I expect conference expansion to pick up again in the coming months. When it does, the BIG TEN should expand to 20 teams and make a concerted push for 6 of the following teams: Texas, Notre Dame, Oklahoma, Kansas, Miami, Florida State, Georgia Tech, UNC, Virginia, Duke, Boston College, Syracuse, and Virginia Tech. Of these, the only two states that I see as critical are Texas and Florida. As it stands, the SEC has solid footing in both of these recruiting hotbeds that will no doubt prolong its dominance over college football for years to come. To remain competitive against the SEC over the very long term, the B1G needs to add Texas and either Miami or Florida State. Further, to remain competitive against the PAC 12, who has interest in expanding into Texas, and against the BIG 12, who has interest in the state of Florida, the B1G must be the aggressor and gain a foothold in these states before it is left out altogether. Of these 14 teams, the BIG TEN is best served over the next 100 years by taking these six schools: Texas, Miami, Georgia Tech, UNC, Duke, and Virginia. Of these all but Miami are AAU members. But to add either Miami or Florida State, the B1G must make an exception to its AAU rule just as it did with its addition of Nebraska (the B1G knew at the time it invited Nebraska that its AAU membership was in jeopardy, and in fact both Michigan and Wisconsin voted Nebraska out of the AAU). My preference for Miami over Florida State is based on the following: the B1G has more alumni in the southern part of Florida than it does the panhandle, the panhandle is more like the SEC in its culture, the city of Miami is an international gateway, the southern part of Florida is a recruiting a gem for the B1G and the Buckeyes in particular, over the years Miami has been a constant draw for many students in the midwest as well as the DC-NJ-NYC corridor, and finally, have you been to South Beach? With the additions of Texas and Miami, the B1G will have a strong presence in the two most dominant recruiting grounds for college football. Moreover, with the additions of UNC, Georgia Tech, and Virginia, the B1G increases its exposure to other important recruiting states. Finally, the addition of Duke, while not necessary, is one that you do not pass up on. It's a leading academic institution that just so happens to have a dominant basketball program. Duke adds value to BTN's content when basketball ramps up (Kansas for the same the reason).
With these 20 teams, the B1G should be the first power conference to use a "pod" structure of 4 sub-divisions, each with 5 teams. This allows for greater variability and exposure in conference scheduling. Further, this will pave the way for conference "semi-finals" as an important -- and lucrative -- lead up to the conference championship. Within this structure, football schedules would include 3 non-conference games, 8 regular conference games, a semi-final matchup (as well as tiered matchups for non-subdivision champs), and finally, a conference championship. Basketball regular schedules with 20 teams should be done as a round robin, maintaining its conference tournament to include all 20 teams. The four pods could look something like this:
West: Texas, Nebraska, Iowa, Illinois, Northwestern
North: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Michigan St., Purdue
East: Ohio State, Indiana, Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers
South: Miami, Georgia Tech, UNC, Duke, Virginia
Now, before anyone says the idea of a B1G-20 is insane, ask yourself whether it makes any sense to permit other conferences to add these important recruiting grounds. Does it make sense to permit the PAC to add Texas? Does it make sense to allow the Big 12 to add the state of Florida? Does it make sense to allow the ACC to venture into B1G territory without repercussion? Does it make sense to let the SEC remain as the only power conference with a foothold in both Texas and Florida? The answers are clear. Delany and the B1G opened up the expansion craze when it announced its intentions to expand into southern territories. Since then the SEC has gained yet another strategic advantage with the addition of the state of Texas. The B1G meanwhile has yet to make any major move to improve its football product (Nebraska without its ability to successfully recruit Texas is a shell of its former self). The B1G must expand into the states of Florida and Texas because anything less is a failure.







The NCAA rules would have to be changed. Right now the NCAA only allows a conference championship game for a conference with two divisions with additional caveat that the winner of the division is determined by a round-robin tournament. The rules would not permit this structure.
Plus, this would leave the division champion to be determined by just four games within the division and four games outside of it. You'd have to have endless tie-breaking rules. It can't be done with such a short season (i.e. you'd have to have the divisional teams play each other twice each season like the NFL to make it make sense).
I think maybe that's the point...to hell with the NCAA. Once the dust settles, there will most likely be 3-4 power conferences.
All conference's should just stay at 14, eliminate Non Conf games and Championship games that way whatever team can play every single team in their conference and determine the true winner... However I know that'll never happen because the small non-AQ schools would be hurt bad by not getting the payouts from playing the AQ schools among many other reasons.
I don't like the idea of eliminating non-conf games altogether. I think that's an excellent barometer of how good a team really is. It also provides us with some really spectacular matchups that incorporate regional fanbases that normally wouldn't square off.
Brutus Greyshield, I think you are correct about NCAA rules. However, presuming the expansion armageddon happens as many think it will, the NCAA will be a thing of the past. Four (or five) superconferences, under such a scenario would craft their own rules.
I also agree that there are complications with the structure, but in my opinion, the positives far outweigh the negatives.
We don't want Miami! Major sanctions coming. We don't need their "swagger" either
Missouri is the only school left that I want in the BigTen.
"YOLO" = I'm about to do something extremely ignorant/stupid & I need an excuse to do it.
yeah uh miami is not needed in the same conference as TOSU.
For reasons stated here, of your target list, only five are logical fits for the B1G: Kansas, Virginia, UNC, Duke and Georgia Tech. The AAU membership issue is not insignificant - while Nebraska lost its membership, UNL is still much more like the other Big Ten schools than most of the other expansion candidates you mentioned.
Texas would make sense, but I remain unconvinced that they would give up their top dog status in the Big 12 voluntarily, and oddly enough, the Big 12 appears relatively stable for the moment.
Andy, I have read that Texas would have to give up their media rights for a number of years if they left the Big 12. This would make me think they won't leave. Know anything about this?
http://www.mrsec.com/2012/05/big-12-extends-media-rights-deal-begins-to-fix-itself/
The Grant of Rights is, from what I've read, pretty air-tight. That said, contracts are made to be broken, and if anyone could break the stranglehold of the Big 12's media deal, it would be the uber-powerful Longhorns. Looking at it from their point of view, however, there is not a compelling case for them to want to leave. They're already the biggest, most profitable athletic program in the country, and while their Longhorn Network has struggled, they're not just going to abandon it to latch on to the BTN, I wouldn't think. Right now we stand to gain more by adding them than they do, which doesn't suggest a move is likely.
If the Big XII goes away, so does the grant of rights. Sure, the leftovers (KSU, ISU, Baylor, TCU) could try and hang on, but in reality, they'd have to start looking out for themselves and joing other conferences.
Well, that sort of goes without saying, but something very huge - like the Catholic 7 walking out of the Big East - would have to happen. The conference rebounded pretty strongly from its most recent exodus, and the Grant of Rights is designed, in theory, as a strong deterrent aimed at just such a catastrophic chain of events.
Agree on Texas - both why we want them and why we don't/won't.
I keep seeing Kansas, but don't believe they offer anything but basketball and we don't need a basketball upgrade. Population wise they are unhelpful. The football team and tradition are atrocious. Most pointedly, their academics are lower than anyone in or contemplated to be in the conference except possibly Nebraska.
The ACC schools listed are interesting, with G Tech the least desirable geographically and the most desirable in terms of media markets.
I like NDame and either Syracuse or B College to finish our rational footprint and keep our tradition.
G-Tech is very much a desired addition due to their huge number of D1 quality recruits. That parlays into strengthening the UNC, UVA addition along with G-tech, and probably Duke as excellent additions to the conference.
The expansion driving factors are not at all just about football
Boxley
Over on Bucknuts, "Friday Boarding House" articles states that Michigan is moving into the Buckeyes division along with Rutgers and Maryland, and that Wisky and Illinois are moving to the West division.
Hopefully this will also mean that they will rename the L&L divisions into something far less ludicrous.
Boxley
I cannot think of a reason why a simple directional name (East/West, North/South) can't be used. Delaney needs his head checked for Legends and Leaders.
Regarding exit penalties -- be it the ACC's $50 million or Big 12's grant of rights, contract law teaches us that these are always negotiable.
Regarding AAU status -- again, the B1G has shown to make an exception to the rule with the addition of Nebraska. Yes it was in the AAU at the time of invitation, but it was also under review for expulsion at the time, and both Michigan and Wisconsin voted it out of the AAU. The B1G has -- and should -- make an exception for the right football school. I argue that Florida State, and preferrably Miami, are reasons to make the exception.
Let's assume the B1G only adds a combination of Virginia, UNC, Georgia Tech, Duke, or Kansas, sticking strictly to its AAU rule, play this scenario out and it doesn't look good for the B1G's long-term football product. Under such a scenario, the SEC would most certainly add Virginia Tech and make a push into North Carolina (I think the SEC already has its sights on UNC). Further, the Big 12 would add Clemson, Florida State, and Miami. You would essentially have the SEC and Big 12 locking up the two most important recruiting grounds. Why does it make sense for the Big Ten that currently is in a stronger bargaining position than the Big 12, to allow the Big 12 to simply walk away with the state of Florida? It doesn't make sense. The Big Ten would have to make a run on at least one of the Florida schools.
This reminds me of the Office episode where Michael eats the sugary pretzel on Pretzel Day.
Instead of having a 8 game conference schedule with a semi-final, why couldn't you just bump up to a 9 game conference where you play everyone in your pod and another pod and that would be the division for the year. You could rotate the other pod every year so you would play everyone in the B1G every 3 years.
Buckeye till I'm dead
That would only work if there were no crossovers/protected rivalries between teams who are not in the same pod.