Big Ten at 20 (Warning expansion related)
Warning: This post is about Big Ten Conference expansion. If you are sick of this topic or do not care about this topic stop reading. This post is not for you.
If you are intrigued by this topic, such as myself, feel free to continue.
Additionally the ideas in this post are not all that original – the diary’s intention is more to talk these concepts out among Michigan friends who enjoy such conversation.
Impetus:
In the last couple months there have been some rumors on the internets that conference expansion talks could heat up again. And specifically that the Big Ten could go to 20 teams. I am not an advocate for this at all. I personally enjoyed the conference the most when it was at 11 teams.
However this concept did spark my imagination – if further expansion was inevitable, and 20! was the number, how the hell would you have a legit conference work like that.
My proposal for football:
1) The conference would consist of 4 divisions
2) All would still play a 12 game season, with two teams playing in the Big ten championship game for a 13th game. The conference schedule would have to be expanded to 10 games. Everyone would lose one of their Non-conference games.
3) Each team would play their 4 other intra-division opponents every year.
4) Each team would play all 5 teams in an opposite division every year. However, the division versus division match ups would rotate on a yearly basis.
5) The tenth game would be played against the equal seed (same standings) of a predetermined opposite division opponent each year. For example: There would be two 1 seed v 1 seed games, two 2 seed v 2 seed games, two 3 seed v 3 seed games, and so on. Everyone would play a tenth game, even the 5 seeds versus the 5 seeds.
6) The two wining teams from the 1 seed v 1 seed games would then meet in the conference championship game
Possible schools for addition:
From the rumblings – and it is probably just wishful thinking/talk – the schools most likely to join the conference are as followed –
(Again I don’t think this is going to happen but these are the names thrown out there, presently and it the past)
Texas
Oklahoma
Georgia Tech
University of Virginia
Florida State
The 6th school is a little trickier. My belief is if the Big Ten could secure the above schools they’d go after University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill with all they’ve got. However I think UNC wouldn’t leave Duke behind, and more likely would end up in the SEC.
Which would mean the Big Ten would fall back on University of Kansas (AAU member, connects Texas/OU to rest of Conference).
Below I lay out both options, as well as the general concept of the schedule, and what Michigan’s schedule would look like in a 6 year span (when they would have played everyone home/away at least once).
Thoughts?
Go Blue!
East | North | West | South | |||
Option 1 | Florida ST | Penn ST | Wisc | Texas | ||
Georgia Tech | Mich | Minn | OU | |||
UNC | MSU | Iowa | Nebraska | |||
UVA | Ohio ST | ILL | IU | |||
Maryland | Rutgers | NW | Pur | |||
East | North | West | South | |||
Option 2 | Florida ST | Mich | Wisc | Texas | ||
Georgia Tech | MSU | Minn | OU | |||
UVA | Ohio ST | Iowa | Nebraska | |||
Maryland | Rutgers | IU | Kansas | |||
Penn ST | NW | Pur | ILL | |||
Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Year 4 | Year 5 | Year 6 | |
East Schedule | North +West 10th game | West + South 10th game | South + North 10th game | South + North 10th game | West + South 10th game | North +West 10th game |
North Schedule | East + South 10th game | South +West 10th game | West + East 10th game | West + East 10th game | South +West 10th game | East + South 10th game |
West Schedule | South + East 10th game | East + North 10th game | North + South 10th game | North + South 10th game | East + North 10th game | South + East 10th game |
South Schedule | West + North 10th game | North + East 10th game | East + West 10th game | East + West 10th game | North + East 10th game | West + North 10th game |
Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Year 4 | Year 5 | Year 6 | |
@MSU | MSU | @MSU | MSU | @MSU | MSU | |
Option 1 UM Sched + 2 Non-Con games | Rutgers | @Rutgers | Rutgers | @Rutgers | Rutgers | @Rutgers |
@FSU | Texas | @Wisc | Wisc | @Texas | FSU | |
Ga Tech | @OU | Minn | @Minn | OU | @Ga Tech | |
@UNC | Nebraska | @Iowa | Iowa | @Nebraska | UNC | |
UVA | @IU | ILL | @ILL | IU | @UVA | |
@Maryland | Pur | @NW | NW | @Pur | Maryland | |
@Penn ST | Penn St | @Penn ST | Penn St | @Penn ST | Penn St | |
OSU | @OSU | OSU | @OSU | OSU | @OSU | |
South Seed | @West Seed | East Seed | @East Seed | West Seed | @South Seed | |
@MSU | MSU | @MSU | MSU | @MSU | MSU | |
Rutgers | @Rutgers | Rutgers | @Rutgers | @Texas | @Rutgers | |
Option 2 UM Sched + 2 Non-Con games | @FSU | Texas | @Wisc | Wisc | OU | FSU |
Ga Tech | @OU | Minn | @Minn | @Nebraska | @Ga Tech | |
@Penn ST | Nebraska | @Iowa | Iowa | Kan | Penn St | |
UVA | @Kan | IU | @IU | @ILL | @UVA | |
@Maryland | ILL | @Pur | Pur | NW | Maryland | |
@NW | NW | @NW | NW | @NW | NW | |
OSU | @OSU | OSU | @OSU | OSU | @OSU | |
South Seed | @West Seed | East Seed | @East Seed | West Seed | @South Seed | |
Pros | ||||||
In a 4 year span play everyone in conference at least once | ||||||
Regional rivals would continue | ||||||
Ten games, hence Big 10 (marketing angle) | ||||||
From a strategic standpoint you have contained or surrounded SEC | ||||||
Marquee games every weekend | ||||||
All teams have equal home/away games every year | ||||||
Academic standards have not been overly diminished. Institutional cooperation enhanced. | ||||||
Own huge swath of country/Media Markets | ||||||
Teams could continue to schedule non-conference rivals if they choose | ||||||
Winning divisions would be important, seeding would add intrigue | ||||||
Mich/OSU would take place before Thanksgiving again | ||||||
Clear/fair conference champion would be crowned | ||||||
Would be able to easily regionalize Big ten network - instead of 1 network expand to 4. And possibly allow Big ten to buy out/absorb Longhorn Network | ||||||
For the most part all States will be connected. There will be a gap on either the southwest or southeast depending on who joins. | ||||||
Recruiting territory would be greatly expanded. Nebraska could hit up Texas again. East coast teams would have better tools to sell Florida kids. | ||||||
For basketball. Everyone plays each other once -- then seeded Tourney for champion | ||||||
Cons | ||||||
Besides regional rivals would other teams play each other enough to really be considered conference foes? | ||||||
Travel at end of season could be difficult on fans | ||||||
Teams would no longer ever have 8 home games. Lose a 3rd Non-Conference game/guaranteed gate | ||||||
UM/OSU would not be last game of year | ||||||
There is a possibility although not likely that the Big Ten Champion could have a losing or .500 record | ||||||
Inevitably the division balance could be uneven. West would need Wisc/Iowa to be a power. | ||||||
January 31st, 2016 at 3:52 PM ^
I'd rather see the B1G go back down to the 10.
January 31st, 2016 at 4:08 PM ^
January 31st, 2016 at 9:49 PM ^
Good school, iconic football program, rabid fanbase, got us a championship game, etc. Should've stopped there
February 1st, 2016 at 9:29 AM ^
I don't know how good of a school Nebraska is.....
Otherwise I agree with your other points.
February 1st, 2016 at 12:00 PM ^
Nebraska was in the AAU at the time they were brough in, but since that time they have lost their accreditation.
February 3rd, 2016 at 9:22 PM ^
An important distinction regarding the loss of accreditation is that, from my understanding, the AAU changed how they measure some of the qualifications, which especially affected Nebraska. I guess their medical school isn't on their main campus. The research $$ related to the medical school no longer counted. Thus, the loss of AAU membership.
February 1st, 2016 at 11:41 AM ^
I still don't understand the addition of Rutgers. If they wanted the NY market that bad, why not Syracuse?
Rutgers All-time record 641–621–42 (.508) Bowl record 6–4 (.600)
Syracuse All-time record 708–503–49 (.581) Bowl record 15–9–1 (.620) 1 Heisman winner
Let's not even compare the basketball programs...
The only thing Syracuse lacks is a football stadium, but they've been trying to replace the Carrier Dome and B1G money would have helped them with that.
February 1st, 2016 at 11:58 AM ^
Rutgers is a lot closer to NYC than Syracuse
February 2nd, 2016 at 9:06 AM ^
in NYC than Syracuse. They also brought the NJ market.
January 31st, 2016 at 3:58 PM ^
There are always teams that will jump but UNC is to ACC as Michigan is to Big 10..........
January 31st, 2016 at 6:51 PM ^
January 31st, 2016 at 4:10 PM ^
The most logical final solution to me is 8 conferences based entirely off location. Each conference (16 teams each, one or two would have to have 17 in the coming years) has a championship game. The winner of each conference feeds into an 8 team playoff for the National Championship. You could create 8 (!!!) TV networks that would all contain at least one major program and major viewer market. As divisions would be 8 teams each (a couple with 9) you should play 9 conference games with one crossover game and 3 OOC games. Each school could establish protected rivalries for those that fell out of your conference (ND/USC for one, others that are seperated by a state or two may be split as well, like Tenn/UF).
January 31st, 2016 at 10:43 PM ^
January 31st, 2016 at 4:11 PM ^
that doesn't either dilute the B1G or make a mockery of our geographic footprint. I say drop Rutgers and let's play ball. (I'm a Jersey guy and originally advocated Rutgers; the marriage has not worked.)
January 31st, 2016 at 9:51 PM ^
The value Rutgers brings is 1) cable dollars for as long as this extortion scheme lasts and 2) home games away from home for Michigan fans out east
January 31st, 2016 at 4:17 PM ^
January 31st, 2016 at 6:54 PM ^
January 31st, 2016 at 10:14 PM ^
Taking three schools from the same state (nevermind that they're only 20 miles apart) defeats the whole purpose of expanding geography.
I could see a scenario where UNC could jump ship (money talks). They'd still be able to play Duke in basketball every year. However, that rivalry runs so deep that I think there be a serious uproar in the fan base if a change was made.
NC State could probably land on its feet in the SEC (and actually have a chance to play for a basketball title in Kentucky's "off years").
February 1st, 2016 at 1:42 AM ^
February 1st, 2016 at 9:21 AM ^
Living down here, I don't get the impression that UNC and Duke care about rivalries with NC State or "State" or Wake Forest "Wake". You could convince them both to join the B1G because they care about each other.
January 31st, 2016 at 4:24 PM ^
of home and away games.
January 31st, 2016 at 4:25 PM ^
How would Rutgers ever win a conference game? Now that we have Harbaugh, that is.
January 31st, 2016 at 4:47 PM ^
January 31st, 2016 at 5:01 PM ^
January 31st, 2016 at 5:03 PM ^
This is a very nice presentation.
I would oppose Florida State and Oklahoma on academic grounds and insignificant media markets. Oklahoma is also tethered to Oklahoma State in conference shifting scenarios.
I suppose they expand the footprint but Tallahassee and Norman are a) small, b) rural, and c) not close to anything bigger.
Ann Arbor is the sixth-biggest city in Michigan at 114,000 but more importantly it is extremely well-educated and the closest Big Ten town to bigger markets like Detroit and Toronto.
Does Norman get us into OKC? Do we need OKC? Does OKC even care about OU?
Tallahassee's closest big market is Atlanta, which we're already covering locally with Georgia Tech, a terrific school.
I might replace FSU with Miami. University of Florida is the best academic institution in the state, but they're not budging from the SEC. Miami is a clear #2, in a huge market, and it's proven in the past 30 years to be relatively unbound by conference loyalty, going from independent to Big East to ACC.
It has often been said that Virginia is bound to Virginia Tech and that's fine by me. VT is a good school -- a lot like Purdue. Adding both UVA and Virginia would bring the whole state into the Big Ten and potentially give us some media bleed into North Carolina and Tennessee.
Texas is an obvious choice.
Kansas over UNC because UNC is an ACC blueblood and unlikely to leave without its Tobacco Road partners (NC State, Duke). Kansas also gives us better geographic contiguity and it dips into the Kansas City/St. Louis market that we missed when the SEC took Missouri.
So my six additions would be:
Texas
Kansas
Virginia
Virginia Tech
Georgia Tech
Miami
February 1st, 2016 at 11:06 AM ^
"Does Norman get us into OKC? Do we need OKC? Does OKC even care about OU?"
February 2nd, 2016 at 12:44 AM ^
January 31st, 2016 at 5:18 PM ^
Did you mean impetus? Just asking.
January 31st, 2016 at 7:21 PM ^
of resistance to this...
January 31st, 2016 at 6:41 PM ^
is leaving notre dame out of the conference !!!
Go Blue!
January 31st, 2016 at 7:23 PM ^
January 31st, 2016 at 7:32 PM ^
February 1st, 2016 at 9:24 AM ^
I'm a proponent of screwing ND out of any chance to join a legitimate conference. Let's work forward from that premise.
February 2nd, 2016 at 3:59 PM ^
I believe that ND being forced to join a conference, especially one as strong as the B1G is the ulitmate in screwing them over. If they were to join the B1G, it would be years before they would lose less than 2-3 games a year in conference, especially if they get stuck with UM, MSU, and OSU as division mates. Add in road trips to Madison and Iowa City every now and then and it's highly unlikely they contend for national relevance more than twice a decade. ND belongs in the B1G, and having ND in the conference would be a gain for teams in the conference as they would be a big draw for their road games, and would eliminate ND poaching the spot on UM/MSU/Purdue's schedule that is reserved for a quality opponent. Just my $0.02.
January 31st, 2016 at 8:40 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 31st, 2016 at 8:42 PM ^
Bluevod is talking a lot about this. Why do we trust him?
January 31st, 2016 at 8:50 PM ^
although --- I'm not entirely sure 10 conference games would work. I think that college football is pretty locked into 12 regular season games. There is literally no other weekend to add to the regular season unless you start before Labor Day or move Championship Week further back.
If we're locked into 12 regular season games, I don't think we have 10 conference games (because of the desire to keep some OOC games).
I'd guess a 20-team setup has 4 groups of 5, with 2 groups making up one division in a year and NO cross-over play prior to the B1G Championship game. Rotate the divisions every 2 years.
January 31st, 2016 at 9:52 PM ^
i do not like it. to many teams
February 1st, 2016 at 12:45 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 1st, 2016 at 1:01 AM ^
February 4th, 2016 at 12:36 AM ^
They rank right up with us in academics ? And they are a public school .How about ND, Stanford,Cal, UCLA, M, UVA , NW, GT, USC, and Duke in the Big Brain ?
February 1st, 2016 at 8:07 AM ^
It won't happen but if I could make a wish, I'd go for 4 conferences of 20 teams each with two divisions in each conference, and reconstitute the old Big Ten for one division and the other 10 schools in the other. Ditto for all of the other conferences. Nine conference games within the division, one game with the other division in the conference and two games with other teams from the other four conferences.
This alignment immediately makes for an eight team playoff due to "symmetry" of four conferences and the divisional winners in each conference playing each other and the winner going to the NC playoffs.
There would be no independent schools eligible for national playoff consideration.
February 1st, 2016 at 9:45 AM ^
So we'd host traditional B1G rivals like Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota once every six years? I don't understand why this needs to be done.
February 1st, 2016 at 10:06 AM ^
Wisconsin? Are they currently in the B1G? WHen was the last time we played them, seems like years ago. Hate this conference reallignment.
February 1st, 2016 at 10:07 AM ^
The only way I would be ok with 20 teams in the B1G is if they did it like MLB did before inerleague play. Have two "leagues" that only play each other if they meet in the championship.
The Big Ten League:
Michigan
Illinois
Minnesota
Purdue
Wisconsin
Indiana
Iowa
Ohio State
Michigan State
Northwestern
The Other 10 League:
Nebraska
Penn State
Maryland
Boston College
Georgia
Gerogia Tech
North Carolina
Duke
Florida State
Syracuse
The only time they would ever play each other in football, in a confrence game, would be in the Confrence Championship game. Sets up two fairly competitive leagues and it doesn't destroy what is great about college football. Keep it at 9 confrence games and everyone plays all the teams in thier league. In theory, they could schedule a non-confrence game against a team from the other league. This way each team still gets a shit ton of TV money but fans can go back to enjoying the yearly rivalries that help to make this sport great.
February 1st, 2016 at 12:42 PM ^
2 more teams..2 eight teams divisons ........
Oklahoma and Georgia Tech
February 1st, 2016 at 2:50 PM ^
I'm not really sure who this benefits.
If the goal is TV dollars, I'm not sure anyone gets more money. Maybe we'd get something more if Texas came in, but Texas would get less.
If the goal is football competition, you'd be bringing in a few teams to shore up the other half of the conference, but we'd never play them.
By the way, the Big 10 shares its revenue and won't let Texas be in charge. I can't see that ever happening unless they ditch the Longhorn Network. Even then, it's going to be a hard sell for both sides.
February 1st, 2016 at 4:16 PM ^
really fucked everything up because we could have moved toward something like this in the wake of a Big 12 implosion.
Four 16-18 team "Conferences" with two major "Divisions" of 8 or 9 that resemble the old conferences. And in many cases I literally mean "resemble the old conferences." In this scenario, nobody gets left out of the game of musical chairs, and only one more team would need to be added: And it happens to be Houston.
ACC (17)
ACC Atlantic (resembles old Big East)
BC, Louisville, Miami, ND, Pitt, Rutgers ($%&#!!!), Syracuse, VT, West Virginia
ACC Coastal (resembles old ACC)
Clemson, Duke, FSU, GT, Maryland ($%&#!!!), UNC, NC State, Virginia, Wake
BIG 10 (16)
Big Ten East (resembles most of old 11-team Big 10)
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, MSU, OSU, Northwestern, Penn State, Purdue
Big Ten West (geographically perfect hybrid of B1G West and old Big 12 North)
Iowa, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Wisconsin
SEC (16)
SEC East (resembles most of old SEC)
Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, S.Carolina, Tennessee, Vandy
SEC West (geographically perfect hybrid of SEC West and parts of old SWC)
Arkansas, Houston, LSU, Ole Miss, Mississippi St., Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., Texas A&M
Pac 12 (16)
Pac 12 "Mountain" (geographically aligned remnants of the SWC and newer additions to the Pac 12)
Arizona, ASU, Baylor, Colorado, Texas, TCU, Texas Tech, Utah
Pac 12 "Pacific" (The old Pac 8)
Cal, Oregon, Oregon St., Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington, Washington St.
February 2nd, 2016 at 8:17 AM ^
Yes, nice job. Well thought out. Back in the day (i.e., before CFP, and during the rounds of musical chairs) I would begin writing diaries with layouts similar to this (Moonlight Graham's scheme), trying to preserve some semblance of tradition and geography while creating a playoff first round in the conference championships.
I even did maps and charts, but always ended up dropping the effort -- feeling like I was chasing my tail.
You've got it about right. Texas is the big one -- splitting up Texas-Oklahoma is problematic, but something has to give. And I guess the Red River game would still be played, but it loses something if it is non-conference in a world where conference champions are automatically in the CFP. Thus, I might be inclined to switch OU and TCU -- splitting up the two Oklahoma teams is less problematic, IMHO.
Comments