schools would look to add anybody else. no one has stated why they they think the non-football schools would look to expand beyond the eight that they already have. if they look to expand, then xavier probably would be in the discussion, but what makes you so sure that they'll even look to expand?? a conference only needs six teams to be an automatic qualifier, and they already have two more than that.

ESPN contract would be pretty weak with only 8 teams, max 8 games per week. If this shake up will prove 1 thing it is TV money is the only factor that matters.

[xubrew]

I doubt ND ends up with that group. And they're not going to stay with seven members.

i seriously doubt notre dame ends up anyplace else. they've given every indication that they intend to remain affiliated with those schools. if notre dame leaves i agree they probably wouldn't stay with seven, but i believe notre dame will remain affiliated.

i just realized that the big east football schools would not be automatic qualifiers if they go their own way. that doesn't mean they won't do it, but it does mean that it is likely they'll try and persuade the non-football schools to stay.

[MADXSTER]

The A10 is probably better than a BE without Syracuse and Pitt.

minus Fordham

[LA Muskie]

i just realized that the big east football schools would not be automatic qualifiers if they go their own way. that doesn't mean they won't do it, but it does mean that it is likely they'll try and persuade the non-football schools to stay.
It's pretty much assumed that if the Big 10 expansion forces the Big East to split into 2 (football and non-football), the NCAA will grant a waiver to allow both "halves" to get automatic qualifications in NCAA championships immediately so long as they have the minimum number of schools in each conference.

[LA Muskie]

The basketball fan in me would LOVE to see a conference in which Wake, Georgetown, Duke, Villanova, UNC, Marquette etc. battle every night.
I agree. That would be AWESOME.

[LA Muskie]

i seriously doubt notre dame ends up anyplace else. they've given every indication that they intend to remain affiliated with those schools. if notre dame leaves i agree they probably wouldn't stay with seven, but i believe notre dame will remain affiliated.

i just realized that the big east football schools would not be automatic qualifiers if they go their own way. that doesn't mean they won't do it, but it does mean that it is likely they'll try and persuade the non-football schools to stay.
I think NDU is serious about staying independent in football, which I think means it will stick with the Catholic basketball schools.

But I think they're making a mistake in doing so. Unless they make a*major and sustained resurgence in the next 5 years, there's no way NBC is re-upping that contract, and nobody else is dumb enough to do what NBC did. ND seems to fit the Big 10 model. They should take their opportunity while it's there for them.

[xudash]

I think NDU is serious about staying independent in football, which I think means it will stick with the Catholic basketball schools.

But I think they're making a mistake in doing so. Unless they make a*major and sustained resurgence in the next 5 years, there's no way NBC is re-upping that contract, and nobody else is dumb enough to do what NBC did. ND seems to fit the Big 10 model. They should take their opportunity while it's there for them.

But they won't take that opportunity, as you initially pointed out.

As far as the remaining 7+ND remaining at 8, I would concede that possibility were all 8 sufficiently strong out of the gate. The problem is that they aren't perceived to be that way; nobody looks at a Providence, St. Johns, DePaul or Seton Hall as real drivers in the sport right now. I understand that less can be more. All we need do is consider the A10 being stuck with LaSalle and Fordham to get there. But this is one case where adding a Xavier and Dayton or SLU would be additive.

[xubrew]

It's pretty much assumed that if the Big 10 expansion forces the Big East to split into 2 (football and non-football), the NCAA will grant a waiver to allow both "halves" to get automatic qualifications in NCAA championships immediately so long as they have the minimum number of schools in each conference.

that is a big assumption. i'm not saying you're wrong. i'm just curious as to where you heard that. a conference needs six full members that have been together for four years. c-usa and the mountain west received no souch waiver, although the leagues were strong enough that no one noticed. this new league would be as well in most (if not all) sports. but for the first four years they would be without one. that's why they agreed to stay together until at least 2010 the last time.

a waiver of that nature is unprecedented. i personally am not assuming that at all. that's why they wanted the basketball schools to remain in the league the last time around. had a waiver been presumed, they probably wouldn't have so enclined to keep them.

[LA Muskie]

that is a big assumption. i'm not saying you're wrong. i'm just curious as to where you heard that. a conference needs six full members that have been together for four years. c-usa and the mountain west received no souch waiver, although the leagues were strong enough that no one noticed. this new league would be as well in most (if not all) sports. but for the first four years they would be without one. that's why they agreed to stay together until at least 2010 the last time.

a waiver of that nature is unprecedented. i personally am not assuming that at all. that's why they wanted the basketball schools to remain in the league the last time around. had a waiver been presumed, they probably wouldn't have so enclined to keep them.
I agree it's a big presumption, but I've read it several times and it seems quite plausible to me. The C-USA and Mountain West weren't BCS conferences. The Big East is, and its brethren will feel bad about what happens.

[waggy]

The BE situation is interesting. The football schools may not go anywhere. There really doesn't appear anywhere for them to go. At least not that's any more appealing than the status quo. Costs a school $5M to leave? To go to CUSA? Doubt it.

[xubrew]

I agree it's a big presumption, but I've read it several times and it seems quite plausible to me. The C-USA and Mountain West weren't BCS conferences. The Big East is, and its brethren will feel bad about what happens.

it is a bcs conference, but they weren't gonig to give them a waiver five years ago. just sayin'.

the basketball schools are fine. it's the football schools that wouldn't be automatic qualifiers to ncaa championship events. however, it's also worth noting that bowl games are not championship events. they could keep their bcs status and automatic bcs bid. maybe that's what you're thinking of. it's the ncaa championships they wouldn't be AQs for. even that is somewhat moot since the conference champion probably wouldn't need an automatic bid anyway.

[xudash]

The BE situation is interesting. The football schools may not go anywhere. There really doesn't appear anywhere for them to go. At least not that's any more appealing than the status quo. Costs a school $5M to leave? To go to CUSA? Doubt it.

I think this whole thing is about landing on the right football boat. Landing on the right football boat is about landing on the right evolving super conference. The ability to do that REQUIRES any serious program to get to an all-sports conference format.

The BE as it exists today cannot possibly stay together. Again, all this is about money as driven by football. I can't see schools like WVU just sitting around for the next train.

I understand your point Waggy. It's almost a situation where they could make it worse. Then again, if they don't do anything, it is a ticking time bomb anyway - they know they need to solve for football. The presumption here is that a 6th BCS conference could still be perceived to be capable of being put together.

If ND stays independent (likely) and if the Big10 goes west and east, with east equating to Pitt, Rutgers, and Syracuse, then that alone will blow up the affiliation between the football and basketball schools - in my opinion - with WVU and Louisville contacting the SEC or ACC and, failing interest there, those schools clamoring to take the remaining football schools to combine them with the best of the rest (e.g. TCU, Houston, etc.).

The old movie line 'you have a dizzying intellect' just came to mind.

[SixFig]

The old movie line 'you have a dizzying intellect' just came to mind.

You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in a land war in Asia" - but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line"! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha...

*dead*

http://fiercepika.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/vizzini.jpg

Great movie

[xudash]

http://www.ctpost.com/sports/article/Big-Ten-expansion-talk-has-Big-East-other-470801.php#page-1

So take it in the other direction: the BE gets pro-active (I don't see how they could do anything fast enough to have an answer against $21 million a year or whatever the Big10 payout is, but say they do).

So they add football schools and keep the hoops schools, going to 20 or plus-20 in membership? I doubt that.

[LA Muskie]

it is a bcs conference, but they weren't gonig to give them a waiver five years ago. just sayin'.

the basketball schools are fine. it's the football schools that wouldn't be automatic qualifiers to ncaa championship events. however, it's also worth noting that bowl games are not championship events. they could keep their bcs status and automatic bcs bid. maybe that's what you're thinking of. it's the ncaa championships they wouldn't be AQs for. even that is somewhat moot since the conference champion probably wouldn't need an automatic bid anyway.
Nope. I was talking about the NCAA Championships. I didn't believe it when I heard it earlier, either, but the more I think about it I just don't see the NCAA forcing them to commit a hostile "take over" of an automatic bid-holding conference.

That, of course, assumes that the remainder don't just split up, which I think is far more likely when UConn bolts to the ACC.

[LA Muskie]

http://www.ctpost.com/sports/article/Big-Ten-expansion-talk-has-Big-East-other-470801.php#page-1

So take it in the other direction: the BE gets pro-active (I don't see how they could do anything fast enough to have an answer against $21 million a year or whatever the Big10 payout is, but say they do).

So they add football schools and keep the hoops schools, going to 20 or plus-20 in membership? I doubt that.
I'd love to see the Big East be proactive about all of this, but other than hiring Tagliabue I haven't heard anything more than remote rumor (and hardly even any of that). I complained before that they seemed to be playing this in a very reactionary mode.

[xudash]

You fell victim to one of the classic blunders - The most famous of which is "never get involved in a land war in Asia" - but only slightly less well-known is this: "Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line"! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha...

*dead*

http://fiercepika.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/vizzini.jpg

Great movie

Miracle Max (Billy Crystal) - "He's only MOSTLY dead."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GrYNaaYSjs

[waggy]

Link to a blogger in the SF bay area with a short mention of the Pac-10 annual meeting. Nothing earth shattering, but a couple tid-bits, and it looks like some other content worth perusing. Glow would probably like, if he doesn't already have it.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2010/05/04/pac-10-football-basketball-tv-deals-and-expansion-will-the-phoenix-meetings-produce-news/

[waggy]

Missouri governor talks up Big Ten (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5184715)

[xudash]

http://bucknuts.com/index.php/component/option,com_idoblog/Itemid,1347/id,10084/task,viewpost/

[Mark 3 Pointer]

Don't know if this has been posted... but it looks like Xavier is part of the non-football playing big east contingency plan if the Big10 does expand. X, Dayton, St.Joes and Duquense would join the non-football schools according to this. The part relating to X is the last paragraph of the first page and the first couple of the second page.

Now we just need the BIG10 to go ahead with it's money grab so X can take over the world!

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/college/football/schools_ready_to_scramble_after_z2H0Wo3Qh8zTA0eEjW nSzO

[xu95]

I don't see any scenario where the Big East basketball schools want to add St. Joes or Duquesne (maybe Duquesne for the Pittsburgh market). St. Joes is shit and they already have Philly with Villanova.

xu95

[XUOWNSUC]

Now we just need the BIG10 to go ahead with it's money grab so X can take over the world!

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/college/football/schools_ready_to_scramble_after_z2H0Wo3Qh8zTA0eEjW nSzO

X taking over the world! Nice!

[waggy]

Big 12 commissioners quote prior to conference meetings..




“The importance of these meetings can’t be overstated,” Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe said. “This is a critical point in the time of the Big 12 and there needs to be some honest discussion about what must happen to solidify the members’ standing in the conference.”



http://www.kansascity.com/2010/05/31/1983982/big-12-meetings-in-kc-will-focus.html

[waggy]

E-mails hint eyes are upon Texas

OSU's Gee says UT president 'would welcome a call'

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/sports/stories/2010/06/04/e-mails-hint-eyes-are-upon-texas.html?sid=101

[SM#24]

A couple of other Big 12-Pac 10-Big 10 articles.

http://bleacherreport.com/tb/b4pXY

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5251329

[waggy]

Unless they have no other option, I can't see Texas joining the Pac 10. They're better off aligned with a more easterly time zone.

The B10 though, by dropping this bomb and then just letting it sit there, has really got some people scrambling. I love all the speculation. Wild.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

Don't know if this has been posted... but it looks like Xavier is part of the non-football playing big east contingency plan if the Big10 does expand. X, Dayton, St.Joes and Duquense would join the non-football schools according to this. The part relating to X is the last paragraph of the first page and the first couple of the second page.

Now we just need the BIG10 to go ahead with it's money grab so X can take over the world!

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/college/football/schools_ready_to_scramble_after_z2H0Wo3Qh8zTA0eEjW nSzO

Interesting...

http://i27.tinypic.com/2uge0pv.jpg

[GuyFawkes38]

Lots of rumors going around that the pac 10 will try to add 6 teams from the Big 12 (I believe Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., Colorado). The Big 10 started the expansion talk, but they seem to be moving the slowest.

Texas appears to be the big prize (even more so than ND for various reasons). Yet, I've heard Texas wants to keep the Big 12 intact so they can create an independent TV network. Maybe the Pac 10 or the Big 10 will try to force a move by attracting other Big 12 members.

It's a mess. I'm sure each conference has Ivy League economic advisers who know game theory on their payrolls.

[waggy]

Nebraska, Missouri given Big 12 deadline...

Nebraska and Missouri have been given an ultimatum by the Big 12 and told they have until this Friday to decide if they want to remain in the conference or entertain the possibility of joining the Big Ten, two highly placed officials of two Big 12 schools have told the Statesman.

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/bohls/index.html

[waggy]

Pac-10 commissioner gets approval to pursue expansion; spotlight on 6 teams from the Big 12

Dallas Morning News Blog.

http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/06/pac-10-commissioner-gets-approval-to-exp.html

[waggy]

Supposedly Delaney was quoted by the Chicago Tribune that the Big 10 might have to speed things up now given what is going on with the Big 12 and Pac 10, but I looked at the Tribune website and couldn't find anything.

[waggy]

Big Ten meets, will likely speed up timetable

Big Ten officials all but acknowledged Sunday that they intend to follow a turbo-charged timetable for expansion.

With possible expansion candidates Nebraska and Missouri facing an ultimatum from the Big 12, the Big Ten clearly is ready to stop dawdling and get down to business.

A longer way of saying that came from Michigan State President Lou Anna K. Simon: "Our announcement in December has caused institutions and conferences to consider their futures, and that has had an impact on our deliberations."

http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/06/big-ten-meets-will-likely-speed-up-timetable.html

[waggy]

Detroit Free Press report on Big 10 meeting has a little more/better info...

http://www.freep.com/article/20100606/SPORTS08/100606019/Big-Ten-officials-discuss-expansion-at-meetings

[waggy]

The Notre Dame AD attended todays meeting of Big 10 presidents.

[waggy]

Apologies for post after post, but this stuff is irresistable.

Nebraska decision a key as expansion big dog Texas mulls options

Texas has indicated that if Nebraska doesn't declare its allegiance to the league by mid-month, it would take a reported offer to join the Pac-10. Nebraska was issued an ultimatum by the Big 12 during the league's spring meetings last week in Kansas City. It has, at most, less than two weeks to declare its allegiance to the Big 12 or the league could split apart, leading to conference realignment before the Big Ten even acts.

What is being underplayed nationally is that Texas feels it can move forward in an 11- or 12-team Big 12 that includes Nebraska. However, without the Huskers, Texas would have to look West to the Pac-10.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/13488650/nebraska-decision-a-key-as-expansion-big-dog-texas-mulls-options

[cinskyline]

Looks like things are going to happen very, very soon. I wonder what Nebraska will do.

[waggy]

I've also read on an ACC team blog, that the B10 would probably stop at just one program, if that program were Notre Dame.

[GuyFawkes38]

Nebraska, Missouri given Big 12 deadline...

Nebraska and Missouri have been given an ultimatum by the Big 12 and told they have until this Friday to decide if they want to remain in the conference or entertain the possibility of joining the Big Ten, two highly placed officials of two Big 12 schools have told the Statesman.

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/bohls/index.html

I don't understand this. I don't think the Big 10 wants Nebraska. And the Big 10 apparently doesn't want to make a decision about Missouri anytime soon. Can the Big 12 really just impose a deadline like that. What would happen if Nebraska and Missouri don't make a decision by then.

I doubt the schools of Texas really want to join the PAC 10 due to market concerns. The much larger population centers of the midwest and east coast tend to ignore west coast athletics. I think they currently like their position between the east and west.

[waggy]

I think the B12 schools realize that Missouri is gone if offered by the B10, but feel they can add another institution, or just stay at 11 and be just fine. For some reason though they feel that losing Nebraska is a bigger deal. Ironically, I'm not sure that the B10 really wants Nebraska. Nebraska would be crazy not to go to the B10 if offered.

[GuyFawkes38]

I think the B12 schools realize that Missouri is gone if offered by the B10, but feel they can add another institution, or just stay at 11 and be just fine. For some reason though they feel that losing Nebraska is a bigger deal. Ironically, I'm not sure that the B10 really wants Nebraska. Nebraska would be crazy not to go to the B10 if offered.

yeah, I also sense the Big10 doesn't want Nebraska. The market size isn't big. The strength of the football program has come into question in the past 10 years. And a Big10 official said that ideally they would like a more southern school (although I'm sure they'd take ND).

[waggy]

I read in a recent story that the Nebraska-Missouri relationship goes back to forever.

[GuyFawkes38]

Well, if the Big 10 only takes either Nebraska or Missouri, it'll definitly hurt the other school. The north Big 12 region is already really weak (and it looks like Colorado wants to be in the Pac10). maybe Nebraska and Missouri will decided to stick together. The former Big 8 schools are in a bind.

[waggy]

Given the Missouri-Nebraska history, it probably means there is an offer on the table (off the official record of course) for Nebraska as well. And Nebraska is undecided.

[waggy]

I'm a sucker for a good conspiracy theory.

Big 12 blew it by eschewing playoff

By Dan Wetzel @ Yahoo!Sports

Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe all but killed his own conference on April 30, 2008.

That’s when he decided to team up with the Big Ten and Pac-10 to reject a four-team playoff being pushed by the SEC and ACC. If the Big 12 (and/or the Big East) had supported it, the so-called “Plus One” model likely would’ve happened.

Even that modest playoff would have meant hundreds of millions of additional revenue for college athletics. It would have then allowed for easy expansion for an even more lucrative 16-team postseason. That would have solved all the monetary concerns that have left the Big 12 on the verge of collapse at the hands of its one-time allies, the Big Ten and Pac-10.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-expansion060610

[GuyFawkes38]

I'm a sucker for a good conspiracy theory.

Big 12 blew it by eschewing playoff

By Dan Wetzel @ Yahoo!Sports

Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe all but killed his own conference on April 30, 2008.

That’s when he decided to team up with the Big Ten and Pac-10 to reject a four-team playoff being pushed by the SEC and ACC. If the Big 12 (and/or the Big East) had supported it, the so-called “Plus One” model likely would’ve happened.

Even that modest playoff would have meant hundreds of millions of additional revenue for college athletics. It would have then allowed for easy expansion for an even more lucrative 16-team postseason. That would have solved all the monetary concerns that have left the Big 12 on the verge of collapse at the hands of its one-time allies, the Big Ten and Pac-10.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-expansion060610

Lots of assumptions made, but it's an interesting perspective.

All of this expansion talk is making my head spin. I really doubt it's a good thing for college athletics, even from a financial perspective. I remember in finance at X my professor talked about how corporate mergers typically never work out. Corporate management teams dream that some sort of magical synergy will develop. In practice, they never work out.

[waggy]

I think the Pac 10, Big 12 South talk is a big smokescreen. Once (if) Nebraska commits to the Big 10, then the Pac 10 will be in the catbird seat to invite who they really want out of the Big 12. I doubt they really want 3 (or 4) teams from Texas.

[jdm2000]

I find it interesting that Texas apparently wants no part of the SEC. But after reading an article in the Kansas City paper this weekend, I can see why. Apparently part of the Nebraska-Texas bad blood goes back to the formation of the Big XII, when Texas won out on the location of the league office (in Dallas) and the limitation of accepting partial qualifiers (Texas wanted to limit it, Nebraska did not). http://www.kansascity.com/2010/06/05/1995770_big-12-problems-trace-to-leagues.html?storylink=omni_popular

If that's the case I can see Texas not being a fan of some of the SEC approach, which is by most accounts more lax on the academic side.

[jdm2000]

By the way, the KC paper has pretty solid reporting from the Big XII perspective.

[SixFig]

If Texas, Nebraska, Texas Tech etc. leave Kansas in the dust let's invite them to the A-10...just for kicks.

[jdm2000]

Nothing illustrates better how college football is driving the bus than how Kansas is apparently going to be left out in the cold--they are not even showing up in any discussions, despite having a top 5 basketball program. I wonder if they and K-State would suddenly become candidates for Big East replacement--how far is Lawrence from Louisville, Marquette and DePaul, after all?

[STL_XUfan]

Kansas is going to get screwed hardcore, and I couldn't be happier about it.

MIZ - ZOU


In all seriousness I wouldn't be surprised to see the mountain west make a move to be the the 5th 16 team conference by picking up teams left behind by the big xii and other major non-bcs schools.

[LA Muskie]

I doubt they really want 3 (or 4) teams from Texas.
They don't. But by all accounts they are a package deal.

[Masterofreality]

Nothing illustrates better how college football is driving the bus than how Kansas is apparently going to be left out in the cold--they are not even showing up in any discussions, despite having a top 5 basketball program. I wonder if they and K-State would suddenly become candidates for Big East replacement--how far is Lawrence from Louisville, Marquette and DePaul, after all?

Mountain West would make a lot more sense.

[jdm2000]

Mountain West would make a lot more sense.

Certainly for football, but I think that the basketball in the MWC would not be up to the level they want (not that it is not good, just that they would prefer to be in a conference with Syracuse and Louisville for basketball).

[GoMuskies]

Certainly for football, but I think that the basketball in the MWC would not be up to the level they want (not that it is not good, just that they would prefer to be in a conference with Syracuse and Louisville for basketball).

Not that important IMO. Kansas doesn't need a strong basketball conference for their basketball program. They can be Louisville from the '80s in the Metro Conference or UNLV from the late '80s/early '90s in the Big West. They'd have no problem scheduling big-time OOC games every weekend in January and February. They wouldn't have to miss a beat.

[waggy]

The Big 10 has said that there was a small chance that maybe no expansion would happen, but given how far this has gone I think they have to add at least one school now. It's also been reported that B12 money distribution is not equal, but is distributed equally in the B10. So my question is if you were the B10 presidents would you agree to an inequal distribution to gain Notre Dame, or if ND demanded more, would you move on to Nebraska, Mizzou, etc.?

[SixFig]

Not that important IMO. Kansas doesn't need a strong basketball conference for their basketball program. They can be Louisville from the '80s in the Metro Conference or UNLV from the late '80s/early '90s in the Big West. They'd have no problem scheduling big-time OOC games every weekend in January and February. They wouldn't have to miss a beat.

They could be Xavier in the '10s.

[waggy]

After a weekend of denials and hushed discussions, the Big Ten will expand to 12 teams as early as Friday. Reports are emerging (javascript:void(window.open('http://omaha.com/article/20100608/NEWS01/100609687#nu-to-big-10-as-early-as-friday'));) that the Nebraska Cornhuskers will become the 12th team in the league.

The Big Ten has officially offered an invitation to Nebraska.

http://www.foxsportsohio.com/06/09/10/Reports-Nebraska-to-Join-Big-Ten/landing.html?blockID=250141&feedID=3724

[SixFig]

After a weekend of denials and hushed discussions, the Big Ten will expand to 12 teams as early as Friday. Reports are emerging (javascript:void(window.open('http://omaha.com/article/20100608/NEWS01/100609687#nu-to-big-10-as-early-as-friday'));) that the Nebraska Cornhuskers will become the 12th team in the league.

The Big Ten has officially offered an invitation to Nebraska.

http://www.foxsportsohio.com/06/09/10/Reports-Nebraska-to-Join-Big-Ten/landing.html?blockID=250141&feedID=3724

So it begins...

Worst case for Xavier there are four 16 team super conferences that consolidate power and bend the NCAA to their iron will.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

Its getting crazy. Nebraska is going to big 10. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5268408

Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma state, Colorado, and Texas Tech are looking at the pac 10. SEC still trying to make a bid for them. They are saying the big 12 is pretty much done

Baylor and the rest are pretty much screwed

Will Missouri go to the big 10 as well? Stay tuned!

[waggy]

Googling this story, and reading some of the headlines makes laugh out loud. What a week. Mizzooou could really take it in the ass here.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

Googling this story, and reading some of the headlines makes laugh out loud. What a week. Mizzooou could really take it in the ass here.

hahaha, the big 10 "is giving them the cold shoulder". That's what the report says

[GuyFawkes38]

Via the Petros and Money show, a reporter in Indianapolis who is close to the NCAA is reporting that Notre Dame, Nebraska, Rutgers, Syracuse and Maryland will join the Big 10.

Edit: The reporter is from WFNI.

[waggy]

Via the Petros and Money show, a reporter in Indianapolis who is close to the NCAA is reporting that Notre Dame, Nebraska, Rutgers, Syracuse and Maryland will join the Big 10.

Edit: The reporter is from WFNI.

Wow. Makes alot of sense though, as you know the B10 wants to really get a better foothold in the east and that would certainly do it.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

The rumor mill is full tilt!!!

[waggy]

Edit: The reporter is from WFNI.

So I go there and can't find anything so try a link at the bottom of the page titled Big Ten Expansion, and turns out Muskie's (of LHS fame) imaginary friend Svoboda is the thread starter. Small world.

http://1070thefan.boardhost.com/viewtopic.php?id=201&action=new

[waggy]

Gotta say I'm enjoying listening to these big bad BCS programs cry. First it was Baylor, and then Kansas & KSU, and now a Louisville media hack is crying.

[waggy]

For those of you that might not have seen it, this report by Pat Forde is worth a read.

"I always thought this would play out over this summer," Swarbrick said. "This [recent reports of a Big 12 ultimatum to Big Ten flirters Nebraska and Missouri] reaffirms it more than changes it. It probably assures it."

Swarbrick focused on ND's interests (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=5267138)

[GuyFawkes38]

I think the A10 should extend an invitation to Kansas to join the conference.

In all seriousness, I'm not a fan of any of this. The financial pie doesn't get bigger from such conference changes. This is just a brutal, zero sum fight. It's an ugly Machiavellian battle which will alter longtime rivalries.

Additionally, this all reduces the uniqueness of having an ND education or a Big10 education. Conferences will no longer have like minded institutions.

[STL_XUfan]

Mizzou is playing their hand very close to the chest. The curators are meeting for the next 2 days, so hopefully that will shed some light on what is going on.

I would think that the Big 10 would want Mizzou in order to maximize the network (Mizzou brings along St. Louis and Kansas City) however, if they really do have ND on the hook then they don't care about needing schools for certain TV markets since ND will get their foot in the door of most markets throughout the east and midwest.

[waggy]

Pac-10 expansion: On Thursday, it becomes the Pac-11

100%. Done. Deal. (http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2010/06/09/pac-10-expansion-on-thursday-it-becomes-the-pac-11/)

[Juice]

Mizzou is playing their hand very close to the chest. The curators are meeting for the next 2 days, so hopefully that will shed some light on what is going on.

I would think that the Big 10 would want Mizzou in order to maximize the network (Mizzou brings along St. Louis and Kansas City) however, if they really do have ND on the hook then they don't care about needing schools for certain TV markets since ND will get their foot in the door of most markets throughout the east and midwest.

Would the Big Ten be willing to go to 13 teams compared to 12 or 14? Obviously they had 11 before all of this so an odd number shouldn't scare them but it just seems weird taking only Nebraska and Mizzou.

[danaandvictory]

This is a goofy thought, but what if ND gets into a situation where they have ultimatums from both the Big Ten and the Big East to join in football or pound sand...if they wanted to stay independent in football wouldn't the only logical place for their other sports be the A-10?

[waggy]

The B10 has alot of leverage being able to dangle Missouri. There are only 4 spots left, and just 3 if they take Missouri.

[DC Muskie]

I think this is hilarious.

College sports are such a farce. It's beyond laughable.

So here are my predictions:

Colorado to the Pac 10

Nebraska to the Big Ten

Utah to the Pac 10

TCU to the Big 12

Boise State to the MWC

Call it a day.

[waggy]

Can the B10 get Maryland DC?

[waggy]

It's official: Pac-10 announces addition of Colorado (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/campusrivalry/post/2010/06/report-colorado-to-announce-move-to-pac-10-on-friday/1)

[X-band '01]

I think this is hilarious.

College sports are such a farce. It's beyond laughable.

So here are my predictions:

Colorado to the Pac 10

Nebraska to the Big Ten

Utah to the Pac 10

TCU to the Big 12

Boise State to the MWC

Call it a day.
With Colorado now officially in the Pac-10, you have to wonder if the Big 12 can convince programs like TCU, Utah, and BYU to consider joining their conference to keep their affiliation intact. If the Texas schools somehow decide to remain in that conference, I could see the Pac-10 also looking to invite either one of the 3 aforementioned schools to make their conference an even 12.

But in fairness, the most nervous programs right now have to be Baylor, K-State, Kansas, Iowa State, and Missouri now.

[XUglow]

I think it is amazing that the school with the second most basketball wins ever is wanted by... no one.

[GoMuskies]

I think it is amazing that the school with the second most basketball wins ever is wanted by... no one.

We would gladly take them in the A-10. St. Louis would have a regional rival finally. We could probably even find room for their purple friends.

[DC Muskie]

Can the B10 get Maryland DC?

I have no idea. Terp fans seem to want it to happen.

the funny thing is if the Bg Ten got UVA and Maryland, those wanna be southern idiots will be pissed that Va Tech would end up in the SEC hanging out with Vandy and Ole Miss.

[drudy23]

I don't get it...how does the movement of ONE SINGLE SCHOOL, Nebraska, implode the conference? They're a decent program, but we're not talking USC/OSU/Texas here?

What's so important about NEB that it causes an entire conference to fall?

[GoMuskies]

What's so important about NEB that it causes an entire conference to fall?

I think that picture of ND stadium bathed in red is symbolic of the answer. Nebraska people are crazy about football, and people all around the country watch them. From a television perspective, Nebraska is a very, very valuable commodity.

Granted, I would have expected a conference that still includes Texas and Oklahoma to be able to hold it together.

[drudy23]

It just doesn't make any sense...poof...just like that, the Big 12 is no more.

With schools like Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas...schools at the top of the collegiate ranks in football and hoops. I don't get it.

Sucks to be Kansas. Where does Kansas now go where they don't completely dominate in basketball? If they're not going to the PAC-10, they're going to be like Memphis in CUSA in any of the Western conferences.

Just throw them in the Big East and be done with it....even though it makes no sense. Nothing else seems to make sense.

[GuyFawkes38]

It just doesn't make any sense...poof...just like that, the Big 12 is no more.

With schools like Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas...schools at the top of the collegiate ranks in football and hoops. I don't get it.

Sucks to be Kansas. Where does Kansas now go where they don't completely dominate in basketball? If they're not going to the PAC-10, they're going to be like Memphis in CUSA in any of the Western conferences.

Just throw them in the Big East and be done with it....even though it makes no sense. Nothing else seems to make sense.

completely agree. The Big12 is (was I guess now) a better conference than the Pac10.

It's strange. I think academics/prestige play a big role in all of this. Even though they are athletically inferior, universities would love the chance to be associated with such top academic schools as Stanford, Cal, UCLA, USC.

[XUglow]

If the Pac 10 doesn't get the Texas schools, they will ask Utah to the prom.

http://www.oddpic.com/data/520/fat-prom-date.jpg

[Mark 3 Pointer]

It just doesn't make any sense...poof...just like that, the Big 12 is no more.

With schools like Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas...schools at the top of the collegiate ranks in football and hoops. I don't get it.

Sucks to be Kansas. Where does Kansas now go where they don't completely dominate in basketball? If they're not going to the PAC-10, they're going to be like Memphis in CUSA in any of the Western conferences.

Just throw them in the Big East and be done with it....even though it makes no sense. Nothing else seems to make sense.

When you think of it in terms of Ole' Dirty Bastard it makes complete sense... C.R.E.A.M.

[GuyFawkes38]

It's tough to know exactly what's going on. There's a rumor from a Kansas City radio station that Texas and Texas a&m will join the Big10. Take that with a grain of salt. The rumor from the Indianapolis radio station yesterday appears to be false.

Another odd rumor is floating around. USC and Texas are actually considering joining the NFL (no doubt USC's post season ban might have spurred them to do so).

[waggy]

Terp fans seem to want it to happen.

That's great news for the B10. When you look at the markets, the academia, the politics, etc. I think the Maryland program is a plum 2nd only to Notre Dame.

[X-band '01]

If that comes to fruition, I wonder what kind of reception Gary Williams would get bringing his Maryland team to Ohio State. Not that there was any discontent from Buckeye fans when he left, but it would be interesting to see how Buckeye fans view Williams about 2 decades later.

[GuyFawkes38]

A sign of the times: the best reporting with the best sources on this entire matter comes from ESPN, Rivals, Yahoo/scout, random TV/radio stations.....not newspapers (although, of course, part of the problem/beauty for newspapers is that they have more rigorous reporting standards).

[waggy]

Some of the newspaper blogs are good. Bleacher Report is a joke.

[waggy]

Texas to the B10 rumors persist, and they will continue until Texas finds a home. One route the B10 could take is Missouri, Kansas, Okie (or Okie St), and Texas.

[waggy]

One rumor is BE is pushing Notre Dame away to avoid a B10 raid.

Another rumor is B10 has offered special scheduling arrangements to both Texas and ND.

Mongering is fun.

[waggy]

Looks like this blog post was put together back in April, but definitely a great read. They called Nebraska back then.

The Value of Expansion Candidates to the Big 10 (http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/the-value-of-expansion-candidates-to-the-big-ten-network/)

[X-band '01]

ESPN - Boise State moving to Mountain West (OFFICIAL) (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5276064)

Looks like college football's Cinderella is one step closer to the BCS, especially if the fears of Big 12 implosion come to fruition and they make a move for the Kansas schools and any other Big 12 leftovers.

[D-West & PO-Z]

http://insider.espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/blog?name=bilas_jay&id=5276060

[Muskie1000]

One rumor is BE is pushing Notre Dame away to avoid a B10 raid.

Another rumor is B10 has offered special scheduling arrangements to both Texas and ND.

Mongering is fun.

No, you know what is the best about this whole situation? Watching the big power conferences scrambling around while we can just sit back and laugh. Right now I'm enjoying being the big fish in a little pond, I know if I were in the Big 12 right now (or say a Kansas fan), I would be sweating bullets.

[waggy]

With Nebraska in the fold the B10 can now either expand to the east, or to the south. It'll probably be one or the other. And if you believe the numbers outlined in the link in my previous post are reasonable, expanding to the south with Texas may trump an expansion east, even if it includes ND & NY.

[jdm2000]

Did you see where Nebraska said they only want to play one more year in the Big XII? Wow.

[X-band '01]

Why would Nebraska want to hang around any longer as a lame duck in the Big 12? Better to just have a farewell tour and get it overwith - not that there will be any ill will from Colorado or any of the Texas-Oklahoma bloc if they skip town, but would you want to be at an athletic contest if you're Nebraska at a place like Kansas or even Missouri if they stay put?

Speaking of Missouri, I wonder what their plans are - today was supposed to be their deadline to either swear allegiance to the Big 12 or announce their plans to leave (although they could get an extension until Tuesday). Notice how Texas does not have such an ultimatum - clearly they hold all the cards to that conference's survival at this point. The Big 12 can overcome the loss of Colorado and Nebraska, but they're SOL if the Texas bloc says goodbye.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Why would Nebraska want to hang around any longer as a lame duck in the Big 12? Better to just have a farewell tour and get it overwith - not that there will be any ill will from Colorado or any of the Texas-Oklahoma bloc if they skip town, but would you want to be at an athletic contest if you're Nebraska at a place like Kansas or even Missouri if they stay put?

Speaking of Missouri, I wonder what their plans are - today was supposed to be their deadline to either swear allegiance to the Big 12 or announce their plans to leave (although they could get an extension until Tuesday). Notice how Texas does not have such an ultimatum - clearly they hold all the cards to that conference's survival at this point. The Big 12 can overcome the loss of Colorado and Nebraska, but they're SOL if the Texas bloc says goodbye.

Yeah Mizzou is in some shit. I heard that if the Big 12 does somehow survive that they might actually vote Mizzou out. A lot of hard feelings about how Mizzou was demanding certain things or they would leave, thinking they had an invite to the Big 10. So much for that.

[waggy]

I can't believe that the group of five Big 12 teams would actually go to the Pac 10, but the rumors continue and are at even higher pitch coming out of Texas, Oklahoma fan sites. If that actually goes down, then the Big 10 can only look to the east....

[X-band '01]

Not only that, but if Texas A&M goes against the Texas bloc and instead joins the SEC, that will leave the Pac-10 with 15 and the SEC with 13 teams respectively. It will be real amusing at that point watching proud programs like Kansas, Missouri, and Kansas State whoring themselves out to join the Pac-10, Big 10, SEC, etc.

That's one of the reasons that Nebraska ultimately felt compelled to join the Big 10 - they went on record saying that institutions (probably alluding to Missouri and Texas) were begging them to stay in the Big 12 while they themselves were publicly whoring themselves to the other BCS conferences. That, along with a more equitable TV distribution in the Big 10, Nebraska has to come out smelling like roses after their move.

[waggy]

Frankly, if the TX/Okie Bloc commits to the Pac 10 this quick, they aren't very good poker players. Something has to be afoot in my mind.

[AZtoCA]

http://www.pac-10.org/school-bio/pac10-school-bio.html


EAST COAST BIAS

Pac-10 "Conference of Champions"
-Most National championships of any conference ( At the end of the day that's all that matters, )

Source: OU headed to Pac-10; OSU, Texas, Texas Tech reportedly going as well

http://www.newsok.com/source-ou-headed-to-pac-10-osu-texas-texas-tech-reportedly-going-as-well/article/3467852?custom_click=masthead_topten




"WHo ever has the Most National championships is the Best conference" -PAC-10

[waggy]

OU headed to Pac-10; OSU, Texas, Texas Tech reportedly going as well.

But is it enough to pay Seans bloated salary?

[waggy]

I don't get it...how does the movement of ONE SINGLE SCHOOL, Nebraska, implode the conference?

From what I can gather it appears basically to be mismanagement, or maybe better termed misappropriation of funds... The Texas people have a cigar stuck in one corner of their mouth, and chew dribbling from the other corner, and they peer across the negotiating table with bloodshot eyes and say "This is the deal bitch..". And by God that's the deal. And they'll spite themselves before they'll cave. So F'in dumb. If reports are to believed, TX A&M has 72 hrs. to put together a deal with the SEC.

If this does happen I don't expect Texas to do as well in the Pac10 simply because they are poor managers. They had everything their way in the B12 - not so in the P10. The one saving grace for them though are the penalties against the USC Cheaters.

[SixFig]

Indeed this is a colossal game of Poker:

Nebraska and Colorado cashed in early for fear of losing out.

Kansas, K State Baylor etc. are praying for a miracle with their pair of Kings.

Notre Dame is holding on hoping their two pair is tops as it has been in the past...but it isn't.

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, OK State are playing their three of a kind and grinning all the way.

The Pac-10 and Big 10 have the obvious straight and are looking around as if taunting the other player to fold to them.

And the SEC has a flush that can beat everyone no matter what, but they will wait for the cards to fall.

[STL_XUfan]

I feel as though there is way more truth in this piece of satire than any of the schools would want to admit.

http://www.bringonthecats.com/2010/6/7/1506558/adventures-of-the-big-12-twelve

[xudash]

Indeed this is a colossal game of Poker:

Nebraska and Colorado cashed in early for fear of losing out.

Kansas, K State Baylor etc. are praying for a miracle with their pair of Kings.

Notre Dame is holding on hoping their two pair is tops as it has been in the past...but it isn't.

Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, OK State are playing their three of a kind and grinning all the way.

The Pac-10 and Big 10 have the obvious straight and are looking around as if taunting the other player to fold to them.

And the SEC has a flush that can beat everyone no matter what, but they will wait for the cards to fall.

I would love to see someone summarize it all better than you just did in these seven lines. Great job.

[waggy]

If the TX/OK schools go to the P10, I think that Kansas, KSU, Missouri, Iowa St., and Baylor should look to the Mountain West as a group. Makes sense geographically, and TMW already has it's own TV network. I think it would make an interesting conference from a sports fan perspective, and would very likely qualify for a BCS auto bid. Those 5 remaining schools (with the MWC's help) could also temporarily block a vote to dissolve the B12, since it requires 9 votes, making sure the other 9 pay the exit fees. Not a small amount of money.

In my quest to link every story on the internet relating realignment, here is a blog post from a Missouri perspective.

http://www.rockmnation.com/2010/6/12/1514785/mizzouexpansionapalooza-2010tm-did

[American X]

Got word the SEC commissioner met with the Texas A&M Board of Regents in College Station this weekend.

You would think the SEC would love to have massive and rabid Aggie fanbase. Plus, casual fans across Texas will tune into a Texas A&M - SEC game well before a Texas or Texas Tech versus middling Pac-10 team.

[GoMuskies]

casual fans across Texas

Do these exist?

[American X]

Plus, casual fans across Texas will tune into a Texas A&M - SEC game well before a Texas or Texas Tech versus middling Pac-10 team.


Do these exist?

No, but that is the point. Same game time Saturday - Texas vs. any Pac-10 team besides USC and Texas A&M vs. any SEC team. Only teasips are watching the former and all other eyes are on the Aggies.

Plus, so many of those recruits who leave Texas to play in the SEC no longer have to.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

Texas move to the Pac 10 "Imminent"

Also, I vote to merge this thread and that other one since we are all discussing the exact same thing Mods. Your call though

[GuyFawkes38]

just heard from ESPN that there are conflicting reports. One claims that Texas is about to join the Pac 10. The other (that guy from Orangebloods) claims that Texas will stay in a 10 member Big 12.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

just heard from ESPN that there are conflicting reports. One claims that Texas is about to join the Pac 10. The other (that guy from Orangebloods) claims that Texas will stay in a 10 member Big 12.



"Texas near Pac 10 commitment" - "Departure to Pac 10 coming"
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5284375

Rivals is saying the complete opposite based on that Orangeblood report
"OB: Texas to stay in B12"
http://texas.rivals.com/

Personally, I'll believe ESPN over some Orangeblood gossip site for now

[GuyFawkes38]

Of course, the state of Texas does have an independent streak to it. We all know about the Alamo....then there's this NSFW youtube clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4RNb3tt0LM

Don't mess with Texas.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

Of course, the state of Texas does have an independent streak to it. We all know about the Alamo....then there's this NSFW youtube clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4RNb3tt0LM

Don't mess with Texas.

http://www.theriddlegroup.com/blog/uploaded_images/funny-graphs-texas-797330.gif

[muskiefan82]

Will Xavier then be labeled as the "best of the non-superextraultramegaconference" teams?

[D-West & PO-Z]

just heard from ESPN that there are conflicting reports. One claims that Texas is about to join the Pac 10. The other (that guy from Orangebloods) claims that Texas will stay in a 10 member Big 12.

You would think if they stay in big12 they would look to add 2 more teams in order to keep playing a big 12 championship game.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Of course, the state of Texas does have an independent streak to it. We all know about the Alamo....then there's this NSFW youtube clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4RNb3tt0LM

Don't mess with Texas.

That video was funny but it also has links on the side to so many other funny videos as well. I dont want to derail the thread by posting them though. But check out the burger king one.

[xujeffjeff]

You would think if they stay in big12 they would look to add 2 more teams in order to keep playing a big 12 championship game.
I have heard they will look to add TCU and Utah. A best case scenario for Xavier would be for this to happen. The "mega-conference" push is bad news for Xavier.

[xavierj]

I have heard they will look to add TCU and Utah. A best case scenario for Xavier would be for this to happen. The "mega-conference" push is bad news for Xavier.

The only way it would be bad is if they told Xavier they could not play teams from those conferences nor play in their national tournament. Otherwise it is no different than it is now. UC joined a mega conference and it killed their hoops program. How would you like to be a team like Seton Hall or Providence and have to struggle just to make the NIT every year. Xavier will be fine even with the merger. They will actually be able to attract even more recruits.

Say the major conference teams now forge into 4 mega conferences. About 32 of those teams will struggle to keep their heads above water in conference play. What recruit is going to want to go to a school that struggles to win or who is mediocre every year.

Xavier is not in a major conference now and to be honest it really is an advantage for them. Xavier will be fine in this whole mess and maybe even better off. This thing is for football purposes only and Xavier does not participate in football.

[STL_XUfan]

Personally, I'll believe ESPN over some Orangeblood gossip site for now

He has been pretty spot on in his coverage. I think I would trust Orangeblood over ESPN right now.

[xujeffjeff]

I side with Orangeblood...ESPN reported this morning that Texas will go to the PAC-10 tomorrow, then Orangeblood said it wasn't happening...Now ESPN changed the story on the front page. This orangeblood is the second coming of world wide wes...

[STL_XUfan]

I kinda hope that Texas leaves. They are a cancer on the conference and a plan begging them to come back and giving them an even great unequal share of conference revenue is only going to lead to this whole saga repeating itself in a few years when another team steps up and complains. Texas wants all the benefits of being in a BCS conference while being treated like they are independent when it comes to their money (aka ND who actually is independent).

I think it would be better for the the remaining 6 big 8 teams along with baylor and texas tech go out and find 4 other teams to keep the Big XII alive. The proposed setup is just going to allow the disparity between Texas and 9 teams that should feel blessed to be associated with Texas to grow even further.

[GuyFawkes38]

Well, right now it looks like the PAC 16 is dead.

I just went to the Arizona board and they are heartbroken. I can see why they would be disappointed about the Pac10 having less clout for establishing a good TV deal. But ultimately, isn't it a good thing for their academics, rivalries, and ability to make a good bowl.

[waggy]

Texas stays in B12

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

I side with Orangeblood...ESPN reported this morning that Texas will go to the PAC-10 tomorrow, then Orangeblood said it wasn't happening...Now ESPN changed the story on the front page. This orangeblood is the second coming of world wide wes...

Ya in the end, espn was wrong. I don't think they were incorrect in their reporting this morning since the odds overwhelmingly favored texas joining the pac 10. But overall Orangeblood was right.

I don't like this as a pac 10 fan and an X fan, but I understand why Texas decided on the Big 12/now 10.

Do you guys see this conference as sustainable in the long run? Also, why aren't schools like Oklahoma/A &M/Tech/OSU pissed that Texas got a prime deal and they didn't?

[GuyFawkes38]

Ultimately, either Texas could have destroyed the Big12 by leaving, or the Big10 could have by grabbing Missouri who is begging to leave.

It seems like the Big10 wanted to keep the Big12 intact and they succeeded.

I think we should draw one big lesson from this: Don't mess with Texas.

[smileyy]

The interpretation I've heard elsewhere is that UT wants to dictate a lot of the terms about the conference and money, and that they can do that in the newly weakened Big 12.

Once this settles down, and someone else in the conference gets grumpy about UTs role in it, we could see more shakeout.

[xudash]

The interpretation I've heard elsewhere is that UT wants to dictate a lot of the terms about the conference and money, and that they can do that in the newly weakened Big 12.

Once this settles down, and someone else in the conference gets grumpy about UTs role in it, we could see more shakeout.

Texas is about to become the "Yankees" of that conference, and that will be no better than the lessor of two evils for the disadvantaged teams in that conference.

[LA Muskie]

UC joined a mega conference and it killed their hoops program.
I tend to think that firing Huggins killed their hoops program. Like him or hate him, he wins games and recruits athletes who win games. They haven't had anyone like that since he left.

[Masterofreality]

I tend to think that firing Huggins killed their hoops program, but helped their GPA and APR. Like him or hate him, he wins games and recruits athletes who commit crimes, cut class, get others to do schoolwork for them, get money, cars and apartments and win games. They haven't had anyone like that since he left.

Fixed that for you.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

Reading some of the Texas message boards, many are not happy about this. For example:

"Let me count the ways that this sucks:

1. No National Respect or Recognition: We are now slightly above the Big East. We have 2 good programs and 8 others that have ZERO national name recognition or appeal. Gameday may go to the RRS every few years, but that is it. Get used to all of your SEC, Big 10, ACC and Pac 12 friends laughing at you.

2. No Decent Games: We have OU to look forward to, and then 8 more conference games against the likes of Baylor, ISU, KSU, etc. If you are a season ticket holder, don't expect ANY exciting games. New Slogan: "Come Late, Bring a Portable TV to Watch Real Games, Leave Early."

3. Zero Fun Road Trips: We could have had Boulder, LA, the Bay Area, Scottesdale, Seattle, etc. Now we are (still) stuck with Ames and Kansas. Epic.

4. Huge Long Shot for MNC Invites: We are now the top dog in a second tier conference. Get ready for the Gameday Crew and ESPN campaigning all season for 1-loss teams from real conferences to leap-frog us into the MNC even if we are undefeated.

5. Long Term Program Decline: If you were a 5 star recruit, would you want to play in a second tier conference with no games on national television? (I know we will have our totally awesome new "network", but only diehard UT fans will watch it). When you could go play in a real conference with all of the hype with and against future NFL stars? The negative recruiting writes itself.

6. Dignity: We spent the last 3 weeks listening to pious refrains about the superior quality of the Pac 16 or Big 16 and how our illustrious institution would benefit not only athletically, but academically from the association with so many Top 25 and Teir One Schools. Then Dodds and Powers bait and switch us for a quickie TV deal in a crap conference.

Collge football just died for me. I want to throw up."

"Excellent post with numerous, well-reasoned arguments that all add up to ONE GIANT MISTAKE. Lose Nebraska and we think staying is the way to go? They get the Big 10 and we stay in a severely weakend conference? "

"We are officially The Big Suck. Wow, what a lousy outcome. I thought we had brighter bulbs. No one is going to be interested in a downsized conference. Not TV, not recruits, not alumni, not prospective students. This episode was completely mismanaged by Powers and Dodds."

"The latest report is stating that there will be a "no expansion" clause in the agreement to keep it all together at 10 teams. Worst decision that could have been made for Texas if true"

[DC Muskie]

I think this is hilarious.

College sports are such a farce. It's beyond laughable.

So here are my predictions:

Colorado to the Pac 10

Nebraska to the Big Ten

Utah to the Pac 10

TCU to the Big 12

Boise State to the MWC

Call it a day.

Hilarious.

[GuyFawkes38]

I've noticed people are freaking out the Arizona board too. It's ridiculous. I get the sense that fans just wanted conference affiliation changes for the added excitement of it, regardless of the long term implications for their school.

Texas played this perfectly. They get a lot more cash than they would have ever gotten in the PAC10 (they share revenue evenly). They also get the chance to pursue their own network.

The fact of the matter is that the Big12, even without Colorado and Nebraska, is a much better basketball and football conference than the Pac10. Calling the Big12 a "second tier" conference is ridiculous.

I'm sure it might have been fun for Texas fans to travel to San Francisco, but playing on the west coast is something that most college football schools avoid like the plague. The time zone difference plays havoc with the players and reduces TV ratings.

It made no sense for Texas to jump to the Pac10. I really think it was a negotiating tactic.

[SixFig]

C'mon Texas you're the Lone Star State don't be upset. Show some balls!

This is like an 80's movie where the protagonist has to chose between the socially awkward but strangely attractive girl (Big 12) and the exotic girl who will thrill you and take you to exotic places but will wear you out spiritually (Pac 10).

He always picks the socially awkward one.

[X-band '01]

Texas played this perfectly. They get a lot more cash than they would have ever gotten in the PAC10 (they share revenue evenly). They also get the chance to pursue their own network.

The fact of the matter is that the Big12, even without Colorado and Nebraska, is a much better basketball and football conference than the Pac10. Calling the Big12 a "second tier" conference is ridiculous.

I'm sure it might have been fun for Texas fans to travel to San Francisco, but playing on the west coast is something that most college football schools avoid like the plague. The time zone difference plays havoc with the players and reduces TV ratings.

It made no sense for Texas to jump to the Pac10. I really think it was a negotiating tactic.

That's also why they leaked the possibility of going to the Big 10 - it gave them some leverage in terms of negotiating their own TV deal. The Pac 10 ultimately decided they weren't going to let Texas call all the shots, and with the Big 12 desperate to keep their conference from dissolving, it becomes a no-brainer that they would open their legs and whore themselves out to Texas's demands. A&M fans are going to be pissed because they lose whatever leverage they had into leaving for the SEC.

As far as time zone difference Guy, I don't think that will be a difference in terms of the football program; most of the TV spots are 12:00, 3:30, and 8:00 ET in terms of starting times. If anything, joining the Pac-10 would have helped in terms of eliminating 11:00 AM CT starts.

[GuyFawkes38]

C'mon Texas you're the Lone Star State don't be upset. Show some balls!

This is like an 80's movie where the protagonist has to chose between the socially awkward but strangely attractive girl (Big 12) and the exotic girl who will thrill you and take you to exotic places but will wear you out spiritually (Pac 10).

He always picks the socially awkward one.

Ha!!! Very true.

There's no doubt in my mind that UT fans were excited about traveling to LA, San Francisco, and Seattle. They didn't really take into account that most of the national media and college fan base don't really pay attention to west coast athletics (even USC...how many times were they on TV in the central and eastern time zones).

The Pac10 needed Texas a lot more than Texas needed the Pac10.

[GuyFawkes38]

yes, timezones matter a lot less for football. But it's a big issue for basketball.

And I really do think that the national media pays less attention to Pac10 athletics than they deserve. Most of the national media is thousands of miles away. Why would Texas want to tie itself to that.

[smileyy]

2. No Decent Games: We have OU to look forward to, and then 8 more conference games against the likes of Baylor, ISU, KSU, etc. If you are a season ticket holder, don't expect ANY exciting games. New Slogan: "Come Late, Bring a Portable TV to Watch Real Games, Leave Early."


As opposed to those powerhouse teams that the Pac-10 fields these days?