Conference Realignment
- Status
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
How on earth the contracts involved didn't contemplate what would happen if teams left is beyond me. Maybe they did and this is all just posturing.
its all legal posturing
ESPN's argument is stronger if there are just unaffiliated schools and not a viable B12 league anymore. you do things that strengthen your case, when what you are proposing "stinks" in the normal sense of the word. UT and OU wanna leave, fine. pay the money and go. you cant have it both ways
even Saul Goodman knew the possibility of UT leaving was HIGH
ESPN's argument is stronger if there are just unaffiliated schools and not a viable B12 league anymore. you do things that strengthen your case, when what you are proposing "stinks" in the normal sense of the word. UT and OU wanna leave, fine. pay the money and go. you cant have it both ways
even Saul Goodman knew the possibility of UT leaving was HIGH
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
For the record I make no claims about what anybody WILL do, I'm not in the prediction business on this subject, my jaw was on the floor when Rutgers and Maryland happened, and would have been when Utah was added to the Pac 12 if it weren't for the coincidence of knowing somebody who worked there who insisted that was happening for a year before it did. I should have tried to be an insider, I guess I actually was one, I didn't believe a word of it.
But anyway, saying "(or ND)" gives the game away and makes my point for me. AAU membership is a proxy for prestige, it is not prestige itself.
Listing SUNY Buffalo among the potential additions also makes the point. Being affiliated with the Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center (which is why their research funding is so big) does not make them anything resembling a Big Ten school.
Research volume and academic rigor are not the same thing.
That being said, you can be snooty about either one, and these are immensely snooty people we're dealing with, so who knows what they will do. But if it were that important to have all AAU schools in the Big Ten, they would have found a way to keep Nebraska in the group. It has been rumored that several Big Ten schools actually voted against them in that process.
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
The AAU process I mean.
There was no dispute that Nebraska (because USDA funding doesn't count and their lavishly funded medical school is an independent entity from UNL) was not in compliance with the "rules" of AAU membership, which are tied to the volume of "peer reviewed" research funding. It came as some surprise that they would actually be voted out over it. And supposedly there were Big Ten schools that voted to expel them.
Syracuse then quit voluntarily rather than face the same process. Again, a very prestigious school that just isn't structured to be a federal grant rainmaker in the same kind of way.
If the Big Ten wanted Nebraska to be in the AAU, they would still be in the AAU.
Oh, and y'all know Dartmouth only just joined a couple years ago right? Forget the Big Ten, all of the Ivy League wasn't even in this thing.
Last edited:
Hadn't thought of them, but this makes sense to me. And selfishly my in-laws are there so maybe visits just coincidentally happen to line up with when the Illini are in town? At that point you gotta go to the game right? It's kismet
chrisRunner7
- Spokane, WA
The more I think about it, the more I think not much will happen anytime soon for the B1G.
I just don't think that B1G leadership will have the stomach or the ruthlessness to try to raid the PAC-12. Almost like it would ungentlemanly to do that to a conference that seems like a kindred spirit to the B1G in some ways. I think the most likely scenario is some kind of uninspiring agreement where the two conferences agree to play each other more.
I do think Kansas is a possible addition, but if they need to add a second team to make divisions even, that's where I get stuck. Georgia Tech would make tons of sense, but it seems like it'd be next to impossible to pick off any ACC schools if their TV agreement runs until 2035.
There is not a great financial argument to add Iowa St. and I just don't think it will happen. Unless something unexpected happens with Texas A&M or Notre Dame, I can't see any B1G moves coming. And that's too bad, 'cause I'd love to see them raid the PAC-12.
I just don't think that B1G leadership will have the stomach or the ruthlessness to try to raid the PAC-12. Almost like it would ungentlemanly to do that to a conference that seems like a kindred spirit to the B1G in some ways. I think the most likely scenario is some kind of uninspiring agreement where the two conferences agree to play each other more.
I do think Kansas is a possible addition, but if they need to add a second team to make divisions even, that's where I get stuck. Georgia Tech would make tons of sense, but it seems like it'd be next to impossible to pick off any ACC schools if their TV agreement runs until 2035.
There is not a great financial argument to add Iowa St. and I just don't think it will happen. Unless something unexpected happens with Texas A&M or Notre Dame, I can't see any B1G moves coming. And that's too bad, 'cause I'd love to see them raid the PAC-12.
altenberger22
- South Carolina
A Jimmy McGill reference!
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
For whatever it's worth, the Big Ten, Pac 12, and CFP TV deals all end simultaneously in 2024.
The opportunity to stop playing this game on inevitably losing terms is sitting right there.
The opportunity to stop playing this game on inevitably losing terms is sitting right there.
chrisRunner7
- Spokane, WA
OK, you renewed my hope for something big to happen knowing that the Pac-12 TV deal ends in 2024. Let the bloodbath begin.
I will take six PAC-12 teams, please, seven if we can't get Notre Dame to join. Then, since this is my daydream, I will be extra cynical and boot out Evanston's Big Ten Team for a nice round number of 20 teams. SEC couldn't quite match the national appeal of that conference without picking up some leftovers from the PAC-12.
Nebraska didn't lose their AAU membership because of the conference change. That's an apples to oranges comparison. They lost it because the level of funded research carried out there fell below the AAU threshold. The AAU doesn't give a damn what athletic conference a school belongs to. In fact, because the B1G is primarily comprised of AAU schools, why in the world would the AAU drop Nebraska for joining? Your argument makes no sense. Your "widely known" statement is based on a tweet from an anonymous guy who says that his information comes from "several people." Your changing conferences link related to Nebraska is another fluff piece that says that the conference switch COULD have been a reason for the AAU action, but doesn't back it up with a single quote or sliver of evidence. The author even says that we'll never actually know. As someone who spent a career in the academic world, I can tell you that academic organizations like the AAU have zero interest in what athletic conferences their member institutions compete in.
Exactly right. The bulk of Nebraska's research is agriculture-based, which means that it's primarily USDA-funded. The University of Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha is a fine medical institution. It is, as you say, lavishly funded by old money Omaha and greater Nebraska family money. To UNL's great distress, Walter Scott (Founder of Level 1 Communications and head of Peter Kiewitt Construction) funded a state-of-the-art facility for Engineering education at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, where I was Director of Admissions. Research money flowed to the Peter Kiewitt Institute from Omaha companies and corporations nation-wide. UNL was left out of that, even though many of the faculty teaching in Omaha had dual appointments at UNL. So, the structure of the University writ large was kind of the death knell for their membership in the AAU, because the one campus was less than the sum of the other campuses.
ChiefGritty
- Chicago, IL
Let's do a hypothetical here. Amazon decides they want to jump into college sports broadcasting with both feet and being a West Coast company, they decide the Pac 12 is the vehicle to do it. Armed with an offer that's double what ESPN is paying the SEC, they induce the Pac 12 to expand coast to coast, adding Ohio State and Clemson as football powerhouses, and Illinois and Syracuse to establish their hold on the New York and Chicago markets.
So now we're in the Pac 16. The biggest, richest, and while top-heavy most elite football conference in America. We play in a pod system for all sports, whereby we always play OSU, Syracuse and Clemson, and then the rest against the West Coast teams, and when on the road those games start at like 9PM a lot of the time. But, the money courses through the athletic department. Memorial Stadium is renovated, Ubben is a palace, hockey happens in the proposed downtown facility (as an associate member of the Big Ten like Notre Dame, naturally).
The Big Ten adds Pitt and Iowa State to replace us. We schedule an annual Wrigley Field football game with Northwestern, and try to schedule fairly regular home-and-homes with the old Big Ten schools in basketball, a couple per year, but beyond that we never play those schools anymore.
Two questions
1. Would this make Illinois athletics more or less popular, over time? Would people be more or less invested in it? Would new fans be more or less attracted to it?
2. Five years later, we've become accustomed to the idea that the Pac 16 teams are our conference opponents and the teams we need to battle against in the standings. USC versus Washington and Michigan versus Wisconsin are both on TV at the same time, both battles of ranked teams. Which game are you watching?
It's so crystal clear to me what the answers are, and yet everything in this conversation here and in the media just blindly presumes the opposite.
So now we're in the Pac 16. The biggest, richest, and while top-heavy most elite football conference in America. We play in a pod system for all sports, whereby we always play OSU, Syracuse and Clemson, and then the rest against the West Coast teams, and when on the road those games start at like 9PM a lot of the time. But, the money courses through the athletic department. Memorial Stadium is renovated, Ubben is a palace, hockey happens in the proposed downtown facility (as an associate member of the Big Ten like Notre Dame, naturally).
The Big Ten adds Pitt and Iowa State to replace us. We schedule an annual Wrigley Field football game with Northwestern, and try to schedule fairly regular home-and-homes with the old Big Ten schools in basketball, a couple per year, but beyond that we never play those schools anymore.
Two questions
1. Would this make Illinois athletics more or less popular, over time? Would people be more or less invested in it? Would new fans be more or less attracted to it?
2. Five years later, we've become accustomed to the idea that the Pac 16 teams are our conference opponents and the teams we need to battle against in the standings. USC versus Washington and Michigan versus Wisconsin are both on TV at the same time, both battles of ranked teams. Which game are you watching?
It's so crystal clear to me what the answers are, and yet everything in this conversation here and in the media just blindly presumes the opposite.
No ACC team is on a "realistic list." They can't move until 2035 because of their media deal.
Joel Goodson
- respect my decision™
A&M is going to stay in the SEC. Hardly surprising.
Eh I could see them destabilizing like the Big 12. All it takes is a couple bigger names floating the idea that they want out and everyone starts scrambling to find a dance partner. Before you know it there are no schools left and the contracts are voided. Do you really think UT and Oklahoma are going to be in the Big 12 until 2025? And do you think they are going to pay a dime to get out early? I would bet no on both.
Joel Goodson
- respect my decision™
I think you'd lose that second bet.
There are a million reasons why this wouldn't happen, but I'll play your game with one exception: I don't see Amazon paying that kind of money for 10pm EST starts. So let's assume most of the games are on at an earlier hour.
1. Illinois' popularity will be based on the same reason it is or isn't popular now: winning. If they win more, they will be more popular.
The PAC16 membership might make it more popular with the Chinese and Indian students, since they are probably more familiar with the West Coast schools. It's tough to say.
I think you get used to who you are playing. Believe it not, I don't miss playing the University of Chicago.
2. I am definitely watching my conference mates.
One thing with your exercise that I appreciate is flipping the script on travel out West. I don't think that the Big Ten expands there, although on that podcast posted earlier, supposedly USC reached out to the Big Ten. Still, I don't see it happening.
And speaking of podcasts, Loren Tate mentioned last Saturday that Duke expressed interest in joining the Big Ten. I can't imagine that would be anytime soon.
Illwinsagain
- Cary, IL
@ChiefGritty outed (not that way, his real identity!)
Opinion: Big Ten should reject 'manifest destiny' in realignment, with fan interest in college sports at risk
Opinion: Big Ten should reject 'manifest destiny' in realignment, with fan interest in college sports at risk
Interesting perspective from a fan on the UCLA football fan board, where the topic was Pac 12 teams bolting to the SEC or B1G.
| From strictly a football perspective, I don't see West Coast teams leaving the Pac12 to join either the Big 10 or SEC. I can't imagine West Coast teams traveling to play Big 10 teams during the winter months. Playing a 12:30 PM game at Penn State (or Maryland or Rutgers), that is a 9:30 AM start time on the West Coast - isn't the idea of playing a Pac12 game at 9:30 AM for TV reasons a source of ridicule by several posters on this forum? Other Big 10 road games could be at 10:30 AM PST. I'm also not optimistic UCLA football would be very successful playing games in very cold weather or snow. I will say the Big 10 lines up better with the Pac 12 from an academic standpoint than any other Power 5 conference. The time issue would also come up with West Coast teams traveling to play SEC teams like Florida at 12:30 PM. I think the SEC has little interest in adding teams on the West Coast. They are already successful on the field and in the ratings. Their success has allowed them to recruit top players on the West Coast. I don't see many benefits for them to expand to the West Region. |
- Status