Who should the Big Ten add???

[TexOle]

As I stated earlier the University of Chicago was a member of the Big 10. Jay Berwanger's Heisman is there.

I think it is Notre Dame or Missouri. If neither school jumps then I think the Big 10 stands pat.

There have been rumors in the past that the Pac 10 would add teams so they could have a championship game. Colorado is the main school on that list.

[Sonny]

How about Texas joining the Big 10? Dennis Dodd floats the idea in his latest column:
http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootba ... y/10276524

Delany is playing a dangerous game of Jenga. He has to know that targeting any school would cause conferences to crumble. And we're not talking about Rutgers, Syracuse or Missouri. If the Big Ten expands it's going for the big enchilada. A brand name that will attract advertisers and fans. Think Notre Dame, or Texas.

Certainly no one wants to go through this just because the Big Ten says so. And not for the stated reason: to market the yet-to-be-launched Big Ten Network. National cable carriers aren't enamored with carrying "second-tier sports" featuring "Iowa volleyball" as one Comcast official put it. Delaney understandably got upset but the statement is largely true. Tune in for the first football game on BTN to find out: Indiana State-Indiana.

Still, if you're the Notre Dame trustees you'd have to listen. The Big Ten was jilted in '99 when it put its heart on the line for the Irish. But time heals all kinds of wounds. Who knows what the trustees are thinking eight years later? They took the bold step (at the time) of firing Ty Willingham before his contract was up. With a mega, mega-conference deal on the table could Notre Dame say no again?

If you're Texas president William Powers Jr. you're fascinated by all this. The school has never been comfortable in the Big 12, quarreling with Nebraska and Kansas State over eligibility standards and quietly cursing having to play the likes of Baylor, Iowa State and Kansas.

Texas is certainly the academic fit that the Big Ten seeks. Memorial Stadium is headed for an expansion up to 100,000. Fantasize, Orangebloods, about Ohio State, Michigan, Wisconsin and Penn State coming in on a regular basis while you keep the rivalries with Texas A&M and Oklahoma.

I don't see this working for a variety of reasons. I gotta imagine that the Texas State Legislature would get involved if UT wanted to leave A&M, TTU, etc. behind.

[KnoxVegas]

TU can still play A&M if they jump. All the legislature has to do is make it a law, a la Clemson-South Carolina. No game... No state funds. Pretty simple.

That is this the only in-state game that matters.

[TexOle]

Baylor was chosen to join the Big 12 due to their influence in the Legilature and with Governor Ann Richards being an alum. As much as many people would like to cut funds to the University of Texas it will never happen. That would open a spot for TCU in the Big 12 which would be nice.

[horn17]

I think we are going to start seeing the Big East as a midtier confrence soon....

yeah as soon as miami, BC, VT jump to the ACC...oh wait that already hap...

the Big East - one step up from confrence USA.....

[TexOle]

Where does that put the MWC? The problem is the Big East has a lot of unproven teams. We need to see some consistency out of that conference. It will take 2 more years to legitimize itself.

The Bowl alignment system blows. I loved it years ago when the bowls had to recruit a team to play there. Last year Nebraska got the Cotton Bowl and for the first time couldn't sell any tickets. Texas goes to the Alamo Bowl.

[bste_lax]

The Bowl alignment system blows. I loved it years ago when the bowls had to recruit a team to play there. Last year Nebraska got the Cotton Bowl and for the first time couldn't sell any tickets. Texas goes to the Alamo Bowl.

It's pretty easy, win your games and you will go to a better bowl game.

Also, Nebraska lost in the Cotton Bowl in a close game to Auburn and Texas played a close game with Iowa so the games itself were pretty evenly matched.

[Madlax16]

Where does that put the MWC? The problem is the Big East has a lot of unproven teams. We need to see some consistency out of that conference. It will take 2 more years to legitimize itself.

The Bowl alignment system blows. I loved it years ago when the bowls had to recruit a team to play there. Last year Nebraska got the Cotton Bowl and for the first time couldn't sell any tickets. Texas goes to the Alamo Bowl.

Its not that they COULDNT sell tickets. Trying to get ANY tickets for ANY husker game is getting almost impossible for anything less than the cost of an arm and a leg. Watch any husker game and you will see almost half the stadium in scarlet. The bottom line....nebraska fans are everywhere and they will travel anywhere for a game.

[TexOle]

It was not a sellout. The Nebraska fans this year did not show up. I was disappointed.

[Woodlawn]

Before the Big 8 became the Big 12, there were two events which made that growth necessary.

1) Arkansas left the SWC for the SEC.
2) The Pac 10 made sealed bids to two schools to make the Pac 10 the Pac 12.

Arkansas leaving the SWC both weakened that conference (making it a one state conference, and taking their champion in several sports (basketball, baseball, track, and a strong contender in football) and showed that mega conferences were the future.

The Big 8 knew they were the feeding grounds of the Big 10 (who was talking about adding Penn State at that point and the fear was again that a 12th school would be chosen..... at that time the thought was Missouri or Iowa State) and that they needed to grow or die.

The sealed bid to two schools from the Pac 10 only came with one statement.... that the two schools had a traditional rivalry. (ala all pac 10 schools, which are in natural twosome rivalries).

The rumors started immediately..... and it seemed like there were three likelihoods...... Texas & Texas A&M, Colorado and Colorado State, and Colorado and BYU.

The fact that Colorado was the subject of two rumors and that the SWC was the subject of another meant that the Big 8 and SWC were both looking to save their proverbial lives.

Why was it the Big 8 that grew instead of the SWC? Because the SWC was the conference that included the weakest teams.

The Big 8 could grow (all state schools) to add the three major state schools in Texas, and shed the weaklings like Rice, SMU (which had recently been hit with the football death penalty) and TCU (which has since been strengthened by new conference ties, new AD and new president). Had the SWC grown, instead, they would retain weak teams and shed who?

From the day the Big 8 extended bids to the 3 SWC schools until they accepted and Baylor was added was lightning fast, and was due to behind the scenes groundwork and the attempts of the major players in both conferences working to keep themselves in a powerful confernece.

After the Big 12 was announced, the Pac 10 recended thier bids which was tantamount to an admission that one school was in the new Big 12 and one school was not. (had both been in the new Big 12, there would have been no need to recend the bid.... had one been outside, they could have accepted the bid and made the Pac 10 consider an 11 school conference).

On that note, BYU made public overtures to the Pac 10 and played up their rivalry with Colorado State. This made many assume that it had been Colorado and Colorado State that had been offered Pac 10 bids, and that BYU wanted to Piggy Back on CSU into a more competitive conference.

It was this brush with greatness that many believe led to BYU and CSU leading the way out of the Big West Conference to start up the Mountain West Conference.

All this to say that the Big 10 and Pac 10 are not likely to add schools without some impetus to such a move. It was, in fact, the ACC's addition of schools which threatened the existence of the Big East and led to more conference reshuffling.

The only thing that I believe would cause the Big 10 to add a school would be several years of considerable misfortune in the football program at Notre Dame, which would lead to Notre Dame seeking admission to the Big 10, which the Big 10 would jump at.

As far as the Pac 10 adding two new schools, there would need to be quality candidates in good markets for the Pac 10 to even consider such an expansion. BYU is the Notre Dame of the west in the sense that it is the school that you either love, or love to hate. A BYU/CSU entrance into the Pac 10 is not impossible, and may have been the long term goal of those very schools forming the new Mountain West Conference.

Other schools talking about Pac 10 inclusion mainly do so from self interest and self promotion and are not realistic Pac 10 candidates. (Hawaii, San Jose State, Fresno State, San Diego State, UNLV, Texas Christian and Utah) These do not represent large markets or do not have a strong traditional rivalry or represent a geographic challange for "Olympic Sports" (football and basketball can travel anywhere). Many of these schools such as Hawaii represent "3 strikes".

If you want to talk about a new strong conference developing I would argue for key teams from conferences such as the Big East and Conference USA forming a new conference, but this is again fairly unlikely.

Additionally, the idea that a major conference could today prey upon teams in another major conference is nonsense. Missouri or Iowa State into the Big 10 or Colorado, Texas or Texas A&M into the Pac 10 were only "possible" thoughts before the inception of the Big 12.

Finally the only other conference conception I have heard of in pipe dream expressions is that of a mega conference made up of only the most competitive schools in all conferences (and as a football only conference). Teams like Michigan, Ohio State, Florida, Florida State, Miami, Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, USC, and perhaps one of the "next tier" of TRADITIONALLY powerful teams (such as UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State, Stanford, Colorado, Nebraska, Penn State, Alabama, Auburn, Tennessee etc). Notre Dame might be lured into such a conference.

But I don't imagine that any of the major conferences are going to make any membership changes in the immediate future.

[TexOle]

The dismantling of the SWC is accurate, but you should note that had Ann Richards not been the Governor it is likely that TCU would have been chosen. TCU was starting to see some success under Jim Wacker (yes, I still have a Wacker Cracker). Wacker left for Minnesota, and Pat Sullivan was hired. The success continued until LSU came calling for Sullivan and TCU would not release him. Sullivan destroyed the team and his career. It took Coach Fran to rebuild the team. TCU will always be a strong Mid Major. Nobody wants to add a team that has a small alumni base and competing in against the Texas trio and OU for an audience.

The Dallas Morning News had an article on adding a team to the Big 10 suggesting that Texas was a target. It went on to say that if Notre Dame is not added then it is likely Mizzou with its natural rivalries and the two media markets. Then Arkansas is the likely candidate to join the new Big 12.

I think Notre Dame is the school to join. Notre Dame will struggle in football this year. They are unranked with a tough schedule.

[Woodlawn]

I wasn't making an argument against the Ann Richards line of thought.

I do think that the assertion that the Big 10 is looking actively for a 12th team is the daydream of bored sports reporters.

Texas would not leave the Big 12. They enjoy the rivalries in all sports too much. Same to be said for Missouri, who, while a natural rivalry with Illinois exists; still enjoys even more their rivalries with Kansas (especially) and Nebraska. Arkansas would be a fit for the Big 12, but assaulting the SEC would be as unlikely as the Big 10 assaulting the Big 12 for teams.

Fantasy can get the better of people but the reality is that the major conferences (Pac 10, Big 10, Big 12, SEC, ACC) are not likely to change their memberships any time soon (unless Notre Dame football goes through SEVERAL years of bad performance -- to the benefit of the Big 10 alone).

[Jay Wisnieski]

Watch any husker game and you will see almost half the stadium in scarlet.

TJ, have you ever been to a game? Almost half? I've been going to and watching Nebraska games all my life and I'd say it's at least 97% of the stadium!

[anklebreaker]

Speaking of Nebraska...I have tickets for USC vs. The Big Red
and I can't wait. Anyone who has made the drive through nebraska and stopped to get gas can tell you that only one thing matters in Nebraska and that Cornhusker Football. I once was stopped for three hours on I-80 coming for Omaha on a saturday morning because of a home game. Gotta Love any state that names a highway after a coach. Maybe Duluth will get Rob Graff Parkway.....hahahaha

Answer to the Big Ten Question....NO ONE!!! No school would bring in enough revenue for the Big Ten to make this happen. If Pitt or ISU came into the Big Ten would you really watch Iowa vs. ISU (Already happens, Benson Clarify?) or Penn State vs. Pitt...Over Wisconsin Vs. Minn, Iowa, or Michigan. Or Michigan vs OSU...I think Not! Plus Madison, Minnesota, Michigan and OSU are 4 of the Largest Schools in the country and don't need/want to share any more money then they have to.

[JW]

i think the one team that no one is talking about is Boise St. I think that they are a team that will continue to get better and proved last year that they could compete with the Big Dogs in the Country by beating the Big 12 champion Oklahoma.

My other Nominations would be Akron, Miami (Oh), or Utah