Since football is the straw that stirs the drink for money distribution to conferences / schools, why would there be a need for whole schools to change conferences when football teams can just schedule best revenue games wherever available?

What am I missing? I mean why couldn't some of the body bag games be swapped for something someone would actually want to watch.

I get that a team struggling for 6 wins for bowl eligibility might not want to schedule Ohio State or Alabama every year, but why not have Wisconsin play Miami/FSU or Penn State play Texas A&M type games more regularly? That would seem to bring in more money to conferences than 2-3 "glorified scrimmages".

Would the 12 team CFP made this a more realistic scenario? So if a school loses a game or two they still have chance to make hay in CFP?

If Notre Dame ever agrees to come as a full member in football, the Big Ten takes them, end of story.

From a personal standpoint, I'd like to see Pittsburgh as a Big Ten team. From a financial standpoint, I know it doesn't make much sense (or CENTS).

I'd like to see the Big Ten expand their geographical standpoint, especially southward since that seems to be where the US population is headed. Virginia/North Carolina looks like the "battleground" when the ACC's GOR expires. Part of me would like UVa/UNC/Duke in the Big Ten to have more Eastern/Southeast teams in the Big Ten and improve Big Ten men's basketball and part of me would like the ACC to remain a top conference as well. What I absolutely don't want to see is that other conference add to their arsenal and become even stronger and we become an afterthought.

Excellent points! With the sheer size of B1G alumni, IMO we'll always be 1 / 1A or close enough for ratings, fiscally soundness, on mission, etc. I'm not a believer that more or the most schools in a conference is a good thing or should be the goal at all.

We'll see how things hold up over time in regards to all these schools jumping around; I liked that we waited 19 years before any additional moves after Penn State to let things settle. I think NIL and portal will have a significant impact and should be better understood in relation to conferences and schools fit prior to reorganizing.

To coin the phrase addition by subtraction (in this case, just not adding any more teams and staying put) might be the best long-term strategy.

I agree with you and would like to see the ACC stay relevant. I do think that Duke will drop substantially after Coach K leaves, as he's the end of an Era; reference UNC as they never hit full stride again as perennial Final Four favorite after Dean Smith.

You'd think people worked for the Bursar's offices with trying to use finances as a scoreboard. I think a particular network started this and is milking it for all it's worth.

(02-27-2022 02:40 PM)Strut Wrote:  I agree with you and would like to see the ACC stay relevant. I do think that Duke will drop substantially after Coach K leaves, as he's the end of an Era; reference UNC as they never hit full stride again as perennial Final Four favorite after Dean Smith.

They won THREE national championships under Roy Williams, that's one more than they did under Dean Smith.

(02-27-2022 04:31 PM)schmolik Wrote:  

(02-27-2022 02:40 PM)Strut Wrote:  I agree with you and would like to see the ACC stay relevant. I do think that Duke will drop substantially after Coach K leaves, as he's the end of an Era; reference UNC as they never hit full stride again as perennial Final Four favorite after Dean Smith.

They won THREE national championships under Roy Williams, that's one more than they did under Dean Smith.

Touche!

Big Ten should add: ND, Pitt, Syracuse and BC.

(03-04-2022 02:19 PM)curtis0620 Wrote:  Big Ten should add: ND, Pitt, Syracuse and BC.

At this point we should seriously consider candidates who share our values and not those that root for the dirty sports of the other side. The COP/C need to come to reality and stop allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good.

Adding ND would certainly be a strong addition and certainly be welcomed in a 15, 16, 18, 20, or 21 member Big 10.

I’d say your potential supporting cast comes from the ranks of UVA, UNC, Duke, GT, Miami, Pitt, and Kansas. All but Miami are AAU.

21 is an intriguing size for me as you could go to 3 divisions of 7.

I've really been in shock about my message being ignored and B1G adding schools anyway. Imagine that

I'm on record that I didn't think it's necessary and preferably would not add any schools at all to B1G! Having said that I'm for keeping USC and UCLA as new B1G adds, mainly because they've been my favorite teams to go against in Rose Bowl and now we'll have mini "Rose Bowls" multiple times a year!

I've seen the various schools people are suggesting, but I think we should think bigger : )

Florida and Georgia.

I've brought this up a little on the realignment forum.

But basically, B10 should invite them before the SEC's new deal kicks in in 2024.

The question is, would money, academic prestige, etc., be enough to leave behind a conference that you've been in for awhile and thus, schools you've been playing for awhile.

With all the changes going on in College sports, I think the answer to that could very well be a "yes".

There are apparently rumours that the Big10 is already negotiating for florida state (so is SEC apparently). So that's in the mix as well.

And of course, ND.

I could easily see the Big10 going for those 4 schools. going to 20 (10 times 2 : )

But other than those, I kinda agree, all these suggestions to add a bunch of schools, just to add them... I dunno.

I guess we'll see.