Big Ten to add 12th team?

[Triple-S]

Word is that the Big 10 may expand to 14 or even 16 teams.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/co ... 0862.story

Would this be how it would look?

Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan St.
Notre Dame
Penn State
Purdue
Indiana
Cincinati

Northwestern
Illinois
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Iowa
Iowa St.
Nebraska
Missouri

[leadpipe]

They should expand farther than Nebraska or Missouri, that way when the hoops players who have class at OSU on Tuesdays play the ESPN Big Monday 9:00 game, they can be back on campus, fresh, and ready for class by about 4:00 am.

[furls]

I don't know about 14 or 16, but I can pretty much guarantee that there will be a 12th in the very near (within 2 years) future. It is about the money (to some extent) although the $$ is not as phenomenal as some would make it out to be. Probably something like 500k to $1mill per team in the big ten. For perspective OSU's AD brought in ~$105 million last year. 500k is nothing for Indiana to sneeze at but it is not much for the big dogs.

As for the split, I am absolutely opposed to OSU being in the same 1/2 as scUM. Any geographic split that makes sense has OSU, PSU, scUM in the same division and although scUM blows right now, it will recover. That will end up making the Big Ten split similar to the Big 12 split in which all the good teams are in the same 1/2 of the conference. Frankly, the Big 12 Championship Game is generally the best team in the conference against the 5th best team.

If the OSU vs. scUM game causes OSU to play scUM on back to back weekends, well then so be it, they would likely be the two best teams in the conference in that case. Think about it, if they play each other, than that means that the loser would have to have at least a one game advantage over its closest competitor within its division in order to absorb the loss and still make the championship game. I would bet that the loser of that game would be bumped from the championship game more often than creating a rematch.

I would split them like this in order to create divisional parity and geographic logic:

Div A:
OSU
PSU
Purdue
Indiana
MSU
**New Team**


Div B:
scUM
Wiscy
Minny
NW
Illinois
Iowa

Team schedules as follows:
1. Play all teams in your division every year
2. Play your closest two geographic rivals from the other division every year (rivalry preservation). This just makes sense and helps reduce travel costs some. It also ensures that OSU, PSU, and scUM play each other every year. This system currently exists today.
3. Two rotating home and home series from the other division.
This system leaves 3 non conference games, trimming the schedule from 4 non conferences.

I am not sure why everyone seems to think that some of these Big 12 teams would just drop their conference to come to the Big Ten (or Big East teams for that matter). I am not sure that Nebraska would leave their traditional rivals and come over, I am not sure that there is adequate incentive. The same is true for Mizzou. What would Iowa St. bring to the conference other than another whipping boy? I wouldn't mind seeing WVU or Pitt, but why would they leave? They already have a rivalry and are well established in the other sports (Mens BB etc.). Cincy makes some sense, but they don't cut the academic mustard and I am not sure that they bring enough to the table. ND is the dream scenario, but again, what is the $$ incentive $$? There are not a lot of great programs in the area that are "available" or that are able to pried from their current arrangement.

I think the best possible case (I don't think ND is possible) is probably Mizzou with TCU then defecting to the Big XII, but who knows. All I can tell you is that there will be a championship game sooner than later to get the conference's name out there for an extra week, quiet the critics, and oh yeah, make a few bucks.

[Sea Foam Green]

I hate for my first post to be off topic, but I’m too curious not to ask.  It has been referenced 3 or 4 times in this thread that Cincinnati would not cut the academic mustard of the Big 10.  Normally I would just let this go, but when guys like Herm and Furls, for whose opinions I’m generally lurking on this board, mention it I think there may be something to it.
 
So to those that have mentioned it, is this based on some sort of standards or requirements, or is it solely based on perception?  And if it is perception, is the perception that the Big 10 schools are bastions of academia or that Cincinnati is a community college [or a little bit of both]? As it’s another large public institution, I can’t see how UC wouldn’t be able to keep pace, academically, with the non-Northwestern Big 10 schools.
 
Now, as for back on topic with the expansion, I think a case can be made for any of the teams mentioned [save the east coast schools JoePa is pimping] but UC, Pitt, Louisville, Mizzou all could make sense from some standpoint.  What I have a hard time seeing is what adding a twelfth team gains the big 10 [outside of a conference championship in football].  In my mind, two of the scenarios make the most sense.  First is ND, obviously a big catch for the Big 10, but apparently ND has preemptively rejected the offer [Heard it on the radio, sorry no link].  Second is the recently mentioned expansion to 14 or 16 teams.
 
While this may make the traditionalists go into convulsions, I think it makes some sense if you look at it from a revenue generation standpoint.  At this point in time, I’m guessing Big 10 Athletics is all about growing the Big 10 network and the revenue potential it holds.  Growing the Big 10 by a number of teams pursues this objective on a number of fronts.  First and most obviously it pushes the network into more markets, gaining more eyeballs.  Secondly, and perhaps more importantly it increases the number of teams the Big 10 would be able to have TV rights to, and thus increases the likelihood that the Big 10 Network could hold games of national significance on their network [rather than on ESPN].  Possible results of this are twofold:  it could cause folks from outside the Big 10 footprint to possibly have an interest in having access to the Big 10 Network [People may not want to watch IU v Iowa football game, but I bet there’d be an interest in a Louisville v. Michigan State basketball game], and secondly, again within the big 10 footprint it would increase eyeballs, thus increasing ratings, thus increasing interest from advertisers, thus increasing ad revenue, thus we would no longer be subjected to the continuous barrage of Velveta Rotel commercials.
 
In my opinion, that last possibility makes the entire endeavor worthwhile.
 

[furls]

Sea Foam, thanks for contributing. It was a well thought out articulate post and you should put more of them on this board.


First let me start by saying that there gifted kids and great programs at every school and you get out of a college exactly what you put into it. This is not an assault on UC's academic rigors just a statement of preception/ranking. If UC had an established football history or brought some new market into the fold, none of this would even be a concern. UC's audience is largely already accounted for in the B10 by OSU and UC does not have a great tradition of college football, there is not really any brand recognition. Now historic Nippert Stadium is a terrific venue, but at a cozy 35,000 it is not really the kind of facility that the B10 would be looking for. UC has a decent endowment at $1billion or so, but overall it does not have the great academic reputation. Surprisingly (or not) the B10 schools are ranked pretty respectably by US News:

Northwestern 12
scUM 27
Wisconsin 39
Illinois 39
Iowa 46
PSU 47
OSU 53
Purdue 61
Minny 61
Indiana 71
MSU 71

Cincinnati is unranked and really does not have any exceptionally notable programs. For instance, IU (who finished tied for last in the B10) has one of the nation's best business schools. Illinois is one of the best engineering schools in the country (ranked right up there with scUM, Cal Tech and GaTech). We all know about NW and scUM's graduate and professional schools. Fisher College of Business (OSU) has the 15th ranked EMBA according to Business Week.

The Big Ten is trying to do some work to ensure that they maintain the academic and athletic reputations. Syracuse would be a great fit if the program was not so broken. I tend to agree with Joe PA about getting someone from the east coast. That is a market that the B10 could and should try to break into.

I am not so sure about going to 14 or 16. There may be strength in numbers, but right now I think we would just be getting mediocrity. I am having a hard time find 1 school to add let alone 5, unless the B10 totally raided the top of the Big East and added Pitt, WVU, Cincy, Syracuse, and Rutgers.

[Sea Foam Green]

Thanks for the info Furls, that sheds some lights on things.
 
I wasn’t trying to make a case for UC in the Big 10, or even insinuate that it was a better school than any in the Big 10, I just found it curious how quickly it was dismissed for academics amongst all schools being considered.  I suppose, without researching the topic, my thought process was that all large colleges have the programs they are known for, and then programs they herd people through just to collect the bills.  I’m aware of IU’s Kelly School of business, and I’m also aware that some of the dumbest kids I went to High School with ended up at IU [albeit not in the business school].
 
So I just expanded that thought process to UC.  To counter a point you made, UC does have a few nationally recognized programs;  Their school of music is generally highly rated and their school of design [specifically the Interior Design, Architecture and Industrial Design programs] is typically highly rated and professionally respected.
 
Knowing this, from my standpoint, I guess I didn’t see why having those, paired with some middle of the road programs, paired with whatever programs they used to shuttle people through and pay the bills, made them any different from a Purdue. 
 
I guess the answer is perception, and in this instance the perception was well founded.
 
Again, sorry for getting slightly off topic.

[furls]

Nope you are definitely on topic.

[aoxo1]

Stewart Mandel had a good take on this a couple days ago: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/w ... index.html

[noles1]

Without diving into much of this, my immediate thought was Rutgers would be a good fit.

I like what they can offer and think they are the most realistic to join the conference, knowing that Cuse, Pitt, Cincy and ND all have their own unique reasons for being positioned the way they are.

I think you could make Rutgers and Penn State the end of the year game.

I would recommend OSU and UM (throw in Rutgers) in the same division with Penn State, Purdue and Iowa in the other.

OSU
UM
Rutgers
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan St.

Penn St.
Purdue
Iowa
Northwestern
Minnesota
Wisconsin

Just my two cents.

[JCoz]

I am not sure why everyone seems to think that some of these Big 12 teams would just drop their conference to come to the Big Ten (or Big East teams for that matter). I am not sure that Nebraska would leave their traditional rivals and come over, I am not sure that there is adequate incentive. The same is true for Mizzou. What would Iowa St. bring to the conference other than another whipping boy? I wouldn't mind seeing WVU or Pitt, but why would they leave? They already have a rivalry and are well established in the other sports (Mens BB etc.). Cincy makes some sense, but they don't cut the academic mustard and I am not sure that they bring enough to the table. ND is the dream scenario, but again, what is the $$ incentive $$? There are not a lot of great programs in the area that are "available" or that are able to pried from their current arrangement.

I think the best possible case (I don't think ND is possible) is probably Mizzou with TCU then defecting to the Big XII, but who knows. All I can tell you is that there will be a championship game sooner than later to get the conference's name out there for an extra week, quiet the critics, and oh yeah, make a few bucks.

Furls, while I'm not going to rehash the UM/OSU alignment issue since I've already stated my position, I don't know if those B12 teams would drop the B12 for the Big Ten, but there certainly is quite a bit of incentive to do so, and its the most important incentive to most colleges, that being money.

I think the breakdown in cash is a pretty significant jump in guaranteed dollars for a B10 team vs a B12 team. I think even ND would get a jump in revenue, while thier BCS bowl dollars would drop, all other TV revenue would increase as I understand it.

[BSchultz17]

http://www.ndnation.com/blog/2009/12/no-means-no.html

While we're sometimes accused of tilting at windmills on this topic, Irish athletic director Jack Swarbrick isn't helping matters. While professing loyalty to the independent state of Notre Dame's football program, his statements to the press are peppered with phrases like "we'd sure like to try to maintain [independence]", which is now thought of as a "strong preference" that must be balanced with "implications" in the "industry" of college football while "scenarios play out".

Sounds a lot like those non-denial denials that were so in vogue during our two-week football coaching search. And like Oklahoma fans three weeks ago, we're a little uneasy.

It is slightly frightening to me (an ND fan) that someone who covers the program feels the need to put together such a long article on the reasons not to join the Big 10. And even more bothersom is the inclusion of AD Jack Swarbrick's address at the end of the article for alumni and fans to send along their concerns on the matter.

I wouldn't completely rule out Notre Dame to the Big 10, especially given the time-frame they are looking at. I would say, after reading this article, my chances of Notre Dame joining the Big 10 went from absolutely 100% no, to maybe 90% not going to do it. Football rules at ND, but there are a lot of other people at the University that are interested in what the Big 10 is selling.

[Triple-S]

Morgan Burke whom is the atheletic directory at Purdue just dropped a huge hint during the Purdue/SIU Edwards game, sounding more and more like it's Rutgers.

[jb]

You split them into different divisions and assign each team an annual rivalry game against a team in the opposite division.

Full round robin, no more Penn State type schedule.

[jb]

Sea Foam, thanks for contributing. It was a well thought out articulate post and you should put more of them on this board.


First let me start by saying that there gifted kids and great programs at every school and you get out of a college exactly what you put into it. This is not an assault on UC's academic rigors just a statement of preception/ranking. If UC had an established football history or brought some new market into the fold, none of this would even be a concern. UC's audience is largely already accounted for in the B10 by OSU and UC does not have a great tradition of college football, there is not really any brand recognition. Now historic Nippert Stadium is a terrific venue, but at a cozy 35,000 it is not really the kind of facility that the B10 would be looking for. UC has a decent endowment at $1billion or so, but overall it does not have the great academic reputation. Surprisingly (or not) the B10 schools are ranked pretty respectably by US News:

Northwestern 12
scUM 27
Wisconsin 39
Illinois 39
Iowa 46
PSU 47
OSU 53
Purdue 61
Minny 61
Indiana 71
MSU 71

Cincinnati is unranked and really does not have any exceptionally notable programs. For instance, IU (who finished tied for last in the B10) has one of the nation's best business schools. Illinois is one of the best engineering schools in the country (ranked right up there with scUM, Cal Tech and GaTech). We all know about NW and scUM's graduate and professional schools. Fisher College of Business (OSU) has the 15th ranked EMBA according to Business Week.

The Big Ten is trying to do some work to ensure that they maintain the academic and athletic reputations. Syracuse would be a great fit if the program was not so broken. I tend to agree with Joe PA about getting someone from the east coast. That is a market that the B10 could and should try to break into.

I am not so sure about going to 14 or 16. There may be strength in numbers, but right now I think we would just be getting mediocrity. I am having a hard time find 1 school to add let alone 5, unless the B10 totally raided the top of the Big East and added Pitt, WVU, Cincy, Syracuse, and Rutgers.

Nailed it Fuirls. This is more than just about athletics. I don't see how these insitutions fit into the Big 10. I think Pitt is closest, but their lack of an on campus stadium is a huge minus to me, although Minnesota did do this for quite a while. Syracuse? Rutgers? Really ? Rutgers?

This has to be both aregional, and athletyic quality fit, but also an academic positioning fit, too.

Cincy is a good school, but not that. Not a flagship institution. Very good engineering program, though Furls. Just not great.

[jb]

Morgan Burke whom is the atheletic directory at Purdue just dropped a huge hint during the Purdue/SIU Edwards game, sounding more and more like it's Rutgers.

NY media market.... Only explanation.

[aoxo1]

You split them into different divisions and assign each team an annual rivalry game against a team in the opposite division.

Full round robin, no more Penn State type schedule.

You are only giving them 1 non-conference game?

[jb]

You split them into different divisions and assign each team an annual rivalry game against a team in the opposite division.

Full round robin, no more Penn State type schedule.

You are only giving them 1 non-conference game?

Yes. Deliberately.

And they should play a quality team, not a ham and egger like SEC teams do.

I know it'll never happen, but that's how I'd roll.

Round robin so the best team over 11 weeks wins and no made for TV championship game bull shit. Meaningful non-conference game. In any given year in The Conference there are two gimme games.

I know that I'm delusional, but it'd be different, bold, and the right thing to do. Just not the most profitable, and that's why there's no way.

[aoxo1]

You split them into different divisions and assign each team an annual rivalry game against a team in the opposite division.

Full round robin, no more Penn State type schedule.

You are only giving them 1 non-conference game?

Yes. Deliberately.

And they should play a quality team, not a ham and egger like SEC teams do.

I know it'll never happen, but that's how I'd roll.

Round robin so the best team over 11 weeks wins and no made for TV championship game bull shit. Meaningful non-conference game. In any given year in The Conference there are two gimme games.

I know that I'm delusional, but it'd be different, bold, and the right thing to do. Just not the most profitable, and that's why there's no way.

Love it. Force em to play a BCS conference foe (or ND) for that one extra. Gives the Big Ten some serious cred and cachet and will improve the quality of the play as well.

[gnati]

I get that it is Livingston and all...but no comments/thoughts on what Bill said in the PD a few days ago that Big Ten was seriously considering UCONN if they went to 12....and Missouri, Kansas and Nebraska if they went 14?

[neoleo]

Saw this article last week and it sheds some light into the question of why would a Big 12 team jump to the Big 10.

According to this article, Missouri could make an additional 10 million per year if it where in the Big 10.

http://www.sportingnews.com/college-foo ... ng-big-ten

Missouri could see $10 million windfall by joining Big Ten
Christopher Tritto, St. Louis Business Journal

ST. LOUIS—University of Missouri officials have about 10 million reasons to make the leap to the Big Ten Conference should they be invited.

Mizzou's athletic department would generate an estimated $10 million in additional annual revenue—about twice what it receives now from the Big 12—if it leaves for the Big Ten.

The Big Ten, which has actually consisted of 11 schools since Penn State was added in 1990, announced in mid-December it would take the next 12 to 18 months to explore the possibility of adding a 12th school to the conference. Many suggest Missouri, which could offer the Big Ten strengthened TV markets in St. Louis and Kansas City, would be a top option.

Athletic conferences organize intercollegiate competition, but also collect revenue from football and basketball television contracts, bowl games, basketball tournaments and NCAA grants on behalf of member institutions. The net receipts are then disbursed to those schools' athletic departments.

The Big 12 doled out $103 million in revenue during the academic year that ended June 30, 2008, according to the most recent Internal Revenue Service filings available. The conference disburses some of its money based on the number of television appearances each school makes.

In 2008, Missouri athletics collected $8.4 million, behind the universities of Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska and Texas A&M. Texas led the way with $10.2 million. Some estimates forecast this year's payout to Missouri will be about $10 million as conference revenue continues to grow.

The Big Ten, by comparison, passed along nearly $207 million to its members in 2008. Each member school received about $18.8 million. Accounting for a 12th school, the disbursements would still top $17 million each. That number is estimated to grow to more than $20 million this year, even accounting for a 12th school, as the Big Ten television revenue continues to increase from various rights agreements and its 51 percent ownership of the new Big Ten Network.

Proponents of Big Ten expansion say doing so would help balance the conference's game schedules, attract greater media attention and pave the way for a lucrative conference football championship like the ones held by the Big 12, SEC and ACC conferences.

Notre Dame, whose popular football team is not part of any conference, is considered by many to be the frontrunner Big Ten candidate. But Notre Dame turned down a Big Ten invitation in 1998, has its own national TV contract with NBC through 2015 worth a reported $9 million a year and has shown little interest in giving up its independent status.

Rutgers, Pittsburgh, Syracuse and Nebraska are among the other universities whose names are circulating as potential candidates. But Missouri has been widely discussed as the most likely choice after Notre Dame.

Missouri athletic director Mike Alden has played down a potential move and did not respond to a request for comment for this story. But Gov. Jay Nixon told the Associated Press in December that Mizzou should listen to any offer that might come from the Big Ten and consider the academic benefits as well as the athletic ones.

University of Missouri chancellor Brady Deaton told The Kansas City Star last month that although Mizzou has not been contacted by the Big Ten, "should there be an official inquiry or invitation, we would evaluate it based upon what would be in the best interest of MU athletically and academically."

On the academic side, the Big Ten schools and the University of Chicago make up the highly regarded Committee on Institutional Cooperation, a consortium dedicated to "sharing expertise, leveraging campus resources, and collaborating on innovative programs."
But a jump to the Big Ten could pose some negatives for Mizzou. A move could end or at least seriously dampen Missouri's long and emotionally charged rivalry with the Kansas Jayhawks.

It also could damage Missouri's focused efforts to draw recruits from the high school football hotbed of Texas, where the Tigers currently have a presence through their competition with four Big 12 members. And travel expenses for Big Ten competitions could potentially grow as Missouri would become the southwestern-most school in a conference that stretches north to Minnesota and east to Pennsylvania.

[furls]

I have heard rumors that there is potential for the B12 to completely blow up based on poor TV revenue and expansion pressure from the B10 and PAC10. Both conferences would provide serious revenue upgrades to major B12 programs. Supposedly Colorado is chomping at the bit to move to the P10 and has been for a while and if the B10 jumps in a yanks Mizzou (and the St. Louis market) out of the TV contracts... well, that sparsely populated market becomes that much more problematic.

I have read that the total of B12 contracts is ~75mill per year, compared to the B10's leading 225+million. Now, the B12 does not pay that 75mill evenly, it is actually weighted by the number of TV appearances with Texas getting the largest share last year at ~12million. That means that Texas would actually get a 10mill per year increase from TV revenue alone for playing with the B10. The B10 splits the revenue evenly among all teams, this means that Indiana's TV revenue is actually larger than ND's (at 9mill)!

Additionally, and maybe more importantly to University Presidents, inclusion into the B10 also gets the new team inclusion into the B10's CiC http://www.cic.net/Home.aspx which is kind of like an illuminati mafia in which they share research and academic resources freely. Believe it or not, inclusion in the CiC is a very big deal. I have heard rumors that the B10 could make some overatures to Texas, which would be an absolute homerun.


Here are some articles to support the idea:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/3091 ... sion-texas

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id ... er-big-ten

http://www.burntorangenation.com/story/ ... 153259/001

http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2009/ ... of-orange/

Makes a lot of sense to go to Texas first and see if you can sway them, if not, then take the consolation prize: Mizzou which basically creamed at the opportunity to be considered.

[aoxo1]

Fuck it, the way this is going let's just skip to the end instead of waiting 50 years. We can have one giant conference, with 10 or 11 different divisions. Then, at the end of the season, we'll match up the two most highly regarded division champions to determine the conference champion. Other teams can play consolation games.

We'll call this conference the NCAA.

[pup]

http://buckeyebanter.com/2010/01/31/pittsburgh-to-join-big-ten/

Supposedly, Pitt’s athletic department officials held closed door meetings with all student-athletes this past week to speak with them abut the impending move to the Big Ten. That led to Panther athletes posting this information on there Twitter pages and was quickly erased.

From everything I am hearing, or reading, is that Pittsburgh will formally announce that they will accept an invitation to join the Big Ten on Thursday, February 4.

[Triple-S]

Now I'll have a Pittsburgh team to hate in both leagues.

Ugh, don't like this move, though in a perfect world I'd love to see a reformed Big East that would look something like this:

Pitt
Penn State
Boston College
West Virginia
Cincinati
Rutgers
Miami (Fl.)
UConn
Sryacuse

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQ6eSf0nadg

Also, BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[danwismar]

The New York Times does Big Ten expansion...

http://bit.ly/9rTlGB

[danwismar]

shooting down the "Pitt to Big Ten" rumor...

http://bit.ly/cQkhz4

http://bit.ly/9BaTt6

courtesy of Doug Lesmerises (via Twitter)

[fairvis]

http://www.cleveland.com/ohio-sports-bl ... or_te.html

I could deal with this. Texas fits the academic profile of the Big Ten, and god knows the tons of sports that it offers will fit into a Big Ten schedule. Plus, it would give a legitimate anchor in a Western division of teams.

So, that would be:

Big Ten East:
Penn State
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Purdue
Indiana

and Big Ten West:
Illinois
Northwestern
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Iowa
Texas

Sounds like a win-win. The question of whether Texas would leave the Big 12, however, is truly debatable, but they've talked about joining before, and would have at the demise of the SWC if not for the Big Ten deciding that they only wanted 11 teams at the time. If ND doesn't want in, I'd say Texas is the next dream option.

[CohibaTC]

I think bringing Texas into the Big 10 is a long shot IMO. BUT if they do, I wouldnt be surprised if they also bring in a Missouri and Pitt to satisfy some natural rivalries (Penn State/Pitt and Texas/Missouri). It would make for a nice smooth transition.

[Cerebral_DownTime]

Texas will NEVER join the Big 10. Maybe a lesser French 12 team, but not the crown jewel of the confrence.

[exiledbuckeye]

Texas will NEVER join the Big 10. Maybe a lesser French 12 team, but not the crown jewel of the confrence.

I think it's a long shot, but never say never. The increase in revenue sharing from B12 to B10 is significant, and academically it makes a lot of sense.

[Cerebral_DownTime]

I'm sayin never, because if Texas leaves the Big 12 they'll might as well break up the confrence. Plus I thought to join the Big 10 you need to border one of the states currently in the confrence.

[exiledbuckeye]

I'm sayin never, because if Texas leaves the Big 12 they'll might as well break up the confrence. Plus I thought to join the Big 10 you need to border one of the states currently in the confrence.

I think they absolutely would kill the Big 12. Lots of rumblings for a while that Nebraska wants out. Colorado has wanted to join the Pac10 for a while as well. Or, you see a new form of the Big 12. I could see TCU joining with some of the existing Big 12 teams.

[dmiles]

A blogger wrote a pretty compelling piece about why UT would want to do it. Chief among the reasons the mass profitability of the Big 10 Network, and how much revenue they add by opening up Dallas, Austin, San Antonio and Houston markets.

UT rakes in about 6-7 million in TV money, vs. the 22 mill that Northwestern, Indiana, and Illinois make. Texas would add to the incoming revenues, contracts rewritten, etc. The gist of the blogger's article was simply that adding subscribers in a non-Big-10 area was the chief concern. This basically makes teams like Iowa St. and Pitt tough to add because they bring nothing to the table in terms of adding subscribers.

Additionally there would be the highly profitable championship game, and both the Big-10 and Texas make out like banditos...

[JCoz]

Texas will NEVER join the Big 10. Maybe a lesser French 12 team, but not the crown jewel of the confrence.

The crown jewel in the storied 15 year history of the Big 12?

NEVER?....I wouldn't be so sure......

[jordan kramer]

Pac-10 talking about maybe Utah, Colorado, or Texas. i'd much rather see them invite Boise St. into the conference, but then again everyone is scared to play them...

[aoxo1]

If Texas leaves the Big XII for the Big Ten, I have to believe that sets off a huge shakeup in the college football world. Nebraska and Oklahoma would leave as well. I'll buy into the Colorado moving to the Pac 10.

Would the SEC expand to 14 and realign, with perhaps Texas Tech or A&M and Oklahoma? Hard to see Bama moving to the SECE, but maybe Auburn moves there. LSU makes the most sense to me, except geographically. I would say Nebraska, but I would think the SEC would want to add a school in Texas. Maybe Nebraska leaves with Texas to join the Big Ten?

That leaves 8 schools left, without any heavy weights. Assuming one of Boise or Utah goes to the Pac 10 with Colorado, does the Big XII become the Big X and add the other plus TCU?

[exiledbuckeye]

FWIW, here's a commentary piece from yesterday's Austin American-Statesman: http://www.statesman.com/sports/longhor ... 30052.html

Basically, this guy argues that Texas will never join the B10 because they're afraid to play a football game in cold weather in November.

[fairvis]

If Texas leaves the Big XII for the Big Ten, I have to believe that sets off a huge shakeup in the college football world. Nebraska and Oklahoma would leave as well. I'll buy into the Colorado moving to the Pac 10.

Would the SEC expand to 14 and realign, with perhaps Texas Tech or A&M and Oklahoma? Hard to see Bama moving to the SECE, but maybe Auburn moves there. LSU makes the most sense to me, except geographically. I would say Nebraska, but I would think the SEC would want to add a school in Texas. Maybe Nebraska leaves with Texas to join the Big Ten?

That leaves 8 schools left, without any heavy weights. Assuming one of Boise or Utah goes to the Pac 10 with Colorado, does the Big XII become the Big X and add the other plus TCU?

And that's the thing about this Big Ten expansion. It has the potential to be a new realignment of leagues no matter what direction it goes, unless it just picks up Notre Dame (whose faculty would love to be part of the Big Ten, just the administration is not). I love this kind of speculation, it's good fun.

The Big Ten will want an established team in the Association of American Universities to add to the conference. That means that any new members will be on this list:

http://www.aau.edu/about/article.aspx?id=5476

So pick and choose the 1-3-5 members that you think would fit in... but they will be on this list, since the Big Ten loves the fact that all members of the conference (including U Chicago) are there.

[JoJo White]

Sorry, Texas will not join the big 10.

Dare to dream though...

[FUDU]

Sorry, Texas will not join the big 10.

Dare to dream though...

They'd be better off not to, we play defense up here.

[Cerebral_DownTime]

Sorry, Texas will not join the big 10.

Dare to dream though...

They'd be better off not to, we play defense up here.

Oh ZING!

[mattvan1]

Sorry, Texas will not join the big 10.

Dare to dream though...

Agree they will not join, but UT needs the B10 (or PAC10) way more than either of those conferences need UT. BTW, UT and tOSU are twin sons of a different mother. More alike than most could imagine.

[JoJo White]

Sorry, Texas will not join the big 10.

Dare to dream though...

They'd be better off not to, we play defense up here.

GO look up Big 10 vs. Big 12 in bowl games the past couple years and then get back to me. Scoreboard is scoreboard.

[JoJo White]

Sorry, Texas will not join the big 10.

Dare to dream though...

Agree they will not join, but UT needs the B10 (or PAC10) way more than either of those conferences need UT.

No, and no.

It is a coup for any conference to land UT. Texas is the most valuable football program in the country and any conference would be lucky to have them.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/paper-trail ... -team.html

[Anglefan]

The Big Ten has done incredibly well in the Alamo Bowl actually, considering that it's a road game every year. The real scoreboard is revenue. The Big 12 isn't worth shit. It's a mess.

[Triple-S]

Sorry, Texas will not join the big 10.

Dare to dream though...

They'd be better off not to, we play defense up here.

GO look up Big 10 vs. Big 12 in bowl games the past couple years and then get back to me. Scoreboard is scoreboard.

Purdue is 3-0 against the Big XII all-time in Bowl games, including a victory over a number 4 ranked K-State team in 1998. :).

TOSU, has only lost once to a Big XII team in a Bowl game, and that was admittingly a fluke call in 2008.

[JoJo White]

The Big Ten has done incredibly well in the Alamo Bowl actually, considering that it's a road game every year.

Last 5 years in the Alamo Bowl: Big 12 4-1, Big 10 1-4. And the one win was against Aggy so it doesn't count.

The Big 12 isn't worth shit. It's a mess.

[gnati]

No, and no.

It is a coup for any conference to land UT. Texas is the most valuable football program in the country and any conference would be lucky to have them.

Fair enough and if I grant that point to you...

If the Big Ten comes callin for Missouri...and/or the Pac 10 comes callin for Colorado...

Texas is going to be left with its dick in its hand, in an increasingly irrelevant conference with dwindling TV revenue from an already small base.

So yeah, Texas may be all that and a bag of chips, but it can play with itself, so to speak, and if they decide not to play (with anyone, not suggesting Big Ten is only option) I think they will come to regret it.

Hopey Changey stuff is happening, Texas needs to decide which wagon it wants to hitch itself to...Big 10, Pac 10 or SEC.

[GameTimeAllTheTime]

Notre Dame or bust as well... they are certainly the most natural fit.

The thing is, they make $15 million a year from NBC... right now, their Big Ten share would be more. Is NBC willing to make them a better offer for after 2015?

Notre Dame's existing football rivalries within the Big Ten (Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue) as well as successful all around sports programs make the most natural fit.

Do you think that Notre Dame would make more money as an independent in football and all other sports in the Big East or having all sports in the Big Ten? I think the latter would be true. Plus, the mythical Big Ten Hockey Conference can be formed as a super-conference that would have nearly all of its games aired on the Big Ten Network.

There are more things going on then just football in this, I think.

Notre Dame can play a Big Ten schedule (8 games) and still schedule USC, Navy, Stanford, and Boston College.

For any other school, I think Mizzou has the best shot. Good academics, good programs, strong support.

Notre Dame wont join b/c of NBC and they don't want to share there money with the conference which all teams have to do. So they will continue to stay independent because it's the better choice financially. I'd rather have a team kicked out of the big 10 like Northwestern there all time record and bowl record is terrible. That way the big 10 is truly the big 10 but, I doubt that would happen. They should try pulling Nebraska from the big 12 b/c of there rich history and tradition. I think the best option would be to bring in Rutgers or Pitt because they also have tradition and would bring in money to the big 10. Pitt obviously is a football town and Rutgers has the NY/NJ fan-base and money that could be brought into the big 10.

[Anglefan]

The Big Ten has done incredibly well in the Alamo Bowl actually, considering that it's a road game every year.

Last 5 years in the Alamo Bowl: Big 12 4-1, Big 10 1-4. And the one win was against Aggy so it doesn't count.

The Big 12 isn't worth shit. It's a mess.

Your very low IQ is evidenced by the fact that you don't understand the separation between the record of the number four Big 12 team vs. the number five Big Ten team in a bowl game and what is a very weak conference financially and structurally. Mentioning a record over a period of five games just shows an incredible ignorance of the massive long term scope this whole thing covers. A quite blissful simpleton stupidity is very comforting to you, I'm sure. If us adults want to discuss this in real life terms, just take your Skip Bayless level sound bytes to a separate thread please.