Who would you realistically replace Rutgers with?

[Temp430]

Kansas and Missouri for the last two in.   

[Brutus Buckeye]

This would have been a better off season topic then all those stupid "best player to wear number 78" threads. 

[847badgerfan]

Has there been a hierarchical realignment discussion before?  The idea of Texas in the B10 or Florida in the B10 made me think of it.  It's not something I'd ever considered before.


I've seen discussion of a relegation system like in soccer, but between FBS and FCS.  But a top-tier "kings" conference, then the next tier down, and so on.
What would that postseason look like in such a structure?

I don't think that would work well at all. Too much is in flux.

[TamrielsKeeper]

I don't think it's realistic to believe that Rutgers would get kicked out, I think it's a lot more realistic to think that the B1G just expands to compensate for the pick.  Here are some thoughts I have on the topic:

I think and eight team playoff is coming, that's unavoidable.  When it happens, I think they'll give the top 4/5 seeds to winners of the P4/5 CCG's to protect the regular seasons and make CCG's matter.

My preference would be to stick to 14 or go all the way to 20.  I don't think 16 works particularly well for scheduling purposes - you either have to go two divisions of eight, which means with nine conference games (and no protected crossovers) it takes eight years to complete a home and home with all the schools in the conference.  Or, you could go to four divisions of four (i.e. "pods") and rotate the schedule, but with nine conference games, managing those crossover match ups could become really messy.  Additionally, in either scenario, you still have the possibility of a rematch in the CCG, which I absolutely hate.

A 20 school conference w/ a divisional setup based on geography/rivalries makes for the best option in my opinion.  Of course, expansion to 20 would probably require a home run on revenue generating additions in order for the numbers to make sense.  Here's one scenario where I think that could work if everything broke right (divisional names are subject to change ):

Great Plains Division

Nebraska
Wisconsin
Iowa
Minnesota
Illinois

Great Lakes Division

Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan State
Indiana
Purdue

Northeast Division

Penn State
Notre Dame
Northwestern
Rutgers
Maryland

Southwest Division

Texas
Oklahoma
Texas A&M
Missouri
Kansas

If we just assume for a second this could be possible (a big assumption, I realize), I think this kind of setup offers a type of best case scenario if the B1G must continue to expand.  It would protect most vital rivalries, with the clear exception of the split between Northwestern/Illinois - I split those two to provide maximum exposure to the Chicagoland area for visiting B1G schools, since Chicago is the hub of the B1G.  In four of six years, when not on the B1G schedule, perhaps they could schedule that game "OOC" to accommodate for that rivalry.

In this type of scenario, each school would complete a home & home with every school in the other divisions in six years (as opposed to eight years w/ a 16 school conference), and it guarantees no rematches in the CCG.  You rotate the divisions yearly and the school with the best record from that "rotation" goes to the CCG.  No rematches in the CCG, and easy to follow - you look at your schedule and you have to have a better conference record than those teams to make the CCG.

I think the only super long shots on that list are TAMU & Notre Dame.  I think an expanded playoff format that gives preferred seeding to winners of CCG's would force ND into a conference.  I think Texas would like the idea of shutting the SEC out of their home state, perhaps the B1G could be a proxy for achieving that goal.  TAMU seems pretty happy in the SEC, but Texas would probably want an in state rival to come with them, and the only two AAU schools in Texas are UT & TAMU.  I don't see the B1G bringing along TTech/Baylor/TCU/Etc. to accommodate Texas.

[ELA]

Yeah, I feel like the "who should the Big Ten add" question has been driven into the ground?

I think it's more interesting just to ask if it could ever get to a point where Rutgers (or any school) would get the boot, and what would it take?  Would on field lack of performance alone be enough?  Is Rutgers' leash much shorter than when Northwestern was absolutely abysmal for 20 years simply because Rutgers is new, and Northwestern was a founding member?  Does the TV structure play a role in how much rope they get?

Then, if they are kicked out, does the Big Ten feel the need to replace them?  Is the question the same at 13 as it is at 14, that if the member is attractive enough (Texas) it doesn't really matter, but otherwise no for now, or at 13 are they more desperate to get back to 14?  I think those are more interesting question than the "who"?  The who is the same whether we are talking going from 14 to 16 or replacing Rutgers.

[FearlessF]

Would on field lack of performance alone be enough?  Yes, if the networks deemed their content had no value

Is Rutgers' leash much shorter than when Northwestern was absolutely abysmal for 20 years simply because Rutgers is new, and Northwestern was a founding member?  No, I don't think history has much to do with current and future revenue

Does the TV structure play a role in how much rope they get?   Absolutely

Then, if they are kicked out, does the Big Ten feel the need to replace them?  Yes, only kicking someone out because of revenue means the conference wants more money.

[ELA]

Yes, but the same-ish pie split 13 ways is better than split 14.  So simply kicking them out may alone create more money.

[Anonymous Coward]

I always like the idea of Great Lakes and Great Plains divisions, just for midwestern identity reasons, but it never seemed to work with the current list of teams. And, if we grow to 20 or so, I'd much rather have divisions of the Original Ten and Add-Ons. Except with actual good names.

[FearlessF]

agreed, but 13 is an odd number

so either kick out the next weakest link (Maryland) or add a 14th that brings the $$$

since I'm for smaller conferences, I'd get rid of the two that only brought TV sets on basic cable when the basic cable isn't cash flowing

[ELA]

agreed, but 13 is an odd number

so either kick out the next weakest link (Maryland) or add a 14th that brings the $$$

since I'm for smaller conferences, I'd get rid of the two that only brought TV sets on basic cable when the basic cable isn't cash flowing

13 doesn't matter if you get rid of divisions

[FearlessF]

I'm fine with that

Not a fan of CCGs.

If you get rid of divisions and CCGs ya might as well really cut the fat and go back to 11

[utee94]

I'm fine with that

Not a fan of CCGs.

If you get rid of divisions and CCGs ya might as well really cut the fat and go back to 11

Or, you know, go back to ten.  A Big Ten.
And 8 in the Big 8.
And so on.

[847badgerfan]

[utee94]

Meh, Big 11 sucks.  This is what I'm talking about: