SupEr Conference talks have resumed. You were warned.

[CatManTrue]

This is the key point. If you're adding a school that doesn't fit the usual academic profile, West Virginia doesn't bring enough eyeballs with it. It's also somewhere around #60 in the national rankings of universities, similar to Rutgers and Maryland. West Virginia is in the mid-200s.

Ok, let’s break this down really quickly. SEC is becoming the supreme super conference. From what my buddy’s saying, to keep OSU from doing something drastic - say joining the SEC - we need to add two more teams as well.

So the realistic teams we have to pick from - Colorado, Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma State, or West Virginia… aside from Colorado, none fit the supposedly requisite B1G academics (and not to beat a dead horse but neither does UNL). But Colorado is happy in the PAC12 so why would they jump until the true superconference is joined?

So pick 4 from ISU, KU, OkState, and WVU. My buddy and his group of OSU pals claim Kansas and WVU are the picks.

Nobody wants to travel to Oklahoma from Ann Arbor, NJ, or Maryland. And we already have the superior Iowa brand.

So if we’re likely to add any two teams, it’s KU and WVU. We’ll maintain our revenues, and OSU will have two more football patsies to pad their record and CFB playoff case every year.

 

[philconnors12345]

Ok, let’s break this down really quickly. SEC is becoming the supreme super conference. From what my buddy’s saying, to keep OSU from doing something drastic - say joining the SEC - we need to add two more teams as well.

So the realistic teams we have to pick from - Colorado, Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma State, or West Virginia… aside from Colorado, none fit the supposedly requisite B1G academics (and not to beat a dead horse but neither does UNL). But Colorado is happy in the PAC12 so why would they jump until the true superconference is joined?

So pick 4 from ISU, KU, OkState, and WVU. My buddy and his group of OSU pals claim Kansas and WVU are the picks.

Nobody wants to travel to Oklahoma from Ann Arbor, NJ, or Maryland. And we already have the superior Iowa brand.

So if we’re likely to add any two teams, it’s KU and WVU. We’ll maintain our revenues, and OSU will have two more football patsies to pad their record and CFB playoff case every year.

That’s ridiculous.

 

[RhabdoWildcat]

Ok, let’s break this down really quickly. SEC is becoming the supreme super conference. From what my buddy’s saying, to keep OSU from doing something drastic - say joining the SEC - we need to add two more teams as well.

So the realistic teams we have to pick from - Colorado, Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma State, or West Virginia… aside from Colorado, none fit the supposedly requisite B1G academics (and not to beat a dead horse but neither does UNL). But Colorado is happy in the PAC12 so why would they jump until the true superconference is joined?

So pick 4 from ISU, KU, OkState, and WVU. My buddy and his group of OSU pals claim Kansas and WVU are the picks.

Nobody wants to travel to Oklahoma from Ann Arbor, NJ, or Maryland. And we already have the superior Iowa brand.

So if we’re likely to add any two teams, it’s KU and WVU. We’ll maintain our revenues, and OSU will have two more football patsies to pad their record and CFB playoff case every year.

Ok. Lay off the ganja buddy.

 

[Frabjous]

What does your buddy think about investing in Dogecoin? Asking for my buddy.

 

[Turk]

What does your buddy think about investing in Dogecoin? Asking for my buddy.

Ned, his buddy, said hold off on dodgecoin and invest in ocgn at around $7 then ditch it when it crosses $11 prior to labor day.
Something wonderful will happen.

 

[StreamCat]

Right. I've heard that one. And when did Fielding Yost last coach for Michigan?

Hey, I agree, but it doesn’t matter what you or I think. We ain’t Domers. They've got long memories. When did Rockne last coach? I go to ND games a lot. I've heard his name mentioned at every game I've attended.

 

[Hungry Jack]

The “OSU wants more B1G conference patsies to pad its schedule“ theory is more far-fetched than the notion of a large bipedal hominid roaming the deep forests of North America

 

[StreamCat]

The “OSU wants more B1G conference patsies to pad its schedule“ theory is more far-fetched than the notion of a large bipedal hominid roaming the deep forests of North America

I've seen him! I've seen him. It's my Uncle Stu.

 

[Frabjous]

Hey, I agree, but it doesn’t matter what you or I think. We ain’t Domers. They've got long memories. When did Rockne last coach? I go to ND games a lot. I've heard his name mentioned at every game I've attended.

The Domers need to remember that they are 0-4 against my UChicago Maroons.

 

[jimmyNU]

Just got off the horn with my buddy. USC isn’t happening. They haven’t been truly relevant since Pete Carroll left, and OSU doesn’t want a “SoCal Michigan” to deal with. Plus the travel is prohibitive until a true superconference is formed in a few years.

• Sounds like the SupErConference is on hold - there are certain teams desired from the ACC that can’t be poached and Notre Dame isn’t budging… yet. Plus the SEC is holding the cards
• So OSU has pivoted - they want two more patsies in football, but one that is closer, has a large fanbase, sway to keep DC politicians happy, and is regularly ranked in football - that team is West Virginia University
• Kansas is the other desired Big 12 team, as they would be another easy win in football - and add a blue blood basketball team, justifying their addition
• i asked my buddy repeatedly if he had been drinking this morning. He said “just 5 cups of coffee” so I don’t think the spirits are influencing this
• So here are my buddy’s proposed new Conference alignments. I told you guys NUFB would be just fine… MBB is a different story
• East:
  • OSU
  • Indiana
  • Maryland
  • Michigan
  • Michigan State
  • Penn State
  • Rutgers
  • WVU
• West:
  • Northwestern
  • Wisconsin
  • Minnesota
  • Illinois
  • Iowa
  • Nebraska
  • Purdue
  • Kansas

This makes more sense than almost everything else shared on the topic in the past week. That said, I don't think your friend has true inner circle knowledge.

 

[VirginiaWildcat]

This makes more sense than almost everything else shared on the topic in the past week. That said, I don't think your friend has true inner circle knowledge.

He’s enjoying his 10 minutes of fame on the free message board.

 

[rwhitney014]

Ok, let’s break this down really quickly. SEC is becoming the supreme super conference. From what my buddy’s saying, to keep OSU from doing something drastic - say joining the SEC - we need to add two more teams as well.

So the realistic teams we have to pick from - Colorado, Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma State, or West Virginia… aside from Colorado, none fit the supposedly requisite B1G academics (and not to beat a dead horse but neither does UNL). But Colorado is happy in the PAC12 so why would they jump until the true superconference is joined?

So pick 4 from ISU, KU, OkState, and WVU. My buddy and his group of OSU pals claim Kansas and WVU are the picks.

Nobody wants to travel to Oklahoma from Ann Arbor, NJ, or Maryland. And we already have the superior Iowa brand.

So if we’re likely to add any two teams, it’s KU and WVU. We’ll maintain our revenues, and OSU will have two more football patsies to pad their record and CFB playoff case every year.

That many people want to travel to Morgantown? It's not exactly easy to get to, even for places that are nearby.

Again, Nebraska was an AAU member when the Big Ten admitted them. Kicking a school out of a conference is difficult and expensive, unless there's a specific provision somewhere that says a school must maintain AAU membership in order to keep its spot. I don't know whether there is or isn't, but ditching someone on that basis is probably more trouble than it's worth.

While different people are in charge now, all we really know is that the Big Ten picked Nebraska (elite, at the time at least, football program in a small state) and Rutgers and Maryland (entry to giant TV markets) for expansion. Logically, one would think that either one of those two criteria are what we'd be looking for this time around. Kansas offers that with its elite, blue-blood, giant-revenue-producing basketball program. Colorado, in theory, offers that with its fast-growing media market. West Virginia is a solid athletics program; I've picked it in casual conversations with friends before as a place that would be fascinating to attend a football game. But it's not elite in either revenue-producing program, it's in a tiny and shrinking state that has no cities and doesn't bring in any new meaningful media markets, and its academics are way down the list. We all shit on Nebraska around here, but it's #133 in the U.S. News rankings for anyone who care about that. WVU is #241. That's a significant difference.

There's a reason the ACC, where they fit much more logically with the rest of their former Big East brethren, didn't want them.

 

[CatManTrue]

That’s ridiculous.

You are disgracing one of the greatest movies of all time with a handle like that and such an oversimplified post.

Refute the listed points using logic. Or don’t, but at least throw in a Groundhog Day quote for good measure.

 

[CatManTrue]

Ok. Lay off the ganja buddy.

Turk called. He wants his poor quality of insults back.

Seriously though, ganja is legal in Ohio but not where I live. So there’s a possibility my buddy has imbibed while discussing these points.

But why don’t illogical suggestions such as USC or FSU merit such low barbs from you? Those are ridiculous suggestions. At least the possibilities I suggested are plausible.

 

[CatManTrue]

The “OSU wants more B1G conference patsies to pad its schedule“ theory is more far-fetched than the notion of a large bipedal hominid roaming the deep forests of North America

That’s not the only point. The main reason is that now that they’re the dominant team in the conference, they don’t want to cede that position. As long as they only lose at most one game each year, they’re guaranteed a CFB spot. So why not add two “easy wins” in a regularly ranked WVU team in their division and a walk-over cross-divisional opponent in Kansas?

Both should justify their addition in monetary terms. Again, KU basketball pays for itself and WVU has a devoted statewide fanbase. WVU’s population is the same size as Nebraska’s. You do the math.

 

[CatManTrue]

That many people want to travel to Morgantown? It's not exactly easy to get to, even for places that are nearby.

Again, Nebraska was an AAU member when the Big Ten admitted them. Kicking a school out of a conference is difficult and expensive, unless there's a specific provision somewhere that says a school must maintain AAU membership in order to keep its spot. I don't know whether there is or isn't, but ditching someone on that basis is probably more trouble than it's worth.

While different people are in charge now, all we really know is that the Big Ten picked Nebraska (elite, at the time at least, football program in a small state) and Rutgers and Maryland (entry to giant TV markets) for expansion. Logically, one would think that either one of those two criteria are what we'd be looking for this time around. Kansas offers that with its elite, blue-blood, giant-revenue-producing basketball program. Colorado, in theory, offers that with its fast-growing media market. West Virginia is a solid athletics program; I've picked it in casual conversations with friends before as a place that would be fascinating to attend a football game. But it's not elite in either revenue-producing program, it's in a tiny and shrinking state that has no cities and doesn't bring in any new meaningful media markets, and its academics are way down the list. We all shit on Nebraska around here, but it's #133 in the U.S. News rankings for anyone who care about that. WVU is #241. That's a significant difference.

There's a reason the ACC, where they fit much more logically with the rest of their former Big East brethren, didn't want them.

Finally! A well reasoned response. You set a nice example for decent message board discourse, sir. And you deserve a fair response.

Your point about academics were well-received - in the pre-NIL landscape. But OSU doesn’t care about the rest of the conference’s academics, they care about making money and winning the conference as long as they’re in it. That’s it. While the population of WVU is shrinking, they still have a devoted fanbase as those Mountaineers spread out. They’re not going to abandon the team - if anything, inclusion in the B1G will only increase their interest. So they’re a longer shot than Kansas to join - as we seem likely to make some sort of move - but they fit the bill well enough.

Colorado would be a likelier addition if they hadn’t recently joined the PAC-12. Does anyone know what their buyout is? If it’s low, maybe they and Kansas will join together.

And if Colorado and KU join the Big Ten west, who gets pushed to the East?

Illinois, Purdue, or… NU???

 

[Hungry Jack]

That’s not the only point. The main reason is that now that they’re the dominant team in the conference, they don’t want to cede that position. As long as they only lose at most one game each year, they’re guaranteed a CFB spot. So why not add two “easy wins” in a regularly ranked WVU team in their division and a walk-over cross-divisional opponent in Kansas?

Both should justify their addition in monetary terms. Again, KU basketball pays for itself and WVU has a devoted statewide fanbase. WVU’s population is the same size as Nebraska’s. You do the math.

I doubt OSU is much worried about ceding anything in the B1G, especially with Michigan floundering. I'd love to think they are worried about NU challenging their hegemony, but that is a stretch too. So watering down the B1G with two more mediocre programs does not seem to serve any strategic purpose for them.

If OSU wants anything, it is more $$$. Being a public university, I can understand the desire to generate more revenue from its brand as a hedge against a decline in taxpayer support. All public institutions face this issue.

So OSU might be convinced that 28-32 team super league that includes the SEC powers, Clemson, OK and perhaps a few western powers would be the vehicle to maximize its revenue. I think the big fish here is what super league championship game rights would sell for, as this would be the de facto national championship.

This is the only OSU end game that makes any real sense to me. It is also more fantasy than fact at this point.

 

[willycat]

That many people want to travel to Morgantown? It's not exactly easy to get to, even for places that are nearby.

Again, Nebraska was an AAU member when the Big Ten admitted them. Kicking a school out of a conference is difficult and expensive, unless there's a specific provision somewhere that says a school must maintain AAU membership in order to keep its spot. I don't know whether there is or isn't, but ditching someone on that basis is probably more trouble than it's worth.

While different people are in charge now, all we really know is that the Big Ten picked Nebraska (elite, at the time at least, football program in a small state) and Rutgers and Maryland (entry to giant TV markets) for expansion. Logically, one would think that either one of those two criteria are what we'd be looking for this time around. Kansas offers that with its elite, blue-blood, giant-revenue-producing basketball program. Colorado, in theory, offers that with its fast-growing media market. West Virginia is a solid athletics program; I've picked it in casual conversations with friends before as a place that would be fascinating to attend a football game. But it's not elite in either revenue-producing program, it's in a tiny and shrinking state that has no cities and doesn't bring in any new meaningful media markets, and its academics are way down the list. We all shit on Nebraska around here, but it's #133 in the U.S. News rankings for anyone who care about that. WVU is #241. That's a significant difference.

There's a reason the ACC, where they fit much more logically with the rest of their former Big East brethren, didn't want them.

How easy is it to get University Park, Pa.?

 

[StreamCat]

The Domers need to remember that they are 0-4 against my UChicago Maroons.

I love it!!!!! My son is going to hear about that!!!!

 

[CatManTrue]

How easy is it to get University Park, Pa.?

Or Evanston, Illinois?

 

[zeek55]

In order of likelihood to receive an invite into the Big Ten:

1) ND is by far the highest; they have an open invite whenever they want. King football brand. Great academics, not AAU. Would grow the pie for everyone.

2) UNC. Big brand in a big growing state in the Mid-Atlantic. AAU, great academics. Decent football, king in basketball. Would grow the pie for everyone.

3) UVa. Decent brand in a big growing state in the Mid-Atlantic, though 2nd to Va Tech in parts of its own state. AAU, great academics. Probably carries its own weight at least due to additional markets.


After those 3 it's tougher:

4) Ga Tech is a possibility, but they don't really bring Atlanta or Georgia into the Big Ten; gives a foothold there sure, but UGa has total coverage over Georgia with Ga Tech a distant second (or maybe 3rd/4th after SEC teams). Great location though for helping rest of the Big Ten target recruits and there's lots of Big Ten alumni in Atlanta. AAU, great academics. Okay football/basketball. Probably doesn't grow the pie and would need to be used as a connector or with a group of schools that does the grow the pie.

5) Duke is a possibility, but probably only paired with UNC. AAU, great academics. Poor football program, king in basketball. As a duo with UNC, the pie probably grows over time due to the basketball rivalry being added to the conference, and it's nice for Big Ten schools to get more visits to NC.

6) FSU is difficult to know, it's a king in football, but not AAU. Solid academically, okay in research but not on the level of Big Ten schools. 2nd biggest in Florida markets behind UF and would probably bring most of them as well. National brand. I think would be considered in a big move with Ga Tech and 4 others (probably ND/UNC/UVa/Duke). Access to Florida recruiting grounds and tons of Big Ten alums in Florida (though FSU is not close to those parts of the state). Would grow the pie and help neutralize effect of adding some of these other schools like Ga Tech/Duke/UVa.


Not likely:

Clemson is a football king, but doesn't really fit the Big Ten or bring more markets. National brand for football of late, but no idea whether they can keep that going post Dabo. Not AAU, decent academically.

Va Tech is decent football-wise and probably draws better viewership in Virginia due to the Beamer era, but not a big national football brand, and markets overlap with UVa. Not AAU, decent academically. Probably only would be considered in a duo with UVa if nobody else from the ACC moved (but that's not likely).

Miami is a football king, and brings Miami as a market. Not AAU, good academically. But doesn't have great fan support and probably isn't likely to be considered unless it's part of some big 6 team configuration if ND says no.


Basically it comes down to 1-6 being the schools that I can envision being in the Big Ten at some point. Rest just aren't going to happen. Kansas, WVU, Iowa State, none of them are coming.

 

[rwhitney014]

How easy is it to get University Park, Pa.?

It's hard, but it's home to the biggest college sports draw in a state 7 times the size of West Virginia. And they at least have an airport with flights to four major cities, including Chicago. Butts in seats is less and less important vis a vis TV, streaming, and digital eyeballs, but the assertion I was replying to was that "Nobody wants to travel to Oklahoma from Ann Arbor, NJ, or Maryland." Morgantown ain't exactly centrally located. I'd like to visit White River Gorge, though.

Relative to 98% of college towns in the U.S., Evanston is extremely easy to get to.

Finally! A well reasoned response. You set a nice example for decent message board discourse, sir. And you deserve a fair response.

Your point about academics were well-received - in the pre-NIL landscape. But OSU doesn’t care about the rest of the conference’s academics, they care about making money and winning the conference as long as they’re in it. That’s it. While the population of WVU is shrinking, they still have a devoted fanbase as those Mountaineers spread out. They’re not going to abandon the team - if anything, inclusion in the B1G will only increase their interest. So they’re a longer shot than Kansas to join - as we seem likely to make some sort of move - but they fit the bill well enough.

Colorado would be a likelier addition if they hadn’t recently joined the PAC-12. Does anyone know what their buyout is? If it’s low, maybe they and Kansas will join together.

And if Colorado and KU join the Big Ten west, who gets pushed to the East?

Illinois, Purdue, or… NU???

Sure, WVU has a devoted fanbase, but it's small.

I really can't imagine that Ohio State turns down teaming up with Alabama and Oklahoma and Texas and Clemson because the Big Ten brought West Virginia in. They will turn it down because their economic power stems from chasing undefeated seasons every year, which is not going to continue if they play those teams (well, three of them) in the regular season every year. They're printing money in the Big Ten, and they are smart enough to heed cautionary tales from schools like Miami and Virginia Tech, which were at the top of the sport when they engineered a move into the ACC and have slowly dripped into relative irrelevance. At least insofar as this super-tier of schools is concerned.

The Big Ten makes a ton of money and there's no real reason to believe that's going to stop, even if there's a super-conference of some kind. OSU can schedule games against schools like Alabama in non-con whenever it likes. No one's turning down their call.

If we do expand, Purdue moves east. Maintaining the IU-PU trophy game resulted in everyone else having to have a silly "protected rival" across divisions. Adding KU/whoever else to the West and moving Purdue into the East actually simplifies things from that perspective, unless that someone else is ND. (It won't be.). And it keeps geographic integrity, to the extent that matters at all. (It doesn't.) Someone will rue the loss of the annual Cannon game, but find me someone that invested in that trophy and I'll find you someone who cares more about the Old Oaken Bucket.

 

[EvanstonCat]

Ok, let’s break this down really quickly. SEC is becoming the supreme super conference. From what my buddy’s saying, to keep OSU from doing something drastic - say joining the SEC - we need to add two more teams as well.

So the realistic teams we have to pick from - Colorado, Iowa State, Kansas, Oklahoma State, or West Virginia… aside from Colorado, none fit the supposedly requisite B1G academics (and not to beat a dead horse but neither does UNL). But Colorado is happy in the PAC12 so why would they jump until the true superconference is joined?

So pick 4 from ISU, KU, OkState, and WVU. My buddy and his group of OSU pals claim Kansas and WVU are the picks.

Nobody wants to travel to Oklahoma from Ann Arbor, NJ, or Maryland. And we already have the superior Iowa brand.

So if we’re likely to add any two teams, it’s KU and WVU. We’ll maintain our revenues, and OSU will have two more football patsies to pad their record and CFB playoff case every year.

Now it's clear your buddy is full of shit.

It makes zero sense to add KU or WVU. Zero. They are worse than Maryland and Rutgers. Which is why we didn't add them last time.

 

[EvanstonCat]

In order of likelihood to receive an invite into the Big Ten:

1) ND is by far the highest; they have an open invite whenever they want. King football brand. Great academics, not AAU. Would grow the pie for everyone.

2) UNC. Big brand in a big growing state in the Mid-Atlantic. AAU, great academics. Decent football, king in basketball. Would grow the pie for everyone.

3) UVa. Decent brand in a big growing state in the Mid-Atlantic, though 2nd to Va Tech in parts of its own state. AAU, great academics. Probably carries its own weight at least due to additional markets.


After those 3 it's tougher:

4) Ga Tech is a possibility, but they don't really bring Atlanta or Georgia into the Big Ten; gives a foothold there sure, but UGa has total coverage over Georgia with Ga Tech a distant second (or maybe 3rd/4th after SEC teams). Great location though for helping rest of the Big Ten target recruits and there's lots of Big Ten alumni in Atlanta. AAU, great academics. Okay football/basketball. Probably doesn't grow the pie and would need to be used as a connector or with a group of schools that does the grow the pie.

5) Duke is a possibility, but probably only paired with UNC. AAU, great academics. Poor football program, king in basketball. As a duo with UNC, the pie probably grows over time due to the basketball rivalry being added to the conference, and it's nice for Big Ten schools to get more visits to NC.

6) FSU is difficult to know, it's a king in football, but not AAU. Solid academically, okay in research but not on the level of Big Ten schools. 2nd biggest in Florida markets behind UF and would probably bring most of them as well. National brand. I think would be considered in a big move with Ga Tech and 4 others (probably ND/UNC/UVa/Duke). Access to Florida recruiting grounds and tons of Big Ten alums in Florida (though FSU is not close to those parts of the state). Would grow the pie and help neutralize effect of adding some of these other schools like Ga Tech/Duke/UVa.


Not likely:

Clemson is a football king, but doesn't really fit the Big Ten or bring more markets. National brand for football of late, but no idea whether they can keep that going post Dabo. Not AAU, decent academically.

Va Tech is decent football-wise and probably draws better viewership in Virginia due to the Beamer era, but not a big national football brand, and markets overlap with UVa. Not AAU, decent academically. Probably only would be considered in a duo with UVa if nobody else from the ACC moved (but that's not likely).

Miami is a football king, and brings Miami as a market. Not AAU, good academically. But doesn't have great fan support and probably isn't likely to be considered unless it's part of some big 6 team configuration if ND says no.


Basically it comes down to 1-6 being the schools that I can envision being in the Big Ten at some point. Rest just aren't going to happen. Kansas, WVU, Iowa State, none of them are coming.

Disagree. After the Rutgers and Maryland debacles (and they were debacles) its clear that we have to be going after football cache. How do you counter Texas and OU? You can only do so with blueblood football programs. Back to the Nebraska and PSU formula. Tons of tradition, national championships, large fanbases. And I don't think the AAU thing is going to be as big of a deal as people are saying.

So in order, these would be:

Texas and OU - if Phillips were here, you better believe we'd be counteroffering right now. And take OU without Texas if we had to.

ND - not coming, but otherwise arguably #1 on the wishlist
Clemson - the only school that could really counter OU out there in terms of football cache right now

FSU and USC as next tiers. Has been's, but like UT still have some power to their brands.

Miami and UDub as possibly your next tier.

Barring any of these, I bet we stay pat (or at least we should). Nobody with a clue is going to counter UT and OU with KU and WVU. You'd just be ceding superiority to the SEC. Much less a repeat of Maryland and Rutgers in any one of a bunch of mediocre ACC programs. Please.

 

[Hungry Jack]

Now it's clear your buddy is full of shit.

It makes zero sense to add KU or WVU. Zero. They are worse than Maryland and Rutgers. Which is why we didn't add them last time.

I think I know his buddy. We got pretty crazy one night during a chance meeting in a bodega in Malaga and ended doing shots off a flamenco dancer's derriere. Fun guy. Memorable night. But I don't think he knows college football.

 

[zeek55]

Disagree. After the Rutgers and Maryland debacles (and they were debacles) its clear that we have to be going after football cache. How do you counter Texas and OU? You can only do so with blueblood football programs. Back to the Nebraska and PSU formula. Tons of tradition, national championships, large fanbases. And I don't think the AAU thing is going to be as big of a deal as people are saying.

So in order, these would be:

Texas and OU - if Phillips were here, you better believe we'd be counteroffering right now. And take OU without Texas if we had to.

ND - not coming, but otherwise arguably #1 on the wishlist
Clemson - the only school that could really counter OU out there in terms of football cache right now

FSU and USC as next tiers. Has been's, but like UT still have some power to their brands.

Miami and UDub as possibly your next tier.

Barring any of these, I bet we stay pat (or at least we should). Nobody with a clue is going to counter UT and OU with KU and WVU. You'd just be ceding superiority to the SEC. Much less a repeat of Maryland and Rutgers in any one of a bunch of mediocre ACC programs. Please.

ND will come if they have no other choice, i.e. if ACC gets raided.

I would guess anyhow.

 

[CatManTrue]

In order of likelihood to receive an invite into the Big Ten:

1) ND is by far the highest; they have an open invite whenever they want. King football brand. Great academics, not AAU. Would grow the pie for everyone.

2) UNC. Big brand in a big growing state in the Mid-Atlantic. AAU, great academics. Decent football, king in basketball. Would grow the pie for everyone.

3) UVa. Decent brand in a big growing state in the Mid-Atlantic, though 2nd to Va Tech in parts of its own state. AAU, great academics. Probably carries its own weight at least due to additional markets.


After those 3 it's tougher:

4) Ga Tech is a possibility, but they don't really bring Atlanta or Georgia into the Big Ten; gives a foothold there sure, but UGa has total coverage over Georgia with Ga Tech a distant second (or maybe 3rd/4th after SEC teams). Great location though for helping rest of the Big Ten target recruits and there's lots of Big Ten alumni in Atlanta. AAU, great academics. Okay football/basketball. Probably doesn't grow the pie and would need to be used as a connector or with a group of schools that does the grow the pie.

5) Duke is a possibility, but probably only paired with UNC. AAU, great academics. Poor football program, king in basketball. As a duo with UNC, the pie probably grows over time due to the basketball rivalry being added to the conference, and it's nice for Big Ten schools to get more visits to NC.

6) FSU is difficult to know, it's a king in football, but not AAU. Solid academically, okay in research but not on the level of Big Ten schools. 2nd biggest in Florida markets behind UF and would probably bring most of them as well. National brand. I think would be considered in a big move with Ga Tech and 4 others (probably ND/UNC/UVa/Duke). Access to Florida recruiting grounds and tons of Big Ten alums in Florida (though FSU is not close to those parts of the state). Would grow the pie and help neutralize effect of adding some of these other schools like Ga Tech/Duke/UVa.


Not likely:

Clemson is a football king, but doesn't really fit the Big Ten or bring more markets. National brand for football of late, but no idea whether they can keep that going post Dabo. Not AAU, decent academically.

Va Tech is decent football-wise and probably draws better viewership in Virginia due to the Beamer era, but not a big national football brand, and markets overlap with UVa. Not AAU, decent academically. Probably only would be considered in a duo with UVa if nobody else from the ACC moved (but that's not likely).

Miami is a football king, and brings Miami as a market. Not AAU, good academically. But doesn't have great fan support and probably isn't likely to be considered unless it's part of some big 6 team configuration if ND says no.


Basically it comes down to 1-6 being the schools that I can envision being in the Big Ten at some point. Rest just aren't going to happen. Kansas, WVU, Iowa State, none of them are coming.

Your 1-8 is simply not happening for another 10+ years, period. By your own admission on this very board. So I don’t see why you keep talking about them like they’re coming anytime soon because they’re not.

You are making the dangerous assertion that the B1G will do nothing for 10+ years. This is a ridiculous assumption. The B1G is going to invite teams at some point, and the five I listed are the most logical list. UNLESS a true superconference is formed which seems unlikely given the ACC GoR.

If you have actual information to share, please do. But neither ND nor the ACC teams you listed are walking through that door. So the B1G either needs to stay at 14 teams while everyone passes us by, or choose two more potential B1G stalwarts. My sources indicate they will be either CU, KU, or WVU. What do yours say?

 

[curdog]

Now it's clear your buddy is full of shit.

It makes zero sense to add KU or WVU. Zero. They are worse than Maryland and Rutgers. Which is why we didn't add them last time.

Yes, RU and MD were a disaster. Their additions helped make the BIG the wealthiest confernce in the country and gave the BIG the flagshup
Universities in 2 of the wealthiest, best educated states in the US, each year pumping out 10s of thousands of extremely qualified HS graduates looking for colleges to attend. Total disaster.

 

[CatManTrue]

Sure, WVU has a devoted fanbase, but it's small.

I really can't imagine that Ohio State turns down teaming up with Alabama and Oklahoma and Texas and Clemson because the Big Ten brought West Virginia in. They will turn it down because their economic power stems from chasing undefeated seasons every year, which is not going to continue if they play those teams (well, three of them) in the regular season every year. They're printing money in the Big Ten, and they are smart enough to heed cautionary tales from schools like Miami and Virginia Tech, which were at the top of the sport when they engineered a move into the ACC and have slowly dripped into relative irrelevance. At least insofar as this super-tier of schools is concerned.

The Big Ten makes a ton of money and there's no real reason to believe that's going to stop, even if there's a super-conference of some kind. OSU can schedule games against schools like Alabama in non-con whenever it likes. No one's turning down their call.

If we do expand, Purdue moves east. Maintaining the IU-PU trophy game resulted in everyone else having to have a silly "protected rival" across divisions. Adding KU/whoever else to the West and moving Purdue into the East actually simplifies things from that perspective, unless that someone else is ND. (It won't be.). And it keeps geographic integrity, to the extent that matters at all. (It doesn't.) Someone will rue the loss of the annual Cannon game, but find me someone that invested in that trophy and I'll find you someone who cares more about the Old Oaken Bucket.

You raise some interesting points. What’s clear between you and I is that OSU is holding all the cards. I don’t think they’ll jump ship so really it’s about how they play them:

I hope you’re right about Purdue moving to the East, because historically it’s NU that gets jobbed.

 

[zeek55]

Your 1-8 is simply not happening for another 10+ years, period. By your own admission on this very board. So I don’t see why you keep talking about them like they’re coming anytime soon because they’re not.

You are making the dangerous assertion that the B1G will do nothing for 10+ years. This is a ridiculous assumption. The B1G is going to invite teams at some point, and the five I listed are the most logical list. UNLESS a true superconference is formed which seems unlikely given the ACC GoR.

If you have actual information to share, please do. But neither ND nor the ACC teams you listed are walking through that door. So the B1G either needs to stay at 14 teams while everyone passes us by, or choose two more potential B1G stalwarts. My sources indicate they will be either CU, KU, or WVU. What do yours say?

The Big Ten is not going to make a move just to make a move.

WVU is never going to happen. They were literally available to add the past 50 years at any time and never got added. We chose Rutgers over them.

Why? WVU doesn't add anything; no footprint (their main TV market is Pittsburgh which is already accounted for by Penn State). And academically, WVU would be far below any Big Ten university by any academic prestige/research metric you care to use.

Kansas and Colorado are the same; they've always been available to the Big Ten in previous expansion rounds and yet we left Kansas in the Big 12 and didn't try to grab Colorado with Nebraska (but there's a small chance of Colorado in the scenario I outline at the bottom of this post). Also, you haven't explained how any of those schools justifies $70 million in extra revenue, let alone a pair of them.


I'll give you the shortlist of schools that could justify bringing themselves and another to the conference (i.e. expand the pie by $140+ million):

1) ND

2) FSU

3) Clemson

4) UNC

That's the list; 3 football mega brands and the Texas of the Mid-Atlantic (UNC). But Clemson is unlikely for a variety of reasons; smaller markets/footprint, doesn't help the rest of the Big Ten with recruiting like FSU or UNC.

UVa, Duke, and Georgia Tech are likely to be considered in combination with those schools that I listed above; none of those 3 justifies expansion on their own. But that's the shortlist for expansion, and as you notice they're all tied to the ACC.


So what do we do? Short of taking 8 teams out of the Pac-12 (which is far more likely than your scenario of WVU/Kansas btw) such as USC/UCLA/Cal/Stanford/Oregon/UW/Arizona/Colorado, there's nothing else to do right now.

If you're proposing a Big Ten with 22 teams; those 8 from the Pac-12 would work and would expand the pie, they account for roughly 95+% of the Pac-12's current value and splitting the current Pac-12 deal 8 ways instead of 12 gets you around $45 million per team.

Added to the Big Ten (i.e. negotiating for those 22 > just the sum of our two conferences), can easily see those 8 justifying another $600+ million in revenue ($75 million per team) for the conference, so they'd pay for themselves.

Everything else is just not going to happen. I've looked at these numbers for 10+ years. That's what works.

 

[EvanstonCat]

Yes, RU and MD were a disaster. Their additions helped make the BIG the wealthiest confernce in the country and gave the BIG the flagshup
Universities in 2 of the wealthiest, best educated states in the US, each year pumping out 10s of thousands of extremely qualified HS graduates looking for colleges to attend. Total disaster.

Uh... no.

We were already the wealthiest conference in the country before we made those putrid adds, and now the SEC is overtaking us in the passing lane because we aren't moving fast enough. OU and TX vs. KU and WVU? Which do you think is going to mean more to our TV contracts? Markets shmarkets. People want to watch the best football in the land. And right now, that is the SEC and it will be even more so if they add OU and TX, and people are talking about adding Kansas and WVU. Which bring neither CFP level football nor markets. Do you honestly believe Maryland and Rutgers moved the needle for us on anything? If so, why stop at MD and NJ for this round? By your logic, we should add NYU, UConn and UMass if we were looking to add the wealthiest and best educated.

Pumping out 10s of thousands of extremely qualified HS graduates looking for colleges to attend???? I don't think any university in the B1G including us gave a crap about that. Each of the State Universities are driven by their in-state student pools. And we are going to attract kids nationally regardless. Even if applicants from MD and NJ went up at NU (which I doubt), who really gives a crap in the grand scheme? NU isn't exactly hurting on the applications front.

 

[EvanstonCat]

The Big Ten is not going to make a move just to make a move.

WVU is never going to happen. They were literally available to add the past 50 years at any time and never got added. We chose Rutgers over them.

Why? WVU doesn't add anything; no footprint (their main TV market is Pittsburgh which is already accounted for by Penn State). And academically, WVU would be far below any Big Ten university by any academic prestige/research metric you care to use.

Kansas and Colorado are the same; they've always been available to the Big Ten in previous expansion rounds and yet we left Kansas in the Big 12 and didn't try to grab Colorado with Nebraska (but there's a small chance of Colorado in the scenario I outline at the bottom of this post). Also, you haven't explained how any of those schools justifies $70 million in extra revenue, let alone a pair of them.


I'll give you the shortlist of schools that could justify bringing themselves and another to the conference (i.e. expand the pie by $140+ million):

1) ND

2) FSU

3) Clemson

4) UNC

That's the list; 3 football mega brands and the Texas of the Mid-Atlantic (UNC). But Clemson is unlikely for a variety of reasons; smaller markets/footprint, doesn't help the rest of the Big Ten with recruiting like FSU or UNC.

UVa, Duke, and Georgia Tech are likely to be considered in combination with those schools that I listed above; none of those 3 justifies expansion on their own. But that's the shortlist for expansion, and as you notice they're all tied to the ACC.


So what do we do? Short of taking 8 teams out of the Pac-12 (which is far more likely than your scenario of WVU/Kansas btw) such as USC/UCLA/Cal/Stanford/Oregon/UW/Arizona/Colorado, there's nothing else to do right now.

If you're proposing a Big Ten with 22 teams; those 8 from the Pac-12 would work and would expand the pie, they account for roughly 95+% of the Pac-12's current value and splitting the current Pac-12 deal 8 ways instead of 12 gets you around $45 million per team.

Added to the Big Ten (i.e. negotiating for those 22 > just the sum of our two conferences), can easily see those 8 justifying another $600+ million in revenue ($75 million per team) for the conference, so they'd pay for themselves.

Everything else is just not going to happen. I've looked at these numbers for 10+ years. That's what works.

This. Though not sure I'd group UNC in there - not sure there is any Texas of the mid-Atlantic. I don't think their market is Texas like, and they aren't as strong on the football index as the other three. Maybe throw in USC and maybe also Oregon instead.

On Clemson, you may be right that its unlikely, but it shouldn't be. I think we can all agree OU is a homerun add for the SEC (well except for those delusional folks who still think Rutgers and Maryland were good adds). Clemson would be most like OU in terms of impact and maybe even more so. Bigger population/market than OU for sure. Perennial CFP contender and actually gets past the semifinals. They alone would enable the B1G to lay a legitimate claim to being #1 in football still. Without them and with anyone else, we are 2nd to the SEC, especially an SEC with OU. They increase the football power index of the B1G more than any other school out there, and that would absolutely help recruiting. I get that FSU would help get us into Florida, but not getting why you think UNC would have so much impact.

We really flubbed this whole thing with the whole AAU BS. Nebraska isn't AAU anymore so it doesn't mean anything, and we would bring ND in a heartbeat. Just hold the nose, and add OU (and Texas) and we aren't looking to be #2. Instead we got Rutgers and Maryland. Ugh.

 

[zeek55]

This. Though not sure I'd group UNC in there - not sure there is any Texas of the mid-Atlantic. I don't think their market is Texas like, and they aren't as strong on the football index as the other three. Maybe throw in USC and maybe also Oregon instead.

On Clemson, you may be right that its unlikely, but it shouldn't be. I think we can all agree OU is a homerun add for the SEC (well except for those delusional folks who still think Rutgers and Maryland were good adds). Clemson would be most like OU in terms of impact and maybe even more so. Bigger population/market than OU for sure. Perennial CFP contender and actually gets past the semifinals. They alone would enable the B1G to lay a legitimate claim to being #1 in football still. Without them and with anyone else, we are 2nd to the SEC, especially an SEC with OU. They increase the football power index of the B1G more than any other school out there, and that would absolutely help recruiting. I get that FSU would help get us into Florida, but not getting why you think UNC would have so much impact.

We really flubbed this whole thing with the whole AAU BS. Nebraska isn't AAU anymore so it doesn't mean anything, and we would bring ND in a heartbeat. Just hold the nose, and add OU (and Texas) and we aren't looking to be #2. Instead we got Rutgers and Maryland. Ugh.

Clemson is a power now, but who knows what that looks like in the future, especially 10 years out which is when the ACC is probably poachable. FSU institutionally is more of a long-term power (say if coaches change at both) because it's the 2nd most important school in Florida with similar pull over Florida recruits like A&M has in Texas. And that's always FSU's edge over Clemson if you think long-term. Clemson can revert to being like a better South Carolina if Dabo leaves, but if he stays long enough and really cements them as a generational national brand, they could seriously be worth taking. FSU always can be a national power; Clemson's will be much more dependent on having a special coach (like a better version of Va Tech?).

That's the fortunate (?) thing about the ACC not being poachable for 10-11 years, it means we get to see how these things play out.

Now you may very well be right; if Clemson makes 8 of the next say 10-11 playoffs, it will be very hard to argue that they aren't a national power in their own right, and the Big Ten would have to seriously think about taking them. There's a point at which a school has been a national power for so long that it remains one.

But it's always worth thinking; what if a program has a bad coach, would you still take them? How easily can they come back to being a national power from that. FSU is much easier to turn around than Clemson if both had bad coaches.

Not so different from how Northwestern has slowly changed perception of our program to the point where people typically refer to the 80s Northwestern as a separate time if they're comparing current Kansas to other historically bad periods for power programs (though guess they won't be a power program soon). If Dabo keeps building Clemson the next decade, maybe they will be seen as a long-term power and not a short-term spike.


Thing is, adding say 7 or 8 Pac-12 schools probably is the easiest route to adding USC/Oregon/UW because they can play each other 6-7 times in sports and then just play a few out of division games against the rest of the Big Ten (at least for football). Makes things easier in terms of travel.


In any case, yeah I can understand the argument about UNC. But I'd maintain that the Big Ten and SEC would take the duo of UNC and UVa in a heartbeat, and UNC is the more valuable of the two. That duo is worth $140+ million to either the Big Ten or SEC, so both would do it. They're the heart of the Mid-Atlantic which neither conference has; huge recruiting grounds/solid brands/great basketball schools (even though that's not driving the bus).

Yeah, the AAU thing is overblown in my opinion.

I think you're wrong about Maryland/Rutgers btw. They did bring big markets with them that they pump tons of alumni into and that have tons of Big Ten alums (NYC/Philly/DC markets; they have like several hundred thousand alums in those 2 markets to combine with all the Big Ten alums in those 2 markets). We get a ton of Big Ten Network money out of those markets due to those 2 schools (in combination with the rest of the Big Ten alums there).

Maryland/Rutgers is like a lesser version of UNC/UVa (which is why the Big Ten would add UNC/UVa in a nanosecond). Adding large flagships in good markets filled with Big Ten alums and with good academics will always make sense for the conference.

The SEC did the same with A&M/Missouri or South Carolina/Arkansas. None of those are national brands. They just bring extra markets/recruiting grounds/flagships in their states.


I get that Texas/OU were different because they're also national brands, but that doesn't change the value that market additions still give.

I agree though that the Big Ten must bring football powers in the next move which is why I'm heavily in favor of adding FSU (leading UNC/Duke/UVa/Ga Tech out of the ACC) and then hitting #20 with Notre Dame. That gives you 2 national football brands and all the markets from NYC down to Florida on the East Coast to go along with all the Midwest markets that the conference already has.

 

[CatManTrue]

He’s enjoying his 10 minutes of fame on the free message board.

Incorrect! Consider all of this a free appetizer.

The true fame will come when I write a book about all of this. I’m considering entitling it “Things My Buddy Told Me”. But I’m open to suggestions.

 

[CatManTrue]

Clemson is a power now, but who knows what that looks like in the future, especially 10 years out which is when the ACC is probably poachable. FSU institutionally is more of a long-term power (say if coaches change at both) because it's the 2nd most important school in Florida with similar pull over Florida recruits like A&M has in Texas. And that's always FSU's edge over Clemson if you think long-term. Clemson can revert to being like a better South Carolina if Dabo leaves, but if he stays long enough and really cements them as a generational national brand, they could seriously be worth taking. FSU always can be a national power; Clemson's will be much more dependent on having a special coach (like a better version of Va Tech?).

That's the fortunate (?) thing about the ACC not being poachable for 10-11 years, it means we get to see how these things play out.

Now you may very well be right; if Clemson makes 8 of the next say 10-11 playoffs, it will be very hard to argue that they aren't a national power in their own right, and the Big Ten would have to seriously think about taking them. There's a point at which a school has been a national power for so long that it remains one.

But it's always worth thinking; what if a program has a bad coach, would you still take them? How easily can they come back to being a national power from that. FSU is much easier to turn around than Clemson if both had bad coaches.

Not so different from how Northwestern has slowly changed perception of our program to the point where people typically refer to the 80s Northwestern as a separate time if they're comparing current Kansas to other historically bad periods for power programs (though guess they won't be a power program soon). If Dabo keeps building Clemson the next decade, maybe they will be seen as a long-term power and not a short-term spike.


Thing is, adding say 7 or 8 Pac-12 schools probably is the easiest route to adding USC/Oregon/UW because they can play each other 6-7 times in sports and then just play a few out of division games against the rest of the Big Ten (at least for football). Makes things easier in terms of travel.


In any case, yeah I can understand the argument about UNC. But I'd maintain that the Big Ten and SEC would take the duo of UNC and UVa in a heartbeat, and UNC is the more valuable of the two. That duo is worth $140+ million to either the Big Ten or SEC, so both would do it. They're the heart of the Mid-Atlantic which neither conference has; huge recruiting grounds/solid brands/great basketball schools (even though that's not driving the bus).

Yeah, the AAU thing is overblown in my opinion.

I think you're wrong about Maryland/Rutgers btw. They did bring big markets with them that they pump tons of alumni into and that have tons of Big Ten alums (NYC/Philly/DC markets; they have like several hundred thousand alums in those 2 markets to combine with all the Big Ten alums in those 2 markets). We get a ton of Big Ten Network money out of those markets due to those 2 schools (in combination with the rest of the Big Ten alums there).

Maryland/Rutgers is like a lesser version of UNC/UVa (which is why the Big Ten would add UNC/UVa in a nanosecond). Adding large flagships in good markets filled with Big Ten alums and with good academics will always make sense for the conference.

The SEC did the same with A&M/Missouri or South Carolina/Arkansas. None of those are national brands. They just bring extra markets/recruiting grounds/flagships in their states.


I get that Texas/OU were different because they're also national brands, but that doesn't change the value that market additions still give.

I agree though that the Big Ten must bring football powers in the next move which is why I'm heavily in favor of adding FSU (leading UNC/Duke/UVa/Ga Tech out of the ACC) and then hitting #20 with Notre Dame. That gives you 2 national football brands and all the markets from NYC down to Florida on the East Coast to go along with all the Midwest markets that the conference already has.

Here’s the thing though: the B1G can’t really add FSU in its current form. There’s no rational explanation why they would travel to Minneapolis or Piscataway for winter match-ups. But they would travel to Ann Arbor or Happy Valley.

If we do end up with one or two superconferences down the road, then the B1G’s days are numbered. At least in it’s current inception. We have to be reasonable and anticipate that, someday, the “conference powers” will jump ship to partner with the Clemsons, FSUs, Oklahomas, and USCs of the world as it will make the most economic sense.

Then our AD will truly have to earn his paycheck as we wouldn’t make sense in that type of conference. But we would in either a watered down Big Ten or an Academic superconference as I already outlined. Which would you prefer?

 

[StreamCat]

Forsooth! My mother has crossed the River Styx; yet she will deliver righteous, unmerciful justice. An errant poster has written “between you and I.“ Forbidden! She will rise and smote the heathen and display his bloody head on a spike for all to behold. We will tremble.

 

[zeek55]

Here’s the thing though: the B1G can’t really add FSU in its current form. There’s no rational explanation why they would travel to Minneapolis or Piscataway for winter match-ups. But they would travel to Ann Arbor or Happy Valley.

If we do end up with one or two superconferences down the road, then the B1G’s days are numbered. At least in it’s current inception. We have to be reasonable and anticipate that, someday, the “conference powers” will jump ship to partner with the Clemsons, FSUs, Oklahomas, and USCs of the world as it will make the most economic sense.

Then our AD will truly have to earn his paycheck as we wouldn’t make sense in that type of conference. But we would in either a watered down Big Ten or an Academic superconference as I already outlined. Which would you prefer?

But why? Other than the SEC, the Big Ten has the most high quality group of schools in terms of markets.

Why would anybody leave when the Big Ten can always add ND and a bunch of ACC teams or a bunch of Pac-12 teams.

Everyone just has to take a step back and realize this will all work out after next TV contract is signed and as we get to 2032.

 

[klemman]

That’s not the only point. The main reason is that now that they’re the dominant team in the conference, they don’t want to cede that position. As long as they only lose at most one game each year, they’re guaranteed a CFB spot. So why not add two “easy wins” in a regularly ranked WVU team in their division and a walk-over cross-divisional opponent in Kansas?

Both should justify their addition in monetary terms. Again, KU basketball pays for itself and WVU has a devoted statewide fanbase. WVU’s population is the same size as Nebraska’s. You do the math.

Again, you’re looking at the old model. With enough teams and recognition as a super conference, the SEC won’t need to play out of conference games. Ant expansion of the playoffs will just enable more SEC teams, even with losses to make the playoffs.

OSU has been dominating the Big 10 but it’s not because of Ohio players. It’s that they’ve been able to recruit top prospects nationally and only grab a few handpicked Ohio or Big 10 states.The need to recruit nationally will only continue to grow. The argument to come to OSU to play patsies and make the playoffs if we go undefeated, isn’t nearly as enticing as play in the conference with the best teams, best players, most recognition, and even with a loss or losses you can make the playoffs.

 

[rwhitney014]

Here’s the thing though: the B1G can’t really add FSU in its current form. There’s no rational explanation why they would travel to Minneapolis or Piscataway for winter match-ups. But they would travel to Ann Arbor or Happy Valley.

Is it really that different from traveling to Syracuse or Chestnut Hill or Pittsburgh? Louisville and Blacksburg can get chilly too. As can South Bend, of course, but they're more the Ann Arbor/Happy Valley class.

ACC covers a lot of land these days. It's a far cry from the Piedmont conference it used to be when it was just the NC schools, Clemson, Virginia and Maryland.

 

[CatManTrue]

But why? Other than the SEC, the Big Ten has the most high quality group of schools in terms of markets.

Why would anybody leave when the Big Ten can always add ND and a bunch of ACC teams or a bunch of Pac-12 teams.

Everyone just has to take a step back and realize this will all work out after next TV contract is signed and as we get to 2032.

I hate to sound oversimplistic but, again, because of money.

The top five-six teams in each conference bring in the lion’s share of the money. In the Big Ten, that means OSU, Michigan, Ped State, Nebraska, Iowa, and Michigan State. In the NIL world, these programs are realizing that there aren’t really any rules and they don’t have to share the pot with the smaller schools that don’t bring as much.

I think someone like @EvanstonCat who has a MBA and works in finance can articulate this better than my simple Tech mind, but think of the ~$700M TV revenues that the B1G currently brings in total and splits evenly amongst all 14 members. Well the big dogs account for the vast majority for those revenues in not only the B1G, but also the ACC, SEC, and PAC12. We all know why Notre Dame hasn’t joined a conference - because they don’t need to share the money. Economists likely refer to smaller schools like us as rent-seekers.

So if all of those massive programs team up a la the NWO concept, they can unlock significant revenues in a new super conference as my buddy and I have discussed. I’m starting to think that he told me about the Kansas / WVU to throw us all off the scent of the super conference. But as I’ve read up more about the history of UT & OU and their joining the SEC, the superconference that I outlined makes more sense - and I suspect that is still the ultimate goal for the CFB powers.