Does anyone think that a possible co champion Iowa and Ohio State will encorage the Big 10 to expand to 12?

If Iowa and Ohio State were playing for the Big 10 championship would the loser get an at large bid?

Is it Notre Dame or some other reason the Big 10 is reluntant on expanding to 12 teams. Does the Big 10 deserve two BCS bids after a horrible OOC schedule this year?

Without a playoff, every BCS conference should have 12 teams with a conference champion to determine the best BCS participants for at large.

big 10 has been looking at expansion since penn state joined, and they WILL expand. question is when. notre dame has always been the first choice, and ironically, had the irish fallen flat for 3-4 years, it would have happened. but as long as they're in the running for a bcs bowl every 4 years, it makes all the sense in the world to remain independent. tv contract, plus they share their bowl payout with NO ONE. frankly i think that was a bad decision by the bcs -- they held all the power to force nd into a conference, and they gave in.

other teams they've talked about are syracuse and, believe it or not, missouri. but that would force the big 12 to find a replacement, where none is immediately apparent.

i wish i could offer some prescient thought of who will be the 12th team in the big 10, but i have no idea how that's going to shake out. it will probably come to the pac 10 expanding first, which would would all but force the big 10 to follow suit.

unless someone out there knows something...?

A valid point, but why would the BCS care if Notre Dame joined a conference or not?

Big 10 Conference is there any thing that us Big East fans can do to help get Notre Dame into your conference.

goober --

the bcs was originally drawn up by conference commissioners (spearheaded by roy kramer) to more or less ensure that a national championship would come from among them, while still maintaining bowl alignments (the citrus and cotton bowls, for instance, have always had very high payouts) and satisfying the public's desire for a 1-2 matchup at the end of the season. there had been split champions twice in the 90's -- nebraska/michigan and colorado-georgia tech -- and it could easily have happened again, and the commissioners didn't want the ncaa to step in and find its own remedy, which might include a playoff with mid-major conferences, and consequently a smaller percentage of payouts to the big six.

at that point, they could have decided whatever they wanted to. leave notre dame out. require that only teams from a major conference get to play in. or require that notre dame go undefeated if it wanted in. they had all the money, and tie-ins to every bowl with a significant payout. the prospect of losing out on that money would have made notre dame think twice about remaining independent, and since the big 10 was 1/6 of the voting share of the bcs, it could have brought additional pressure.

instead, notre dame has a far easier requirement to get into a bcs bowl than any other at-large team. it only has to win 9 games; finish in the top 12 in the bcs ratings; and automatically qualifies if it is in the top 6. admittedly, that is still a tough road to hoe, but they pulled it off in 2000 by beating nobody in the top 15. it could happen again, very easily. and every time it happens, $13-$15 million that would have gone to one of the big six is taken away by notre dame, which does not have to share a penny with any other school. every other bcs conference has to share its money with other conference members. the big XII will earn about 19 million from the bcs, maybe 17 million after oklahoma's expenses, but that is divided 12 ways, for a little under 1.5 million per team.

the inequity is that notre dame only has to qualify once every six years to come out ahead financially of any given member of a bcs conference. no one else has it that easy...except perhaps florida state this year.

I feel that the Big Ten will be expanding soon. ND looks like they're out of the picture, simply due to the fact, they don't really want to join. However, there is another school that the Big Ten has had some history with, and I think they'll probably turn to that school very soon. That school is Missouri. Missouri has felt like a misfit in the Big 12, and would probably leave the Big 12 for the Big Ten in a heartbeat. Missouri has played quite a few Big Ten opponents in the past, so the Big Ten is familiar with them. They bring the very lucrative St. Louis market also. To replace Missouri, I can see the Big 12 going after BYU.

missouri is a nice match because it creates a geographic rivalry with iowa. you can see the last weekend of the big ten season shaping up with wisconsin-minnesota, iowa-missouri, northwestern-illinois, purdue-indiana, michigan-ohio state and michigan state-penn state. instead of having the staggered system where one team (iowa this year) finishes a week early and watches its fate decided by others.

as for byu, there has been speculation that they would join the pac ten with utah, but that has never been very popular. they like utah, and may team them up with former wac-mate hawaii if they expand, but i agree with you that byu is a better fit for the big xii. it alone has the tradition that the big xii would covet, and its basketball program will certainly do no worse than perennials nebraska, colorado, texas a&m and baylor. and the fact that byu is a religious school will not turn anyone off in the big xii, whose swc members had smu and tcu on the sched year after year.

I like the idea of expanding to include Iowa State or Missouri. That leaves a spot in the XII for Arkansas, which belongs with its SWC brothers from Texas.

As a replacement for the SEC, that gets difficult. I think FSU would be the logical choice, but it will not happen as long as Bowden is around. Remember he was the one who said it would be too difficult to win NCs in the SEC, so he joined the ACC. Clemson will never happen as long as Carolina has a say in the decision.

VT might be interesting even though they are down this year. They might even consider it as a preemptive move if Miami goes to the ACC.

Or, how about Miami to the SEC? A very long shot.

Louisville? Never as long as Kentucky has a say so. Memphis? Three teams in Tennessee is not really feasible.

West Virginia? Possibly,

the end of my ramblings, what do you think? :-X

The SEC won't take any non-BCS team. It would rather stay at 11 teams than take Louisville, Memphis, etc. They will steal a team from the ACC, and the ACC will either stay at 8 teams or pick off a Big East team like Miami or Virginia Tech.

Beg to disagree. The University of Texas, who has a lot of clout in the Big XII, does not really want Arkansas in the conference. Texas A&M, another big powerbroker in the Big XII, does not really want Arkansas in either. The reason why is that both of these big Texas schools have always suspected Arkansas of cheating to get Texas recruits, and they didn't like it that many Texas recruits chose Arkansas over them. The two might be willing to play Arkansas OOC, but they will not let them into the Big XII.


Agree on FSU. Also, there would be two other schools (possibly three) that would be opposed to Clemson's admission to the SEC besides South Carolina. Georgia does not want Clemson either, and I seriously doubt that Auburn would want them in either. The reason you ask? All three schools recruit Georgia heavily, and Georgia and Auburn do not want another SEC school gobbling up Georgia recruits. You could also add Tennessee to that mix also.
Now for the other two schools, Miami and VT. Both schools have a better chance at getting into the SEC than Clemson. Of the two, I think Miami has the better shot at getting into the SEC. The SEC wants more Florida recruits and the addition of Miami would help that goal. Also, the SEC has an intense dislike of the ACC, and would love to make sure that the ACC would not be much of a factor on the BCS scene. The addition of Miami would accomplish that. Plus, VT has made it known that it would love to be in the ACC, but VT is opposed by, not by UVa, but the four Carolina schools.
At the same time, there is a lot of resistance in the ACC in the subject of giving Miami membership. Look for the SEC to take advantage of the situation, and look for Mississippi State to get the boot from the SEC (the only shocking move I will predict!!)

I remembered before the Georgia-Clemson game this year, a repporter asked how many Georgia players had been recruited by Clemson and how many Clemson players had been recruited by Georgia. Almost every player on both teams had been recruited by the other school. Clemson in the SEC or not, is still going to compete for Georgia recruits. So it isn't a really valid point against not including them. Clemson is not more than 30 minutes from the Georgia border.

But I do buy the argument that Clemson won't let South Carolina have any say about their conference affiliation. Remember back to when South Carolina left the ACC, Clemson was so furious that they actually wanted to end the rivalry by never scheduling South Carolina again. State law forces the 2 schools to play. The game is huge in the state, but I'm sure if the law wasn't in place or have a fan revolt, both institutions would just walk away from each other.

As for VTech not getting into the ACC because of the NC schools is quite plausible. Many have argued on many boards that the NC schools are trying to hog control of the conference by keeping the conference membership down to 9 teams. The NC schools power dilutes whenever a new member joins. I personally want the ACC to expand to 12 and bring Miami, VTech & West Virginia(Or UCF) on board. Also, the NC schools have the view that they are the money winners of the conference and that any new members would be stealing revenues that they earned. ( Iam a little biased against NC because it seems like almost every other day I get cutoff by a North Carolinian whenever I drive around Greenville).

If the Big East does not expand and have all division 1 football members play a regular schedule, the following would be best:

Miami, WVU, Va Tech to the ACC


Pittsburgh to the Big 10


Big East would revert back to a basketball conference with 10 members all playing round robin and the teams playing football could all become independent just like Notre Dame. The remaining Big East schools playing football could battle Notre Dame for the BCS at large bid.

You may think it is not a valid point, but it really isn't once you really start thinking about it. Currently, Klempsum competes in the Awful College Conference (along with the Gnats) and the University of Georgia competes in the SEC East. We can tell recruits in our own state of Georgia that they will be playing in one of the best conferences in the land, and one that has won many championships. Just about everyone who has a brain knows that the Awful College Conference sends only one team a year to the big bowls: F$U. Therefore, Georgia can pick up recruits that wish to play in a real conference and earn their bowl rings. The lazy Ga recruits pick Klempsum or F$U and go on a cakewalk. It would be different if both UGa and Klempsum were in the same conference. Also, did you know that Auburn has not played Klempsum in the regular season since WWI??? They will renew that series for the first time since WWI next year I think. Don't know how long it will last before it goes back into mothballs.

But I do buy the argument that Clemson won't let South Carolina have any say about their conference affiliation. Remember back to when South Carolina left the ACC, Clemson was so furious that they actually wanted to end the rivalry by never scheduling South Carolina again. State law forces the 2 schools to play. The game is huge in the state, but I'm sure if the law wasn't in place or have a fan revolt, both institutions would just walk away from each other.

As for VTech not getting into the ACC because of the NC schools is quite plausible. Many have argued on many boards that the NC schools are trying to hog control of the conference by keeping the conference membership down to 9 teams. The NC schools power dilutes whenever a new member joins. I personally want the ACC to expand to 12 and bring Miami, VTech & West Virginia(Or UCF) on board. Also, the NC schools have the view that they are the money winners of the conference and that any new members would be stealing revenues that they earned. ( Iam a little biased against NC because it seems like almost every other day I get cutoff by a North Carolinian whenever I drive around Greenville).[/quote]

Lash,

I think you're right about Pitt (rather than Notre Dame, Iowa State, or Mossiouri) heading to the Big 10. I think Pitt has to show continual success and improvement for a couple of years, but they seem to have the inside track, at least on paper:

Most to Gain and Least to Lose--

Of all these schools, only Notre Dame (to my knowledge) has flat out snubbed the Big 10. They're currently enjoying the best of both worlds, scheduling flexibilty, and a fat NBC contract that may be renewed.

Iowa State and Missouri are probably interested, but they are already in a quality BCS conference with a title game, existing rivalries (stronger in hoops than in football), and quality bowl tie-ins.

Pitt has no major in-conference rivalries that would tie it down, is in an undersized conference whose continued existence is somewhat uncertain and which has no championship game and inferior bowl tie-ins (if I'm not mistaken) to the Big 12 and the Big 10.

Perks for Big 10--

Pitt has a very strong football tradition, and in the last several years they have been more successful than ISU or Missouri, and arguably better than Notre Dame.

Pitt has a strong basketball tradition (at least as far back to the beginning of the Big East), and is currently a top 2 team.

Penn State would be happier with a natural rival to play at the end of the season, and Paterno has expressed a desire to renew the series with Pitt.

The Big Ten could blanket Pennsylvania and grab a larger share of the eastern tv market.

I've read that the Big 10 claims not to be interested in adding another school unless it will have as great an impact as Penn State did upon entering the conference. If that's true, only Notre Dame has a real shot right now, but for numerous reasons (including some bad blood), Notre Dame probably won't be asked to join. Of the other candidates that fit the Big 10 mold, Pitt is currently the most succesful in athletics. I don't think Iowa State or Missouri would be a bad fit. Far from it. But I think Pitt, if their success continues, is the best possible (avaliable) fit for the Big 10 right now.

If Pitt manages to beat Miami next year and win a major bowl game, then with their success in hoops this year, they won't be a hard sell to Big 10 fans. The Happy Valley crowd will be especially pleased to resume their annual war, and the Big 10 (finally) can have a title game. Iowa vs. OSU would have been quite a treat after the two relative duds the SEC and Big 12 gave us this year.

What is this obsession on this board about booting schools from conferences? There is so much more involved in conference membership other than football. I've said this before, but it is convenient to look at the last 2-3 years in football and think MAJOR changes should be made. You must look at the big picture with ALL sports, traditions, etc. ALL SEC schools (excepting Vandy) are notorious for cheating, so MSU is no special case, and have been successful in basketball for the last decade. The 1996 Final Four for instance plus an SEC title or two (memory fails me at the moment...maybe it was West Division title). State has been really bad recently on the gridiron. BAAAAD. But MSU has decent to good men's and women's basketball programs and is traditionally a baseball powerhouse. And remember that the Bulldogs won the SEC west in football only five years ago, and four years ago, they were 8-0 and ranked in the top 10 before losing.

I quote javaman again: "Sometimes schools just naturally belong in a conference because they are the very basis for the regional identity, heritage, and very definition of what makes the conference what it is.

"Ole Miss and MSU are part of this SEC identity, and at the very heart and soul of both the conference and the South. To not have them be part of the SEC would be like not having Indiana/Illinois part of the Big10, or Cal/Stanford not be part of the Pac10. "

***

DND, I know this an old post, so, I apologize if you've already "rescinded" this notion of booting anyone from the SEC.