There are good arguments both ways on whether the Big Ten should have expanded to the east coast. What is done is done, Rutgers and Maryland are coming and they are good schools who will contribute. Their fans should feel welcomed into the conference.

At the same time though, no fan of existing school should feel they need to blindly accept decisions of the conference leaders as good and it shouldn't be considered a slight at Maryland and Rutgers fans if others disagree with the Big Ten going to the east coast.

I personally think the Big Ten remaining at 10 would have been a mistake going forward (even though it is what I would have wanted), but also think the conference should have remained Midwestern (outside of Penn State who was close enough and big enough to be an exception)). I understand the reasons both for and against expansion to the east coast, but I think what is very undervalued right is the regional pull of conferences. The SEC gets tremendous support from fans throughout the south for no other reason than it's seen as the conference that represents the south. By lessening regional identity, you reduce conference pride and reasons to care beyond your own team.

Again there are good arguments both ways, but I don't think there was a definitive argument either direction.

(08-30-2013 11:36 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Unfortunately that has happened, the Rose Bowl has a very limited lifespan and we very rarely played a PAC team in it anymore anyways. It is what it is.

Could not disagree more on this. It's slowly loosing its position, but it's a long way from a limited lifetime. Since the BCS went to 5 games, the Rose Bowl has been Big Ten vs. PAC-10/12 I believe everytime (although not both champions often enough).

Going forward, it and the Sugar Bowl will seem like the two biggest bowls by far. Two out of three years, the Rose Bowl will be Big Ten vs. PAC-12. In the third year, it will be a semi-final and seem bigger as that's the only time semi-finals will be on New Years Day. Besides that, I bet the committee tries to get Big Ten/PAC-12 teams there.

(09-01-2013 03:45 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Going forward, it and the Sugar Bowl will seem like the two biggest bowls by far. Two out of three years, the Rose Bowl will be Big Ten vs. PAC-12. In the third year, it will be a semi-final and seem bigger as that's the only time semi-finals will be on New Years Day. Besides that, I bet the committee tries to get Big Ten/PAC-12 teams there.

I think that's right.

The BCS system downgraded the big ol' bowls, since just every once in a while being the location at which the championship game is played a week later is much less of a big deal than being the game where a Big Ten and/or PAC-8/10 makes its final claim to the old polls based National Championship.

Being the route to the NCG one year in three is similar to the frequency of the Rose Bowl having a say in the National Championship before the BCS system was ever launched. So rather than being a further step down, its a step partway back toward the status it once held.

Not all the way back, since obviously two years in three the best teams in both the Big Ten and Pac-12 will be aiming higher than the Rose Bowl ...

... but, still, partway back.

(08-26-2013 08:00 PM)Blackhawk-eye Wrote:  

(08-26-2013 01:00 PM)brista21 Wrote:  

(08-25-2013 03:39 PM)Blackhawk-eye Wrote:  Future Members: Don't care

You're still stuck with us...

Not this year.

I'm going to enjoy this final year of the real Big Ten.

For me the final year of the real Big Ten was 1992. Everything since has been a farce of the name.

Congrats to chrisRU on his perfect 14-0 picks! I'm bringing up the rear at 12-2.

(09-03-2013 10:07 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Congrats to chrisRU on his perfect 14-0 picks! I'm bringing up the rear at 12-2.

I was so close with my Rutgers pick.