Big 10 expansion talk heating up

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Since Notre Dame keeps itself off the table, Missouri and Pitt are supposedly the top two candidates. Pitt has pretty good football and basketball teams, but the size of the market isn't as big as Missouri. Barring Notre Dame from doing a 180 and joining the Big 10, Missouri is probably the top target.

Why would Missouri leave the Big 12?

The only plausible reason I've heard is that the University of Texas is blocking the formation of a Big 12 Network because it has some TV deal with the Texas cable system(s) where they get to keep all of the money. The Big 10 has a successful TV network and averages the biggest ratings of any conference. Also, Missouri also realizes that it will always get its ass kicked in any Big 12 title game by Oklahoma or Texas. They probably have a better shot at reaching a BCS bowl game in the Big 10.

Geographically, Missouri also makes more sense than Pitt. A Big 10 West would include Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Iowa and Missouri. Pitt screws up the balance. The Big 10 East would be MSU, Michigan, Ohio State, Pitt, Penn State and probably Wisconsin (which doesn't really fit and Wisconsin has a rivalry with Minnesota). Since Illinois and Indiana are both two team states, they couldn't be part of the Big 10 East if Pitt joined.

[Donuthole]

Big 12 here we come!

[SeattleUte]

Since Notre Dame keeps itself off the table, Missouri and Pitt are supposedly the top two candidates. Pitt has pretty good football and basketball teams, but the size of the market isn't as big as Missouri. Barring Notre Dame from doing a 180 and joining the Big 10, Missouri is probably the top target.

Why would Missouri leave the Big 12?

The only plausible reason I've heard is that the University of Texas is blocking the formation of a Big 12 Network because it has some TV deal with the Texas cable system(s) where they get to keep all of the money. The Big 10 has a successful TV network and averages the biggest ratings of any conference. Also, Missouri also realizes that it will always get its ass kicked in any Big 12 title game by Oklahoma or Texas. They probably have a better shot at reaching a BCS bowl game in the Big 10.

Geographically, Missouri also makes more sense than Pitt. A Big 10 West would include Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Northwestern, Iowa and Missouri. Pitt screws up the balance. The Big 10 East would be MSU, Michigan, Ohio State, Pitt, Penn State and probably Wisconsin (which doesn't really fit and Wisconsin has a rivalry with Minnesota). Since Illinois and Indiana are both two team states, they couldn't be part of the Big 10 East if Pitt joined.

The Big 10 is a better conference. Missouri should go.

Maybe this is BYU's big break. I've never pictured the Utes in the Big 12.

[beefytee]

Why would Missouri leave the Big 12?

The Big 10 is a much more stable and history rich conference. Even if it has been down the last few years, they still seem to get 2 teams into the BCS most years.

Delany has done a pretty good job of keeping the Big 10 relevant.

[TripletDaddy]

Where is the expansion talk heating up (besides here on the message board)?

[SteelBlue]

Where is the expansion talk heating up (besides here on the message board)?

It's all coming from the Barry Alvarez quote last week. I've seen it reported on ESPN and otherwise only online.

[Babs]

This thread cracks me up. Couldn't we just post a link to the equivalent thread from the year before (and the year before, and the year before) to much the same effect?

[LiveCoug]

The Pittsburgh market isn't as big as the Mizzou market? Columbia market is tiny. If you are including the St. Louis market, then that's about the same size as Pitt.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Where is the expansion talk heating up (besides here on the message board)?

"The Big Ten Conference will actively explore the possibility of expansion in the next 12-18 months, according to a statement released Tuesday from the league's Council of Presidents/Chancellors."

[ame="http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=4745381"]Big Ten to explore possibility of expansion in next 12 to 18 months - ESPN@@AMEPARAM@@http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=4745869@@AMEPARAM@@4745869[/ame]

[Color Me Badd Fan]

It's all coming from the Barry Alvarez quote last week. I've seen it reported on ESPN and otherwise only online.

Look below, the league commissioner has made a public statement to the effect and it was released today. It isn't merely hopeful CB-esque banter.

It is possible that they're throwing around the possibility of adding Pitt, Syracuse or Missouri as a means of trying see where Notre Dame stands. Perhaps, they'll just do this year after year if ND continues to become increasingly irrelevant. ND has to realize that once the Big 10 actually expands to 12, it will only have the choice between remaining independent or joining the Big East.

[TripletDaddy]

"The Big Ten Conference will actively explore the possibility of expansion in the next 12-18 months, according to a statement released Tuesday from the league's Council of Presidents/Chancellors."

Big Ten to explore possibility of expansion in next 12 to 18 months - ESPN

Hmm...

well, I asked for some evidence. That counts.

Talks: start your engines!

[SteelBlue]

http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_...n-came-calling

Missouri says they would listen to a big 10 offer.

[Babs]

The Big 10 is a much more stable and history rich conference. Even if it has been down the last few years, they still seem to get 2 teams into the BCS most years.

This post is so ill-informed. The Big 12 has had more BCS title appearances than any other conference, and only the Pac 10 (which has the fewest) has a higher winning percentage than the Big 12 in title games. The Big 12 has a better overall BCS record than the Big 10.

More significantly, the Big 12 claims more AP/Coaches/BCS national championships than any other conference.

[woot]

This post is so ill-informed. The Big 12 has had more BCS title appearances than any other conference, and only the Pac 10 (which has the fewest) has a higher winning percentage than the Big 12 in title games. The Big 12 has a better overall BCS record than the Big 10.

More significantly, the Big 12 claims more AP/Coaches/BCS national championships than any other conference.

You're refuting the Big 10's better history by citing BCS appearances? There is no way you're actually arguing that the Big 12 is as good as the Big 10 historically, right?

[TripletDaddy]

This post is so ill-informed. The Big 12 has had more BCS title appearances than any other conference, and only the Pac 10 (which has the fewest) has a higher winning percentage than the Big 12 in title games. The Big 12 has a better overall BCS record than the Big 10; and the Big 12 claims more AP/Coaches national championships than any other conference.

I think you mean football championships.

The Big 12 does not claim more overall collegiate national championships, does it?