<p>[SEC</a> accepts Texas A&M; Baylor temporarily stands in way - NCAA Football - SI.com](<a href=“http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/ncaa/09/07/texasam.sec/]SEC”>http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/ncaa/09/07/texasam.sec/)</p>
<p>Baylor - The Crybaby!! ;p</p>
<p><a href=“It Sucks to be Baylor - YouTube”>It Sucks to be Baylor - YouTube;
<p>BIG-12 is on life support…</p>
<p>Well Baylor is smart, they realize if A&M goes, there pretty much is no hope for the Big 12 and eventually the Pac-12 and possibly Big Ten will cherry pick schools and Baylor will be left in a random mid-major conference (they probably realized this from the start of all of this expansion talk or should have at least)</p>
<p>Interesting article from the Pac-12’s perspective </p>
<p>[BCS</a> football: Realignment update (Pac-12 CEOs don’t want to expand) | College Hotline](<a href=“http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2011/09/06/bcs-football-realignment-update-the-pac-12-doesnt-want-to-expand/]BCS”>BCS football: Realignment update (Pac-12 CEOs don't want to expand) - College Hotline)</p>
<p>Pretty much how I feel. If A&M to the SEC works that has the SEC at 13 members, they’ll need to add at least one more. And who knows if they will stop at one, they will likely add three. </p>
<p>I don’t like the way it is headed, but it looks like 16 team superconferences are going to happen within the next 5 years. Might lead to a college playoff but I question how stable the conferences will be long term.</p>
<p>“What the hell does that mean?”</p>
<p>To people in the Northeast there are 2 types of hicks: those to the south, and those to the west. So if BC wants to play bigtime football, it needs to choose between the hicks to the south (ACC) or to the west (Big 10).</p>
<p>The Big 10 schools tend to be the most prominent and respected schools in their states–also the biggest. The lesson the Midwesterners learn from that is big=good. Where I live in the Midwest, one hears things like, “I didn’t do well in high school, so I had to go to a small school.” Yeah, there are a few notable smaller schools in the Midwest–Chicago, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Wash U, Case Western–but they are often not on the local radar. They are often dismissed as overpriced boutiques for New Yorkers, Communists, and/or eggheads.</p>
<p>In contrast, the ACC has welcomed smaller, leaner schools like Duke, Wake, and Miami. It has even picked the smaller state schools in some states (Clemson, FSU, and GATech are all smaller than USC, Florida, and UGa). Additionally, schools like UNC, UVa, Maryland, and VaTech don’t have that huge megaversity vibe that is so prominent in the Big 10.</p>
<p>In the Northeast, as opposed to the Midwest, big=not elite. In Massachusetts, few things are worse than going to the biggest school–UMass. In the Ivy League, it’s no accident that the least prestigious is the one with the largest undergrad population. So, in the eyes of a lot of people associated with BC, jumping into the Big 10 doesn’t look particularly prestigious. Yeah, there are lots of great minds among the students and faculties in the Big 10, but with such enormous size there has to be some weak ones too, and that doesn’t work well with the Northeastern mindset.</p>
<p>Re the Soviet army, they were big on sheer numbers…millions of men, thousands of tanks. So they’d throw 100,000 men over here, and 200,000 men over there. They knew* lots* would die from disease, cold, hunger, and/or bullets but that didn’t bother them enough to weed out the weak right from the start. They knew the strong would make it through and achieve the objective. Sound like Big 10 admissions?</p>
<p>^wow…what a bunch of BS.
ACC was opportunistic and stole the best two (Miami/VaTech) from the Big East. They had to get one more to get 12 members and that opened the door for the oddball Boston College since the ACC couldn’t get Penn State/Ohio State to join. It had nothing to do with size. ACC would have loved to add Ohio State/Penn State or any of the SEC if they could. But ACC was pathetic in football and there’s no way Penn State/Ohio State or any SEC school would leave their storied conferences.</p>
<p>Sam, you’re missing the context, and that is that if BC is looking south and west, it sees the ACC environment as better than the Big 10 environment. It wasn’t a discussion about what the folks running the ACC prefer, it’s a discussion about why BC might prefer to stay put rather than jump into dogpile of a bunch of gigantic Midwestern state schools.</p>
<p>Of course ACC environment fits; <em>any</em> Div-I school would fit in ACC. ACC has very little character and tradition; the schools don’t really have much in common.</p>
<p>Schmaltz:</p>
<p>That makes no sense at all. There are thousands of people from the east (and the west) at Wisconsin; Michigan; and Northwestern.</p>
<p>Ah, how soon we forget. ACC Expansion.</p>
<p>The ACC primary, if not sole, purpose for expansion was to create a conference football championship game. They looked enviously at the success of the SEC championship game (which wasn’t all that popular an idea in the SEC, initially) and the $$$ rewards it garnered.</p>
<p>Thus, the ACC looked to raid the Big East, where members like Syracuse and Boston College complained that football programs were not being nourished well enough and thus weren’t making their full $$$ potential as a league. The ACC specifically wanted the football jewels of the Big East; Syracuse, Boston College and Miami. Unfortunately for Syracuse, the Virginia State Legislature threw a wrench into the works at the last minute by essentially forcing UVA to oppose expansion if Virginia Tech was not also invited. UVA followed orders and the rest is history.</p>
<p>But unintended consequences always ensue. Boston College apparently has never been happy with the move to the ACC, Miami football has been dull for years, and the ACC championship game typically gets a rousing “ho-hum” from the national media and from fans. When the SEC and ACC championship games are held in the same town in the same year, guess which one is sold out and gets the high TV ratings? I was in Atlanta the first year the city hosted both games, and I saw many more SEC signs than ACC banners.</p>
<p>And now Florida State is complaining [again!!!] about the poor state of ACC football. Except this time FSU doesn’t have the same bargaining power. The SEC will not invite an additional Florida school to join its august club. The Big 10, as far as we know, is not looking to the southeast. And my guess is that the Big East, while likely would be very happy to have FSU, isn’t going to get down on its knees for any ACC member, given the history of the raid.</p>
<p>I seen no reason why the B10 would ever want to consider BC.</p>
<p>Another domino to fall…</p>
<p>[Texas</a> A&M Accepts Invite to Join Southeastern Conference - Bloomberg](<a href=“Bloomberg - Are you a robot?”>Bloomberg - Are you a robot?)</p>
<p>It’s official!! Welcome to the era of Super Conferences!! lol</p>
<p>tsdad,</p>
<p>I am from Asia and the Big 10 schools are in general more highly regarded than ACC. At the end of the day, research is what makes the school known worldwide, unless it belongs to the Ivy. So schools like Miami, BC, Wake, NC State seem to have almost no draw overseas.</p>
<p>Wow Sparkeye, it’s going to get crazy now! Do you think UT and TAM will ever play each other again in any sport now?</p>
<p>^^ Hell No!! At least not for another decade or so imho… Bad blood between the two goes very deep… In fact, the hatred has probably surpassed that of Ohio State vs Michigan as of late!! There is absolutely ZERO mutual respect between the two!!</p>
<p>[University</a> Suing Aggie Store Over “Saw 'Em Off” Logo - Burnt Orange Nation](<a href=“University Suing Aggie Store Over "Saw 'Em Off" Logo - Burnt Orange Nation”>University Suing Aggie Store Over "Saw 'Em Off" Logo - Burnt Orange Nation)</p>
<p>In fact, it gets dirty and personal… ;p</p>
<p><a href=“Texas A&M Athletic Director Bill Byrne Lashes Out At Aggie Alum - KBTX News 3 - Shane McAuliffe - YouTube”>Texas A&M Athletic Director Bill Byrne Lashes Out At Aggie Alum - KBTX News 3 - Shane McAuliffe - YouTube;
<p>
Haha! My dear friend, Sam, you just proved to me the theory that the longer a thread goes on CC, the more likely someone will bring up reputation in Asia. ;)</p>
<p>
True. Wolverines and Badgers > Mildcats.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, please, Schmaltz. Midwesterners aren’t as dumb as you depict them. I’ve lived in the Midwest most of my life, and I just think you’re close to 100% wrong about this.</p>
<p>The fact is that many of the Big Ten schools are BOTH big and good, and Midwesterners know it. Very few of them mistake size for quality in the way you describe. Yeah, when I lived in Michigan I did hear a few people say, “I didn’t do well in high school, so I had to go to a small school,” but that didn’t mean they were mistaking size for quality. It usually meant they couldn’t get into the BEST school in the state, the University of Michigan, and maybe they couldn’t even get into Michigan state which is arguably the second-best school in the state (though partisans of Kalamazoo College would contest that); and so they had to settle for Ferris State or Olivet College or some such, a smaller school with objectively lower admission standards and weaker academic programs. It just happens that the best schools in the state are large; it’s not that people think “large = good.” I’ll bet you’d have a hard time finding a single person in the state of Michigan who would say Michigan State is a better school than the University of Michigan BECAUSE IT’S BIGGER (which it is); some MSU partisans might vainly attempt to convince you MSU is the better school for this or that reason, but size wouldn’t be one of the reasons. And you’d certainly not find very many people in Michigan (except a few displaced Buckeyes) who would say Ohio State is better than Michigan BECAUSE IT’S BIGGER (which it is).</p>
<p>Similarly, you won’t find many people in Indiana who would say Purdue is a better school than Indiana U because it’s bigger (which it is); that debate would turn on the relative merits of science & engineering (Purdue) v. humanities & social sciences (IU). I doubt you’d find many people in Illinois who would say UIUC is a better school than the University of Chicago or Northwestern because it’s bigger—though you’re probably right that the University of Chicago is probably off some Illinoisans’ radar screens. That’s less true for Northwestern because of its Big Ten sports profile.</p>
<p>The truth is, most of the big publics in the Northeast are just not at the same level of academic quality as the Big Ten publics. That, combined with the number and strength of high quality private institutions in the Northeast, puts public higher education in a very different light there. But that doesn’t mean Northeasterners disrespect the quality of Midwestern public higher education. Michigan and Wisconsin, in particular, have long attracted large contingents of Northeasterners, especially from the New York-New Jersey area. They come for quality, not size, and they’re a bit envious of their in-state classmates who enjoy quality at a cut-rate price. Size is incidental in all this. Yes, there are some who think small is always better, and some who prefer big for whatever reason. But of all the thousands of Midwesterners I’ve known over the course of my lifetime, I swear I’ve never encountered one who, in the course of discussing higher education with them, made the mistake you describe, of thinking “big = good.” You’re just making that up.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, the thing is the Wildcats do have great research in business/law/economics and certain areas of engineering/chemistry. And they got the best journalism school in the world. Coupled with the consistent top-15 showing in college ranking, it’s enough to make up the slight edge Wolverines have on research. ;)</p>
<p>Haha, the debates are still raging! I am just happy that we got to see some football last week. Perhaps we should shelve discussing what will happen to the Aggies, Longhorns, or Sooners for a few months. </p>
<p>It seems that we might better off to argue about the “intelligence” of ranking Boise State that high, hyping a game against a mediocre opponent as a milestone, and considering a schedule many high schools would find eminently doable to be sufficient to claim a national BCS game. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Part of the same reason why it seemed like the B10 was clamoring over Texas a year ago. Money.</p>
<p>It’s tied to the Big Ten Network, the more viewers/markets they would have the more money they would get in theory. </p>
<p>B10 needs to be careful when expanding though. Pitt would add nothing to the money pie and Missouri would do little, if that. Texas would do wonders, but they are probably going to stick with the Longhorn Network, so no thanks. Notre Dame would be great from a BTN standpoint, that would secure the NYC market and probably more. Oklahoma would not bring too many markets/viewers, but they would be the same as Nebraska, brand name high quality football. However, I think Delany/B10 took a lot of flak for Nebraska’s academics, aren’t OU’s even worse?</p>
<p>But the Big Ten needs to be careful of expanding just for the sake of expanding. The Big Ten splits the money equally so last year every school go 1/11 of the cut, this year it will be 1/12 of the cut. If they expand to 16, it would be 1/16 of the cut. So the total money will be higher no doubt, but the Big Ten better be certain when broken down to each school the money is going to be higher. </p>
<p>So BC may not seem like a great pick but at this stage, it’s all about the money, unfortunately. And BC would bring the B10 a whole new market. I don’t like it, but with today’s announcement of A&M heading to the SEC (finally official it looks like) we are finally on an almost certain path to “superconferences”. Unless the SEC kicks someone out to stay at 12, but I don’t see that happening.</p>
<p>Well Wildandyoung, the Big East did expel Temple football, but no one really cared and few tears were shed.</p>