Since my C-USA pals don't want to talk about expansion anymore, and I hate the MWC and MAC fans, I figured that I would try to make some new friends with the WAC.
When I read the MWC boards all they talk about is taking Fresno, Boise St., and UTEP to create their BCS ready conference. But I feel that in a few years that all of the BCS conferences are going to go 12 teams. This means that the Big East adds 4, the PAC 10 adds 2, and the Big 10 adds 1. The question is, who fills those 7 spots and then what does the WAC, MWC, and C-USA do (assuming that all 7 teams are taken from these 3 conferences.

Here is what I think:
The Big East adds:
UCF
ECU
Navy
Memphis (My school, Marshall, would be considered in Memphis' place because of geography, but Memphis will win out)
Marshall is added only if WVU or Pitt go to Big 10

The PAC 10 adds:
Utah
Fresno St.

The Big 10 adds:
Here is were it gets tricky, because we all know that they want Notre Dame, and we also know that as long as NBC is paying the big bucks that ND isn't going anywhere.
Do they stay in Big 10 territory or go outside of it?
I think that they will fill the last spot by stealing from the Big East or Big 12. They would either take Pitt or WVU from the BE or take Iowa St. from the Big 12.
If neither of these choices work then they would have to go after Navy before the Big East got them, or take a MAC school, and none of them are ready to jump to a mid-major much less a BCS conference. (sorry had to take a shot at the former mates)

The Big 12 adds:(If the Big 10 some how steal away Iowa St.)
TCU

So if worst comes to worst then
C-USA will lose at least 3 but up to 4
WAC will lose at least 1
MWC will lose at least 2

So now the C-USA needs at least 3 teams to get a C-USA championship game back.
C-USA will add: (along with UTEP, SMU, Rice, Tulane, Tulsa, Houston, UAB, USM, and Marshall)
Louisiana Tech
Miami (OH)
Toledo

Now the WAC needs 2 and MWC needs 2 and the MAC just need 1 to get back to 12(Because of the additition of Temple this year the MAC has 13). This is where the WAC overtakes the MWC as the best non-BCS conference in the west.
The WAC will add:
UNLV
North Texas
Colorado St.

Now the MWC needs at least 4.
MWC adds:
Arkansas St.
UL-Monroe
UL-Lafayette
Troy

The MAC adds:
Army

This is my prediction of the not to distant future. I have accepted the fact that I have no life during the summer, and NEED more than anything for college football to come back in to my life ASAP. Hope you have an opinion my prediction, so that I will have a sense of accomplishment. One last thing, GO HERD!!!

MU42 Wrote:Since my C-USA pals don't want to talk about expansion anymore, and I hate the MWC and MAC fans, I figured that I would try to make some new friends with the WAC.
When I read the MWC boards all they talk about is taking Fresno, Boise St., and UTEP to create their BCS ready conference. But I feel that in a few years that all of the BCS conferences are going to go 12 teams. This means that the Big East adds 4, the PAC 10 adds 2, and the Big 10 adds 1.

I don't particularly like expansion threads either, but just this once I'll humor you.

There is a major problem with what you are assuming. Who will require the BCS conferences to move to 12? The BCS?

The PAC-10 is already upset about having its champ not play in the Rose Bowl. They have on more than one occasion threatened to pull out of the BCS and take the Rose Bowl with them if they weren't able to place one of their teams in it. They have the power to do that so the BCS made sure that on most years (ie if the PAC-10 isn't playing for the NC or if the Rose bowl isn't hosting it) that they are able to get a team into it. They could very easily do this.

Bottom line is that the BCS will not be able to force the PAC-10 to expand. No one will. They also require a unanimous vote to expand and there is no way the Oregon and Washington schools will give up playing USC and UCLA every year. They just approved an 9th conference game so that everyone plays each other every year. They aren't moving anywhere.

MU42 Wrote:Since my C-USA pals don't want to talk about expansion anymore, and I hate the MWC and MAC fans, I figured that I would try to make some new friends with the WAC.
When I read the MWC boards all they talk about is taking Fresno, Boise St., and UTEP to create their BCS ready conference. But I feel that in a few years that all of the BCS conferences are going to go 12 teams. This means that the Big East adds 4, the PAC 10 adds 2, and the Big 10 adds 1. The question is, who fills those 7 spots and then what does the WAC, MWC, and C-USA do (assuming that all 7 teams are taken from these 3 conferences.

Here is what I think:
The Big East adds:
UCF
ECU
Navy
Memphis (My school, Marshall, would be considered in Memphis' place because of geography, but Memphis will win out)
Marshall is added only if WVU or Pitt go to Big 10

The PAC 10 adds:
Utah
Fresno St.

The Big 10 adds:
Here is were it gets tricky, because we all know that they want Notre Dame, and we also know that as long as NBC is paying the big bucks that ND isn't going anywhere.
Do they stay in Big 10 territory or go outside of it?
I think that they will fill the last spot by stealing from the Big East or Big 12. They would either take Pitt or WVU from the BE or take Iowa St. from the Big 12.
If neither of these choices work then they would have to go after Navy before the Big East got them, or take a MAC school, and none of them are ready to jump to a mid-major much less a BCS conference. (sorry had to take a shot at the former mates)

The Big 12 adds:(If the Big 10 some how steal away Iowa St.)
TCU

So if worst comes to worst then
C-USA will lose at least 3 but up to 4
WAC will lose at least 1
MWC will lose at least 2

So now the C-USA needs at least 3 teams to get a C-USA championship game back.
C-USA will add: (along with UTEP, SMU, Rice, Tulane, Tulsa, Houston, UAB, USM, and Marshall)
Louisiana Tech
Miami (OH)
Toledo

Now the WAC needs 2 and MWC needs 2 and the MAC just need 1 to get back to 12(Because of the additition of Temple this year the MAC has 13). This is where the WAC overtakes the MWC as the best non-BCS conference in the west.
The WAC will add:
UNLV
North Texas
Colorado St.

Now the MWC needs at least 4.
MWC adds:
Arkansas St.
UL-Monroe
UL-Lafayette
Troy

The MAC adds:
Army

This is my prediction of the not to distant future. I have accepted the fact that I have no life during the summer, and NEED more than anything for college football to come back in to my life ASAP. Hope you have an opinion my prediction, so that I will have a sense of accomplishment. One last thing, GO HERD!!!

Stupidest post ever.

The Big East realizes all the revenue it needs with one BCS football team and 6-8 NCAA Tournament bids. Memphis is the only team on their radar that would add any value for them. Notre Dame wouldn't consider the Big East in football. Notre Dame may be interested in the Big 10, however.

The SEC will never expand beyond the numbers they have. The PAC 10, will also not expand. The Big 12 will not expand, either.

The only team that realistically has a shot at the BCS expansion is Memphis, IMHO. They offer a fantastic BB program and a decent FB program.

The MWC will look to Texas to get TCU a travel partner, IMO. UTEP, SMU, Tulsa and Rice are on the radar. N Texas could also be an option, but unlikely. UTEP is probably largest on the radar.

The only question I'd like to have answered is if C-USA would be interested in La Tech if they ever lost UTEP and/or Memphis. If C-USA took La Tech, then the WAC would probably have to look at either long term options or hopefully we'd be attractive enough to get UNLV or SDSU.

Im must be a real dunce because everyone seems to want SDSU and UNLV to move to the WAC. why???? They are a couple of bottom feeders.
We have enough of those, we need one school if LT leaves, its MONTANA.
No one else comes close.

ejmpalle Wrote:

MU42 Wrote:

The only question I'd like to have answered is if C-USA would be interested in La Tech if they ever lost UTEP and/or Memphis. If C-USA took La Tech, then the WAC would probably have to look at either long term options or hopefully we'd be attractive enough to get UNLV or SDSU.

I could be wrong, but I would be very surprised if C-USA added La. Tech any time in the near future. No offense intended to La. Tech fans, but C-USA expansion has always been motivated by trying to gain access to the largest media markets; they don't seem to be particularly concerned about the quality of the teams that they add. I can't imagine that they would be very interested in expanding into Ruston. If C-USA needed to add another team, I would guess that they would add North Texas or one of the Florida Sun Belt schools before they would add La. Tech.

MU42 Wrote:Since my C-USA pals don't want to talk about expansion anymore, and I hate the MWC and MAC fans, I figured that I would try to make some new friends with the WAC.
When I read the MWC boards all they talk about is taking Fresno, Boise St., and UTEP to create their BCS ready conference. But I feel that in a few years that all of the BCS conferences are going to go 12 teams. This means that the Big East adds 4, the PAC 10 adds 2, and the Big 10 adds 1. The question is, who fills those 7 spots and then what does the WAC, MWC, and C-USA do (assuming that all 7 teams are taken from these 3 conferences.

Here is what I think:
The Big East adds:
UCF
ECU
Navy
Memphis (My school, Marshall, would be considered in Memphis' place because of geography, but Memphis will win out)
Marshall is added only if WVU or Pitt go to Big 10

The PAC 10 adds:
Utah
Fresno St.

The Big 10 adds:
Here is were it gets tricky, because we all know that they want Notre Dame, and we also know that as long as NBC is paying the big bucks that ND isn't going anywhere.
Do they stay in Big 10 territory or go outside of it?
I think that they will fill the last spot by stealing from the Big East or Big 12. They would either take Pitt or WVU from the BE or take Iowa St. from the Big 12.
If neither of these choices work then they would have to go after Navy before the Big East got them, or take a MAC school, and none of them are ready to jump to a mid-major much less a BCS conference. (sorry had to take a shot at the former mates)

The Big 12 adds:(If the Big 10 some how steal away Iowa St.)
TCU

So if worst comes to worst then
C-USA will lose at least 3 but up to 4
WAC will lose at least 1
MWC will lose at least 2

So now the C-USA needs at least 3 teams to get a C-USA championship game back.
C-USA will add: (along with UTEP, SMU, Rice, Tulane, Tulsa, Houston, UAB, USM, and Marshall)
Louisiana Tech
Miami (OH)
Toledo

Now the WAC needs 2 and MWC needs 2 and the MAC just need 1 to get back to 12(Because of the additition of Temple this year the MAC has 13). This is where the WAC overtakes the MWC as the best non-BCS conference in the west.
The WAC will add:
UNLV
North Texas
Colorado St.

Now the MWC needs at least 4.
MWC adds:
Arkansas St.
UL-Monroe
UL-Lafayette
Troy

The MAC adds:
Army

This is my prediction of the not to distant future. I have accepted the fact that I have no life during the summer, and NEED more than anything for college football to come back in to my life ASAP. Hope you have an opinion my prediction, so that I will have a sense of accomplishment. One last thing, GO HERD!!!

This is highly unlikely on a number of levels. Aside from the comments that others have made, here are my thoughts:

First, I keep hearing over and over again that all the BCS conferences will expand to 12 teams, and I don't understand the logic behind this assertion. Given that the BCS system was created in order to ensure that the current BCS members receive a disproportionate share of the revenue in college football, they have zero incentive to expand further. There is no reason that the BCS conferences would suddenly decide to expand to 12 teams. (As erda pointed out, the PAC-10 would probably leave the BCS under this scenario.)

A football championship game would not be sufficient to motivate the BCS conferences to expand, incidentally. The last I read, the SEC is the only conference that makes enough from its football championship game to justify expanding to 12 teams. The Big 12 and the ACC don't earn enough revenue from their championship games to offset the costs of having to share their revenue with another school. And if a conference like the Big 12 isn't earning a huge payday from its championship game, I strongly doubt that the PAC-10 or the Big East would do much better.

Regarding the specific scenarios that you suggested, I can probably assure you that the PAC-10 will never add Fresno State. Again, no offense to any Fresno fans, but the PAC-10 takes pride in the fact that all of its member institutions are strong research schools. I can't imagine that Stanford or Cal or UCLA would agree to add a CSU school to the PAC-10. If the PAC-10 were forced to expand, I agree that Utah would probably be on the short list, but I think they would try to get Texas or Colorado long before they would invite Utah.

Similarly, the Big 10 takes a great deal of pride in being the top academic conference in the country (other than maybe the Ivy League), and they aren't going to add anyone that would hurt that reputation. Frankly, I doubt they will ever add anyone as long as there is a chance that they could get Notre Dame. If they did, however, you can just about rest assured that it won't be West Virginia or Iowa State. The only viable expansion candidates that fit the Big 10's academic profile that I can think of are Rutgers and possibly Pitt. If those are the best options available, I think the Big 10 probably doesn't expand.

Broncoguy Wrote:Im must be a real dunce because everyone seems to want SDSU and UNLV to move to the WAC. why???? They are a couple of bottom feeders.
We have enough of those, we need one school if LT leaves, its MONTANA.
No one else comes close.

First off, Montana won't come without Montana State and they aren't ready to come and don't want to come now.

As for SDSU and UNLV, they represent two of the largest markets in the MWC and their loss would signal big trouble for the MWC. To begin with, CSTV could almost certainly dump or renegotiate the television contract -- lowering its value substantially. Don't think CBS wouldn't do it either.

With apologies to the independence of the state of Nevada, both are basically California schools and the WAC would be creating a western conference with far more potential than a mountain conference could ever have. I think that they would do much better as members of a western conference than they have done as members of a mountain one.

Yoda out...

Yoda..Do you envision Nevada Southern and SDSU as addtions to the current WAC or as substitutes..?

11 is a rather unwieldly number...

Also the west would seem to be the tougher football division whereas Boise would appear to have a much easier time in the east..

west:

Nevada
Nevada Southern

Fresno
SJSU

SDSU
Hawaii

east:

Boise
Idaho

USU
NMSU

LaTech...

My take.....

Eastern Athletic Conference (split from the Big East)
1. West Virginia
2. Louisville
3. Pitt
4. Syracuse
5. Uconn
6. Cincinnati
7. Rutgers
8. USF
9. Memphis
10. ECU (UCF underminds USF's potential)

Mountain West (to keep up with the BE, similar to taking TCU)
1 BYU
2. Utah
3. TCU
4 .Air Force
5. Colorado State
6. Wyoming
7. UNLV
8. San Diego State
9. New Mexico
10 UTEP


CUSA
West
1.Tulsa
2. Houston
3. SMU
4. Tulane
5. N. Texas
6. Rice

East
1. S. Miss
2. Marshall
3. UCF
4. UAB
5. La. Tech
6. Louisiana Lafayette

Sun Belt (some d1aa will jump up to fill this spot)
1. MSTU
2. Troy
3. Arkansas State
4. FAU
5. FIU
6. Louisiana- Monroe
7. App State
8. James Madison


MAC WEST
1. Northern Illinois
2. Ball State
3. Western Michigan
4. Central Michigan
5. Eastern Michigan
6. Toledo
7. Western Kentucky

MAC EAST
1. Miami
2. Bowling Green
3. Ohio
4. Kent State
5. Akron
6. Buffalo
7. Temple (football only)

Big East (basketball)
1. Villanova
2. St. John?s
3. Georgetown
4. DePaul
5. Marquette
6. Providence
7. Seton Hall
8. Notre Dame (basketball only)
9. Temple (basketball only)
10. St. Louis (cathlolic university)


WAC (I don't see any changes unless the MWC wants to go to 12)
1. Fresno State
2. Hawaii
3. Boise State
4. Idaho
5. San Jose State
6. New Mexico State
7. Utah State
8. Nevada

nvspuds Wrote:Yoda..Do you envision Nevada Southern and SDSU as addtions to the current WAC or as substitutes..?

11 is a rather unwieldly number...

I'm not sure that I envision it at all. If LA Tech went to CUSA, then I suppose it could be as a replacement. Otherwise, they would have to be two of three teams added to make a WAC 12.

No way that they would be replacements for two teams going to the MWC, if that's what you mean. The chances that they would come are remote under any circumstances but there is no way that they would come should the WAC lose two top programs to the MWC.

Yoda out...

ejmpalle Wrote:The MWC will look to Texas to get TCU a travel partner, IMO. UTEP, SMU, Tulsa and Rice are on the radar. N Texas could also be an option, but unlikely. UTEP is probably largest on the radar.

How far do two schools have to be to considered travel partners? The PAC-10 has five sets of travel partners, and only the distance between UW and WSU is more than 90 minutes of driving (its 4.5 hours).

UTEP and TCU are almost nine hours apart in driving distance. That doesn't scream travel partner to me. If they consider UTEP, it has to be to get a foot into El Paso.

SMU would be an obvious travel partner if you add a team strictly to be a travel partner. If you want to add to the conference's footprint and get a hold of a big market, Houston or Rice are the choice. And they could loosely fit the "travel partner" designation for TCU at five hours apart.

mattsarz Wrote:

ejmpalle Wrote:The MWC will look to Texas to get TCU a travel partner, IMO. UTEP, SMU, Tulsa and Rice are on the radar. N Texas could also be an option, but unlikely. UTEP is probably largest on the radar.

How far do two schools have to be to considered travel partners? The PAC-10 has five sets of travel partners, and only the distance between UW and WSU is more than 90 minutes of driving (its 4.5 hours).

UTEP and TCU are almost nine hours apart in driving distance. That doesn't scream travel partner to me. If they consider UTEP, it has to be to get a foot into El Paso.

SMU would be an obvious travel partner if you add a team strictly to be a travel partner. If you want to add to the conference's footprint and get a hold of a big market, Houston or Rice are the choice. And they could loosely fit the "travel partner" designation for TCU at five hours apart.

I agree. The reason that UTEP is on the radar, is because they have past history with the MWC. If UTEP could ever gain control of its bowl game, then they become even more attractive to moving on to another conference, given the right offer. I see SMU being a better fit than any other school, except for, maybe Rice. Rice would certainly help the MWC not be such an awfull baseball conference.

But all of this is assuming the MWC can make themselves more attractive than C-USA. Given that C-USA still has ties to ESPN, I don't think they can.

ejmpalle Wrote:

mattsarz Wrote:

ejmpalle Wrote:The MWC will look to Texas to get TCU a travel partner, IMO. UTEP, SMU, Tulsa and Rice are on the radar. N Texas could also be an option, but unlikely. UTEP is probably largest on the radar.

How far do two schools have to be to considered travel partners? The PAC-10 has five sets of travel partners, and only the distance between UW and WSU is more than 90 minutes of driving (its 4.5 hours).

UTEP and TCU are almost nine hours apart in driving distance. That doesn't scream travel partner to me. If they consider UTEP, it has to be to get a foot into El Paso.

SMU would be an obvious travel partner if you add a team strictly to be a travel partner. If you want to add to the conference's footprint and get a hold of a big market, Houston or Rice are the choice. And they could loosely fit the "travel partner" designation for TCU at five hours apart.

I agree. The reason that UTEP is on the radar, is because they have past history with the MWC. If UTEP could ever gain control of its bowl game, then they become even more attractive to moving on to another conference, given the right offer. I see SMU being a better fit than any other school, except for, maybe Rice. Rice would certainly help the MWC not be such an awfull baseball conference.

But all of this is assuming the MWC can make themselves more attractive than C-USA. Given that C-USA still has ties to ESPN, I don't think they can.

Utep may be on the Radar but not Rice or SMU. nothing wrong with those fine schools but I just don't see it happening again and I doubt they would go anyway without each other. I do agree that the WAC loses one ,at the most, to the MWC if we go to 10. That 1 will be Boise or Nevada. Zero loss to the WAC if the Utep thing happens. I wouldn not lose sleep over the MWC expandiong and really hurting the WAC.

Worst case scenario is a CUSA Memphis or ECU loss to the BE, then LA Tech to the CUSA and a Boise/Nevada move to the MWC.. That one would hurt a little but you only need to add one to be fine.

I agree ejm. C-USA has a contract with ESPN for 10 games in football and 10 games in basketball. They'll also be on CSTV a lot.

Is it better for UTEP to stay with ESPN and CSTV? Or will they be better off with CSTV and the mtn?

I don't think the "history" thing matters much to UTEP. The ties were severed 7 years ago already. Just like with Hawaii, there will be kids entering UH and UTEP as freshmen that have no clue that the MWC teams were even in the WAC at one time...and they probably wouldn't care anyway..

It's all about "now" and the "future". And the future looks pretty good for the WAC and C-USA.

I, too, believe the next round of changes will start in the east with the Big East. One thing is for sure, the Pac 10 will never invite Fresno. To say otherwise is to ignore the culture out here on the left coast. Utah is a possibility if they can justify a rival/travel partner. Pac 10 would look at Colorado or Hawai'i. Same statement holds for a potential invite to BYU. Won't happen. The WAC should definitely continue to pursue SDSU and UNLV for both geographic and rivalry reasons. The Chancellor of the CSU system could make that happen since he is on record as favoring all three CSU schools in the same conference.

In reality, I believe the Big 10/11 will ultimately invite Missouri as a travel partner with Iowa. That is where BYU may get the call- as a replacement in the Big 12 for Missouri.

Except for UNLV and SDSU, this is a time for the WAC to sit tight and await the changes that will start with the Big east. Let's be opportunistic.

Am I the only one that thinks that Houston, and not UTEP/Rice/SMU will be who the MWC looks to take to balance out TCU?

WAC_FAN Wrote:Am I the only one that thinks that Houston, and not UTEP/Rice/SMU will be who the MWC looks to take to balance out TCU?

I don't disagree, but both Rice and Houston struggle to receive support because Houston isn't much of a college town. Hope over to the C-USA board and UH and Rice supporters readily acknowledge that.

Am I the only one who thinks this is a waste of time?

I am serious about this. The MWC may never again expand. Yes they have said that they are keeping their options open, but they (or any other league) will not do it without a reason. There would have to be a significant monetary incentive for them to do it. Travel may be a reason, but they didn't see a 9 team league as such a huge detriment when they invited TCU. They knew that a 9 team league would make basketball scheduling a little harder, but they didn't see a need to invite 2 teams.

Anyways that is my rant. If travel was the only consideration for expansion then there are a few candidates. Houston, Rice, SMU, UTEP, and Tulsa would all be targeted. No offense to any of those schools, but I don't think that they are being actively pursued. (And there is no guarantee that they would come.)

My guess is (gasp) Tulsa. They have a traditionally strong hoops team, their football team has improved and they would provide exposure in Oklahoma. I don't know whether they would ever even consider the move, but I could see either them, Houston, or UTEP as teams that become very valuable to a conference. All 3 are committed to improving all areas of their athletic programs, and they are all in TX/OK area.

But it ain't happening for a long time if it does happen. This the only time I will chime in on this for the summer.

StanfordAggie Wrote:This is highly unlikely on a number of levels. Aside from the comments that others have made, here are my thoughts:

First, I keep hearing over and over again that all the BCS conferences will expand to 12 teams, and I don't understand the logic behind this assertion. Given that the BCS system was created in order to ensure that the current BCS members receive a disproportionate share of the revenue in college football, they have zero incentive to expand further. There is no reason that the BCS conferences would suddenly decide to expand to 12 teams. (As erda pointed out, the PAC-10 would probably leave the BCS under this scenario.)

A football championship game would not be sufficient to motivate the BCS conferences to expand, incidentally. The last I read, the SEC is the only conference that makes enough from its football championship game to justify expanding to 12 teams. The Big 12 and the ACC don't earn enough revenue from their championship games to offset the costs of having to share their revenue with another school. And if a conference like the Big 12 isn't earning a huge payday from its championship game, I strongly doubt that the PAC-10 or the Big East would do much better.

Regarding the specific scenarios that you suggested, I can probably assure you that the PAC-10 will never add Fresno State. Again, no offense to any Fresno fans, but the PAC-10 takes pride in the fact that all of its member institutions are strong research schools. I can't imagine that Stanford or Cal or UCLA would agree to add a CSU school to the PAC-10. If the PAC-10 were forced to expand, I agree that Utah would probably be on the short list, but I think they would try to get Texas or Colorado long before they would invite Utah.

Similarly, the Big 10 takes a great deal of pride in being the top academic conference in the country (other than maybe the Ivy League), and they aren't going to add anyone that would hurt that reputation. Frankly, I doubt they will ever add anyone as long as there is a chance that they could get Notre Dame. If they did, however, you can just about rest assured that it won't be West Virginia or Iowa State. The only viable expansion candidates that fit the Big 10's academic profile that I can think of are Rutgers and possibly Pitt. If those are the best options available, I think the Big 10 probably doesn't expand.

It would be difficult to agree too much with this post, as it covers all the salient points. The only thing I can add is a bit of elaboration on a few items.

First, many people have it in their minds that the BcS is going to somehow force the Pac-10 to add 2 teams. The conference will tell the BcS to take a flying leap and recreate the traditional Rose Bowl setup with the Big-10 before they allow anyone to dictate their membership. Won't happen, least of all with a Cal State school. To the Pac-10, they're nothing but glorified community colleges. As much as BYU is anathema for the Pac-10, if it ever came down to adding BYU or a CSU school, the presidents would hold their noses and call Provo.

By way of additional comments on the Big-10, anyone who hasn't lived in Big-10 country has no clue as to the way that conference views itself. The Big-10 is as much of an academic consortium as it is an athletic conference. Any future member, other than Notre Dame, will need to be a member of the Association of American Universities to even have a chance to be considered (and ND is working hard to receive an AAU invite). Even then that may not be enough. It's my understanding that Missouri, an AAU member, has contacted the Big-10 about possibly joining some day, only to receive a firm rebuff. The school simply isn't considered good enough to be in the Big-10.

The one point are where I would disagree with StanfordAggie is Iowa State, which would probably be the top candidate, if Notre Dame weren't in the mix. It's got a great geographic, academic and rival fit and would result in the cleanest possible division split (Central vs. Eastern time). I have no way of knowing if the Cyclones will ever get an invite, just that I'd put my money on them if the Big-10 did expand and gave up on Notre Dame. I do agree that Rutgers, Pitt and possibly Syracuse would be the only other schools with the right academic pedigree to receive any consideration.