TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

For the civil discussion of college sports
Post Reply
User avatar
squirrel
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 29275
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: Peoria, IL

TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by squirrel » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:14 am

OK, now that we know the B10 is serious about going to 12. . .we know where the first action will be.

Let's get the math out of the way first. . .

Big 10 goes to 12. We can assume that in order to keep up, the Pac-10 does too.
"[. . .] and it would be foolish to gobble up sliders when there’s a steak hidden in the fridge." -Kirk Wessler

User avatar
TheAsianSensation
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 8144
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2003 12:43 pm

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by TheAsianSensation » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:19 am

More importantly, I see the Big 10 and Pac 10 as BFFs. They'll go to 12 with the Big 10.

Of course, the first thing is figuring out Team 12 for the Big Twelven. I think we can pretty much go off of squirrel's tier list in the other thread.
Tier 1: Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Missouri, Syracuse
Tier 2: West Virginia, Rutgers
Tier 3: Cincinnati, Louisville
In addition, other teams I've heard rumored are Nebraska (probably too far away), Iowa St (not relevant enough), and Memphis (not smart enough).


And thus the debate starts. Who would the Big 10 want first? Who would be willing to move?
That's enough, Reggie Miller.

That's enough, Chris Webber.

http://bracketball.blogspot.com/

User avatar
squirrel
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 29275
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: Peoria, IL

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by squirrel » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:27 am

Let's start with Tier 1 and 2. . .

I think ND is still probably the league's #1 target. Will they move? I think it is infinitely more likely now than it was in the early 1990's.

I don't think Pitt is sexy enough an addition. They go through spells where they're not good in either basketball or football. I don't think they'd flinch.

Syracuse I believe would be the most aggressive and passionate about joining. They won't like the travel, but its a dollars and cents move for them. But I think once they are in, they would be a thorn in the side. This has always been the school my money is on. The Big Ten would love a slice of the NY market.

Missouri I'm indifferent towards. I don't think they bring a lot to the table, and I don't know if they move or not.

I think West Virginia is the most intriguing add. . .I like the corner of OSU, PSU, and WVU A LOT. Also of the above, most fits the mold of smash mouth football and large state flagship schools.

Rutgers is the fall back for all of the above, and is simply in the picture for the NY market. I don't think the Big Ten would offer, and I don't think Rutgers would make the move if invited. They would be trading similar situations, and moving only to one with worse travel.
"[. . .] and it would be foolish to gobble up sliders when there’s a steak hidden in the fridge." -Kirk Wessler

User avatar
TheAsianSensation
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 8144
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2003 12:43 pm

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by TheAsianSensation » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:32 am

My own personal take:

Notre Dame: At this point in time, I don't think Notre Dame will budge. Later on, as we proceed, they may be forced to change their mind. But that's a subject for another day ;) But by the time they decide they need a conference, it may be too late to join the Big 10.

Syracuse: When I think Big East basketball, Syracuse is very promiment. Are they willing to leave that behind? The $$$ says it's profitable for them to do so.

Missouri: It seems like all the buzz for the Big 10 expansion is the idea of expanding east, not west. It seems like the target is to be more relevant in the east. Obviously, Missouri doesn't help it. However, Missou brings a very good geographical fit and the St Louis and possible Kansas City markets.

Pittsburgh: The Big 10 already sort of has Pennsylvania because of PSU. Would they rather monopolize that state, or try another eastern state?

West Virginia: Doesn't bring the catchet Syracuse or Pittsburgh does, but it fits geographically and competitely. I think this is a good safety net option.

Rutgers: I can't see this. The Big 10 wants the NJ/NY market, sure. But do those markets want the Big 10? I think Rutgers would rather gamble being relevant in the Big East.

Louisville: Doubt it gets this far. Kentucky is a meh region to try and expand to, but competitively, they fit.

Cincinnati: Ohio St would vehemently disapprove. But the rest of the Big 10 wouldn't. I think this is where the buck stops: If the Big 10 gets this far down in the list of potential teams, they add Cincy.

Iowa St: No chance, but if every possible option works against them and they just HAVE to have a 12th, here's a team that'll definitely move, IMO. Makes sense for ISU in every regard.



My verdict: You don't make a big deal about expansion and then add, say, Missouri, when it's clear that east coast exposure is your endgame. If I were in charge of the Big 10, I'd add Missouri.

But I'm not.

If I had to preidct what would happen, I think it's Syracuse.

TAS wants: Missouri (actually, I want Notre Dame first, but whatever)
TAS predicts: Syracuse
That's enough, Reggie Miller.

That's enough, Chris Webber.

http://bracketball.blogspot.com/

User avatar
TheAsianSensation
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 8144
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2003 12:43 pm

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by TheAsianSensation » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:37 am

squirrel wrote:I think ND is still probably the league's #1 target. Will they move? I think it is infinitely more likely now than it was in the early 1990's.
I ultimately think only one of two things would prompt ND to find a conference:

1) The TV contract/BCS situation becomes unprofitable
2) There's a split between BCS teams and non-BCS teams within FBS, forcing them to find a home to fit in with the other BCS teams

1) won't happen for a few years. 2) can very easily happen, but by the time it does, the Big 10 will have already added their 12th team.
Missouri I'm indifferent towards. I don't think they bring a lot to the table, and I don't know if they move or not.
Exposure in Missouri isn't exactly top prize, but it's a nice bonus. Missouri, probably maybe stretching into Kansas and Arkansas....Missouri is stuck in an increasingly Texas-centric conference.
That's enough, Reggie Miller.

That's enough, Chris Webber.

http://bracketball.blogspot.com/

User avatar
squirrel
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 29275
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: Peoria, IL

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by squirrel » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:39 am

Fair points.

squirrel wants: ND (just to make it easy)
squirrel predicts: Syracuse (circumstantially everything seems to be pointing this way)

So if we both predict Syracuse, let's roll with it.

New Big Ten

Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Michigan
Michigan State
Minnesota
Northwestern
Ohio State
Penn State
Purdue
Syracuse
Wisconsin

Big East or Pac-10 next?
"[. . .] and it would be foolish to gobble up sliders when there’s a steak hidden in the fridge." -Kirk Wessler

User avatar
RedDevil
Postaholic (100 posts)
Postaholic (100 posts)
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 12:15 pm

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by RedDevil » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:15 pm

Now - do they split into divisions and if so, how
North-South
East-West

ANy thoughts

User avatar
TheAsianSensation
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 8144
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2003 12:43 pm

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by TheAsianSensation » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:56 pm

RedDevil wrote:Now - do they split into divisions and if so, how
North-South
East-West

ANy thoughts
This was the question I was about to ponder. Neither of those options present a "clean" breakup of 6 vs. 6. And God forbid they come up with something similar to what the ACC did.

A North-South division would separate Ohio St and Michigan (would never happen)
A East-West division would pool OSU, PSU, and Michigan in the same side (3 football powers in the same division would never happen)
Any division separation would require OSU and Michigan on the same side, and Penn St on the opposite side. Using geography, that configuration is impossible.

I think we'd see the following:

Ohio St
Michigan
Michigan St
Syracuse
Minnesota
Iowa

Northwestern
Illinois
Indiana
Purdue
Penn St
Wisconsin


There would be absolutely no rhyme or reason from a geographical standpoint. yep.
That's enough, Reggie Miller.

That's enough, Chris Webber.

http://bracketball.blogspot.com/

User avatar
TheAsianSensation
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 8144
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2003 12:43 pm

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by TheAsianSensation » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:57 pm

squirrel wrote: Big East or Pac-10 next?
Let's take the Pac-10, because they'll be trailing right behind the Big 10. Besides, the Big East is going to get messy :lol: so let's get the simpler one out of the way first.
That's enough, Reggie Miller.

That's enough, Chris Webber.

http://bracketball.blogspot.com/

salz4life
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 9236
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2003 4:24 pm
Location: Fox Lake, Illinois

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by salz4life » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:06 pm

TheAsianSensation wrote:
RedDevil wrote:Now - do they split into divisions and if so, how
North-South
East-West

ANy thoughts
This was the question I was about to ponder. Neither of those options present a "clean" breakup of 6 vs. 6. And God forbid they come up with something similar to what the ACC did.

A North-South division would separate Ohio St and Michigan (would never happen)
A East-West division would pool OSU, PSU, and Michigan in the same side (3 football powers in the same division would never happen)
Any division separation would require OSU and Michigan on the same side, and Penn St on the opposite side. Using geography, that configuration is impossible.

I think we'd see the following:

Ohio St
Michigan
Michigan St
Syracuse
Minnesota
Iowa

Northwestern
Illinois
Indiana
Purdue
Penn St
Wisconsin


There would be absolutely no rhyme or reason from a geographical standpoint. yep.

Not saying your wrong, but why would Michigan and Ohio St. not be split up? Take away the fact that Michigan stinks right now.... wouldn't the Big Ten want their (arguably in Michigan's case right now) two powerhouse programs possibly playing in a Conference Title game? They could split them up and still have them play every year as one of the crossover games. Ultimately, you are probably right and they wouldn't get split up.... but just a thought.
"The Pack Leader"

User avatar
squirrel
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 29275
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: Peoria, IL

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by squirrel » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:12 pm

I was going to say, there's a school of thought that says Michigan and Ohio State demand to be split up for football. . .it's also possible you go to a different format for basketball, so you still have the home-home.

I was going to save the divisional split for later, since that's a whole 'nother ball of wax. But while we're on the topic, here's my take on it.

You're not going to be able to go geographically, except where you keep rivalries intact.
I think you will see the following paired together and reasoning:

Penn State-Syracuse (travel)
IU-Purdue (rivalry)
Illinois-NW (rivalry)

So I can see the following for football:

Penn State, Syracuse, Ohio State, Indiana, Purdue, Michigan State
Michigan, Illinois, Northwestern, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin

And then for hoops:

Ohio State, Penn State, Syracuse, Michigan, Michigan State, Wisconsin
Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, Iowa, Minnesota, Northwestern
"[. . .] and it would be foolish to gobble up sliders when there’s a steak hidden in the fridge." -Kirk Wessler

User avatar
TheAsianSensation
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 8144
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2003 12:43 pm

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by TheAsianSensation » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:13 pm

salz4life wrote:Not saying your wrong, but why would Michigan and Ohio St. not be split up? Take away the fact that Michigan stinks right now.... wouldn't the Big Ten want their (arguably in Michigan's case right now) two powerhouse programs possibly playing in a Conference Title game? They could split them up and still have them play every year as one of the crossover games. Ultimately, you are probably right and they wouldn't get split up.... but just a thought.
I know Miami and FSU got the ACC to split them up, but they also play in September. OSU/Michigan would still be in November, in all likelihood. To have a distinct chance of seeing OSU/Michigan two weeks in a row is somewhat less than desirable for the Big 10.

And it also lends itself to this: I think the Big 10 would like the scenario that would happen often: Ohio St and Michigan playing in the Big 10 de-facto semifinal, followed by the title game, giving it back-to-back marquee games.
That's enough, Reggie Miller.

That's enough, Chris Webber.

http://bracketball.blogspot.com/

User avatar
TheAsianSensation
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 8144
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2003 12:43 pm

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by TheAsianSensation » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:15 pm

I will say this: If OSU/UM decide to play in October instead of November, then the split becomes logical.

As far as basketball, I see the Big 10 doing what the ACC does - don't bother with divisions and just keep a good solid rotating schedule organized and in place.
That's enough, Reggie Miller.

That's enough, Chris Webber.

http://bracketball.blogspot.com/

salz4life
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 9236
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2003 4:24 pm
Location: Fox Lake, Illinois

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by salz4life » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:19 pm

You do bring up about The Game being the final conference game. Probably does make better sense to keep them together for that reason. I'd rather The Game stay at the end of the year.
"The Pack Leader"

User avatar
squirrel
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 29275
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: Peoria, IL

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by squirrel » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:20 pm

On the Pac-10. . .they'll add 2, and it will likely be done in a manner to keep travel partners and in-state rivalries intact:

The frontrunners:

BYU-Utah (would impact only 1 conference)
Colorado-Colorado State (would impact 2 conferences)
Nevada-UNLV (would impact 2 conferences) -- Nevada would be the longshot of longshots. . .
"[. . .] and it would be foolish to gobble up sliders when there’s a steak hidden in the fridge." -Kirk Wessler

User avatar
TheAsianSensation
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 8144
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2003 12:43 pm

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by TheAsianSensation » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:27 pm

Ok, here's my Pac 10 thoughts:

1) BYU and Utah. Two programs that can compete and win. The Utah market comes along for the ride. I think if you take one, you have to take the other with the 2nd choice. I just don't see any way around it.

2) Colorado. Obvious benefits for the Pac 10 in marketability. The question is if it would be a positive equity move for Colorado. They're sort of outliers in the Big 12; does west coast exposure trump Texas exposure?

And I'm not convinced Colorado St would be a package deal with Colorado.

3) Colorado St - It'd be like adding Colorado Lite.

4) Boise St - There's obvious football benefits, and it's a regional host for basketball tourney games. However, competitiveness in other sports is an issue, and the Idaho market isn't exactly a prime target

5) Nevada and UNLV - I'll lump these together - I do think UNLV is slightly more attractive to the Pac 10, and I could definitely see them taking UNLV without taking Nevada. The problem is that the market for the Pac-10 doesn't extend - Nevada is basically in Pac-10 region already.

6) New Mexico - A darkhorse, but not a great one. They'd be competitive, but like Boise, the market is a concern.

7) San Diego St/Fresno St - Unlikely, but both programs can be competitive. However, they don't extend their markets any, and there's no national catchet.

8) Texas Christian - My ultimate darkhorse. Richer than most mid-majors and competitive. And the Pac-10 invades the Texas market.
That's enough, Reggie Miller.

That's enough, Chris Webber.

http://bracketball.blogspot.com/

User avatar
squirrel
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 29275
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: Peoria, IL

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by squirrel » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:35 pm

The non-conventional split options, IMO:

Utah/Colorado
Utah/UNLV
BYU/Colorado
Colorado/Hawaii
Colorado/UNLV

I do think the Pac-10 really wants Colorado. The question is who do they pair them with? And if it is Utah or BYU-they have always been loyal to each other and may be a package deal. I know that one would jump if given the opportunity, the question is who is more attractive? BYU has a more consistently strong tradition in football, but they both have good basketball traditions. But BYU would be a nice complement to Stanford as a private institution.

So that opens the door for the darkhorse. . .

Which would be among the following: UNM, Hawaii, San Diego State, UNLV, Colorado State (but I do get your points against Colorado State), TCU.

But economy would be driving this move, and a lot of expense is tacked on for your members when you add Hawaii.

And the more I think about it, UNLV and Colorado just sounds like a real big pickup.
"[. . .] and it would be foolish to gobble up sliders when there’s a steak hidden in the fridge." -Kirk Wessler

User avatar
TheAsianSensation
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 8144
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2003 12:43 pm

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by TheAsianSensation » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:41 pm

I'm having quite the debate with myself about Colorado. The Pac-10 would take them in a heartbeat. But I'm not so sure Colorado is better off in the Big 12. Easier path to a conference championship in football. Slightly more geographical relevance.

I suppose, if Colorado is not the answer, the Utah/BYU package deal IS. And those 2 would jump in a second, and I don't see any other set of 2 teams that would remotely match what this package deal would offer if Colorado doesn't jump.

So, for entertainment purposes, let's go ahead and say Colorado jumps to the Pac-10, to make things interesting (although I'm not convinced)?
That's enough, Reggie Miller.

That's enough, Chris Webber.

http://bracketball.blogspot.com/

User avatar
squirrel
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 29275
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: Peoria, IL

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by squirrel » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:45 pm

Fair enough. . .let's roll with Colorado.

Now the bigger question: Who. Goes. With. Them?
"[. . .] and it would be foolish to gobble up sliders when there’s a steak hidden in the fridge." -Kirk Wessler

User avatar
TheAsianSensation
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 8144
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2003 12:43 pm

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by TheAsianSensation » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:49 pm

My hunch: The Pac-10 asks BYU first. As you said, private school to match up with Stanford, and with BYU, you get Mormons across the world, theoretically. It's a unique opportunity to expand your fan base.

If BYU refuses to split with Utah, then you ask Utah if they'll split with BYU :lol: Honestly, I'd root for this scenario, with Utah splitting, just to see the drama that results between the two :lol:

If neither split, I think next in line is UNLV (Vegas, baby!), just trumping TCU, Colorado St, and Boise St. And for obvious reasons, the Pac-10 won't have to offer beyond UNLV.

Boy, this is a tough one, to be honest. You can sorta see why the Pac-10 won't expand unless the Big 10 doesn't. A lot of relatively solid options, but no 2 options that really fit like a puzzle piece perfectly. I really don't know what to predict.

side note: As we progress, I'm pretty sure we'll reach a point where a split within FBS becomes a distinct possibility, and the chances of the MWC being part of the good side of the split is very reasonable. If BYU and Utah could somehow know ahead of time that they could join the BCS while being in the MWC, that makes things easier for them. But at this stage, not so much.
That's enough, Reggie Miller.

That's enough, Chris Webber.

http://bracketball.blogspot.com/

User avatar
squirrel
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 29275
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: Peoria, IL

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by squirrel » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:55 pm

I agree. . .plus, BYU and Utah figure to be THE powers in the bigger MWC.

Logic says Utah is priority #1, for the Pac-10, but I, like you, think BYU will be offered first. And I think they accept.
"[. . .] and it would be foolish to gobble up sliders when there’s a steak hidden in the fridge." -Kirk Wessler

User avatar
TheAsianSensation
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 8144
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2003 12:43 pm

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by TheAsianSensation » Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:00 pm

Ok, BYU and Colorado in the Pac 10.

For divisions, could go a couple different ways:

Washington schools + Oregon schools + Colorado/BYU
California schools + Arizona schools

or

Washington schools + Oregon schools + Stanford/Cal
UCLA/USC + Colorado/BYU + Arizona schools

I don't know enough about them from a rivalry standpoint to say which of the 2 would happen, but at least it breaks down logistically into one of these 2.
That's enough, Reggie Miller.

That's enough, Chris Webber.

http://bracketball.blogspot.com/

User avatar
squirrel
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 29275
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: Peoria, IL

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by squirrel » Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:07 pm

I like the former. . .if we're going to make things complicated for ourselves with who goes where, let's keep the divisions as clean as possible. We can always revisit those.

So, that leaves the BXII short 1, and the MWC short 1 (but at a clean 8).

Who does the Big XII pick up?

The main options are: Utah, Colorado State, New Mexico, Boise State, Memphis, TCU, and loooooooooooooooong shot Illinois State ;)
"[. . .] and it would be foolish to gobble up sliders when there’s a steak hidden in the fridge." -Kirk Wessler

User avatar
TheAsianSensation
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 8144
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2003 12:43 pm

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by TheAsianSensation » Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:22 pm

Well, let's be careful here. Let's assume the Pac-10 and Big 10 do this simultaneously. Now the Big 12 needs one, and the Big East needs, well, a lot more than 1. Once Syracuse leaves for the Big 10, you can practically write Memphis into the Big East using permanent marker.

Let's deal with the Big 12 first. Using the same logic as before, I think there's 2 candidates better than the rest: Utah and TCU. Arkansas and/or LSU isn't leaving the SEC. Boise St is probably too much of a haul. New Mexico is plausible but not as plausible as Utah or TCU.

To me, I can't see it being anyone else. So, Utah vs. TCU. Let the debate begin.
That's enough, Reggie Miller.

That's enough, Chris Webber.

http://bracketball.blogspot.com/

User avatar
squirrel
All Universe
All Universe
Posts: 29275
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: Peoria, IL

Re: TAS and Squirrel Re-Construct DI

Post by squirrel » Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:29 pm

Utah has been more relevant in more sports recently. And it recaptures the lost Mountain region.

TCU has the Texas thing working against it, IMO. The Big XII has just the right balance of Texas and non-Texas, plus it has provide a clean divisional split.
"[. . .] and it would be foolish to gobble up sliders when there’s a steak hidden in the fridge." -Kirk Wessler

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests