Here's a great article from the Omaha World-Herald with some great behind the scenes details on how Nebraska moving to the Big Ten came to be: http://www.omaha.com/article/20100830/BIGRED/708309872
Printable View
Here's a great article from the Omaha World-Herald with some great behind the scenes details on how Nebraska moving to the Big Ten came to be: http://www.omaha.com/article/20100830/BIGRED/708309872
Ohio State and Michigan reportedly getting split up in the new Big Ten
The rest of the article can be read at: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5519832Quote:
The Big Ten will announce its much-anticipated, two six-team divisional setup for the 2011-12 season later Wednesday, with traditional football powers Ohio State and Michigan in opposing divisions and new member Nebraska aligned with the Wolverines.
Multiple sources told ESPN.com that the two divisions in the Big Ten will look like:
• Michigan, Nebraska, Iowa, Michigan State, Northwestern and Minnesota.
• And Ohio State, Penn State, Wisconsin, Purdue, Indiana and Illinois.
The Big Ten issued a press release saying it would announce its divisional alignment at 7 p.m. ET Wednesday. According to sources, the divisions were decided upon Monday.
Colorado to join Pac-10 in 2011, not 2012: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5601601
In sort-of-related news, University of Denver is seeking to join the WAC. http://denver.sbnation.com/2010/9/20...wac-conference
There are also rumors that at least eight other schools will make presentations to the WAC.
Let the speculation begin (again)....
After Temple beat UConn, I wonder if the Big East will try to add them back.
Please WAC, please take Denver... they are the worst fit team for the Sun Belt and it would balance out our conference schedules.
Denver in the WAC makes no sense ... at least not for the WAC. Bring a school that has no football and is primarily a hockey power into a football-driven conference with no hockey.
Pac-12 divisions were announced today during an official news conference:
North Division: Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, Stanford, Washington, Washington State
South Division: Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, UCLA, USC, Utah
Title game will be played at home site of team with best overall conference record.
Wow, that's pretty interesting. Looks like some pretty big rivalries might go unplayed now or spread out quite a bit (Cal vs USC, Stanford vs UCLA, UCLA vs Cal, etc).
I believe they voted to keep the rivalries: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5711336
I like the idea of a home game for the Title game because it means the fans will go crazy. The SEC might have it best since it always has a neutral site that all the fans will travel to but I hate that they play in a dome on fake grass. The ACC has shown how not to do a title game.
It's an interesting choice. Most people perceive that CCGs are supposed to be "neutral site", but I guess we'll see what the reaction is.
What'll be interesting is if, for example, Cal plays at USC during the season, then they meet in the CCG and it's Cal @ USC. Rematches in the CCG are one thing ... rematches at the same site will be very interesting in terms of public perception.
That has massive, massive recruiting implications. Very interesting.Quote:
But the conference did vote to keep the historic California rivalries. The Bay Area schools have played the Los Angeles schools every year since 1946 in rivalries that started long before that. Cal and Stanford will each play UCLA and USC every year in football.
The other cross-divisional games in the nine-game conference schedule will rotate, with the Oregon and Washington schools most likely playing in Los Angeles every other year as opposed to the current annual trips.
Yup. The rich get richer in the Pac-12 conference.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
So, now we know who holds all the cards in the Pac-12 (and it's certainly not the teams that have kept that shitty conference a float in the wake of the USC scandal).
The Big East is looking to expand: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/s...r_espn_5756898
I hear they are interested in the Buffalo Bills.
HWill - :D
Villanova and UCF are the two early names that seem likely. I'm not sure either help the conference, but they make some sense.
Why would TCU join that conference and deal with all that travel? They should just push the Big 12 to boot Iowa St and try to join the Big 12/10-2.
Personally I think the biggest problem the Big East faces is a lack of great teams and how it leads to a weak strength of schedule. Same goes for the MWC. Both of those conferences shouldn't expand anymore unless you get a good team. Adding teams like Villanova or Temple will not improve the Big East at all. Those two conferences should actually keep the same members and just sign a pact to have crossover games every year between the top teams. Keep an open date and have the Top 4 teams play the Top 4 teams from each conference in September. ie. #1 vs. #1, #2 vs. #2, etc. That way if TCU wins the MWC they would play the Big East champion (Pitt) in an occ game, Boise could play Syracuse, and so on. That would help the conference champions overcome the weakened strength of schedule in the BCS without diluting the conference talent levels to where they become even more crappy.
TCU would have to be pretty stupid to go to the Big East for football-only. The MWC has all the momentum right now to get an automatic spot in the BCS in the next few years. The MWC is, I believe, perceived as a better conference. And if you went to the Big East for football-only, you'd be asking for death for your basketball program.
Plus you add the uncertain future of the Big East (since it was perceived as the Big Ten's #1 target), and I wouldn't think the grass looks very green.
The Big East is in serious, serious trouble as a conference. Even if it expands, no major programme will go there. Moving up some FCS teams (as most rumours speculate) will do nothing to improve conference prestige/strength.
TCU apparently is quite interested in coming to the Big East. Hopefully they can get Houston to come with them as I don't see them being able to do anything with only 10 teams. 12 is the minimum for a successful expansion (hopefully that includes UCF as well).
The Big East is still poaching ground. If I'm TCU I try to stay put and get in an expanded Big 12 down the road. Right now I have no idea what the conferences will look like 5 years from now. How aggressive the Big 10 is in expanding further or the SEC, PAC 12 to go beyond 12 teams will have a huge impact.
I think TCU's leaders would be smart enough to know that the Big 12 adding TCU would be unlikely at best. There's no incentive for the Big 12 to do so.
I would disagree about that Jeff. I know everyone looks at how it wouldn't add a new TV market but TCU is a top notch program. Losing Nebraska hurt and adding TCU would help. What's to stop the Big 12 from booting Iowa St and adding TCU to strengthen the conference and not have to share any extra money with people? Everyone is looking to expand but I wonder if some conferences may look to contract or replace in the future. When the top few football teams are bringing in the money, the shared revenue model will be under greater scrutiny if you want to expand or change.
In the situation where I could still believe that perception (of the strength of your conference) was part of the equation, and not just money, I'd agree with you. The only way I could see the Big 12 adding TCU is if TCU starts consistently outperforming the Big 12 champion. If TCU actually looked stronger, and had a better chance at BCS/MNC, than anybody in the Big 12 -- then the Big 12 would be interested. But while Texas holds all the cards in the conference, I just can't see it. Because it's really not just about whether or not TCU is strong -- the Big 12 has to believe that TCU would be strong against Big 12 competition.
Obviously it's possible that they would kick out Iowa State and add TCU. But, when you look at the money line ... they'd lose Iowa and gain nothing.
But TCU would add bowl money to the equation since Iowa St. blows. I know it wouldn't add any extra TV sets in Texas but I have to think a Texas-TCU matchup would generate greater TV revenue nation wide than Texas-Iowa St. It would certainly get more national viewers and the big conferences are largely dependent on their national TV deals. The Big 10 makes a lot of money with the BTN but ABC's TV money is still their money maker. The Big 12 losing Nebraska really hurt. I think they would benefit from adding another strong team.
I remember hearing an analyst state that if Congress ever forced the big schools to do some playoff they hated or shared more money that they would even consider leaving the NCAA and creating their own organization with schools of their choice and not share any money at all. I know that's extreme but I think these schools are willing to look at anything in terms of generating revenue. We might hate the things they do but the almighty football dollar drives everything.
It's just a shame that a few of these smaller schools have built up really good programs and could easily be considered a quality BCS team but can't get in a BCS conference. Utah is in the PAC 10 now but Boise St and TCU have shown themselves to be worthy of joining a BCS conference. I think it would be a much easier solution to just find a spot for those two teams in a BCS conference and give themselves a shot at the title as opposed to some of the crazy playoff scenarios out there.
I still hope/believe that the MWC will be a BCS conference sooner rather than later. I hate that Utah and BYU leaving may have negatively influenced that, but I think the MWC deserves to be a BCS conference.
I may have to stop dissing Iowa St. Nebraska just escaped yesterday.
Iowa State has been tough lately, and did beat Nebraska on the road last year. I wonder if that fake PAT was a parting gift for us :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Rudy
Link
The Utah State Aggies are getting new neighbors as the Western Athletic Conference moved Thursday to ensure its long-term survival — just not the ones they might have wanted most.
While the WAC added Texas State, Texas-San Antonio and Denver to its ranks starting in 2012 to make up for the pending loss of Boise State, Fresno State and Nevada to the Mountain West Conference, it learned Thursday that cherished target Montana has rejected overtures and decided not to move up to the Football Bowl Subdivision.
“I’ll have to admit, we were expecting that the University of Montana would be part of the WAC,” league commissioner Karl Benson said.
But with the Grizzlies planning to stay in the lower-level Big Sky Conference, the WAC might eventually invite Seattle University in all sports except football — which is how Denver is joining the league, since it doesn’t have a football team and doesn’t plan to create one.
Only Texas State and Texas-San Antonio are bringing football teams to the WAC.
But Benson said the WAC will continue to look for other prospective new members, in addition to Seattle, though he did not name any. Ideally, he said, the league would include nine teams in football and 10 in all other sports.
“We still have options, and we still have time,” he said.
Barring other additions, the new-look WAC figures to feature eight teams in football and nine in men’s and women’s basketball, starting in 2012-13.
Its three new schools will join San Jose State, New Mexico State, Idaho, Louisiana Tech, Hawaii and the Aggies in a conference that has survived seemingly constant upheaval during the last 15 years. It’s possible, though, the new football team from Texas-San Antonio might not play a full league schedule until 2013.
The Roadrunners don’t play their first season until next fall under former Miami coach Larry Coker, and both they and Texas State plan to move to the Football Bowl Subdivision level from the lower-level Southland Conference in 2012.
Denver will join from the Sun Belt Conference.
“I’ve said often that when schools join the WAC, they get better,” Benson said. “And over the past 10 years, we have a track record to prove it.”
The Aggies praised the expansion, even though they soon will have to travel farther for some of their conference road games.
Football coach Gary Andersen noted the opportunity to increase recruiting in Texas, while men’s basketball coach Stew Morrill said “the new additions will prove they belong” and make the WAC stronger.
“These programs have the right plan and have committed resources in place to back them up and be successful in the WAC,” athletic director Scott Barnes said. “Collectively, their academic and athletic success is impressive.”
It'll be pretty cool to see some new smaller schools in the video game to try to build up to powerhouses :nod:
Last time they added a new school (WKU) we had the roster editing glitch where after X teams had edits, the game would soft freeze. Just saying. :PQuote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
Well maybe one of the entries in the tournament (full customizable conferences) along with their catching of that bug this time around will be in the game.....Quote:
Originally Posted by cdj
Texas State, Texas-San Antonio, Denver and Seattle?
Bye, bye, WAC.
My initial reaction as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
At least LA Tech will be able to play a team "relatively" close now. Travel is gonna suck even harder for Hawaii though.
Woot! A worthy opponent in the Big East again!
I wouldn't actually be saying there are no worthy opponents in the Big East when WVU only goes 4-2 in conference play, with UConn about to be your Big East champion if they beat South Florida. Though I am still not sure if I agree with this. Adding TCU is going to make for some long ass trips. TCU to everyone, Syracuse/Rutgers/UConn the farthest out of everyone there now in trips to TCU, etc. It's a good pickup football team wise. I don't know enough about TCU's other sports to know if it's a good move. Travel-wise, I'm more convinced that it's a bad move in those regards.Quote:
Originally Posted by morsdraconis
And poor Boise State. You go from the WAC to WAC Jr. With TCU leaving for the Big East, Utah bailing for the Pac 10, BYU going indy, basically all Boise State is doing is trading some WAC bottom feeders for some MWC bottom feeders with Nevada/Fresno tagging along from the WAC and Air Force and San Diego State making some decent opponents.
Uhhhhhhhhhh a fairly legit rumor going around that Miami is fielding some interest in joining the Pac 10.... :D
I said this on Twitter....the NCAA should just rename all the conferences after colors. Or just numbers. The One Conference, The Two Conference, The Gray Conference....
No truth on this apparently (thank god).Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers
How about this way instead? http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...ce_realignmentQuote:
Originally Posted by JBHuskers