Conference Realignment Observation

[Enhance]

I've been spending a lot of time floating around Tigerboard and netbuffs, just to see what they've been saying about the expansion talk.

 

Tigerboard is arguably the most affluent board in the Big 12 as far as Big 10 expansion talk is concerned. Over the last week, multiple topics get started over there talking about who should get an invite, who shouldn't, and what kind of money can be made. But, I wonder if this has more to do with something else...

 

Missouri, much like the rest of the Big 12 North, feels relatively frail in comparison to the South. Nebraska is putting the fight back, but the South is still better (imho) team for team in most cases. Does anybody get the feeling that fans from Missouri and Colorado want to be picked up by another conference just so they can win more games? Here's why I say this, and I'll use a scenario as an example.

 

Let's say that in the last decade Missouri had won a couple of B12 titles, been in the Top 15 consistently, and even gone to a title game. Would any of them care about going to the Big 10 as much? Would they want to risk the football success in exchange for better academics and more revenue? I really don't think they would. To me, I get the slight impression that going to the Big 10 would make their trip to becoming an elite football program easier, but that using the revenue and academics tag-lines is their cover for it.

 

That's the impression I get, at least. If they had been really successful in the last decade, why would they want to change conferences? It would put that all to risk.

 

Correct me if I'm off base here, guys.

[GSG]

I don't know about winning more games, I think it's just all about the $$$$. The Pac 10 isn't going to be any easier for CU IMO. And we've seen that Missouri can be beaten by teams similar to the Big 10 (Navy - run the ball, milk the clock, play D). It seems Missouri just wants a bigger slice of a pie that they aren't helping to bake.

 

As far as academics are considered, I don't believe any of that crap. That's all just perception based on the fact that they have older schools with more alumni. More alumni means greater chance of them being successful and in position to shepherd kids from their schools into inflated salaries and positions of athority.

[Judoka]

....here's my two cents.

 

In regards to the expansion in general, I think the cohesiveness of the Big XII hinges on perception and trust.

The perception is that Texas is given a louder voice than the rest of the conference and in our view took over the conference. I'm not sure if there is any validity to this, but this seems to be the common thought. With that, how do other member schools trust Texas to look out for the Big XII as a whole? From my view, they seem to be in the Big XII out of convenience.

 

To your point on a more successful Missouri program. I would disagree. In that kind of scenario If you're having that kind of success why not take your ball to a different conference for more money and prestige? I don't think winning would be as big of a factor. They would want to be part of what they consider "elite".

 

As to Colorado...given the state of their program, I think they might be looking for a change of scenery. They would be a non-player in a revised PAC-10.

 

In the end, it will all be about money...and the spin that is put on obtaining it.

[fro daddy]

I dont think it has anything to do with "winning more". I think its all about the benjamins. We are talking about 10-11 million more a year. For the most part MU has been winning the vast majority of their big12 games since the program starting really getting better. Yes they have no beat OU or TX and have not won a conference title. But i dont think being about to compete in conference is even an issue. If you sit down and think about it, MU would probably do about the same. They are not quite good enough to be elite and beat elite teams. they are better than most, but not the best. SO that really doesnt change regardless of your conference. If MU cant beat OU or TX they probably cant beat OSU either.

 

I do think there is some love to the idea of the BIG 10 for sports other than football though. Outside of KU, there is not really a big 12 north school that cares for BB like MU. KSU over the past 3 years, but its still no like MU. I think the perception is that the big10 is more of a BB conference as well.

 

The acadimics deal is just for the admins to brag about. the money is the main player in this. I think MU brings a better all around athletic program than most of the other canidates. SO that is a plus to MU. But I personally believe that there is going to be a major shift of teams leaving the BIG12. And I think NE and MU end up in the BIG10 when its all done. I just think MU is saying, "are we any worse off"? if not, then why not take the money?

[bbeerma2]

I dont think it has anything to do with "winning more". I think its all about the benjamins. We are talking about 10-11 million more a year. For the most part MU has been winning the vast majority of their big12 games since the program starting really getting better. Yes they have no beat OU or TX and have not won a conference title. But i dont think being about to compete in conference is even an issue. If you sit down and think about it, MU would probably do about the same. They are not quite good enough to be elite and beat elite teams. they are better than most, but not the best. SO that really doesnt change regardless of your conference. If MU cant beat OU or TX they probably cant beat OSU either.

 

I do think there is some love to the idea of the BIG 10 for sports other than football though. Outside of KU, there is not really a big 12 north school that cares for BB like MU. KSU over the past 3 years, but its still no like MU. I think the perception is that the big10 is more of a BB conference as well.

 

The acadimics deal is just for the admins to brag about. the money is the main player in this. I think MU brings a better all around athletic program than most of the other canidates. SO that is a plus to MU. But I personally believe that there is going to be a major shift of teams leaving the BIG12. And I think NE and MU end up in the BIG10 when its all done. I just think MU is saying, "are we any worse off"? if not, then why not take the money?

 

Are you kidding Fro?

 

If you look at the year-end AP Polls for the 2000s

 

Basketball

Big Ten vs. Big Twelve

#1 - 2 #1 - 1

#2 - 1 #2 - 2

#3 - 1 #3 - 2

#4 - 1 #4 - 2

#5 - 1 #5 - 1

#6 - 3 #6 - 3

#7 - 0 #7 - 3

#8 - 2 #8 - 0

#9 - 0 #9 - 3

#10 - 2 #10 - 1

#11 - 1 #11 - 1

#12 - 0 #12 - 5

#13 - 4 #13 - 1

#14 - 1 #14 - 2

#15 - 2 #15 - 1

#16 - 1 #16 - 1

#17 - 1 #17 - 1

#18 - 1 #18 - 1

#19 - 0 #19 - 0

#20 - 3 #20 - 1

#21 - 2 #21 - 0

#22 - 1 #22 - 0

#23 - 0 #23 - 1

#24 - 1 #24 - 3

#25 - 2 #25 - 0

Top 5

6 vs. 8

Top 10

13 vs. 18

Top 15

21 vs. 28

Top 25

33 vs. 36

 

Football

Big Ten vs. Big Twelve

#1 - 1 #1 - 2

#2 - 1 #2 - 1

#3 - 1 #3 - 2

#4 - 2 #4 - 2

#5 - 2 #5 - 4

#6 - 1 #6 - 2

#7 - 2 #7 - 2

#8 - 6 #8 - 3

#9 - 3 #9 - 2

#10 - 0 #10 - 1

#11 - 1 #11 - 1

#12 - 1 #12 - 3

#13 - 1 #13 - 1

#14 - 1 #14 - 2

#15 - 1 #15 - 0

#16 - 2 #16 - 1

#17 - 1 #17 - 0

#18 - 2 #18 - 1

#19 - 0 #19 - 2

#20 - 5 #20 - 2

#21 - 0 #21 - 1

#22 - 0 #22 - 2

#23 - 1 #23 - 0

#24 - 3 #24 - 1

#25 - 0 #25 - 1

 

Top 5

7 vs. 11

Top 10

19 vs. 21

Top 15

24 vs. 28

Top 25

38 vs. 39

 

In both sports, the Big 12 seems to trump the Big Ten in terms of rankings. Regardless, the numbers of appearances in the final polls are somewhat similar, so they are no more of a basketball conference than the Big 12. They are a very comparable conference in general in most sports. I think the big difference would be that they rarely field top baseball teams, yet dominate in hockey. This is not a great fit for any Big 12 school. They do, however, give us a comparable level of competition in volleyball. Watching the volleyball team on Big Ten Network will be quite nice.

[NoKoolAidForME]

People love to talk about the voice that Texas is given. Lets not forget the rest of Big 12's history. Texas had backing from the rest of it old mates whereas NU got turned on by all the rest of the Big 8. The Big 8 had no problem seeing changes because they could not compete against NU. They gave in on the scholarship rule, money distribution, and the title game. None of the Big 8 members stood with NU on any issue during the alignment. It was like we cant beat them so we will screw them. All these other school seeking to move besides NU are just looking for a payday. If you can be like Purdue, Northwestern, and Illinois and have big time payday without winning or fans at your games then why not. Texas has at least that right; they keep what they earn.