The BT expansion conversation isn't new. In fact, it seems like officially, or unofficially, it's talked about every other year. A few years ago, seemingly, Delany spoke out of turn when he intimated that a twelfth team was going to happen. A week or so later, he drastically changed his tune.
During the last few times that expansion was a possibility, things didn't line up. The ACC and Big East were shifting and other conferences were reacting by wrapping up their members with large contracts. Atop that, Delany's crush on Notre Dame probably didn't help anything...But it's different in late 2009.
No other major conferences are looking to expand...and some of the non-BCS conferences are feeling the financial pinch of the near-depression-like economic conditions. Last year, Big East members members wondered aloud if their basketball conference's size was hurting its members' chances of making the tournament. And in the Big 12, a few athletic directors have openly expressed their disgruntlement with the way the conference is being run.
But the BTN, Jim Delany , Rotel and Velveeta have combined to create a (delicious) force that is making serious noise. And while we as BT fans might not appreciate the genius that is Tim Doyle or Glen Mason, Those outside the Midwest do.
The Comcast and Time Warner "dominoes" that fell in the last two years sent tremors through the sports television world, and EsPN reacted in kind by officially crawling into bed with the SEC last year (after years of flirting and innuendo).
There was a time, not long ago, when Fox Sports dedicated much of its talent to the Big 12, Big East and Pac-10. But, the success of the BTN caused them to shift while following the sponsorship dollars and Fox Sports regional coverage has gotten weaker in the process.
Joe Tiller weighed in on the talk of expansion this week in the J & C saying, "It's all money-driven." But really, regardless of the talk from Burke and other ADs, this is all about money. I'm not faulting it, mind you, but it always has been. Granted, it wasn't to this extent at the turn of the 1900s when conferences started to form. They were merely trying to save money by playing teams that were closer together. But the conferences yield power and generate revenue. Sure, it took the BT about 70 years to stop favoring UM and aOSU in its scheduling practices, but equity was eventually achieved and the conference is stronger for it.
But as much momentum as the BT has gained the last few years, the Big 12 might have lost that much...and this is another reason why the expansion talk is so different in '09. Missouri's athletic director, Mike Alden, has started talking publicly about why joining the BT might make sense. If Alden is merely applying pressure on his conference or is seriously considering the possibility of changing alliances hasn't yet been made obvious. But, it seems this move makes logistical sense.
Obviously if Mizzou comes in to the BT, the Big 12 will need a replacement team. TCU seems to be a school that would be a good fit due to its proximity and natural rivals within the conference. I would assume that it would be pretty easy for the Big 12 to poach the Horned Frogs from the Mountain West...especially in the wake of their BCS placement following yet another undefeated season by a team within the underappreciated MWC.
So will it happen? Who knows.
Is it all about money? Yes. And that money from big time football and basketball programs drives everything from less-profitable sports to near campus businesses. Plus, it generates more dough for these schools than any academic endeavor...and puts money back into the school for what's really important, education.
Big TV contracts, advertisements and the 24/7 online scrutiny of college athletics might be viewed as out of hand by many, and the system can easily help fuel bad actors like the guy in Lexington, or boosters from Los Angeles to Columbus to Gainsville...but like everything, there are plenty of positives within the imperfect system that is college sports.
I don't think the BT necessarily needs a conference championship game in football, but instead needs to make sure its season goes into the first week of December. But, I am a fan of having either 12 or 10 teams in the league simply because even numbers create a lot more possibilities in all sports...but since contraction isn't on the table, I hope we can soon welcome another gold and black team to the BT in 2011 or '12.
11 comments:
Very interesting break down of the situation. I agree with you that the Big 12 could talk TCU into changing conferences easily if Missouri jumps over to the Big 10+2. What will the Big Ten call itself if it gets another team?
There has also been a fair amount of talk about the Pac 10 expanding as well. But so far, it seems more like talk in the media than anything else. I do think that if the Big 10+2 happens, and the Big 12 can quickly plug the gap, the Pac 10 would feel more pressure to expand at that point. Schools that get mentioned are Boise State, Utah and BYU. Other California schools get mentioned, but only in passing.
I am very interested to see what kind of domino effect this could have if the Big Whatever does expand.
Right on, Paul...the ramifications of this will be wide.
AWD sent me some links today about other candidates that seem to be pipedreams...but much of their fanbase is interested- KU and UT (Texas) both have some fans that think it makes sense.
I like Mizzou because of the built-in Illinois rivalry...but UT would be super-interesting for a ton of reasons, both athletically and academically.
I like the Utes & BYU as P10 teams...but don't know if Boise's basketball program fits the conference too well...plus, their venues seem very small for a P10 team.
I like Missouri but I LOVE Texas!!! I know the talk of neighboring states, but cmon...we add a powerhouse in both sports...plus on away games we get to party on 6th Street in Austin? Sign me up.
I don't know about the Pac-10. I know they have a nice schedule situation where everyone plays everyone, thus clearly deciding a conference champion. The Big East is the same, while the ACC, SEC, and Big 12 have their conference title games. Only the Big Ten is screwy
Imagine if Iowa had not lost to Iowa State in 2002. Both Iowa and OSU would have been undefeated with no clear way to decide who would have faced Miami for the national title. Iowa would have gone instead of OSU because of the rule that the team with the longest drought since being the Big Ten's non at large BCS representative would have gotten the automatic bid (and title game invite.)
T- No, I don't think so.... BCS title game is BCS #1 vs #2, and I think that trumps the "who has the longest drought" argument... no?
Also, I'll say it again... if any of you really think Texas is a possibility, you're in la-la-land.
The ACC and Big East were shifting and other conferences were reacting by wrapping up their members
I've reacted by wrapping up my member, too. Ah, college....
I will second Ben. Sixth Street tops any bar scene I have ever seen. Simply ridiculous. Good thing I had some friends looking after me when I visited two weeks ago.
Boys....Getting drunk and laid is a reason to join the SEC, not the Big Ten.
Oh yes. I went there.
Ryan-
It is an experience everyone should have at least once in their life!
Those lucky bastards live it. I've never seen burnt orange look so good as on 6th St. My oh my.
I've read very good things about the women at UT ... and not all the comments were from men. (Kind of an equal-opportunity campus, I guess, which makes sense considering that it's huge. The campus, I mean.)
Texas is a nice match in NCAA 10. In RL, the academics are cool, they bring a ton of athletic power to the table (which might not be so cool for the rest of the conference), but the geography sucks, and UT leaving the Big 12 is like ND on a bigger scale: Texas gets a large share of Big 12 money but also gets the benefits of conference play in all sports. Zero chance. none.
Missouri's AD gave all the answers you'd want to hear if you're hoping to add them: yes, we're still in the Big 12, yes, we're hoping the Big 12 improves, what is this Big Ten thing you keep mentioning? No, I can't say who might be talking to us. What number on my cell phone?
Compare that to Pitt's reaction:
""
And yeah, I think the size of the Big East does hurt their at-large chances. (Deservedly so. How many .500-conference teams do we need in the tournament anyway?) Well, if you don't like it, leave. Or kick Notre Dame out, they don't like the conference like you guys do anyway.
Although at least Swarbrick was honest and candid: no, we won't go, and I wish they'd stop calling. It's sooooo annoying.
The only thing about TCU replacing Missouri is alignment. Missouri's a North team. Either TCU or Baylor ends up in the North; neither of those would fit well. Colorado State would probably be a better geographic fit, plus they might be less likely to rock the boat when Texas comes to take their TV money each year.
Maybe they'd even consider Houston, but of course that would leave the same problem with North vs. South ... the best fits are Texas schools and they don't need another Texas school.
Post a Comment