Old man yells at cloud, reopens Big Ten expansion can of worms.
by John M (The Crimson Quarry) on May 5, 2009 10:05 PM EDT
Email
PrintThere are no meaningful games until September, so I suppose I should weigh in on Joe Paterno's recent comments about Big Ten expansion. Apparently, a question about whether a team from the northeast could win a BCS championship precipitated the question. Paterno said:
"The only [Northeastern] team that's got a shot would be us, and yet we've got a tough job because the Big Ten is not as visible in the key times as the Southeastern Conference and the Big 12."
Asked what sort of response he had received, Paterno raised his eyebrows in a facial shrug.
"You know, it's a conference that's dominated by a couple of people," Paterno said. "If I start talking, they're polite, but they snicker.
"They don't know I know they're snickering, but they're polite. ...I wish I were younger and going to be around [another] 20 years."
I really don't buy the rationale that the Big Ten's layoff, all of two weeks more than that of other conferences, hurts Big Ten schools all that much. Ohio State has played for the BCS title three times in the last six years, including in 2006 and 2007. The Buckeyes have lost the last two, but the Big Ten and the long layoff didn't prevent OSU from qualifying for the title game. As for Penn State, if the Nittany Lions had won at Iowa, they would have played for the title, likely as the #1 ranked team. Also, the absence of a championship game does not prevent the Big Ten from playing later. Starting next season, the Big Ten plays its final weekend of games after Thanksgiving, and the Pac-10 plays its final regular season games on the same day as the ACC, SEC, and Big 12 title games.
In any event, Paterno listed Rutgers, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse as possible candidates for expansion. I talked about expansion nearly two years ago in this post. That post was precipitated by comments by Delany that sounded very pro-expansion, so Boiled Sports may be on to something about Delany's preference that it be his idea.
Still, while Delany's position is an odd flip-flop, I think he's more right now than he was two years ago, when his primary motivation was selling the Big Ten Network to as many cable companies as possible. It's easy to mock the money motivation, but at the very least, any prospective team should do no harm financially. I have to question whether a team like Rutgers, an afterthought in the NYC media market, would increase the cut for the current 11 conference teams, even with a championship game. Is the awesomeness of having Rutgers or Pitt in the Big Ten a sufficient reason to take money out of the pockets of the current 11 members?
I don't claim to have a great handle on the numbers, but I think Delany is right when he says a) there's no obvious fit out there and b) there's no justification for expansion for expansion's sake. I wouldn't mind a Big Ten title game, but I don't see much support for the idea that it's a panacea for the Big Ten recent postseason struggles.
4 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Here is the thing.
Its all about Notre Dame. The absolutly only way it happens is with Notre Dame they are the only geographic, academic, competitive, and tradition rich fit. It has been tried and failed many times, it will never happen. They won’t leave the big east B-ball and their TV contract and easy bowl ties. The big ten is the old stubborn man in the room. They like being the oldest, most tradition rich, high academic conference. Proud and stubborn. Think about it, they jumped to get PSU because they fit, but when all the other conference shake ups were happening, they stood still because its an exclusive club, and they are too snobby to have “lowly” Rutgers or some MAC school as a member(in their opinion, not mine).
And I agree, despite recent BCS struggles, the Big Ten is still such a brand, the only one with their own network, some of the best travelling fans, the biggest stadiums and the best bowl tie-ins. If people sre still feeding the machine money, why would the higher ups budge? Certainly not to appease fans or an 80+ year old football coach who is still a “newbie” and outsider to the conference.
Though as a PSU fan, adding Pitt would be absolutly great, anything to spark up that dormant giant of a rivalry.
There’s my 2 cents.
Black Shoes.
Basic Blues.
No Name.
All Game.
The best fits
Academically, geographically, and athletically (in terms of tradition and facilities), are Notre Dame, Missouri, Iowa State, West Virginia and Pitt. Notre Dame has been tried before and won’t happen unless and until the football program bottoms out completely, which is not out of the question. Missou and ISU are not likely to jump ship from the Big 12. I have always thought that the Big East had gotten too bloated and wide-spread. I do not know whether there would be any interest on the part of either of Pitt or WVU to make a move.
I agree, though, that neither expansion nor a title game in football is going to necessarily fix a problem (and don’t necessarily think that a problem exists).
ND or bust? Plus: Divisions?
I’m here via SB Nation’s “Bleed Cubbie Blue” (note the name & avatar), but am an IU alum and Hoosier by birth & choice. The hypothetical BigTen expansion is one of my all-time favorite “what if?” questions, and I’m suckered in every time the question comes up.
Notre Dame is the obvious best fit- a singular athletic tradition and the only candidate that actually INCREASES the league’s academic stats. Plus- I haven’t seen this directly stated- ND one-ups Delaney’s “9th state” dictum with it’s nationwide fanbase and ‘subway alumni’ especially in the ESPN/East Coast region.
The other choices are all distant second choices. I can see the East Coast benefit of Rutgers/Syracuse/UConn. Pitt and Mizzou would be OK, and Louisville/WVU would fit geographically, but would be academic drags. Boiled Sports seems to think we should just sign up someone NOW, but I think we need leadership that will make the ND addition happen, and only accept an alternate if it’s a worthwhile fit.
But beyond all this, the real game is in the subdivisions. If you add an eastern football powerhouse (esp ND or WVU), how do you geographically split the league so that the newbie, UM and OSU aren’t together? Added difficulty: keep in-state rivals together (UM & MSU, IL/NW, IU & PU- and PSU and Pitt if added). And keep in mind travelling costs…
Welcome, Sandberg Era.
I’m a long-time BCB reader myself. I mostly agree with you about the options. Notre Dame is the obvious fit, but I don’t think it will ever happen. ND alumni and fans are almost uniformly opposed to it, although many faculty members want it. I don’t think all the leadership in the world is going to change that.
I generally agree with your assessment of the other schools. The Rutgers fascination is one that I don’t get. If the Big Ten were inclined to expand into new states in the east, I would far prefer Syracuse to Rutgers. Syracuse has excellent tradition in both football and basketball and it’s my sense (not supported by any stats, of course) that Syracuse has more support in metro NYC than Rutgers has, despite the proximity of the Rutgers.
As I said in the linked post a couple of summers ago, I think Kentucky is an underrated prospect. They certainly aren’t a football power, but they have excellent fan support for football and of course an elite basketball program. I doubt UK would ever make the move. It probably would be much like the ND situation: the faculty and administration would be intrigued because of the academic prestige, but the fans and alumni would revolt.
I agree with you about the Boiled Sports post. I’m all for making fun of Jim Delany, and have done it often in the past, but yeah, the underlying presumption of the post seems to be that adding a 12th team is a desperate need, almost as if we are playing a football game with 10 guys on the field. I don’t see it that way. The Big Ten has been represented in 5 of the last 10 NCAA title games and 3 of the last 7 BCS title games. On average, we have excellent attendance in both sports, very good TV deals, a partially-owned network that seems to be a cash cow. I’m not opposed to expansion, but I don’t see the point of trying to convince ourselves that Rutgers, WVU, or Louisville are plausible “Big Ten schools.”
Re: Roland 86, I don’t think it’s snobbishness. The Big Ten has a brand, and I think it’s important not to dilute it to fill an ill-defined need.
re: hoosierdaddy now: I agree with you on many of the schools, but I see Iowa State as a tough sell. Not much tradition in either sport, they add no new geography, no media appeal. I simply don’t see how ISU would make the Big Ten a better conference.
by John M (The Crimson Quarry) on May 9, 2009 9:01 AM EDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
