A Modest Proposal for Big Ten Expansion

on 05 11, 2010

Apparently, the Big Ten Conference wants to expand; a novel concept to say the least (sarcasm implied).  If, as is widely assumed, the conference expands past twelve and to at least fourteen, few can deny that a new Big Ten would be the catalyst for a major reactionary chain of events which will leave the world of college athletics looking quite different.  Before this can happen, a final decision must be made by Jim Delany and the boys over at the Big Ten office.  So, beyond a general consistency with respect to region, what appears to be their criteria?  Here’s a quick breakdown of what may be the top three requirements:

ANY CHARACTER HERE

Member of the Association of American Universities

The Big Ten, perhaps more so than any other conference in America, recognizes it’s purpose as an academic institution.  Each of it’s eleven current members are also a part of the Association of American Universities.  According to it’s official website, the AAU “works to maintain the productive partnership between the nation’s research universities and the federal government.”  In Layman’s terms, these schools form a conglomerate which pulls a lot of weight in the area of federal research funding; the type of funding which ensures that member universities can maintain a strong faculty and have their names stamped on new and innovative developments in all realms of science, sociology, medicine, and so on.  The newest members of the conference would need to be members of the AAU, so that all departments of all universities within the new Big Ten could benefit, not just the athletic departments.

ANY CHARACTER HERE

Television Ratings/Market

The Big Ten already operates the extremely successful Big Ten Network.  There appears to be a belief within the conference offices and member schools that expanding the network’s reach to larger television markets will be the most beneficial way to grow the Big Ten brand.  Moving to a large market would only help the conference in it’s negotiations with the major national networks which already cover the bulk of their games.  This criteria measure holds the key to the true longterm success of the conference, as it needs to be weighed and balanced well with the third and final major measure to ensure that the competitive product it generates keeps the conference relevant against other major conferences in all sports.

ANY CHARACTER HERE

Competitive Balance

As mentioned above, competitive balance will need to be weighed accurately against television ratings and markets in order to at least maintain and, in a best case scenario, improve the Big Ten’s already robust image as one of the “big six” conferences.  In recent years, the Big Ten has been inconsistent in extra-conference competition in both of the major money making sports.  In football, the Big Ten holds the most BCS bowl births since it’s inception, but their overall record is only 10-11.  In men’s basketball, the ACC ran off a ten year streak of dominance in the ACC/Big Ten Challenge before the Big Ten won it’s first this past season.

ANY CHARACTER HERE

After considering these three major measures for criteria, who fits best with what the Big Ten wants? Some would say that conversation includes eight possibilities: Connecticut, Colorado, Missouri, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, and Syracuse.

First, let’s eliminate the elephant in the room: Notre Dame. The Fighting Irish have said they’re more than happy with their independent status.  They have a lucrative television contract with NBC (which I’ve always thought might mesh well with the Big Ten Network and a potential weekly triple-header with Notre Dame’s conference game in prime time, but the powers-that-be obviously disagree).  Notre Dame doesn’t want to share revenue, and as long as the BCS is formatted in it’s current fashion, it will never need a conference to do so.  While they make no money from the current format if they don’t make a BCS bowl, they also don’t have to share the money when they are involved, unlike any member of a conference.  Notre Dame’s independence allows them to travel all over the country, playing home games in places like Yankee Stadium and Cowboys Stadium.  This helps with exposure, which obviously helps with recruiting (although you wouldn’t know it when looking at their recent history).  Everyone agrees that adding Notre Dame would be a dream come true for the Big Ten for a number of reasons; (1) No individual television market can compete with what the Fighting Irish does ratings-wise, (2) None of the other seriously considered institutions is even close in academic prowess, and (3) South Bend is right in the heart of Big Ten country.  Alas, the bottom line remains the same as it’s been since 1999, when these two parties last flirted with the notion of going home together: Notre Dame is the pretty girl who isn’t going to put out.

Now that that’s out of the way, we’ll sink our teeth into realistic possibilities:

In one scenario, the Big Ten could ransack the already weakened Big East Conference and steal the three schools closest to the largest television market in the country, New York City.  By adding UConn, Rutgers, and Syracuse, the Big Ten would no doubt improve it’s television ratings.  As a unit, this group of three has the potential to benefit the conference more than any other three combined.  As with any great reward, this scenario presents great risk as it has considerable weak spots when all three schools are considered individually.

ANY CHARACTER HERE

While it is consistently relevant in basketball and regionally close to the headquarters of ESPN, UConn isn’t a member of the AAU and has yet to prove itself as an annually competitive football program.  Connecticut alone isn’t directly linked to Pennsylvania, which suggests the Big Ten may be weary of the Huskies as it’s own entity.  Connecticut seems to be a reach at best.

ANY CHARACTER HERE

On a similar note, due it’s close quarters with the city, Rutgers appears to be the key to the   New York market.  This is highly debatable, as Rutgers’ athletic program, while seeing a recent jump from putrid to average in football, is traditionally sub-par in all of the major money making sports.  This historical lack of competitiveness calls into question Rutgers’ ability to bring the bacon with the   market that appears, on the surface, to come with the school.  Furthermore, leaving the weaker Big East can only lessen Rutgers’ ability to compete with the   powers of it’s conference.  While Rutgers is a member of the AAU, without that athletic competitiveness, the fans simply won’t tune in, which is counter productive to the purpose of bringing in the school closest to the New York market.  Rutgers’ flaws in two of three major criteria areas suggest that it may not be among the best choices for the Big Ten.

ANY CHARACTER HERE

Of the three, Syracuse is the best fit.  While not immediately affiliated with the New York market, it can be argued that Syracuse may pull more attention from the city than Rutgers, as the school is actually in the state of New York.  The Orange are an annual power in men’s basketball, and while it has fallen on tough times recently, they have the 15th winningest football program (based on winning percentage) in history, currently tied with Georgia Tech at 673 wins.  Finally, Syracuse is a member of the AAU and the state of New York directly borders Pennsylvania, the eastern most state already in the Big Ten.  Market?  Check.  Athletic competitiveness?  Check.  Academic prowess?  Check.  Regional compatibility?  Check.  Syracuse seems to be a natural fit for Big Ten expansion.

ANY CHARACTER HERE

The fourth Big East school that can seriously be considered for expansion, Pittsburgh, also states a strong case.  The city of Pittsburgh boasts a relatively medium television market, but one that has a disproportionately strong passion for football.  This idea suggests that it may be strong enough to outweigh both Connecticut and Rutgers when the uncertainties of those two schools are taken into consideration.  Pittsburgh has recently developed a nationally competitive basketball program, and it’s football program is only ten wins behind Syracuse, ranking 18th all-time.  The Panthers also have a long history as a rival to current Big Ten member Penn State, having met the Nittany Lions ninety-six times.  Lastly, the University of Pittsburgh is a member of the AAU, and it’s location in western Pennsylvania is essentially halfway between Penn State and Ohio State.  Market?  Check.  Athletic competitiveness?  Check.  Academic prowess?  Check.  Regional compatibility?  Check.  Common sense would suggest that, just as with Syracuse, Pittsburgh is a natural fit for Big Ten expansion.

Much like the three New York market schools, the three schools to the west of current Big Ten territory seem like a strong unit, but when broken up they have their flaws.  This is good, as through the process of elimination, there appears to already be two schools from the east which fit perfectly into the Big Ten.  So, which of the Big 12 schools fits best? Let’s look at them individually:

Colorado University brings with it the Denver television market.  Athletically, the Buffaloes have been very inconsistent of late in football and irrelevant in basketball.  The school is, however, a member of the AAU.  Colorado is perhaps the weakest of all the possibilities when looked at individually.  The only logical reason for the league to seriously consider Colorado would be as the final piece to a completely western expansion of the conference, and the idea of total western expansion has even more holes than that of complete eastern expansion.

ANY CHARACTER HERE

The Nebraska Cornhuskers have as strong a tradition on the gridiron as any school in the country.  With 827 wins, it ranks 8th all-time in winning percentage among all Bowl Subdivision programs.  This strength would easily overrule it’s relative ineptitude in basketball and the lack of obvious regional television market it brings to the table (although, it could be argued that the true size of Nebraska’s market is immeasurable, as their success, much like Notre Dame’s but to a lesser degree, has bred fans all over the country).  Nebraska also borders Iowa, a current Big Ten state.  Academically though, Nebraska is ranked 463rd by Forbes on their most recent list of American colleges and universities, lowest of any AAU member.  With asterisks on it’s market and academic prowess, Nebraska has some questions with regard to it’s inclusion in a new Big Ten.  That said, it’s football program has such a strong history, that it may outweigh any other argument.

ANY CHARACTER HERE

The University of Missouri may offer the most balanced candidacy of the three Big 12 schools.  It offers the 35th winningest football program in history, lower than both Colorado (22nd) and Nebraska, but a far superior basketball program to both the Buffaloes and Huskers.  The Tigers already have an annual rivalry with current Big Ten school Illinois.  Missouri is a member of the AAU (ranking 90 spots higher than Nebraska on that same Forbes list), and it offers two fairly large television markets to the conference in St. Louis and Kansas City.  Market?  Check.  Athletic competitiveness?  Check.  Academic prowess?  Check.  Regional compatibility?  Check.  When one considers that the Big 12 would probably fight harder to keep Nebraska’s overbearing football history than it would for Missouri’s across-the-board consistency, it’s clear that Missouri, while perhaps not the most desirable, is the most realistic of these three for Big Ten annexation.

If this happens to be the case (which, while it may seem logical after reading the arguments, isn’t necessarily the case with the Big Ten), then the conference could be broken into two division: East and West.  The East Division would consist of the seven schools that are eastern most within the conference’s region, and the West would follow suite.  And for the logistical arguers: beyond the traditional reasons for keeping the name “Big Ten,” the conference would now have schools in, count ‘em, ten different states.  Hence, the name remains Big Ten.  Here’s how the new Big Ten Conference would look:

EAST DIVISION


ANY CHARACTER HERE

WEST DIVISION


Under this new format, the Big Ten could host a conference championship game in football.  This game could be played at any number of places in the ten states and multiple markets that the Big Ten would now control.  A game in the elements of Green Bay’s Lambeau Field, Chicago’s Soldier Field, or Pittsburgh’s Heinz Field could alternate yearly with a game in a controlled climate like that of Indianapolis’ Lucas Oil Stadium, or St. Louis’ Edward Jones Dome.

The division alignment maintains such yearly rivalries as Ohio State-Michigan and Missouri-Illinois, while reestablishing the Penn State-Pittsburgh matchup.  It also creates potential new rivalries by infusing the conference with new blood.  The only current rivalry that would suffer from this division alignment would be Indiana-Purdue, which can be remedied with an inter-divisional scheduling rule, much like the conference has now to remedy it’s current eleven team format.  Each school would be required to play one school from the opposite division yearly, alternating between home and away.  Here’s one possibility for the set up: Indiana-Purdue, Michigan-Wisconsin, Michigan State-Minnesota, Ohio State-Illinois, Penn State-Iowa, Pittsburgh-Missouri, and Syracuse-Northwestern.  On top of this, each school would play two other non-division teams yearly, but the selection of those opponents would rotate between the six other non-mandatory, non-division schools.  In total, the conference would require nine conference games per season; six divisional games and three non-divisional games.

In basketball, traditional powers like Indiana and Syracuse would now play a home and home series each year, with a potential third game in the conference tournament.  The basketball schedule would be a bit more complicated, as it’s impractical to play thirteen teams twice a year, but each school would definitely play each of it’s divisional opponents in a home and home series.  Much like the ability to move the conference championship football game around, the basketball tournament could take place in different locations each year, perhaps having different rounds of the tournament in different cities in the same year.

Ultimately, it’s my belief that this is the way to go for the Big Ten.  All three of the schools they would add meet all of the obvious criteria quite well.  The immeasurable components obviously lie within what those guys at the Big Ten office want.  Where are their priorities?  If they’re so consumed with television ratings that they’re willing to take a chance with the east coast, then they would obviously consider the risks with Rutgers and Connecticut as worthwhile.  If they feel the need to expand west, perhaps to break into the Big 12’s market and maybe pipeline more closely to the talent rich west coast, then the last three schools would be their direction.  What I’m suggesting is simply a “best-of-both-worlds” scenario.  Ultimately, this expansion will cause other conferences to look at their position and membership.  It could be as drastic as delivering a death blow to the Big East, or as minimal as the Big Ten adding only one more team to get to twelve.  Only time will tell.

Other awesome content to check out: