B10 should add Arizona & Arizona State
All the talk is about Oregon and Washington. Let me argue instead for Arizona and Arizona State.
1. Not a huge difference in academic profiles betweem the four. Washington has an edge, but UW would be at best middle of the pack in the B10.
2. ASU is not AAU. Really? Did we not learn our lesson from losing Texas/Oklahoma because OU is not AAU?
3. Largest state population of the three states and growing.
4. Where do snowbirds from B10 country vacation and retire? Florida and Arizona. All attractive Florida options are currently unavailable. And Arizona is loaded with B10 alums to go to games, watch games and stream games.
5. Perfect schools to pair with USC/UCLA geographically.
6. Perfect place for baseball, softball, tennis, golf, etc to play in late winter and early spring.
7. Arizona has top tier hoops. ASU has ice hockey. Both have football "potential" a la Maryland.
8. Cock blocks the B12 so that B10 is the only truly national coast-to-coast conference.
9. Oregon and Washington aren't going anywhere. We can always get them later if we want.
10. ASU cheerleaders!
February 10th, 2023 at 3:33 AM ^
Wow, where to even begin.
I guess let's just start with the misinformation -- Washington has a bigger population than Arizona -- and while the difference is slight, what would be relevant is the combined population of Washington and Oregon, which is significantly higher. And you grossly distort the academic differences. UW is an elite public school that would place in the upper tier of the Big Ten. Academic rankings are fickle and overhyped, but some rankings (including U-M's favorite ranking) have Washington extremely high. Oregon is also a respected school -- about on par with Arizona -- but ASU is a significant step below.
That aside, it's pretty clear that all that matters when it comes to expansion is money, football, and (for the Big Ten) academics. Non-revenue sports, geography, cheerleaders, where Big Ten snowbirds retire, and cockblocking the Big 12 are not relevant considerations.
UW and Oregon are far superior brands that would add far more value (and even they might not add enough to warrant expansion). Adding the Arizona schools would just dilute each Big Ten's schools payout. It's a bad idea, and it's not happening.
February 10th, 2023 at 4:20 AM ^
Ok. Lets look at facts. Let's start with academic rankings. I said Washington had an advantage, but still would be middle of the pack in the B10. Looks like an accurate statement to me.
US NEWS RANKINGS
10 Northwestern
20 UCLA
25 Michigan
25 USC
38 Wisconsin
41 Illinois
49 Ohio State
51 Purdue
55 Rutgers
55 Maryland
55 WASHINGTON <=======
62 Minnesota
72 Indiana
77 Michigan State
77 Penn State
83 Iowa
105 ARIZONA <=======
105 OREGON <=======
121 ARIZONA STATE <=======
151 Nebraska
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities
February 10th, 2023 at 6:00 AM ^
USNWR rankings (and rankings in general) are trash, and a terrible way to compare schools quality. Amusingly UW might be #55 in the US rankings, but they're #6 Globally for USNRW between Oxford and Colububia
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings
Either way, UW's academic reputation is WAY better than #55. They're an elite public school, in the same tier as Michigan, UCB and UCLA
February 10th, 2023 at 9:07 AM ^
Apples / Oranges. The global rankings include grad schools not just undergrad. Still, impressive.
February 10th, 2023 at 11:05 AM ^
It's the graduate schools that make the money, though, since they likely correlate better with research funding. UM is great at undergraduate education but elite at graduate programs, and UW is similar in that regard (hence why UM tends to be a bit lower on the USNWR college rankings relative to others).
In the biomedical world (the world I know best, and what brings in the most $$$), UW is ELITE and could make an argument for best in the B1G, and certainly a peer to UM, Northwestern, UCLA, without question. And academic elitism aside, the argument to bring in research $$$ is the reason to seek out academic peer institutions (and part of the reason that Cal/Stanford would be an attractive pair, football reasons aside).
For reference, 2022 NIH research funding:
UW + Fred Hutchinson + Seattle Children's: $1.1 billion
UCLA + Cedars-Sinai + LA Children's: $731 million
UM: $644 million
Northwestern (Chicago + Evanston): $452 million
USC: $325 million
Arizona: $174 million
ASU: $64 million
Oregon: $43 million
Surprising to me that Oregon was so low, but I guess the Phil Knight $$$ makes up for that.
February 10th, 2023 at 12:35 PM ^
"Colububia"? Is that a condition where one grows small breasts in their intestines?
February 10th, 2023 at 7:58 AM ^
A good illustration of this terrible expansion idea making the Big Ten worse than it is now. Not just academically, but financially, geographically and logistically. They don't have to add Oregon and Washington either and I hope they don't, but you have convinced me it would be a much better way to go.
February 10th, 2023 at 8:11 AM ^
Big Ten and SEC expansion is currently being driven by one primary factor, the desire to add marquee games to their TV packages. USC, TX, OU and to a lesser extent, UCLA all do that. Notre Dame would too. Oregon and Washington have the potential to add a couple most years. AZ and ASU simply don't. We'd get some from AZ basketball, but football money dwarfs that.
February 10th, 2023 at 9:10 AM ^
It is all driven by the TV market and who could add more viewers. There is only one school left out there that can do it and as much as I hate to admit it it’s Notre Dame. All other schools don’t move the needle enough to warrant expansion
February 10th, 2023 at 10:24 PM ^
You only want to add Arizona. They will cover the market share in that area easily. Adding both is redundant and sharing money that you don't have to. I know a lot of you don't want expansion but It's inevitable. Why wait on the SEC to cherry pick the teams that could strengthen the Big Ten brand? Don't come to the party late, scrambling for leftovers. The conference that has the stones will pick up all the great marketable programs and simply charge the networks double or triple what they would normally charge (for the added value and because the networks have no choice but to pay because you're the best. Someone will basically control the agenda for the next century. The late comer will have a place because there's always a Protagonist/Antagonist, but the product won't be as great. Its like Coke/Pepsi, Democrat/Republican, good/evil. The Big Ten needs to decide which one they're going to be.
February 10th, 2023 at 8:25 AM ^
Don’t worry, the word “misinformation” was used so they are right and you are wrong
February 10th, 2023 at 9:07 AM ^
You said "Not a huge difference in academic profiles between the four"
Which, by what you just posted, is very incorrect.
February 10th, 2023 at 4:27 AM ^
And let's look at population. I said Arizona was the largest of the three states and was growing the fastest. Well, I was half right. Washington is slightly larger than Arizona in terms of pops but Arizona is growing the fastest. Oregon trails significantly in both metrics.
US CENSUS DATA (2019)
Washington 7.6 million (2010-19 Growth: 13.2%)
Arizona 7.3 million (2010-19 Growth: 13.9%)
Oregon 4.2 million (2010-19 Growth: 10.0%)
https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population
February 10th, 2023 at 8:39 AM ^
Wait until the Colorado river is completely gone and there is no water left in the entire state of arizona. People are going to get tired of not being able to shower or get water from the faucet at some point.
February 10th, 2023 at 9:05 AM ^
So what you are saying is building multiple large metro areas in the desert was about as good of an idea as building houses 10 feet below sea level on the beach?
February 10th, 2023 at 9:17 AM ^
Hey now. Some people are experts at the latter.
February 10th, 2023 at 9:34 AM ^
It’s true, water is a crutch
February 10th, 2023 at 9:54 AM ^
To be fair, ASU and UA not being capable of showering would give them something in common with current B1G institutions MSU and Ohio State.
February 10th, 2023 at 11:11 AM ^
MSU students definitely shower. As far as I can tell, that and a heartbeat are all the prerequisites necessary for being admitted to any of their undergraduate programs.
February 10th, 2023 at 12:47 PM ^
Showering in Axe body spray doesn’t count
February 10th, 2023 at 9:02 AM ^
How do you tell me you’re a Michigan fan living in Arizona without saying I’m a Michigan fan living in Arizona.
February 10th, 2023 at 9:48 AM ^
My thought exactly. OP neglected to put in reason #11 - he lives in Arizona and wants Big Ten football/basketball local to him.
February 10th, 2023 at 9:08 AM ^
I like how in each subsequent response you prove how something you said in your initial post was incorrect haha
February 10th, 2023 at 1:03 PM ^
Sooo.....add Washington and Oregon together.....you get that part right? Two states vs. one.
February 10th, 2023 at 5:05 AM ^
Finally, Washington does much better in the rankings you linked because of research dollars. I get that. And if we can split Arizona away from Arizona State, I think taking Washington and Arizona would be fine. I don't get the attraction of Oregon, either academically or geographically. They have been boosted over the last 20 years by Phil Knight, but there is no guarantee that will last and IMO the State of Arizona is the better long term geographic/demographic choice than the State of Oregon.
February 10th, 2023 at 5:54 AM ^
To be fair there's no guarantee that ANY college stays relevant in college football regardless of institutional standing. Texas, USC, and Miami just to name a few were college football powerhouses especially at the turn of the century and look what they are doing now as compared to then. Texas and USC are slowly getting back to relevancy but Miami is still floundering in mediocrity.
February 10th, 2023 at 6:26 AM ^
No man knows the future.
February 10th, 2023 at 7:16 AM ^
I do know that I will down vote the OP in the near future.
February 10th, 2023 at 8:42 AM ^
Santa does, I believe in Santa!
February 10th, 2023 at 10:26 AM ^
I like Arizona or ASU over Oregon that's a no brainer. I'd even take them over Washington, because no one in Washington State gives 2 shits about college football.
But you only need 1 of the 2. The second is duplicative and isn't worth the squeeze.
February 10th, 2023 at 6:05 AM ^
The Times Higher Education World University Rankings rank universities as a whole. The U.S. News Rankings focus on undergraduate education and panders to H.S. students/parents to sell magazines/books. U.S. News does not give graduate schools within universities much, if any, weight in the rankings. Looking at universities as a whole gives a more accurate picture of a university's academics.
February 10th, 2023 at 9:10 AM ^
Oregon is also a respected school -- about on par with Arizona -- but ASU is a significant step below.
Actually, ASU is higher ranked than Arizona, and it is a better school. ASU is close to Oregon, but all are much lower than UW.
February 10th, 2023 at 11:02 AM ^
Living in Arizona...and that is just not true (and I have my Master's from ASU). ASU has been excellent at gaming rankings in certain areas so they can advertise as such...but ASU is not strong overall...they have a few elite programs (their sustainability school is amazing) but they also accept SOOOOO many people and build enrollment in ways that allows many students to simply pad the university coffers in exchange for a degree. I know that happens many places, but ASU is a pretty extreme example of it. Now, the perception is different (there was a time not to long ago when many strong HS graduates would not consider ASU and that has definitely changed due to creation of ASU's Honors College) but ASU is not an academic institution on par overall with the other schools discussed here
February 10th, 2023 at 4:57 AM ^
Wow. That’s an extensive list of non-factors in the decision process of conference expansion…
February 10th, 2023 at 5:11 AM ^
Geography is a non factor? Nor is population/demographics? How about media market size? Phoenix is 11. Seattle is 12. Portland is 21. Ok.
February 10th, 2023 at 7:40 AM ^
UCLA and USC were added to the Big Ten because they "bring value." They make the Big Ten more appealing to the networks. Washington and Oregon are currently on the outside because they don't bring enough value. The Arizona schools have never really been in the conversation.
Elsewhere, who cares what a second-tier conference (Big Twelve) does?
February 10th, 2023 at 7:41 AM ^
so you think the 11th largest media market size is better than the combined population of eyeballs watching and paying for games from the 12th and 21st largest? ok.
February 10th, 2023 at 8:21 AM ^
I was told there would be no math.
February 10th, 2023 at 9:42 AM ^
I can verify math is the enemy and should be fought at all costs
February 10th, 2023 at 10:01 AM ^
I think this is what OP is truly trying to do.
February 10th, 2023 at 3:08 PM ^
The Big Ten added two schools from Southern California. Both of those schools accepted, and all parties involved knew that the closest Big Ten school is ~1,500 miles away. Pretty safe to say that no, geography isn’t a factor.
As has been pointed out, you take the #12 and #21 media market over the #11 media market every time. That’s not even a question. So sure, media markets are a factor. Just not one that supports your opinion.
February 10th, 2023 at 5:46 AM ^
The B1G didn't lose Texas/Oklahoma because of the AAU.
February 10th, 2023 at 6:24 AM ^
Also, I always preferred the 20 team 'pod' system.
W: Oregon, UCLA, USC, Washington, (Arizona St. OR Stanford)
MW: Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin
ME: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan St., Northwestern, Purdue
E: Maryland, Ohio St., Penn St., Rutgers, (Pitt, Syracuse, OR Virginia)
...keeps the big TEN if you look at it East vs. West, keeps the geography together in a way that makes sense. Adds Oregon, Washington + two other teams...and you can fight over those two (academics vs. geography vs. TV market vs. AAU)...I don't give a shit - all 5 of those teams I listed would be fine. Pick one for the E and one for the W.
- Play 3 non-conference games
- Play 4 division games
- Play 2 games vs. the other division in your half of the country (W/MW and E/ME)
- Play 1 game vs. each of the remaining two divisions.
...For example, Michigan would play the 4 in its division + Ohio St., Rutgers, Minnesota, UCLA as an 8 game schedule.
- Then in Week 12... #1 E vs. #1 ME for a shot at the B1G Championship Game. And #1 W vs. #1 MW for a shot at the B1G Championship Game.
- The other 16 teams would all play each other in Week 12, placing the top teams against each other while avoiding rematches.
- B1G Championship Game rotates between Lucas Oil (Indianapolis) and SoFi (Los Angeles).
February 10th, 2023 at 9:27 AM ^
In general, I believe your ideas hold merit. But Michigan and OSU should not be playing in season under this scenario. This has them too likely playing twice before the CFP even kicks off.
I would prefer that, for football, there be a two-tier conference division set-up with the top programs playing each other in season and having the conference championship decided from within that top division-and without a championship game. This would produce multiple meaningful, must-see matchups every week that would dominate TV viewership.
February 10th, 2023 at 6:04 PM ^
You realize that's about to come now as we get rid of divisions?
It'll just be Michigan/OSU in Week 12 and the the next weekend in Indy.
February 10th, 2023 at 5:51 AM ^
You make a compelling argument for adding Washington to the B10
February 10th, 2023 at 6:12 AM ^
Washington would be a nice add on a lot of levels. Geographically, I think Arizona makes more sense. If you go over to the USC boards, you will find they prefer the Arizona schools. One reason is geography. It is 965 miles from Los Angeles to Seattle. In comparison, it is 359 miles from Los Angeles to Phoenix. If the B10 is looking for schools to pair with USC and UCLA, Washington and Oregon are not nearly as close as people think. In fact, just as a benchmark, it is significantly shorter (715 miles) to go from Chicago to New York than from Los Angeles to Seattle (965 miles) or Los Angeles to Portland (826 miles).
If the B10 wants to set up travel schedules for non revenue sports, it would be cheaper and easier to go out on a West Coast trip to USC/UCLA/UA/ASU than it would be to go to Los Angeles, then Portland, then Seattle. A team could fly out to L.A. and then use busses to get from school to school and fly back out of Phoenix. As I said above, I think the demographics are also better. Washington has massive research dollars, so I can understand the draw of that for B10 presidents. Oregon does not.
February 10th, 2023 at 6:32 AM ^
Who has the bigger brand and draws a bigger TV audience for college football.
Oregon, Arizona or Arizona St.?
...you keep bringing up all of these factors that DO. NOT. MATTER.
Answer that one question and you'll have your answer.
February 10th, 2023 at 6:42 AM ^
Historically? Probably Washington. Currently, probably Oregon. Over the next 50 years? Idk. But I would add two points.
1. The B10 received inquiries from a number of schools, including Washington and Oregon, and apparently could not make the numbers work despite their football value.
2. Leaving USC and UCLA out on an island is very risky long term. The B10 media deal only runs until 2030. The SEC or even the B12 could come after them if the B10 does not take steps to fully integrate them and embrace them, including taking serious their travel concerns. Whether it's UA/ASU or UW/UO or some other grouping, the B10 needs to find someone to pair with USC/UCLA. This is not a static situation.
February 10th, 2023 at 6:56 AM ^
Oregon and Washington couldn't make the numbers work...but you know thar Arizona and Arizona St. can?! That is asinine.
There is absolutely NOTHING that suggests Arizona/Arizona St. would have better "numbers" than Oregon/Washington.
Oregon/Washington weren't competing against Arizona/Arizona St. (or Cal/Stanford)...they were competing against the B1G revenue share WITH them vs. the B1G revenue share WITHOUT them.
That's it.
If the B1G revenue share is $40M with them, but $50M without them...they're not getting an invite.
But that doesn't mean Arizona/Arizona State wouldn't be $50M to $30M (or something lower than Oregon/Washington).
If Arizona/Arizona St. were going to increase the revenue share of the B1G...they would be in the B1G. Period.