Lately, there have been a number of interesting ideas about how the B1G can respond to the Texas/Oklahoma move to the SEC.
Some are good, others are on the fringe of fantasy.
The reality is that there are no realistic blue blood football programs anywhere near the B1G geographic footprint, and with travel costs exploding, glamorous and exotic notions of combining Pac-12 blue blood programs with the B1G are nothing more than delusional wet dreams. Shuttling low/no-revenue teams back and forth between the coasts just does not make financial sense, and is a waste of that revenue advantage we still have over the SEC. And trying to pick through the bones of the soon-to-be cadaver of the Big 12 is about as promising as trying to find the Hope Diamond in your little sister's childhood box of plastic baubles. There is no Fenn's Treasure awaiting in the prairie wastelands of the Big 12. Sorry.
So how do we respond? With careful, surgical expansion that makes scheduling and cultural sense, and adds significant revenue with which to upgrade the competitiveness of all of the B1G's athletic programs. There will be no home run response, but more of a productive incremental addition that will ultimately be more stable and profitable than the ego-centric bickering of the SEC prima donnas. And ultimately, that revenue will no doubt restore the glory of some of the tarnished B1G blue blood programs while elevating exciting new and innovative programs - like Purdue's - to compete with the best.
And so I offer my quiet alternative after looking at the following:
1) number of TV households (cable companies may not be as important, but TVs are still used for streaming, so the more TVs the better...),
2) geographic footprint (with the additional time and cost of long distance multi-team travel, long term bi-coastal conference partners are just not feasible - sorry)
3) research reputation (we haven't kicked out Nebraska as they are still an R1 research institution, even if not AAU),
4) football quality/history (they have had to be good or at least promising at some point!),
5) other intangibles (e.g. other sports notoriety/cache), and
6) cultural similarities.
Obviously, to have a B1G championship, you need two divisions, with each including natural rivalries (old or new) that make geographic sense and are within the same division so it doesn't create scheduling issues in order to "protect" old rivalries. And those rivalries should also make as much sense as possible from a competitive standpoint so that we don't have one team dominating the other for decades - which would not be much of a rivalry!
With all that said, while I am intrigued by the University of Toronto due to their obvious geographic proximity, outstanding educational and research reputation (AAU member, as well), HUGE television market (#4 in North America behind NY, LA, and Chicago), there is still enough of a doubt culturally - with Canada's curious penchant for CFL football rules, and doubts about whether there would be all that much interest in competing with US teams - that I think it is too early to take such a big risk. If the U of Toronto actually becomes interested, they can cut their teeth in the MAC with a natural rival across the lake in fellow AAU member, the University of Buffalo. Maybe after some history, and undoubtedly more future conference re-alignments, they could be a more realistic alternative. Just not now.
Next, as much as we all would gladly roll out the welcome mat to the domers, that wet dream is N-E-V-E-R going to happen, at least not with the B1G. Even if Touchdown Jesus whispered directly to Jack Swarbrick under the Golden Dome and pleaded with him to join the B1G, domer pride and arrogance would still be a bridge too far. So it's best we all bury it and forget about it.
Finally, we have to come to grips with the fact that there are no more Texas/Oklahoma pedigree level teams within reasonable travel distances - and who fit the B1G culture. One of the reasons why the Rose Bowl has been so much fun in the distant past was because of the cultural and style differences between say - Michigan/OSU vs UCLA/USC. We can still have that if we want, perhaps by making an exclusive agreement with what could become the PAC-16, for our best teams to play in the Rose Bowl as a quarter- or semi-final for the eventual CFP. Just not in the same conference!
So without further ado, here is how I see a 16-team B1G (shown with rivalry pairs), without apologies...
B1G West:
Wisconsin/Minnesota
(series began in 1890, oldest and longest rivalry in the B1G, Wisky up 62-60-8)
Iowa/Nebraska
(series began in 1891, has been played in spurts until UN joined the B1G, Nebraska up 29-19-3)
Illinois/Northwestern
(series began in 1892, Illinois up 55-54-5)
Purdue/Indiana
(series began in 1891, Purdue up 74-42-6)
B1G East:
Ohio State/Penn State
(series began in 1912 with Penn State winning 37-0, has been irregular until PSU joined the B1G, OSU up 21-14)
Michigan/Michigan State
(series began in 1898, UM up 71-37-5, but MSU is up 9-4 in the last 13 games)
Maryland/North Carolina
(series began in 1920, has been mostly regular since the war years, UNC up 37-32)
Boston College/Rutgers
(series began in 1919, was annual in the 80's-2000's, BC up 20-6)
Final thoughts...
When looking at the potential size of the TV markets of all the reasonable alternatives, only 4 programs topped the 3 million mark:
1) TCU (Dallas, Waco, Tyler, Wichita Falls) - 3.776 million TVs
2) Boston College (Boston/Manchester, Providence, Springfield, Portland ME) - 3.775 million TVs
3) North Carolina (Raleigh/Durham/CH, Charlotte, Greensboro, Greenville NC) - 3.553 million TVs
4) Texas A&M (Bryan, Houston, Tyler, Beaumont) - 3.398 million TVs.
Missouri came close to 3 million at 2.839 million, and none of the next ones - Virginia, Syracuse, Kansas, Oklahoma State, and Iowa State did not crack 2 million TVs.
TCU is not even an R1 designated research university, so it would never be a realistic alternative despite getting us into the Dallas/Fort Worth market. (And SMU is not even a consideration.) A&M won't come in without a nearby partner - such as Missouri, but their combined total, net of significant travel costs, plus the cultural differences between Texas football and the B1G, just don't make as much sense as BC and UNC - which together add at least 7.5 million more TVs, perhaps more due to the national brand UNC basketball has. There may be a modest break from the goal of having contiguous states, but it is entirely reasonable in this era of teams like West Virginia joining the Big 12.
Ultimately, BC and UNC could become sleeper powers based on their history and pedigree. Not necessarily right away, but with better prospects than Rutgers and Maryland faced when they were added.
JMHOAU
Some are good, others are on the fringe of fantasy.
The reality is that there are no realistic blue blood football programs anywhere near the B1G geographic footprint, and with travel costs exploding, glamorous and exotic notions of combining Pac-12 blue blood programs with the B1G are nothing more than delusional wet dreams. Shuttling low/no-revenue teams back and forth between the coasts just does not make financial sense, and is a waste of that revenue advantage we still have over the SEC. And trying to pick through the bones of the soon-to-be cadaver of the Big 12 is about as promising as trying to find the Hope Diamond in your little sister's childhood box of plastic baubles. There is no Fenn's Treasure awaiting in the prairie wastelands of the Big 12. Sorry.
So how do we respond? With careful, surgical expansion that makes scheduling and cultural sense, and adds significant revenue with which to upgrade the competitiveness of all of the B1G's athletic programs. There will be no home run response, but more of a productive incremental addition that will ultimately be more stable and profitable than the ego-centric bickering of the SEC prima donnas. And ultimately, that revenue will no doubt restore the glory of some of the tarnished B1G blue blood programs while elevating exciting new and innovative programs - like Purdue's - to compete with the best.
And so I offer my quiet alternative after looking at the following:
1) number of TV households (cable companies may not be as important, but TVs are still used for streaming, so the more TVs the better...),
2) geographic footprint (with the additional time and cost of long distance multi-team travel, long term bi-coastal conference partners are just not feasible - sorry)
3) research reputation (we haven't kicked out Nebraska as they are still an R1 research institution, even if not AAU),
4) football quality/history (they have had to be good or at least promising at some point!),
5) other intangibles (e.g. other sports notoriety/cache), and
6) cultural similarities.
Obviously, to have a B1G championship, you need two divisions, with each including natural rivalries (old or new) that make geographic sense and are within the same division so it doesn't create scheduling issues in order to "protect" old rivalries. And those rivalries should also make as much sense as possible from a competitive standpoint so that we don't have one team dominating the other for decades - which would not be much of a rivalry!
With all that said, while I am intrigued by the University of Toronto due to their obvious geographic proximity, outstanding educational and research reputation (AAU member, as well), HUGE television market (#4 in North America behind NY, LA, and Chicago), there is still enough of a doubt culturally - with Canada's curious penchant for CFL football rules, and doubts about whether there would be all that much interest in competing with US teams - that I think it is too early to take such a big risk. If the U of Toronto actually becomes interested, they can cut their teeth in the MAC with a natural rival across the lake in fellow AAU member, the University of Buffalo. Maybe after some history, and undoubtedly more future conference re-alignments, they could be a more realistic alternative. Just not now.
Next, as much as we all would gladly roll out the welcome mat to the domers, that wet dream is N-E-V-E-R going to happen, at least not with the B1G. Even if Touchdown Jesus whispered directly to Jack Swarbrick under the Golden Dome and pleaded with him to join the B1G, domer pride and arrogance would still be a bridge too far. So it's best we all bury it and forget about it.
Finally, we have to come to grips with the fact that there are no more Texas/Oklahoma pedigree level teams within reasonable travel distances - and who fit the B1G culture. One of the reasons why the Rose Bowl has been so much fun in the distant past was because of the cultural and style differences between say - Michigan/OSU vs UCLA/USC. We can still have that if we want, perhaps by making an exclusive agreement with what could become the PAC-16, for our best teams to play in the Rose Bowl as a quarter- or semi-final for the eventual CFP. Just not in the same conference!
So without further ado, here is how I see a 16-team B1G (shown with rivalry pairs), without apologies...
B1G West:
Wisconsin/Minnesota
(series began in 1890, oldest and longest rivalry in the B1G, Wisky up 62-60-8)
Iowa/Nebraska
(series began in 1891, has been played in spurts until UN joined the B1G, Nebraska up 29-19-3)
Illinois/Northwestern
(series began in 1892, Illinois up 55-54-5)
Purdue/Indiana
(series began in 1891, Purdue up 74-42-6)
B1G East:
Ohio State/Penn State
(series began in 1912 with Penn State winning 37-0, has been irregular until PSU joined the B1G, OSU up 21-14)
Michigan/Michigan State
(series began in 1898, UM up 71-37-5, but MSU is up 9-4 in the last 13 games)
Maryland/North Carolina
(series began in 1920, has been mostly regular since the war years, UNC up 37-32)
Boston College/Rutgers
(series began in 1919, was annual in the 80's-2000's, BC up 20-6)
Final thoughts...
When looking at the potential size of the TV markets of all the reasonable alternatives, only 4 programs topped the 3 million mark:
1) TCU (Dallas, Waco, Tyler, Wichita Falls) - 3.776 million TVs
2) Boston College (Boston/Manchester, Providence, Springfield, Portland ME) - 3.775 million TVs
3) North Carolina (Raleigh/Durham/CH, Charlotte, Greensboro, Greenville NC) - 3.553 million TVs
4) Texas A&M (Bryan, Houston, Tyler, Beaumont) - 3.398 million TVs.
Missouri came close to 3 million at 2.839 million, and none of the next ones - Virginia, Syracuse, Kansas, Oklahoma State, and Iowa State did not crack 2 million TVs.
TCU is not even an R1 designated research university, so it would never be a realistic alternative despite getting us into the Dallas/Fort Worth market. (And SMU is not even a consideration.) A&M won't come in without a nearby partner - such as Missouri, but their combined total, net of significant travel costs, plus the cultural differences between Texas football and the B1G, just don't make as much sense as BC and UNC - which together add at least 7.5 million more TVs, perhaps more due to the national brand UNC basketball has. There may be a modest break from the goal of having contiguous states, but it is entirely reasonable in this era of teams like West Virginia joining the Big 12.
Ultimately, BC and UNC could become sleeper powers based on their history and pedigree. Not necessarily right away, but with better prospects than Rutgers and Maryland faced when they were added.
JMHOAU
