<p>hawkette, when great programs play each other, rivalries are born. OSU and Texas already have a rivaly of sorts. Michigan and Texas played each other just once, but it was a great game (Rose Bowl), with Texas needing a last minute field goal to win. When top 10 pograms such as Texas, OSU, PSU, Michigan, Notre Dame, Oklahmoma play each other annually, youcan bet that excellent rivalries will be formed within a decade. Now imagine all of those 6 programs in the same conference! </p>
<p>Travel costs would increase by a tiny fraction of the extra revenues generated from having such a conference.</p>
<p>And you have to balance the gain as well. Its not just money grubbers trying to put more money in their pockets. If Texas gets $10 million in additional money a year, that could be a phenomenal gain for all students. It could mean better facilities for the student-athletes, or it could be used for need-based scholarships. For an in-state student, going to Texas costs about 20K. If you just took $10 Million (and I’m pulling this number out of my butt here, I feel like its a reasonable estimate) and put it straight to Financial Aid, thats 500 in-state students Texas could then afford to send for free.</p>
<p>This is a non-issue, at least for football. The big football programs fly their teams to away games, except for very local contests where they may occasionally travel by bus. So we’re basically talking about the difference between a 1.5-to-2-hour charter flight and a 3-hour charter flight—not exactly taking you to the breaking point on student-athlete time commitments. The typical Big Ten school has, what, 8 conference games a year? That’s 4 home and 4 away. So that’s a total of maybe 4 to 6 extra hours of travel time per football season. Not a deal-breaker, not with the millions of additional dollars per school that are on the table.</p>
<p>Travel time and travel cost may be bigger issues for the non-revenue sports, but Texas seems to be in the process of abandoning most of those already. And frankly I don’t think the best interests of the cross country team or the golf team are going to be the engine driving this train. In any event, there’s almost certainly enough extra money on the table to pay the incremental travel costs many times over. Could even mean a travel upgrade for some non-revenue-sport teams that now travel long distances by bus or van.</p>
<p>Someone who is apparently well-connected in the ways of Big 12 football has said that sources are telling him that Missouri and Nebraska are on their way to the Big Ten. The original post can be found here:</p>
<p>Post subject: Mizzou and Nebraska to the Big 10
Posted: 07 Jun 2010 14:12 pm
per my sources. Expect an announcement in 36-48 hours.</p>
<p>If it turns out to be true this time, the Big Ten expansion should include the following schools imho:</p>
<p>16 teams (+5)</p>
<ol>
<li>Nebraska
TV Markets: Lincoln/Omaha </li>
<li>Mizzou
St. Louis/Kansas City
-------------------------PHASE I ADDITION</li>
<li>Rutgers
NY/NYC/NJ</li>
<li>Syracuse
New England/NY/NYC
-------------------------PHASE II ADDITION</li>
<li>Notre Dame
Nationwide
-------------------------PHASE III ADDITION</li>
</ol>
<p>Sparkeye (writing/reading this handle really makes me queasy!), in a scenario where Nebraska, Mizzou join the Big 10, I still think that the second phase would involve Texas and Oklahoma. I just don’t see the Northeast ever developing in college sports culture. New Yorkers are too taken by the Giants/Yankees to ever care about college sports.</p>
<p>Of course, should Texas fall through, Rutgers and Syracuse/Pitt would be the logical alternative. But Texas will be the first priority.</p>
Yes, yes, yes, no, yes, and yes. Those five schools are known to have great football programs, I can not speak for UMich part due to its history of misconduct.</p>
<p>
I would be afraid to see Nebraska and Missouri join the Big Ten Conference, I think all schools would benefit if the two were left in the Big 12.</p>
<p>I hope that would be the case as well, Alex. Even though the chances of TAMU tagging along the Longhorns to Big Ten would be greater than Oklahoma especially when Texas Legislators are factored into the equation (Also, PHASE II would have 2 spots left before my final - PHASE III Capstone, ND). </p>
<p>P.S. I often ponder as to whether Syracuse could have the potential to be THE basketball cash-cow as STATE if added to the Big Ten…</p>
<p>“Yes, yes, yes, no, yes, and yes” That statement MADE ME LAUGH SO HARD. CoolBreeze, your increasing hate of Michigan never ceases to make me laugh.</p>
Oh jeez… well it’s never bad to laugh. Though I have only stated facts, easly found in recent statistics and articles. As I’ve already stated, I would be really afraid to see Nebraska and Missouri join the conference. It’s better for Big 12 and Big 10 if they don’t.</p>
<p>Coolbrezze, you should learn to temper your passions. Michigan’s football program does not have a “history of misconduct”. Players practicing long hours is a minor offense, and the only one that Michigan’s footnall program has been guilty off in the modern era. If you think other programs are not guilty of the same, you would be wrong. In Michigan’s case, a few disgruntled players blew the wistle. Had the coach been more flexible and diplomatic, those players would not have snitched in their program.</p>
<p>Many football programs are guilty of the same offenses.</p>
<p>I know you have pride in the University of Iowa, but seriously stop trying to trash or bad mouth Michigan. It doesn’t look good on your part especially because of your extensive involvement in the Michigan forum. Now please stop making your biases so obvious.</p>
I agree with this statement. I also would note that the northeast has so many outstanding schools, including publics and more notably the privates. Though the Northeast does have a large college sports culture.</p>
<p>“I agree with this statement. I also would note that the northeast has so many outstanding schools, including publics and more notably the privates.”</p>
<p>Yes do tell us about the outstanding public universities in the northeast.</p>
<p>The private schools are most notable; many public schools in the northeast are outstanding though most have not develop great football programs such as Texas, OSU, PSU, Iowa, Notre Dame, Oklahmoma.</p>
<p>I still think Mizzou and Nebraska are just a bluff by the Big Ten, aimed at getting Texas to contemplate the likelihood of a Big 12 break-up. Once they do, they’ll see a brighter future in the Big Ten both financially and academically. Mizzou and Nebraska have passionate fan bases, but ultimately they’re small-market teams. Not enough TV screens to make it worth splitting the take. Face it, the only realistically attainable big markets on the Big Ten’s radar are NYC and Texas. NYC is a hard nut to crack due to the lack of an established big-time college sports tradition. Texas, on the other hand, has both the market and the tradition. It also has the motivation if the numbers are right—and they are. It only needs a whack across the forehead to see that the status quo is untenable. The Big Ten and Pac 10 threatening raids on its conference provide that whack. My prediction when the dust settles: Texas, Texas A&M, and Texas Tech join the Big Ten, bringing the conference to 14. Notre Dame caves and joins the bandwagon, and after an intense competition among Big Ten wannabes, Rutgers emerges as the 16th Big Ten member.,</p>
<p>I agree bclintonk. Texas (Wisconsin’s long lost twin), Texas A&M and Oklahoma are the three that make sense to me. Texas Tech may be invited at the insistance of Texas. The fifth spot goes to Notre Dame. The only way the Big 10 goes east is if Texas says no.</p>
<ol>
<li>Nebraska
TV Markets: Lincoln/Omaha </li>
<li>Mizzou
St. Louis/Kansas City
-------------------------PHASE I ADDITION</li>
<li>Notre Dame
Nationwide
-------------------------PHASE II ADDITION</li>
<li>Texas</li>
<li>TAMU
Texas!! lol
-------------------------PHASE III ADDITION</li>
</ol>
<p>*Friday, June 11th deadline for Nebraska & Missouri imposed by the Big 12 AD.</p>