Replacing Oregon with Virginia Tech and upgrading Bowling Green to Oregon State does not give one a tough schedule. Instead of one opponent with a pulse they now have two...I'm so impressed.
-
Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .
College Football 2009
- Thread starter Kraznaya
- Start date
Replacing Oregon with Virginia Tech and upgrading Bowling Green to Oregon State does not give one a tough schedule. Instead of one opponent with a pulse they now have two...I'm so impressed.
Our OCC is Marshall and Miami. Kinda hard to judge.
But OSU also is going to play 2 other top 15 teams in Penn State and Iowa, and at least two other top 25 teams in conference play. Miami was in the top 10 last year, and Marshall ought to win 7 games.
Ohio State's schedule is more than respectable. If they weren't going to play anybody good in conference play, then they should find bigger fish in the OCC...which coincidentally, is exactly what OSU did.
I remember in the preseason lots of people were lolwuting Navy. Navy finished #26 last year.
Wait! What? WHY??? I for one find this infinitely amusing.
I dislike RR far more than I dislike UM. Seeing him humiliated is worth more to me than continued laughing-stock seasons.
It looks like the Big Ten expansion process is moving up. The Chicago Tribune is reporting that a decision could come in the next few months as to which school(s) will be added (there could be up to 5).
If I had to pick the 5, assuming that Texas and ND were off the table, here would be my choices:
1. Nebraska
2. Kansas
3. Missouri
4. Rutgers
5. Connecticut (I realize they are not AAU, but they meet the standards and bring a lot more to the table than Syracuse).
If I had to pick the 5, assuming that Texas and ND were off the table, here would be my choices:
1. Nebraska
2. Kansas
3. Missouri
4. Rutgers
5. Connecticut (I realize they are not AAU, but they meet the standards and bring a lot more to the table than Syracuse).
And Rutgers will continue to be bad in the Big 10, but that's not the point of adding them (because someone has to lose!). The rationale behind Rutgers is that they justify the Big 10 getting tier 1 rates in Philadelphia (where it currently gets tier 2 despite Penn State), as Comcast argued that they also served much of New Jersey. In addition, combined with Connecticut they give the Big 10 leverage to get much better rates than before in NYC. I'm not sure if any combination of teams can actually 'deliver' that market, but Connecticut also brings value in the great basketball program (men's and women's to the network) as well as added exposure in the New England/New York market for the Big 10 teams.
These schools also fit the profile of a Big 10 university...a large state flagship university that receives the bulk of the research dollars for that state.
My issue with Pittsburgh is that while it is a great school athletically and academically it doesn't bring much any new market to the table. So I struggle to see how it will pull it's own wait money wise. The Big 10 network is already on tier 1 in Pittsburgh and if Pittsburgh really added that much more to the conference wouldn't they have been added a long time ago?
As for Syracuse, they look nice at a glance, but I feel there are serious issues with them. First, can they rebound as a football school. Let's face it, their facilities are horrible for football. So unless they will agree to build a completely new football stadium, there is no way I could agree with allowing them in. My second big issue with them is that they are a small (at least compared to most big 10 schools), private school. Third, they suck at research, seriously they really do, they recieve less funding than the powerhouse research institutions of the University of Dayton, the Desert Research Institute, and the University of Missouri...Rolla campus. They just don't fit in the Big 10. Honestly, it's a much better fit for the ACC then the big 10.
Kraznaya
Princeps
Will the 6 accept though?
Ohio State's president hints heavily that the Big 10 is targeting Texas (but have a Tech problem).
http://www.dispatch.com/live/conten...-big-ten-expansion-eyes-on-texas.html?sid=101
Having to play Tech probably.
Texas is big enough to justify having a third "state" school in the conference. If Oregon, Washington, and Arizona get two state schools, why shouldn't Oklahoma? Both schools have fielded competative teams. Tech is the only state school in Texas with both a law school and med school on its main campus. Maybe Cal wouldn't want to play Tech because of the mismatch in favor of Tech, but Tech probably wouldn't want to mix it up in a spelling bee or tree hugging contest with Cal.
Kraznaya
Princeps
Tech is to placate teh Texas State Legislature to bring in Texas, something the Big 10 is hesitant about doing. If the Pac-10 is willing to make the concession to let Tech in, they are a step ahead of the Big 10 in bringing in Texas.
OK State has T Boone Pickens and stuff. It's probably more manageable to bring them in than also make an invitation to Utah or something.
Honestly, I'd rather the Pac-10 grab only Texas and Colorado, but if the other 4 schools are concessions to bring the rest in, it's better than not bringing in anything at all.
The problem with Texas Tech isn't that three 'state' schools in one conference is a problem (especially if 2 public/2 private isn't a problem in Cali), it's that it doesn't meet the academic standard the conference has set. Right now there is only 1 tier 3 university in the Pac10, Oregon State. Adding Tech and OSU would give them two more. For the academic snobs at Stanford & Cal, that can be a tough pill to swallow.
It's the same problem the Big 10 would have with TT, they just aren't good enough academically to be aligned with the rest of the institutions. This is why you never even hear of Oklahoma being considered for membership, they aren't good enough academically (and they are tier 1 still!).
And honestly, even if Tech were not included in this expansion, it would do perfectly fine. It's a solid institution and would easily find a home in the Mountain West, where it would have a chance to shine and compete for a BCS bid every year. If the Texas Legislature was smart, they'd be trying their best to break apart Tech, A&M, as well as Texas. That way they could each succeed in their respective conferences instead of only having one in consideration for a conference championship every year.
On a side note, if this PAC16 comes about, the Big East would be smart to be preparing to break off the football schools from the basketball schools and inviting Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State and either Baylor or Memphis.
Fetus4188
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2004
- Messages
- 3,629
Oklahoma State, I believe, comes in at 4th all time in NCAA team titles with 40 something (top 3 being UCLA, Stanford, and USC), so yeah, they probably would fit in the conference of champions.
Maybe they should join the Ivy League if they are academic snobs. It's an athletic conference and in the money sport, Tech has never had a losing record in Big 12 play and kicked Cal up one side of the field and down the other when they faced on the field.
I really don't see what you are so upset about. You are on the list of 6, be thankful they didn't put Kansas or Utah on there instead of you. Stanford and Cal, despite your schools obvious academic shortcomings decided they were comfortable enough with your school to give you the invitation. Otherwise you'd be looking at being relegated to the Mountain West.
And also you have had a losing record in "Big 12 play", back in 2000 Mike Leach's first year, you went 3-5 in conference play. But one year of a losing record is nothing to be scoffed at over 14 years, it is an impressive feat.
I think that is going to happen, even if the next expansion phase doesn't result in major 16-team superconferences.
If it DOES though, I'd be a little surprised if the Big East makes it out alive as a BCS caliber conference. I'd imagine the SEC or ACC would try to steal West Virgina and Louisville away to get to 16. The Big Ten will want Rutgers, and maybe Pitt or Syracuse (and if everybody really is going to 16, the Big Ten will almost certainly get Notre Dame as well).
The Big East can grab Memphis, Kansas, UCF, etc...but then it won't be a top tier football conference.
Kraznaya
Princeps
I think the SEC has a great shot at taking Florida State, Miami, and maybe Georgia Tech and Clemson and eviscerate the ACC. The ACC might fall apart or 'move north' absorbing the Big East leftovers that the Big 10 didn't want.
Similar threads
