Let's Play B1G Dominos.

Feb 7, 2007
369
36
28
OK, most of the articles I've read indicate the B1G is likely not done and list off any number of possibilities. Who do you think will be next up and why? I've also added my wild a$$ guesses which mean less than nothing.

1. Notre Dame - National presence, they aren't as important as they think they are anymore and I don't see them going to the SEC.
2. Washington/Oregon - Lock on the Pacific Northwest. Oregon has tons of Nike money. They won't want to be left out of the huge TV deal with the B1G.
3. North Carolina/Duke - Lock up the Raleigh/Durham/Greensboro market which has a reach into all the neighboring states. Both are good schools (especially Duke) and have excellent BB programs along with OK FB programs. The B1G could use some inroads into the South and this could give them that.
4. Stanford/Cal - Longshots. They would lock up the SF bay area. Both have excellent university credentials but neither have a big time presence in either FB or BB. The days of Elway are long past.
5. Clemson, FL State, Miami - Terrible schools unless you like to party and I can't see them going anywhere but the SEC.
5. Kansas - No thanks. What's left of the Big 12 can have them. They are just a BB school with laughable university credentials.

OK, give it your best shot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: purduepat1969

POTFHBTFU

Redshirt Freshman
Jul 25, 2021
1,234
1,215
113
Football drives this whole discussion so I would take UNC, Duke, Cal, Kansas off. Oregon has to be acknowledging the pac is now dead unless it can poach top teams from big 12 so I think we are Oregon and Washington make a run. Maybe a fifth team from west like Stanford to balance out 4 divisions of 5 which is good for non revenue sports. Then note dame acknowledges the seismic shift and joins to round out 20. I see clemson, florida state, Miami going to SEC along with oklahoma state.
 

indyogb

Junior
Jul 7, 2001
2,265
1,584
113
I guess UNC and Oregon are the two best remaining options. I loathe Oregon, so I'm they will probably be added. Probably Stanford, the "Hahvahd of the West" too, based on the hate criteria. :D

I feel really bad for a bunch of good schools that are the "Purdue" of their state - Oregon State, Iowa State, and some others. They're getting absolutely shafted by this mess. The only reason Purdue is safe is because the Big Ten, (maybe) our status as a founding member, and our academic reputation is better than most of the remaining "left-overs". I really think these schools are under-valued and college athletics is turning into a minor league pro system, which is antithetical to its intended purpose. I know it has been the de facto minor leagues for decades, but recent monetary decisions seem to be accelerating the process.
 

FirstDownB

All-American
Oct 12, 2015
9,246
12,972
113
Football drives this whole discussion so I would take UNC, Duke, Cal, Kansas off. Oregon has to be acknowledging the pac is now dead unless it can poach top teams from big 12 so I think we are Oregon and Washington make a run. Maybe a fifth team from west like Stanford to balance out 4 divisions of 5 which is good for non revenue sports. Then note dame acknowledges the seismic shift and joins to round out 20. I see clemson, florida state, Miami going to SEC along with oklahoma state.
Thing is, you can't make these decisions based on the past. It's more like buying stocks.

UNC doesn't have a great football tradition, but you might argue that they have been hampered by being in the same conference as in-state foes NC State, Duke, and Wake. If they were to be elevated as the premier school in a state with a booming population and fertile recruiting ground, a lot could change. They already have the largest fan base by far.

Some of the calculus in these decisions must be what becomes of the schools that get left behind. Do they become MAC level programs or do they continue to thrive on their own and compete for local/regional dollars? Will the ACC, Pac12, Big12 continue to have a seat at the same table as B1G and SEC?
 

TX4GB

All-American
May 19, 2012
7,121
14,671
113
Stanford would help draw Notre Dame. It would also give USC and UCLA fans a game location that is somewhat drivable. Duke might be a Big East basketball only school. Virginia would be considered over them I think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheGunner

Wolegib

All-American
May 23, 2013
9,026
5,239
113
i could go with stanford and notre dame.

i'd rather have CAL than Washington.

several years ago I provided choices for potential expansion: Iowa st, Missouri, Notre dame, Kentucky and Tennessee. I based those choices based on geographic proximity. and people called me FOS!! they still do.

look out the window. everything you used to hold dear has been totally thrown out thanks to the media, Texas, OK, USC, UCLA, and ESPN, $$$$$$$ and the NIL.
 
Oct 19, 2014
56
65
18
Candidates for future expansion:

20:
Notre Dame
North Carolina
Oregon
Washington

24:
Notre Dame
North Carolina
Oregon
Washington
Georgia
Florida
 

njm8845

Senior
Jul 1, 2008
2,934
2,667
113
Am I crazy to not be impressed with Oregon? Low population, not good for recruiting.

and I know they’re like a top 20 program now, but that’s WITH all the Nike money. They were a joke before that and what happens when Knight dies in a few years?

my want list of reasonable candidates:

1. Norte dame
2. Washington
3. Stanford. Huge market, which TV execs eat up. pristine academics, which presidents eat up. Gives the other PAC 12 schools another neighbor.
4. UNC - bigger fan base than Oregon. Bigger market than Oregon. Better school than Oregon. Better recruiting grounds than Oregon. Closer than Oregon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scout70

purduepat1969

All-American
Sep 28, 2011
13,312
19,040
113
i could go with stanford and notre dame.

i'd rather have CAL than Washington.

several years ago I provided choices for potential expansion: Iowa st, Missouri, Notre dame, Kentucky and Tennessee. I based those choices based on geographic proximity. and people called me FOS!! they still do.

look out the window. everything you used to hold dear has been totally thrown out thanks to the media, Texas, OK, USC, UCLA, and ESPN, $$$$$$$ and the NIL.
They called you FOS because you are FOS. Nothing more, nothing less. You do realize if you stopped bragging on yourself and your D1 athlete son, people here might take you more seriously?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PUQBMan.
May 12, 2013
134
497
63
The number of purdue fans that want/think it's a good idea to bring Notre Dame into the fold is mind-boggling. They add nothing TV market-wise. They aren't the national powerhouse they were and always shit the bed in big games (look up their new years six bowl record). They have spurned the Big Ten time and time again when approached for expansion.

**** their arrogance, **** their fan base, they don't deserve a lifeline. Adding them only hurts purdue recruiting-wise. If you're a purdue fan there are zero good reasons for hoping Notre Dame joins.
 
Mar 17, 2022
193
101
43
OK, most of the articles I've read indicate the B1G is likely not done and list off any number of possibilities. Who do you think will be next up and why? I've also added my wild a$$ guesses which mean less than nothing.

1. Notre Dame - National presence, they aren't as important as they think they are anymore and I don't see them going to the SEC.
2. Washington/Oregon - Lock on the Pacific Northwest. Oregon has tons of Nike money. They won't want to be left out of the huge TV deal with the B1G.
3. North Carolina/Duke - Lock up the Raleigh/Durham/Greensboro market which has a reach into all the neighboring states. Both are good schools (especially Duke) and have excellent BB programs along with OK FB programs. The B1G could use some inroads into the South and this could give them that.
4. Stanford/Cal - Longshots. They would lock up the SF bay area. Both have excellent university credentials but neither have a big time presence in either FB or BB. The days of Elway are long past.
5. Clemson, FL State, Miami - Terrible schools unless you like to party and I can't see them going anywhere but the SEC.
5. Kansas - No thanks. What's left of the Big 12 can have them. They are just a BB school with laughable university credentials.

OK, give it your best shot.
Rumor has it Oregon and Washington have already stated an interest and the BT is waiting on ND to decide before expanding further.

Stanford and Cal are non-starters.... remember the BT network gets 1$ per cable subscription for each household in the state. USC and UCLA were a package deal, but that locks out anymore California schools as they do not being in as much revenue as they would be sucking up. Its why Iowa States phone calls to the BT office never get returned, they add nothing meaningful to the conference revenue.

ND adds no new eyeballs in that sense either but they carry a lot more weight for the Fox contract set to be renegotiated next year.

Oregon and Washington expand the footprint and add more revenue for the BT network

I am guessing UVA or UNC for the 20th member as they fit academically and add new states to the footprint.
 

njm8845

Senior
Jul 1, 2008
2,934
2,667
113
Stanford and Cal are non-starters.... remember the BT network gets 1$ per cable subscription for each household in the state. USC and UCLA were a package deal, but that locks out anymore California schools as they do not being in as much revenue as they would be sucking up. Its why Iowa States phone calls to the BT office never get returned, they add nothing meaningful to the conference revenue.

ND adds no new eyeballs in that sense either but they carry a lot more weight for the Fox contract set to be renegotiated next year.

Oregon and Washington expand the footprint and add more revenue for the BT network

I am guessing UVA or UNC for the 20th member as they fit academically and add new states to the footprint.
I don’t think it’s as simple as “$1 for everyone in the state”. Are you sure about that? I think there are different tiers, and a market may spill over into another state. For instance, I remember one reason why Mizzou was not attractive is because St. Louis was already a certain tier due to proximity to Illinois. Same with Rutgers and the NYC market.
 

njm8845

Senior
Jul 1, 2008
2,934
2,667
113
The number of purdue fans that want/think it's a good idea to bring Notre Dame into the fold is mind-boggling. They add nothing TV market-wise. They aren't the national powerhouse they were and always shit the bed in big games (look up their new years six bowl record). They have spurned the Big Ten time and time again when approached for expansion.

**** their arrogance, **** their fan base, they don't deserve a lifeline. Adding them only hurts purdue recruiting-wise. If you're a purdue fan there are zero good reasons for hoping Notre Dame joins.

I want to play ND. Out of all ND’s opponents, they’ve played Purdue the second most number of times. It was a good rivalry.

Besides that, there are significant money reasons for wanting them to join.ND, along with Texas, had always been the gold prize of conference expansion. It’s ridiculous to say they don’t bring anything TV market wise. How do you think they got their own TV contact? Purdue is not generally recruiting against them anyway… I don’t think being in the same conference will change that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PUQBMan.

njm8845

Senior
Jul 1, 2008
2,934
2,667
113
i could go with stanford and notre dame.

i'd rather have CAL than Washington.

several years ago I provided choices for potential expansion: Iowa st, Missouri, Notre dame, Kentucky and Tennessee. I based those choices based on geographic proximity. and people called me FOS!! they still do.

look out the window. everything you used to hold dear has been totally thrown out thanks to the media, Texas, OK, USC, UCLA, and ESPN, $$$$$$$ and the NIL.
Wait… people called you FOS because you provided a silly list of schools? And now you think you’re vindicated because exactly zero of those schools have indeed joined the conference??

I remember a lot of people wanting Iowa state, which is a complete head scratcher to me. Same with Pitt. I’m glad those in charge have thought bigger.
 
Mar 17, 2022
193
101
43
I don’t think it’s as simple as “$1 for everyone in the state”. Are you sure about that? I think there are different tiers, and a market may spill over into another state. For instance, I remember one reason why Mizzou was not attractive is because St. Louis was already a certain tier due to proximity to Illinois. Same with Rutgers and the NYC market.
It may be state plus regional market, but that still leaves Stanford and Cal out in the cold for the same reasons Missouri, Iowa St and Pitt have no prayer of BT membership.
 

Wolegib

All-American
May 23, 2013
9,026
5,239
113
They called you FOS because you are FOS. Nothing more, nothing less. You do realize if you stopped bragging on yourself and your D1 athlete son, people here might take you more seriously?
Do I detect jealousy? I never bragged about him or his accomplishments or his school!
Yet people like you keep bringing it up!

I offer differing opinions, speculative thoughts and links that back up my ideas! I see very few others here that come close to doing the same! My posts are longer than two sentences and that annoys people!

I said Brohm seems to like to over recruit at certain positions and you call me names! And then say you blocked me long ago but still comment about my posts.

let’s see. Brohm has 2 WR transfers from Iowa, has 4 verbals for WRs and is holding another spot open for another possible WR recruit. But that’s not over recruiting one position, because I must be FOS!

Like I said, rather than agreeing with my obvious observations, you’d rather call me FOS. And then bring my son into the discussion! You talk more about my son than I do! You are so obsessed with my son, why don’t you start your own thread about him!!! You obviously know who he is!
 

Wolegib

All-American
May 23, 2013
9,026
5,239
113
Wait… people called you FOS because you provided a silly list of schools? And now you think you’re vindicated because exactly zero of those schools have indeed joined the conference??

I remember a lot of people wanting Iowa state, which is a complete head scratcher to me. Same with Pitt. I’m glad those in charge have thought
 

Wolegib

All-American
May 23, 2013
9,026
5,239
113
Iowa st would have been a great addition when the idea of expansion was first mentioned several years ago when the Big Ten was concerned about their academic reputation and geography verses $$$$$$$$$ and adding media darlings and mega football teams. Iowa state has respectable athletic programs, a sound academic program and matched the type of school that composed the big 10. We have 2 state schools from Mich and Indiana. At the time Iowa st was brought up, it would have been logical to add a second state school from Iowa.
Notre Dame was brought up because the Big Ten has always wanted Notre Dame to join. Notre Dame’s hockey team already plays with big 10 teams and it enjoys a rivalry in many sports with Big 10 schools in a variety of sports..

Pitt was brought up because of its geographical location and rivalry with Penn st.

Missouri was mentioned because both Missouri and the BiG 10 discussed adding them.

But I brought these names up several years ago. They were very logical and made a lot more sense than adding Rutgers, Maryland and Nebraska. Adding the latter three schools was more about $$$$ than academics.
 
Mar 17, 2022
193
101
43
Iowa st would have been a great addition when the idea of expansion was first mentioned several years ago when the Big Ten was concerned about their academic reputation and geography verses $$$$$$$$$ and adding media darlings and mega football teams. Iowa state has respectable athletic programs, a sound academic program and matched the type of school that composed the big 10. We have 2 state schools from Mich and Indiana. At the time Iowa st was brought up, it would have been logical to add a second state school from Iowa.
Notre Dame was brought up because the Big Ten has always wanted Notre Dame to join. Notre Dame’s hockey team already plays with big 10 teams and it enjoys a rivalry in many sports with Big 10 schools in a variety of sports..

Pitt was brought up because of its geographical location and rivalry with Penn st.

Missouri was mentioned because both Missouri and the BiG 10 discussed adding them.

But I brought these names up several years ago. They were very logical and made a lot more sense than adding Rutgers, Maryland and Nebraska. Adding the latter three schools was more about $$$$ than academics.
You completely miss the point. Had IowaSt, Pitt, and Missouri been added the BT revenue would be about 30% less than it is now because they add nothing to conference income and are just the more mouths to feed. Additionally Missouri and I don't think Pitt meet the academic requirements of AAU membership. Nebraska, Maryland and especially Rutgers all added far more revenue than their share of income.
 
Mar 17, 2022
193
101
43
Do I detect jealousy? I never bragged about him or his accomplishments or his school!
Yet people like you keep bringing it up!

I offer differing opinions, speculative thoughts and links that back up my ideas! I see very few others here that come close to doing the same! My posts are longer than two sentences and that annoys people!

I said Brohm seems to like to over recruit at certain positions and you call me names! And then say you blocked me long ago but still comment about my posts.

let’s see. Brohm has 2 WR transfers from Iowa, has 4 verbals for WRs and is holding another spot open for another possible WR recruit. But that’s not over recruiting one position, because I must be FOS!

Like I said, rather than agreeing with my obvious observations, you’d rather call me FOS. And then bring my son into the discussion! You talk more about my son than I do! You are so obsessed with my son, why don’t you start your own thread about him!!! You obviously know who he is!
How many of those wr recruits will end up as dbs? That's how Tiller got many of his defensive backs. You don't actually pay very much attention to the details do you? You don't get how football recruiting plays it's game and you completely miss the point of Big Ten expansion. I can see why you are not well regarded as a poster
 

purduepat1969

All-American
Sep 28, 2011
13,312
19,040
113
Do I detect jealousy? I never bragged about him or his accomplishments or his school!
Yet people like you keep bringing it up!

I offer differing opinions, speculative thoughts and links that back up my ideas! I see very few others here that come close to doing the same! My posts are longer than two sentences and that annoys people!

I said Brohm seems to like to over recruit at certain positions and you call me names! And then say you blocked me long ago but still comment about my posts.

let’s see. Brohm has 2 WR transfers from Iowa, has 4 verbals for WRs and is holding another spot open for another possible WR recruit. But that’s not over recruiting one position, because I must be FOS!

Like I said, rather than agreeing with my obvious observations, you’d rather call me FOS. And then bring my son into the discussion! You talk more about my son than I do! You are so obsessed with my son, why don’t you start your own thread about him!!! You obviously know who he is!
You're delusional dude. But in a way, I kind of pity you. You clearly yearn for attention that you haven't received...

Either way, you might want to get some help...
 
Last edited:

PUQBMan.

True Freshman
Mar 5, 2015
899
1,750
93
Chula Vista, CA
The number of purdue fans that want/think it's a good idea to bring Notre Dame into the fold is mind-boggling. They add nothing TV market-wise. They aren't the national powerhouse they were and always shit the bed in big games (look up their new years six bowl record). They have spurned the Big Ten time and time again when approached for expansion.

**** their arrogance, **** their fan base, they don't deserve a lifeline. Adding them only hurts purdue recruiting-wise. If you're a purdue fan there are zero good reasons for hoping Notre Dame joins.
I absolutely hate notre dame, but I see it as mind boggling that anyone wouldn’t want them. Regardless of their recent performance (which unfortunately dwarfs what Purdue has done), it’s undeniable that they are one of the biggest brands in CFB. I agree with the sentiment that they don’t deserve a lifeline with how long they’ve spurned the big ten with their arrogance, but this decision is driven by dollars, and you cannot ignore one of the biggest brands in the sport because of pettiness.
As far as recruiting goes, this doesn’t hurt Purdue at all. They’re already getting their pick of the litter with in-state/regional recruits that we were considering.
 
Mar 17, 2022
193
101
43
I absolutely hate notre dame, but I see it as mind boggling that anyone wouldn’t want them. Regardless of their recent performance (which unfortunately dwarfs what Purdue has done), it’s undeniable that they are one of the biggest brands in CFB. I agree with the sentiment that they don’t deserve a lifeline with how long they’ve spurned the big ten with their arrogance, but this decision is driven by dollars, and you cannot ignore one of the biggest brands in the sport because of pettiness.
As far as recruiting goes, this doesn’t hurt Purdue at all. They’re already getting their pick of the litter with in-state/regional recruits that we were considering.
I share your loathing, but ND in the BT gains as many BigTen network subscriptions nationwide as adding the two Cal teams. ND fans will pay to watch ND games on the network, and that is the new "market" they bring and it dwarfs all but a handfull of schools that all frankly are untouchable or truly undesireable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PUQBMan.

njm8845

Senior
Jul 1, 2008
2,934
2,667
113
I’ve always assumed B10 would stop at 20, but why is that the magical number?

It seems reasonable they can get to 22 with ND, UW, Oregon, Stanford, UVA, UNC. I think each schools would grow the pie. Not saying I want this necessarily, just brainstorming.

ALSO…. Was thinking last night how the torpedoing of the ACC directly helps Purdue in keeping brohm. Jumping from the top tier of college football to a lesser, uncertain one would make going home that much harder.
 
Mar 17, 2022
193
101
43
I’ve always assumed B10 would stop at 20, but why is that the magical number?

It seems reasonable they can get to 22 with ND, UW, Oregon, Stanford, UVA, UNC. I think each schools would grow the pie. Not saying I want this necessarily, just brainstorming.

ALSO…. Was thinking last night how the torpedoing of the ACC directly helps Purdue in keeping brohm. Jumping from the top tier of college football to a lesser, uncertain one would make going home that much harder.
As I have stated earlier, Standford is a non-starter, same as Iowa St. They do not add anything to the BT revenue and are just another mouth to feed. They make no sense from a monetary standpoint. Then there is the AAU membership issue, Standford is a member. Iowa St is not. Possible AAU schools to consider?

Oregon
Washington
Utah
Arizona
Colorado
Kansas
UNC
UVA
Ga Tech
Duke

Pitt \
UC Berkley These schools bring little to nothing to the table in terms of expanded revenue, very unlikely
UCSB /
Stanford /
UCSDiego
Penn

Texas \
Texas A&M \ not seeing us poach an SEC school
Vandy /
Florida /
Missouri
 
Last edited:

njm8845

Senior
Jul 1, 2008
2,934
2,667
113
As I have stated earlier, Standford is a non-starter, same as Iowa St. They do not add anything to the BT revenue and are just another mouth to feed. They make no sense from a monetary standpoint. Then there is the AAU membership issue, Standford is a member. Iowa St is not. Possible AAU schools to consider?

Oregon
Washington
Utah
Arizona
Kansas
UNC
UVA
Ga Tech
Duke

Missouri \
Pitt \
UC Berkley These schools bring little to nothing to the table in terms of expanded revenue, very unlikely
UCSB /
Stanford /
UCSDiego
Penn

Texas \
Texas A&M \ not seeing us poach an SEC school
Vandy /
Florida /
Still disagree about Stanford. They would help convince ND to join. Any B10 President would want to be associated with them.

we’ll see in a week at most probably
 
  • Like
Reactions: purduepat1969
Mar 17, 2022
193
101
43
Still disagree about Stanford. They would help convince ND to join. Any B10 President would want to be associated with them.

we’ll see in a week at most probably
Been reading up on this thie am, its not even sure ND CAN join the BT..... there is a clause in their contract that if they join a conference it has to be the ACC. No escape clause found so far.... additionally all the rights to their sports teams other than football belong to the ACC until 2034, and it is specified in the contract ND signed that the only way to break it is unanimous vote of all ACC member schools and another payout beyond the 150 million it takes to leave the ACC agreement they have in football with them. Then there is the NBC contract that runs through 2025 that owns all ND home game television rights. So with all that baggage, I am disinclined to do a damn thing to entice ND to join beyond giving them provisional membership until they sort their shit out and become an AAU member.

Unless Stanford brings 200+ million in additional research revenue to the BT academic arm, they are really not adding enough to get my vote.

I think unless ND sorts out a way to get out of at least part of their ACC entnglements, the BT stands pat for a year unless the PAC tries to make its members sign a new agreement that makes it harder to leave. If that happens we may take an additional 4-5 teams in quick order from them and try to quickly jump to 24 teams.
 

SDBoiler1

All-American
Gold Member
Jul 30, 2001
23,048
15,782
113
New Haven, CT
i could go with stanford and notre dame.

i'd rather have CAL than Washington.

several years ago I provided choices for potential expansion: Iowa st, Missouri, Notre dame, Kentucky and Tennessee. I based those choices based on geographic proximity. and people called me FOS!! they still do.

look out the window. everything you used to hold dear has been totally thrown out thanks to the media, Texas, OK, USC, UCLA, and ESPN, $$$$$$$ and the NIL.
You were FOS because KY and Tennessee would not leave the SEC. They have no reason to leave the SEC and ESPN. Iowa State brings absolutely nothing to the table - nothing. Mizzou got shot down before and honestly belongs in the SEC because of its academics and regional fit. The only school you named that makes any sense is Notre Dame. That’s it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: purduepat1969

SDBoiler1

All-American
Gold Member
Jul 30, 2001
23,048
15,782
113
New Haven, CT
Iowa st would have been a great addition when the idea of expansion was first mentioned several years ago when the Big Ten was concerned about their academic reputation and geography verses $$$$$$$$$ and adding media darlings and mega football teams. Iowa state has respectable athletic programs, a sound academic program and matched the type of school that composed the big 10. We have 2 state schools from Mich and Indiana. At the time Iowa st was brought up, it would have been logical to add a second state school from Iowa.
Notre Dame was brought up because the Big Ten has always wanted Notre Dame to join. Notre Dame’s hockey team already plays with big 10 teams and it enjoys a rivalry in many sports with Big 10 schools in a variety of sports..

Pitt was brought up because of its geographical location and rivalry with Penn st.

Missouri was mentioned because both Missouri and the BiG 10 discussed adding them.

But I brought these names up several years ago. They were very logical and made a lot more sense than adding Rutgers, Maryland and Nebraska. Adding the latter three schools was more about $$$$ than academics.
Eyeballs, alumni bases, and TV money are what matters. Not in-state rivalries when it comes to media rights. Iowa State brings zero to the table. Iowa is much larger and dominates IA already. Iowa State brings which media market? Des Moines, maybe? Wow, what a great addition.

Pitt is a glorified commuter school like Cincinnati. PSU already has Rutgers and Maryland. Pitt once again adds nothing - Pitt doesn’t even own the Pittsburgh media market. PSU does.

Admit it, you’re talking out of your kiester once again. Bringing in USC and UCLA into the BIG is huge for the BIG considering the new media rights deals currently being negotiated. In the end, that’s what matters here. You don’t a bunch of schools that are net takers from the kitty. You add schools that grow the kitty - schools you can actually get. The people saying we should poach SEC schools are morons. It’s not going to happen.
 
Mar 17, 2022
193
101
43
I’ve always assumed B10 would stop at 20, but why is that the magical number?

It seems reasonable they can get to 22 with ND, UW, Oregon, Stanford, UVA, UNC. I think each schools would grow the pie. Not saying I want this necessarily, just brainstorming.

ALSO…. Was thinking last night how the torpedoing of the ACC directly helps Purdue in keeping brohm. Jumping from the top tier of college football to a lesser, uncertain one would make going home that much harder.
I THINK we go to 20 before the end of the year, if not ND and three more PAC schools that are AAU members, then 4 PAC schools, Wash, Ore, and 2 of Az, Utah, or Co. All AAU members in new states and that allows the conference to break into 3 divisions to make the west coasters not have to travel so much

East and West stay as they are with 7 teams and Far West gains the 6 PAC teams. If ND figures out how to get their ADs head out of his ass long enough, they go west and Neb goes to the far west.

Then when the SEC raids the ACC, as is coming VERY soon, we need to be ready to pivot east and offer 4 of ND (if they don't accept this year, UVA, GaTech, and UNC/Duke or both if ND still cannot get their shit together and figure out what is best for them long term.... if they say no then, let the SEC deal with them.
 
Oct 14, 2001
220
176
43
As I have stated earlier, Standford is a non-starter, same as Iowa St. They do not add anything to the BT revenue and are just another mouth to feed. They make no sense from a monetary standpoint. Then there is the AAU membership issue, Standford is a member. Iowa St is not. Possible AAU schools to consider?

Oregon
Washington
Utah
Arizona
Colorado
Kansas
UNC
UVA
Ga Tech
Duke

Pitt \
UC Berkley These schools bring little to nothing to the table in terms of expanded revenue, very unlikely
UCSB /
Stanford /
UCSDiego
Penn

Texas \
Texas A&M \ not seeing us poach an SEC school
Vandy /
Florida /
Missouri
I think that Stanford (the stronger football school) or Cal bring the SF/Bay Area television market. With eyeballs driving revenue, and revenue being a key expansion consideration driver (though streaming and its future impact need to be considered), I believe that it DOES make sense to add one of those two schools.
 
Mar 17, 2022
193
101
43
I think that Stanford (the stronger football school) or Cal bring the SF/Bay Area television market. With eyeballs driving revenue, and revenue being a key expansion consideration driver (though streaming and its future impact need to be considered), I believe that it DOES make sense to add one of those two schools.
I think USC and or UCLA get us those markets already, so nope, no new revenue there.
 

arcb102000

All-American
Aug 27, 2006
7,298
2,486
113
ND can go hang for all that I care. They are arrogant and refused to recognize that the evolution of college football required that they join a conference years ago. They refused to do so and affiliated with the ACC because no other major conference would accept their terms. I believe that the terms of their ACC require that if they were to join a conference, it must be the ACC. (I am willing to be corrected if this is not the case.)

They are likely to be on the outside looking in and that will be to the diminution of their brand. Scheduling a good, playoff-worthy list of games will get very difficult. As we recruit in the same area as them, that works to Purdue's favor.

ND got too cute and now is in the position of joining a less respected conference. Couldn't happen to a nicer group of people.
 

njm8845

Senior
Jul 1, 2008
2,934
2,667
113
Been reading up on this thie am, its not even sure ND CAN join the BT..... there is a clause in their contract that if they join a conference it has to be the ACC. No escape clause found so far.... additionally all the rights to their sports teams other than football belong to the ACC until 2034, and it is specified in the contract ND signed that the only way to break it is unanimous vote of all ACC member schools and another payout beyond the 150 million it takes to leave the ACC agreement they have in football with them. Then there is the NBC contract that runs through 2025 that owns all ND home game television rights. So with all that baggage, I am disinclined to do a damn thing to entice ND to join beyond giving them provisional membership until they sort their shit out and become an AAU member.

Unless Stanford brings 200+ million in additional research revenue to the BT academic arm, they are really not adding enough to get my vote.

I think unless ND sorts out a way to get out of at least part of their ACC entnglements, the BT stands pat for a year unless the PAC tries to make its members sign a new agreement that makes it harder to leave. If that happens we may take an additional 4-5 teams in quick order from them and try to quickly jump to 24 teams.
By all accounts the B10 has offered ND. So apparently the B10 thinks it’s possible for them to join.

I think the B10 can’t stand pat for a year. That would just give time to the Pac12 to fortify their defenses. If Washington and Oregon add value, then admit them, regardless of what ND does. I don’t understand how ND’s decision impacts them. I think it might impact what other schools are invited.
 

njm8845

Senior
Jul 1, 2008
2,934
2,667
113
I THINK we go to 20 before the end of the year, if not ND and three more PAC schools that are AAU members, then 4 PAC schools, Wash, Ore, and 2 of Az, Utah, or Co. All AAU members in new states and that allows the conference to break into 3 divisions to make the west coasters not have to travel so much

East and West stay as they are with 7 teams and Far West gains the 6 PAC teams. If ND figures out how to get their ADs head out of his ass long enough, they go west and Neb goes to the far west.

Then when the SEC raids the ACC, as is coming VERY soon, we need to be ready to pivot east and offer 4 of ND (if they don't accept this year, UVA, GaTech, and UNC/Duke or both if ND still cannot get their shit together and figure out what is best for them long term.... if they say no then, let the SEC deal with them.
I think you are I are thinking very similarly Here’s my prediction:

1. B10 invites ND. This has already happened, and we are allegedly waiting for their response.

2A. If ND accepts, admit Oregon, Washington, and Stanford. The latter was included as yet another incentive for ND. There are no sweetheart deals for ND, but all of their rivals are now in the B10: UM, MSU, Purdue, USC, Stanford. They’ve always liked to think of themselves being a National school, and this is their one opportunity to join a conference that is truly National.

2B. If ND declines, then admit Oregon, Washington, Virginia, UNC. This brings two pair of rivalry schools that fortifies current B10 assets (UCLA and USC in the west and Maryland in the east).

3. I think UNC will have a hard decision: join SEC, or B10?? Their personality aligns with the south, but I think their culture aligns with the north: cares about academics, cares more about basketball. Money will be about the same.

4. SEC finishes off the struggling ACC by adding Clemson, Miami, Florida state, and VT. They’ve always seemed like SEC schools to me. And it seems like whereas B10 cares the most about new markets, the SEC cares the most about getting quality brands.

5. The decimated Pac12 still has more clout than the B12, so they add Oklahoma state, Kansas, Iowa state, and TT to get them back to 12. The B12 has now become a mid major conference. The rest of the schools (Baylor, Kansas state, WV, TCU) hope to get an ACC invite

6. I know divisions are currently going away, but with so many teams, and so much travel, I think you have to preserve traditional rivalries. College sports has always been regional.

6a. here are the new B10 pods, if ND joins:
1 “pacific” - Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington, Oregon
2 “east” - Rutgers, PSU, Maryland, Ohio state, ND
3 “plains” - Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Illinois
4 “lakes” - northwestern, Purdue, Indiana, Michigan, MSU

6b. Here are the new B10 pods, if ND declines:
1 “west” - UCLA, USC, Washington, Oregon, Nebraska
2 “east” - Rutgers, Maryland, PSU, Virginia, UNC
3 “lakes” - Michigan, MSU, northwestern, oh state, IU
4 “plains” - Purdue, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MichaelRR

purduepat1969

All-American
Sep 28, 2011
13,312
19,040
113
I think you are I are thinking very similarly Here’s my prediction:

1. B10 invites ND. This has already happened, and we are allegedly waiting for their response.

2A. If ND accepts, admit Oregon, Washington, and Stanford. The latter was included as yet another incentive for ND. There are no sweetheart deals for ND, but all of their rivals are now in the B10: UM, MSU, Purdue, USC, Stanford. They’ve always liked to think of themselves being a National school, and this is their one opportunity to join a conference that is truly National.

2B. If ND declines, then admit Oregon, Washington, Virginia, UNC. This brings two pair of rivalry schools that fortifies current B10 assets (UCLA and USC in the west and Maryland in the east).

3. I think UNC will have a hard decision: join SEC, or B10?? Their personality aligns with the south, but I think their culture aligns with the north: cares about academics, cares more about basketball. Money will be about the same.

4. SEC finishes off the struggling ACC by adding Clemson, Miami, Florida state, and VT. They’ve always seemed like SEC schools to me. And it seems like whereas B10 cares the most about new markets, the SEC cares the most about getting quality brands.

5. The decimated Pac12 still has more clout than the B12, so they add Oklahoma state, Kansas, Iowa state, and TT to get them back to 12. The B12 has now become a mid major conference. The rest of the schools (Baylor, Kansas state, WV, TCU) hope to get an ACC invite

6. I know divisions are currently going away, but with so many teams, and so much travel, I think you have to preserve traditional rivalries. College sports has always been regional.

6a. here are the new B10 pods, if ND joins:
1 “pacific” - Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington, Oregon
2 “east” - Rutgers, PSU, Maryland, Ohio state, ND
3 “plains” - Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Illinois
4 “lakes” - northwestern, Purdue, Indiana, Michigan, MSU

6b. Here are the new B10 pods, if ND declines:
1 “west” - UCLA, USC, Washington, Oregon, Nebraska
2 “east” - Rutgers, Maryland, PSU, Virginia, UNC
3 “lakes” - Michigan, MSU, northwestern, oh state, IU
4 “plains” - Purdue, Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin
UNC would be foolish not to join the B1G. They're a huge basketball school, which the SEC isn't, and they'd be competitive in football as well.
 

Wolegib

All-American
May 23, 2013
9,026
5,239
113
How many of those wr recruits will end up as dbs? That's how Tiller got many of his defensive backs. You don't actually pay very much attention to the details do you? You don't get how football recruiting plays it's game and you completely miss the point of Big Ten expansion. I can see why you are not well regarded as a poster
We’ve also now recruited 4 high school DBs and added a couple more. It would appear you are the one that needs to pay attention to details. And Brohm isn’t Tiller! And college football has changed drastically since tiller was coaching.

but sure tell me how it used to be when tiller was coaching as it his ways still apply today!
 

Wolegib

All-American
May 23, 2013
9,026
5,239
113
You completely miss the point. Had IowaSt, Pitt, and Missouri been added the BT revenue would be about 30% less than it is now because they add nothing to conference income and are just the more mouths to feed. Additionally Missouri and I don't think Pitt meet the academic requirements of AAU membership. Nebraska, Maryland and especially Rutgers all added far more revenue than their share of income.
I believe you missed my point. My suggestion for adding those team was not made this week or this month or this month. The suggestion was made when conferences considered academics and geography as factors when adding teams rather than $$$$$ and Tv markets!

those teams make absolutely no sense in today’s college football where $$$$$$$ is the first second and final criteria.

and at the time I suggested those teams, the question was posed who would you like the BIG 10 to add rather than discussing all the contracts that would have to be examined.

and in those days we didn’t call posters fos just for sharing ideas for discussion. I guess along with college football morals so have its posters