I only really know a couple of Minnesota grads. They pay far more attention to the Vikings twins and t wolves to care too much about the gophers.
Big10 rumors today
- Thread starter cyclonefan2016
- Start date
I only really know a couple of Minnesota grads. They pay far more attention to the Vikings twins and t wolves to care too much about the gophers.
What about Northwestern? Seems a lot of conference fans wouldn't mind kicking out their private schools (Baylor, Vandy, Wake - Stanford the notable exception)
If the B1G added ISU and KU and needed four 4-team pods it would be very interesting to see how they shook out.
Michigan and Ohio State have to be together; Michigan State has to be in this one too. Is Penn State team #4, or is that too loaded?
Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa is another obvious group of three. Nebraska probably would want in here, but then you are killing the Cy-Hawk, which is one of the more fun and compelling rivalries that you just added to your own conference. On the other hand, if you add ISU in here, you're probably left with a Nebraska/Kansas/Illinois/Northwestern pod.
And of course none of the "have to be together" teams actually have to be if there is some form of protected rivalry.
Maybe you do pure geography and fix it on the back-end with protected rivals (in parenthesis when obvious):
West
Nebraska
Kansas
Iowa (Minnesota)
Iowa State
North
Minnesota (Iowa)
Wisconsin
Illinois
Northwestern
Central
Indiana
Purdue
Michigan (Ohio State)
Michigan State
East
Ohio State (Michigan)
Penn State
Maryland
Rutgers
Michigan and Ohio State have to be together; Michigan State has to be in this one too. Is Penn State team #4, or is that too loaded?
Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa is another obvious group of three. Nebraska probably would want in here, but then you are killing the Cy-Hawk, which is one of the more fun and compelling rivalries that you just added to your own conference. On the other hand, if you add ISU in here, you're probably left with a Nebraska/Kansas/Illinois/Northwestern pod.
And of course none of the "have to be together" teams actually have to be if there is some form of protected rivalry.
Maybe you do pure geography and fix it on the back-end with protected rivals (in parenthesis when obvious):
West
Nebraska
Kansas
Iowa (Minnesota)
Iowa State
North
Minnesota (Iowa)
Wisconsin
Illinois
Northwestern
Central
Indiana
Purdue
Michigan (Ohio State)
Michigan State
East
Ohio State (Michigan)
Penn State
Maryland
Rutgers
Mgoblog is the best Michigan blog by far. Excellent writing and the forum is good but for sure has a lot of Michigan arrogance. Eleven warriors for OSU is also excellent. Sparty has RCMB which can be good but also incredibly toxic. I actually like theonlycolors which is a sports nation site for Sparty news the best.
While its fun to speculate, unfortunately I don't think the B1G answer to the SEC adding OU & UT will be KU & ISU.
BUT... if they were going to do that it can be argued now would be the time for it because I think its much easier to parse out the rest of the B12 to the ACC & PAC for financial reasons than get the B1G to take KU & ISU.
ESPN could pay the ACC & PAC a little more to take those schools and avoid exit fees and GOR fees altogether for those involved.
Baylor & WVU to the ACC and the remaining schools TCU, TT, OSU & KSU to the PAC. In this scenario if both the ACC & PAC networks could get in state footprint subscriber rates in Texas it goes a ways towards paying for their additions. Its questionable Baylor on its own could get Texas coverage but ESPN might be able to creatively package it with the SEC Network somehow to make it work. The estimated B12 contract renewal is not supposed to be that far behind the ACC contract and it remains to be seen the PAC contract. The PAC and ACC can then monetize conference semi-final games also.
The other incentive for ESPN is they are going to be paying 17M-25M per school per year MORE for the 4 new additions to the B12. The AAC contract was about 7-8M a year and 8M is the amount I believe for BYU.
It probably won't happen but there would be a lot of incentive for ESPN to try and get this to happen now instead of later. Which B12 school wouldn't feel better long term with a place in one of the remaining P4 leagues in lieu of exit fees and GOR's from OU/UT?
Nah the big ten loves considering itself the premier academic conference (up for debate) so northwestern is in there. Also about every 5 years they put together a good football team and their fans are very chill.
Latest thing on the brain:
Let's say the 4 conferences go to 16 like we've outlined. For all the talk about expanding the playoff, if the 4 conferences do 4 pods with a semifinal round, we could have a de-facto 16 team playoff. Conference champions move on.
Of course, it doesn't solve the question of the G5 and next rung of schools like BYU, Cincy, UCF, Houston. But who knows.
Again, all in fun.
The B1G isn't interested in the PAC making more money though.
That seems like it will definitely be the marketing but it feels like it could be made to justify almost any decision the B10 makes:
-Expansion "we're only expanding with like minded institutions"
-Staying put "we are made up of elite institutions and don't want to dilute that"
-Strong alliance with Pac12/ACC "we are aligning with the best and most complete institutions across the country"
It would give cfb a true playoff.
Honestly, if 72-80 teams split off into a new division with either 4 or 6 leagues you can do the same. A 6 team playoff of conference champions works, just like NFL playoffs, even 8 could work if there were 4 leagues where there were 20 or more teams, since there would be no more reason for bowl games. Lets say there was still the SEC, B1G, B12, ACC, PAC and a combined MWC/AAC of leftovers. Obviously the last league would be weaker filling one of the playoff spots but the positive for the B1G/SEC is they would monetize their own expanded league playoffs and not share it with others. They probably can get a bigger share of revenues this way than going to a 12 team playoff.
I hate the greed, but each league having a 4 team playoff(or even 6 team playoff) to determine the conference winner would outstanding assuming each league had 16 or more teams. It would give CFB a real ending and everyone plays their way in. Each league leaves one regular season game as floating, where they play the first round of their conference playoffs and assign their other teams a conference matchup of others not making the playoffs or even an attractive, fun regional non conference matchup. The hard part here is the teams getting a bye, but it could be treated for them as a game to give underclassmen and backups game experience because they are already in the next round OR those two teams could just get a bye that week(which may be better).
Informally NW has a much more prestigious reputation than Purdue. I don't believe I've ever heard Purdue referred to academically.
I'm not really sure how a conference kicks out a school outside of heavy scandals, but obviously that's not even a thing.
It's more of a fan fiction thing rather than anything of substance. I do wonder how close we got with Baylor after their issues.
Leagues are going to have autonomy to do what they want to. Pods are ok for scheduling but why would you do pods for win/loss standings instead of one single set of standings for win/losses?
If you are trying to monetize conference semi-final games you want the best matchups possible. Why risk having one pod be a dog each year where there are clearly better teams for that #4 spot? You take the top 4 in a single division standings.
Oh here we go again.
Post on a ISU message board as a "friendly fan" of another school. And then show the typical B1G arrogance whenever possible.
KU has no value? Please. With comments like that and some of your other gems, I would say your so-called "sources" are completely full of shite.
Were you in the room when KU was being discussed? I suppose you cast the deciding vote against them, perhaps? Your schtick is getting well past it's expiration date...
There is no good way to get the clear best 4 teams when you have uneven scheduling. There are downsides to every proposal. When you play only 9 of 15 teams in your league, there’s a big element of luck
