ADVERTISEMENT

B1G expansion plans?

Last edited:
for the benefit of iufb, we need to expand east not west. actually i think we're already overly expanded. we need to go back to the big ten of 40 years ago.
We are in the midst of a great cleavage in Div 1 sports and the discriminator is dollars. If we add OU and TX, national network revenue will jump and the BTN footprint will increase by 30 million viewers. Not to mention a sea change in national interest. TV payouts per school in the B1G will dwarf that of every other conference including the SEC.
 
We are in the midst of a great cleavage in Div 1 sports and the discriminator is dollars. If we add OU and TX, national network revenue will jump and the BTN footprint will increase by 30 million viewers. Not to mention a sea change in national interest. TV payouts per school in the B1G will dwarf that of every other conference including the SEC.

are you under some impression that the states of Tx and Ok don't already get BTN? or every tier of B10 content?

yes, you might move them to paying higher, (in footprint) BTN fees, but we still have never heard how that renegotiation went on the east coast after adding UMd and RU, after BTN always publicized that stuff prior to the east coast renegotiations.

the B10 can't blow up the B12, without blowing up the B10 as we once knew it at the same time. so anyone pro expansion, is anti B10. (other than in name only).

that said, don't make more of this than you should.

the subject of the linked post isn't about expansion, but rather Fox, (who already has OU's tier 3 contract and already is majority BTN owner), selling off some assets to Disney. (who already owns the ESPNs, and also already has contracts with the B10).
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
That addition suddenly balances the degree of difficulty for both the East and West divisions... If the Big Ten picks up TX and OK, I'd suggest we pick up Kansas also (for the KC tv market and the basketball upgrade).

If all that happens then you need to add three in the East to balance the numbers. I'd suggest MA, CT and either Syracuse or WV depending which would bring the most benefit to the league (I don't know the answer to that)...
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
are you under some impression that the states of Tx and Ok don't already get BTN? or every tier of B10 content?

yes, you might move them to paying higher, (in footprint) BTN fees, but we still have never heard how that renegotiation went on the east coast after adding UMd and RU, after BTN always publicized that stuff prior to the east coast renegotiations.

the B10 can't blow up the B12, without blowing up the B10 as we once knew it at the same time. so anyone pro expansion, is anti B10. (other than in name only).

that said, don't make more of this than you should.

the subject of the linked post isn't about expansion, but rather Fox, (who already has OU's tier 3 contract and already is majority BTN owner), selling off some assets to Disney. (who already owns the ESPNs, and also already has contracts with the B10).

The Big Ten as we once knew it is gone forever...(in my opinion).
 
That addition suddenly balances the degree of difficulty for both the East and West divisions... If the Big Ten picks up TX and OK, I'd suggest we pick up Kansas also (for the KC tv market and the basketball upgrade).

If all that happens then you need to add three in the East to balance the numbers. I'd suggest MA, CT and either Syracuse or WV depending which would bring the most benefit to the league (I don't know the answer to that)...

Looks like the answer to my own question is...[drum roll]: Syracuse..., (Buffalo ranked as #51 & Syracuse proper being ranked #81//along with NYC being #1//,with the WV area not even breaking the top 100 tv markets)...
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
We are in the midst of a great cleavage in Div 1 sports and the discriminator is dollars. If we add OU and TX, national network revenue will jump and the BTN footprint will increase by 30 million viewers. Not to mention a sea change in national interest. TV payouts per school in the B1G will dwarf that of every other conference including the SEC.
The B1G already dwarfs the SEC in payouts per school.
 
If you want to expand the conference to the east you have to look at schools like Georgia Tech, Virginia, and UNC.

Nah, you want to completely lock up the northeastern tv market.

If we add Syracuse, Massachusetts, and Connecticut to what we have (P$U, Rutgers and Maryland) we would completely lock up the northeastern tv market (DC to NYC to Boston +).

If $$$$$ is what these moves are all about that's the way to go (in my opinion).
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13 and DANC
We are in the midst of a great cleavage.....

I think someone once uttered that during a Dolly Parton concert.

In any event, I see the next big wave being a “super conference” made up of the top 25 schools in terms of football revenue and attendance, with guaranteed spots in an 8 team playoff.

So, Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State are shoe-ins for that conference.
 
Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Virginia, North Carolina, and X (could be WVU, UConn, Syracuse...lots of choices).

The first Super Conference. For football, it would probably be more like two conferences, with round-robins in both East and West, and a single rotating crossover game each year. That would leave each school to schedule two games on their own. For basketball...I dunno. 20 game season, 19-game round robin with an additional game to create a home-and-home with your biggest rival?
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
I think someone once uttered that during a Dolly Parton concert.

In any event, I see the next big wave being a “super conference” made up of the top 25 schools in terms of football revenue and attendance, with guaranteed spots in an 8 team playoff.

So, Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State are shoe-ins for that conference.
I think we will eventually see four 20-team conferences. The B1G, the SEC, the PAC, and a fourth made up primarily of B12/ACC/American remnants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iulb and vesuvius13
are you under some impression that the states of Tx and Ok don't already get BTN? or every tier of B10 content?

yes, you might move them to paying higher, (in footprint) BTN fees, but we still have never heard how that renegotiation went on the east coast after adding UMd and RU, after BTN always publicized that stuff prior to the east coast renegotiations.

the B10 can't blow up the B12, without blowing up the B10 as we once knew it at the same time. so anyone pro expansion, is anti B10. (other than in name only).

that said, don't make more of this than you should.

the subject of the linked post isn't about expansion, but rather Fox, (who already has OU's tier 3 contract and already is majority BTN owner), selling off some assets to Disney. (who already owns the ESPNs, and also already has contracts with the B10).

The BTN payout continues to grow and grow and grow and you continue to argue they blew it.

I’m thinking the proof is now in the money pudding.
 
Syracuse, UMASS, and UCONN add absolutely nothing to the conference. Georgia Tech brings in the Atlanta TV market, UNC is an iconic brand with a national appeal and following, and Virginia is an elite academic and athletic institution in a populous state.
 
Syracuse, UMASS, and UCONN add absolutely nothing to the conference. Georgia Tech brings in the Atlanta TV market, UNC is an iconic brand with a national appeal and following, and Virginia is an elite academic and athletic institution in a populous state.

Disregarding the TV market debate, the chances of getting North Carolina are virtually nil, and VA extremely unlikely. GaTech is a maybe, while the three I mentioned would be a relatively easy get compared to NC, VA, and GTech...
 
Back to the tv markets for a moment...; on the list I'm looking at:

https://www.stationindex.com/tv/tv-markets

Boston is bigger than Atlanta... VA doesn't give us much more of a market that MD doesn't already cover and..., (unrelated to tv market share), I just find it nearly impossible to believe that North Carolina will ever join the Big Ten. Their alumni would never allow it... (in my opinion)...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
Back to the tv markets for a moment...; on the list I'm looking at:

https://www.stationindex.com/tv/tv-markets

Boston is bigger than Atlanta... VA doesn't give us much more of a market that MD doesn't already cover and..., (unrelated to tv market share), I just find it nearly impossible to believe that North Carolina will ever join the Big Ten. Their alumni would never allow it... (in my opinion)...

You’re acting as if you actually have a say in this matter. Syracuse would be the only viable option of those 3 but what good does it really do to own a market who could not care less about CFB.

We are no doubt on a track for the 4 super conference model. The B1G (Delaney) doesn’t care what we as fans want. If he has a shot at UT and OU, that’s the play. I could see possibly adding Kansas or even Iowa St along too. The super conference model would force ND to join a conference. No way in Hell in that scenario the B1G is adding two schools that have been playing Div 1 fB less than 20 years each. (UCONN and UMass)
 
Back to the tv markets for a moment...; on the list I'm looking at:

https://www.stationindex.com/tv/tv-markets

Boston is bigger than Atlanta... VA doesn't give us much more of a market that MD doesn't already cover and..., (unrelated to tv market share), I just find it nearly impossible to believe that North Carolina will ever join the Big Ten. Their alumni would never allow it... (in my opinion)...
Here's an interactive map of TV markets. Texas brings the mother lode.

http://bl.ocks.org/simzou/6459889
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
You’re acting as if you actually have a say in this matter. Syracuse would be the only viable option of those 3 but what good does it really do to own a market who could not care less about CFB.

We are no doubt on a track for the 4 super conference model. The B1G (Delaney) doesn’t care what we as fans want. If he has a shot at UT and OU, that’s the play. I could see possibly adding Kansas or even Iowa St along too. The super conference model would force ND to join a conference. No way in Hell in that scenario the B1G is adding two schools that have been playing Div 1 fB less than 20 years each. (UCONN and UMass)

You're telling me that Jim Delaney isn't the same BigJimChiTwn that follows my every post?!?

Next I suppose you'll infer that Fred Glass has stopped checking in twice a day to read what I've posted...!;)

//It's all just conjecture on my part and I'm certain I have no say in the matter..., which is too bad but once again reality often sucks:(:cool://
 
That addition suddenly balances the degree of difficulty for both the East and West divisions... If the Big Ten picks up TX and OK, I'd suggest we pick up Kansas also (for the KC tv market and the basketball upgrade).

If all that happens then you need to add three in the East to balance the numbers. I'd suggest MA, CT and either Syracuse or WV depending which would bring the most benefit to the league (I don't know the answer to that)...
If they just add OU and Texas then they should move Purdue to the East and now the divisions are very comparable for football.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
The Big Ten as we once knew it is gone forever...(in my opinion).

Probably. Though, the Big Ten that we once knew could have been out the door as well had we just tried to maintain the status quo.

Conference expansion was most likely an inevitable evolution of college sports. If not the BT striking first, other conferences when have eventually done so. The BT would have been positioned to hold out longer than other conferences, but it would just take one defection for dominoes to start to fall. Had the BT not made the play for TV money (and expansion that helped facilitate it), I could see Illinois having jumped ship to a more lucrative conference deal (I could see them being in the same financial desperation that Maryland was). And if OSU was falling behind in revenue streams compared to other national football powers because the BT fell behind, they certainly would have no qualms about about defecting.

One other thing to consider is all this chatter about Texas/Oklahoma is might just be a bargaining tactic for them to take a larger percentage of Big 12 TV revenue on a renegotiated contract. This again would be something that would threaten a non expansion/financially minded BT, as OSU/Mich would potentially pull the same stunt, which would kneecap the rest of the BT.

In this regard, its perhaps better that the BT is leading and dictating terms of expansion, rather than scrambling and playing catch up.
 
Probably. Though, the Big Ten that we once knew could have been out the door as well had we just tried to maintain the status quo.

Conference expansion was most likely an inevitable evolution of college sports. If not the BT striking first, other conferences when have eventually done so. The BT would have been positioned to hold out longer than other conferences, but it would just take one defection for dominoes to start to fall. Had the BT not made the play for TV money (and expansion that helped facilitate it), I could see Illinois having jumped ship to a more lucrative conference deal (I could see them being in the same financial desperation that Maryland was). And if OSU was falling behind in revenue streams compared to other national football powers because the BT fell behind, they certainly would have no qualms about about defecting.

One other thing to consider is all this chatter about Texas/Oklahoma is might just be a bargaining tactic for them to take a larger percentage of Big 12 TV revenue on a renegotiated contract. This again would be something that would threaten a non expansion/financially minded BT, as OSU/Mich would potentially pull the same stunt, which would kneecap the rest of the BT.

In this regard, its perhaps better that the BT is leading and dictating terms of expansion, rather than scrambling and playing catch up.

Yep.

The Big Ten and ACC took the steps needed to preserve their conferences.
The SEC - due to football $$$ supremacy - didn't need to act, but reacted.
The Big 12 is a dead conference walking.
Texas' refusal to share its TV revenues both killed the conference, and made Texas the likely biggest survivor.

The ACC, BIG and SEC will pick up 2 to get to 16.
The PAC will will add 4.

Those 64 will be in a organization of their own.
They may toss a few of their "academic schools" to make sure 'The Members" are truly dedicated to sports, which will allow for cannibalizing a few schools from the AAC, CUSA and MWC, but those Top 64-ish will not play by NCAA rules much longer.

I have tried to tell friends in the "Next 5" that they should in effect merge the AAC/CUSA/MAC/Sun Belt/Big 12 leftovers and MWC leftovers - and form a "league" with 4 national divisions, and bargain their TV rights as group. Otherwise, they are basically Division II soon. If they did it, they could preserve more TV money longer, and their "4 national divisions" would make for a hell of a post season conference tourney.

But they won't. Everybody will sit tight until the Big 4 have done their thing, and then start to plan.
 
Yep.

The Big Ten and ACC took the steps needed to preserve their conferences.
The SEC - due to football $$$ supremacy - didn't need to act, but reacted.
The Big 12 is a dead conference walking.
Texas' refusal to share its TV revenues both killed the conference, and made Texas the likely biggest survivor.

The ACC, BIG and SEC will pick up 2 to get to 16.
The PAC will will add 4.

Those 64 will be in a organization of their own.
They may toss a few of their "academic schools" to make sure 'The Members" are truly dedicated to sports, which will allow for cannibalizing a few schools from the AAC, CUSA and MWC, but those Top 64-ish will not play by NCAA rules much longer.

I have tried to tell friends in the "Next 5" that they should in effect merge the AAC/CUSA/MAC/Sun Belt/Big 12 leftovers and MWC leftovers - and form a "league" with 4 national divisions, and bargain their TV rights as group. Otherwise, they are basically Division II soon. If they did it, they could preserve more TV money longer, and their "4 national divisions" would make for a hell of a post season conference tourney.

But they won't. Everybody will sit tight until the Big 4 have done their thing, and then start to plan.

I have also thought the 4 16-team conferences is a likely eventual alignment. In that scenario, it wouldn't surprise me if Kansas gets the short end of the stick and gets left out of the big 4.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
Conference expansion was most likely an inevitable evolution of college sports. If not the BT striking first, other conferences when have eventually done so.
Yep, and in fact the ACC has publicly lamented their failure to take Penn State at the same time that they expanded with FSU in 1991. If they had done so, the B1G probably wouldn't have any members east of Columbus OH.
 
Yep.

The Big Ten and ACC took the steps needed to preserve their conferences.
The SEC - due to football $$$ supremacy - didn't need to act, but reacted.
The Big 12 is a dead conference walking.
Texas' refusal to share its TV revenues both killed the conference, and made Texas the likely biggest survivor.

The ACC, BIG and SEC will pick up 2 to get to 16.
The PAC will will add 4.

Those 64 will be in a organization of their own.
They may toss a few of their "academic schools" to make sure 'The Members" are truly dedicated to sports, which will allow for cannibalizing a few schools from the AAC, CUSA and MWC, but those Top 64-ish will not play by NCAA rules much longer.

I have tried to tell friends in the "Next 5" that they should in effect merge the AAC/CUSA/MAC/Sun Belt/Big 12 leftovers and MWC leftovers - and form a "league" with 4 national divisions, and bargain their TV rights as group. Otherwise, they are basically Division II soon. If they did it, they could preserve more TV money longer, and their "4 national divisions" would make for a hell of a post season conference tourney.

But they won't. Everybody will sit tight until the Big 4 have done their thing, and then start to plan.
Not sure how I feel about expansion but it appears that is the path we are headed down. My feeling is that I would rather see the BIG lock up heavy football hitters in Oklahoma and Texas rather than the SEC. If it's going to happen let's be first. I would be Ok with adding Oklahoma & Kansas.
 
Seems that the BTN and Fox are trying to buy Oklahoma's Tier 3 content for 2021 and later....

https://247sports.com/college/oklah...about-buying-Tier-3-rights-from-OU-119647264/


I've followed conference realignment closely and for a long time, and here are some things I think are true about future expansion:

*Texas fans HATE the thought of Texas being in the Big 10. I know people say "It's all about the administrators", but I don't see their administration bucking the big $ donors and all their fans and going to the Big 10. I think TX in the Big 10 is less likely than TX staying in a shitty Big 12 (eg..if OK & Kansas leave, and 2 lesser lights are added), or TX to the SEC, or TX being independent, or TX getting a sweet-heart deal with the ACC ala ND.

*OK fans want the SEC, not the Big 10, probably by a 2-1 majority. They don't hate the Big 10 as much as TX fans, and this is a case where the administrators/faculty could win out. OK fans would get over it if they were in a Big 10 West Division with Nebraska & Kansas.

*Michigan, Wisconsin & NW don't really want OK & Kansas. They were initially against adding Nebraska for academic reasons, and OK & Kansas, if added, would be #14, 15, or 16 in academic stature. Speaking of academics alone, there is a big-time difference between adding Maryland & Rutgers v. OK & Kansas. I don't think, in general, that there is a lot of enthusiasm among BIG 10 schools over the prospect of adding OK & Kansas.........OK is a cultural mismatch & Kansas sucks in FB, and both are smallish schools compared to those in the Big 10.......however, I doubt the Big 10 likes the idea of OK going to the SEC, so they may make the invite anyway.......then OU fans and administrators can fight it out over what league to join.

I think OU does divorce Texas. They don't want to, but they can't stay in a league where they're making $15M less/year than in the Big 10 or SEC.

IMO, OU is the only big fish legitimately available to the Big 10. Kansas is a tag-along, and nobody wants U Conn. Missouri is spoken for, although there is no GoRs issue with them. NC, GT, Duke, VA, & ND are all tied up in the ACC GoRs until 2036.So.....the way I see it do nothing and hope for the best or offer OK & Kansas are the Big 10's only options going forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13 and 76-1
I've followed conference realignment closely and for a long time, and here are some things I think are true about future expansion:

*Texas fans HATE the thought of Texas being in the Big 10. I know people say "It's all about the administrators", but I don't see their administration bucking the big $ donors and all their fans and going to the Big 10. I think TX in the Big 10 is less likely than TX staying in a shitty Big 12 (eg..if OK & Kansas leave, and 2 lesser lights are added), or TX to the SEC, or TX being independent, or TX getting a sweet-heart deal with the ACC ala ND.

*OK fans want the SEC, not the Big 10, probably by a 2-1 majority. They don't hate the Big 10 as much as TX fans, and this is a case where the administrators/faculty could win out. OK fans would get over it if they were in a Big 10 West Division with Nebraska & Kansas.

*Michigan, Wisconsin & NW don't really want OK & Kansas. They were initially against adding Nebraska for academic reasons, and OK & Kansas, if added, would be #14, 15, or 16 in academic stature. Speaking of academics alone, there is a big-time difference between adding Maryland & Rutgers v. OK & Kansas. I don't think, in general, that there is a lot of enthusiasm among BIG 10 schools over the prospect of adding OK & Kansas.........OK is a cultural mismatch & Kansas sucks in FB, and both are smallish schools compared to those in the Big 10.......however, I doubt the Big 10 likes the idea of OK going to the SEC, so they may make the invite anyway.......then OU fans and administrators can fight it out over what league to join.

I think OU does divorce Texas. They don't want to, but they can't stay in a league where they're making $15M less/year than in the Big 10 or SEC. OU and UT are going B1G.

IMO, OU is the only big fish legitimately available to the Big 10. Kansas is a tag-along, and nobody wants U Conn. Missouri is spoken for, although there is no GoRs issue with them. NC, GT, Duke, VA, & ND are all tied up in the ACC GoRs until 2036.So.....the way I see it do nothing and hope for the best or offer OK & Kansas are the Big 10's only options going forward.
Good and valid points but I flat guarantee Texas isn't going to the SEC. A&M has a "Gentlemen's Agreement" with U of FL, U of KY, UGA and USC East to block any second team from any of those states from entering the SEC.

U of TX options would then be B1G, ACC, P12 or stay in B12-2-OU so let's call it the Fine 9 Conference. B12 aka F9 is a sinkhole without OU, ACC is a bridge too far without any additional members between the current ones and Austin, ditto P12. If OU goes B1G then the only viable option for UT is the B1G.

Then when you add up the conference revenue from each of those options, it's a double done deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
Good and valid points but I flat guarantee Texas isn't going to the SEC. A&M has a "Gentlemen's Agreement" with U of FL, U of KY, UGA and USC East to block any second team from any of those states from entering the SEC.

U of TX options would then be B1G, ACC, P12 or stay in B12-2-OU so let's call it the Fine 9 Conference. B12 aka F9 is a sinkhole without OU, ACC is a bridge too far without any additional members between the current ones and Austin, ditto P12. If OU goes B1G then the only viable option for UT is the B1G.

Then when you add up the conference revenue from each of those options, it's a double done deal.


They'll forget about that gentlemen's agreement if they can get TX & Oklahoma. A & M can't block TX, if that's what they want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
ADVERTISEMENT