header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: Likely expansion targets for the B1G

 (Read 16314 times)

TamrielsKeeper

  • Recruit
  • **
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 60
  • Liked:
Re: Likely expansion targets for the B1G
« Reply #140 on: July 29, 2021, 06:03:38 PM »
Lots of chatter on USC boards about going with the B1G. Some "insider" type even posted that the wonks from USC and UCLA already talked with Emperor Barry.

I'd feel much better knowing Barry was leading the charge on this than Warren.

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
  • Liked:
Re: Likely expansion targets for the B1G
« Reply #141 on: July 29, 2021, 06:08:42 PM »
I'd feel much better knowing Barry was leading the charge on this than Warren.
Honestly, I think this is exactly why he was brought in. Which, if you think about, is a shot across Warren's bow, from the Presidents/Chancellors.

I look for USC, UCLA, Ferd, Northern Cal, Oregon, Washington, Arizona and Colorado to make the jump, if offered. That gets it to 22.

ASU, Orsu, WSU, Utah, BYU and Boise to the XII.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

utee94

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 17672
  • Liked:
Re: Likely expansion targets for the B1G
« Reply #142 on: July 29, 2021, 06:22:44 PM »
Lots of chatter on USC boards about going with the B1G. Some "insider" type even posted that the wonks from USC and UCLA already talked with Emperor Barry.
I'd be shocked if the top PAC teams HADN'T approached representatives of the B1G at this point.


847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 25207
  • Liked:
Re: Likely expansion targets for the B1G
« Reply #143 on: July 29, 2021, 06:39:38 PM »
I'm very comforted by the fact that the Emperor is leading this effort. 

Warren is on my shit list. He absolutely sucks.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71536
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Likely expansion targets for the B1G
« Reply #144 on: July 29, 2021, 07:35:25 PM »
A B1G/Pac "alignment" would be a good thing, I think.  Maybe not a merger, but a closer association.

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 71536
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:

MaximumSam

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13092
  • Liked:
Re: Likely expansion targets for the B1G
« Reply #146 on: July 29, 2021, 08:06:11 PM »
I don't think Warren has much support among the OSU leadership

OrangeAfroMan

  • Stats Porn
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18841
  • Liked:
“The Swamp is where Gators live.  We feel comfortable there, but we hope our opponents feel tentative. A swamp is hot and sticky and can be dangerous." - Steve Spurrier

Hawkinole

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2219
  • Liked:
Re: Likely expansion targets for the B1G
« Reply #148 on: July 30, 2021, 01:41:34 AM »
Here is a solution that may work especially since the PAC-12 and Big Ten seem somewhat married to Fox Sports, and television networks are driving these changes according to Bob Bowlsby:

Big Ten adds the following four PAC-12 programs:

California, USC, UCLA, and Stanford. The Big Ten has not bared the PAC-12 cupboard, but adds value. The Big Ten now has 18 teams. Divide them in three divisions.


  • USC, UCLA, Stanford, California, Nebraska, and Northwestern.
  • Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Penn State, and Purdue.
  • Ohio St, Michigan, Indiana, Maryland, Rutgers, and Michigan St.

This leaves the PAC-12 with at least three strong programs that can compete fairly well regularly on a national level. The PAC-12 adds the remaining Big 8 teams, and perhaps a few others like BYU and Houston, or Boise St. The new PAC-12 has some interesting regional rivalries and could be divided into two divisions:

  • Oregon, Washington, Washington St., Oregon St, Arizona St., Arizona, Utah, BYU/Houston/or Boise St
  • Oklahoma State, Kansas, K-State, Iowa State, Colorado, TCU, Baylor, Texas Tech

West Virginia is sent to the ACC.

For basketball, a round-robin schedule of 17 Big Ten games can be played, and to get to 20-conference games add 3 regional rivalry conference games to the schedule.

Adding Notre Dame is the best solution to all this, but unless Notre Dame is threatened with loss of its NBC TV contract, or with narrowing of its access to it to a national title game, Notre Dame will not be coming into the Big Ten.


Hawkinole

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2219
  • Liked:
Re: Likely expansion targets for the B1G
« Reply #149 on: July 30, 2021, 01:47:26 AM »
Maybe put Illinois and Northwestern in the the Western Division, and keep Nebraska in the Central Division to keep the Illinois schools in the same division.

medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: Likely expansion targets for the B1G
« Reply #150 on: July 30, 2021, 11:49:17 AM »
Divide them in three divisions.
You are definitely not the only person to suggest this and I don't mean this to be argumentative, just a question:

How does this three division thing work?  I guess I could see it if the NCAA permitted a four-team league championship playoff.  Then you'd have the top-2 Division Champions host the other Division Champion and the Wildcard followed by a CCG of the two winners.  Otherwise how do you handle this?  
Here is a solution that may work especially since the PAC-12 and Big Ten seem somewhat married to Fox Sports, and television networks are driving these changes according to Bob Bowlsby:

Big Ten adds the following four PAC-12 programs:

California, USC, UCLA, and Stanford. The Big Ten has not bared the PAC-12 cupboard, but adds value. The Big Ten now has 18 teams. 
IMHO, the most valuable programs in the PAC are, in order:
  • USC - helmet, LA
  • Oregon - great history for quite a while now, Phil Knight connection
  • Washington - adds another state and near-helmet long-term football history
  • Colorado - adds another state and good football history
  • Stanford - NorCal
  • UCLA - another LA school
  • One of the Arizona schools but I'm not sure which one
  • Utah - adds another state
  • Cal - just not sure how much they bring
  • The other Arizona school
  • WSU
  • OrSU


I might be wrong around the margins and if I were Barry Alvarez I'd have staffers doing deep research to get this list EXACTLY right but I think if we are adding four PAC schools it should add at least three states to the B1G footprint.  Your suggestion adds four California schools.  There are a LOT of people in California but I'd also consider two things:
  • Among the US born football in general and CFB specifically aren't anywhere near as high a priority as they are in the Midwest or South.  
  • A HUGE percentage of California's population is foreign born mostly from Mexico and Central/South America.  I'd want to see some research to confirm or contradict this but my guess is that most of the sports fans among them tend to be Soccer fans rather than college sports (and specifically CFB) fans.  


medinabuckeye1

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 8906
  • Liked:
Re: Likely expansion targets for the B1G
« Reply #151 on: July 30, 2021, 12:05:24 PM »
If the three-division thing is made functional by allowing a four-team league playoff then I think I'd advocate for adding seven schools:

  • USC
  • Oregon
  • Washington
  • Colorado
  • Either Stanford, UCLA, Utah, or an Arizona school (would need to research to figure out which was the most valuable)
  • Either UVA or VaTech
  • UNC

Then your three, 7-team divisions would be

East:
  • Rutgers
  • Penn State
  • Maryland
  • UVA/VaTech
  • UNC
  • tOSU
  • Indiana
Central:
  • Purdue
  • Michigan
  • Michigan State
  • Illinois
  • Northwestern
  • Wisconsin
  • Minnesota
West:
  • Iowa
  • Nebraska
  • USC
  • Oregon
  • Washington
  • Colorado
  • Stanford/UCLA/Utah/Zona/ASU

It would suck to ship the Hawkeyes and Cornhuskers out west but they'd still have regionalish rivalries with each other and Colorado. 

Assuming an eight game league schedule you'd play the six other teams in your division and one team from each of the other two on a rotating basis except for a few annual rivalries. 

Probably better to have a nine game league schedule playing the other six in your division, one permanent (or perhaps semi-permanent) match-up against a team from each of the other two divisions and the ninth game could rotate or something like that. 

Assume, for the sake of this example, that tOSU loses to PSU and finishes 8-1 while PSU also finishes 8-1.  PSU wins the H2H tiebreaker and is the East Champion.  Meanwhile USC wins the West at 9-0 and Wisconsin wins the Central at 7-2.  Your four league playoff entrants would be:
  • 9-0 USC
  • 8-1 East Champion Penn State
  • 8-1 Wildcard Ohio State
  • 7-2 Central champion Wisconsin
So the League Championship Playoff would be:
First round:
  • tOSU at PSU
  • Wisconsin at USC
CCG:
  • tOSU/PSU vs UW/USC


FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 37519
  • Liked:
Re: Likely expansion targets for the B1G
« Reply #152 on: July 30, 2021, 12:28:46 PM »
since TV networks control the $$$

perhaps each team should individually sign a contract with each network - pay per game, ratings are important

Schedule accordingly

or just two conferences - one owned by ESPN, the other owned by FOX
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

Hawkinole

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2219
  • Liked:
Re: Likely expansion targets for the B1G
« Reply #153 on: July 30, 2021, 01:27:12 PM »
You are definitely not the only person to suggest this and I don't mean this to be argumentative, just a question:

How does this three division thing work?  I guess I could see it if the NCAA permitted a four-team league championship playoff.  Then you'd have the top-2 Division Champions host the other Division Champion and the Wildcard followed by a CCG of the two winners.  Otherwise how do you handle this? 

I am not advocating for the Big Ten to do what I wrote. I believe this is something that is possible to do that would not blow up college football entirely for the remaining Big 8 teams, and for most of the PAC-12, and probably would add value to the TV contract of the Big Ten. 
Frankly, I do not like the idea of the Big Ten adding teams from two-time zones, or three-time zones away. This is one way of doing things, that would not destroy or largely hurt the football programs of the remaining Big 8 and PAC-12 schools. I do think it is important to retain fan interest for college football to remain a national sport. Destroying or minimizing several programs by realignment will make college football less interesting in the long run.
The sport of football in 100-years may be replaced by another sport with fewer traumatic brain injuries, like lacrosse. But, we are not there yet. Mothers may get us there. Lumping things together in some of the manners speculated, could hasten the demise of college football if wide swaths of the population do not have access to viewing their school play the better teams in person if realignment relegates their school to a lower division or quality of play.

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.