<p>Oh, alex, I’m just teasing you. You must know that by now. Yes, U Michigan has a good football program with a long and strong history. I would agree that it belongs on any Top 10 list and maybe a Top 5 list for college football programs. </p>
<p>But I must say that I was surprised when I learned that since 1950, U Michigan has only won 1 national championship (1997) when they shared it with U Nebraska. Given all of the hype one hears about the football team, I would have expected more. Heck, 3 Big Ten teams (Ohio State, Michigan State, Penn State) have won more. </p>
<p>Measuring by national championships since 1950, here is how the schools compare:</p>
<p>8 U Alabama </p>
<p>7 USC, U Oklahoma</p>
<p>6 Ohio State</p>
<p>5 Notre Dame, U Nebraska, U Miami</p>
<p>4 U Texas, Michigan State</p>
<p>3 LSU, U Florida, U Tennessee</p>
<p>2 Penn State, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Ole Miss</p>
<p>1 U Michigan, U Pittsburgh, U Minnesota, U Georgia, U Arkansas, Auburn, BYU, Clemson, U Colorado, U Maryland, Syracuse, UCLA, U Washington</p>
<p>Despite all of the statistics and commentary above, I still think ND is in a class by itself when it comes to college football and the shadow that it casts.</p>
<p>I think ND will stay independent. I also think that we could see Texas, Texas A & M (if Texas carries them) Oklahoma and West Virginia or Oklahoma State heading to the SEC. The Big 10 and SEC are the Big Dogs in this fight. The PAC 10 and ACC will have to make some tough decisions. The ACC is in better shape expansion wise than the PAC 10 but still trail the SEC and Big 10. We may see the 4 big conferences going to 16 each by breaking apart the Big 12 and Big East.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t be surprise seeing Rutgers, or even Pitt and to a extent Syracuse as a Big Ten university, same for ND. Though as a poster above say it does come surprising to see Nebraska and Missouri with offers.</p>
<p>It’s interesting that the future Superconference members are being rumored to be breaking away from the NCAA. It was a new NCAA rule which dictated that a D1 football conference must have 12 members in order to hold a post season league championship game.</p>
<p>This rule directly lead to the ACC expanding to 12 members and causing upheaval of the Big East (BC, VT, Miami) and subsequently C-USA. The number 12 was arbitrary. If the NCAA let leagues have a championship game at 8 members, maybe the old, smaller conferences would be happily continuing on today. The NCAA may have written a rule which will lead to its own demise.</p>
<p>I agree with earlier posters who said that the smaller leagues lead to more intense college rivalries. When a league has 8 members, schools play each other more often - twice a year in sports like basketball.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t be surprised if the Big East becomes nonexistent down the road. Going to be interesting on what each school choices to do. Possibly could see UT-Austin and Texas A&M going to the PAC-10 instead of the SEC or ACC, this is if they don’t join the Big Ten.</p>
<p>I wonder more about the ACC than the Big East (although I wonder about them too). I bet many BC alums wish that Boston College were back in the Big East, particularly how lame football has been in that conference over the last bunch of years.</p>
<p>The Big East as a football conference is pretty much dead. The ACC stands to benefit the most from this, as they could probably add several more Big East schools if they desire to do so. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.</p>
<p>The ACC can have a few Big East schools as possible additions, specifically the schools with no football teams like Seton Hall and Providence College. I was talking with my roommate and we agreed that a BC-PC rivalry would be pretty cool.</p>
<p>I don’t think the ACC would take a school that didn’t have a D1 football program. If it took any schools from the BE, my guess would be that they would be either UConn, Syracuse, or WVU.</p>
<p>True, didn’t think about that. I’ve heard that the Big Ten is also looking at UConn and 'Cuse as possible additions as well. Both schools have great athletics and academics which is what the Big Ten is looking for. Also, the Northeast market…</p>
<p>According to our newspaper today, Vanderbilt was invited into the Big Ten, but claims it won’t go. It better not! I would REALLY miss the SEC games. (and I’m speaking as an Indiana alum)</p>
<p>Naive question-is this conference shifting always dictated by the money? My sense is that many alumni like the traditional ties to their conferences and don’t automatically want to jump. I don’t think many Texans would care much to watch the the Longhorns playing a regular season game against Michigan State. But bring on Oklahoma or Arkansas or even SMU if they continue their resurgence and people will care intensely. Isn’t that worth something??</p>
<p>TV contracts and media market are driving everything.
Cuse the ACC would need to change their by laws to let WVU in since current rules state all schools in the ACC must be in a State bordering the Atlantic Ocean.</p>
<p>Current Big 10 rules state all members must be located in a contiguous State to another Big 10 school.
While I hope Rutgers gets a Big 10 invite I like the old 8-10 team conferences and wish an eastern conference of BC, UConn, Syracuse, Rutgers, Penn St, Pitt, WVU, Maryland and Virginia Tech got off the ground when it was initially proposed. Rumor was Maryland was willing to leave the ACC because the league was dominated by the NC schools- not in competition but in procedural league politics.</p>
<p>Pretty much by money. Texas to B10 not happening. B10 going east coast makes more sense–lots of alums there, lots of students come from there, can’t beat the market potential there.</p>
<p>Aside from ND, UNL is a better candidate than either Mizzou or RU.</p>
<p>But this whole rumor coming out of KC made no sense - ND wouldn’t join the B10 unless the BE was decimated (which it isn’t under this scenario).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t look for the B10 to add more than 2 BE schools at the most (and likely only 1); the NE simply doesn’t care about BE FB (the RU-Cuse game last season was relegated to ESPN360).</p>
<p>If it’s only 1 BE school, it likely will be RU - but RU has serious liabilities which is why there is talk about RU getting a reduced share of B10 TV revenues for a period of time.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>An expansion filled mostly by BE schools would be a $$-loser for the present B10 schools.</p>
<p>And w/ Mizzou, Neb. and CU all possibly leaving the B12, UT very much will be in play.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Pitt doesn’t add a new TV market.</p>
<p>Plus, Pitt has been having trouble Heinz Field.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, many UT fans are more excited about playing dOSU, PSU, UM (and UW and Iowa to a lesser extent) than their current foes in the B12 (OU excluded).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Reportedly, Cornell also is going to get an invite.</p>
<p>Really, some of these rumors/claims are just ridiculous.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The leftover BE schools hardly bring enough to the table (adding BC has hardly been a windfall for the ACC); even the BE school(s) that the B10 takes, if any, would hardly bring enough to the table.</p>
<p>And the ACC could actually lose if the B10 expands to 14 or 16, since the SEC is threatening to match the B10 - that would mean the SEC threatening to poach ACC schools like FSU or Clemson.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Due to academics, UT will look to either the B10 or Pac10 (even the UT alums hold their nose when it comes to possibly joining the SEC).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>W/ regard to the Pac10, CU barely makes it worth the Pac10’s trouble; Utah doesn’t bring enough to the table.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Boise, BYU, TCU, Fresno and Gonzaga would never be considered by the Pac10.</p>
<p>Basically, expansion wouldn’t be worth it for the Pac10 unless it is able to get at least one of the Texas schools (that is either UT or TAMU, if not both).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, it’s in ND’s best interest to join the B10 - but I’d rather the conf. turn away from ND and see ND become even less relevant than it already is.</p>
<p>I agree k&s, the Big 12 will soon disolve. Major programs like Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Colorado simply aren’t getting the exposure and the money they could be getting if they were part of a larger market. I also agree that given its academic strength and liberal culture, Texas will look to either the Big 10 or Pac 10. </p>
<p>If Notre Dame does not join the Big 10 before the expension, its football program will inevitably shrink to irrelevance. I hope that does not happen. The Michigan vs Notre Dame rivalry is fun.</p>
<p>Ideally, Texas, Texas A&M and Notre Dame join the Big 10. Texas can continue to schedule its rivalry games with Oklahoma and Notre Dame with USC annually. Other traditional rivals, such as Air Force, Navy, BC and stanford can be scheduled on a rotational basis.</p>
<p>When evaluating any of these scenarios it’s best to remember the quote from “All The President’s Men”:</p>
<p>“Deep Throat” to Bob Woodward:</p>
<p>“No, I have to do this my way. You tell me what you know, and I’ll confirm. I’ll keep you in the right direction if I can, but that’s all. Just… follow the money.”</p>