College Shake-Up - First Shot Is Fired
#1 Guest_95 Z Out_*
Posted 10 June 2010 - 12:53 PM
Texas, Texas A&M and Texas Tech say they are pledging solidarity and will all three be in the same conference, whatever that may be.
Pac-10 may be looking at Texas, A&M, Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahomas State and Colorado as targets for expansion, making a 16-team super conference. Colorado gets the nod over Baylor beacuse of the Denver TV market. Where does that leave Kansas, K-State, Iowa State, Missouri and Baylor?
Do the ACC, SEC and Big East stand pat, or do they start looking at expansion or realignment? Does the Big Ten target more schools?
What happens to the "mid-major" football conferences (MAC, C-USA, WAC, Mountain West and Sun Belt)? And what about Notre Dame (and the other independents, Army and Navy)?
This could be a very interesting couple of years for college football fans.
#2 Guest_95 Z Out_*
Posted 10 June 2010 - 01:14 PM
#3
Posted 10 June 2010 - 01:25 PM
#4 Guest_95 Z Out_*
Posted 10 June 2010 - 02:53 PM
#5
Posted 10 June 2010 - 05:27 PM
#6
Posted 11 June 2010 - 05:33 PM
#7
Posted 12 June 2010 - 12:24 PM
I say the Big Ten might add two more schools and change their name to The Big Conference.
East Division
Penn St
Ohio St
Michigan
Michigan St
Indiana
Purdue
Possible adds: Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers, or Maryland
West Division
Nebraska
Iowa
Minnesota
Wisconsin
Northwestern
Illinois
Possible adds: Notre Dame (Staying an independent is about pride and tradition anymore not money. All of the schools in the Big Ten make more money on their tv deals then ND does with their deal with NBC.)
I think Missouri is out of the picture now.
#8
Posted 12 June 2010 - 08:17 PM
What exactly does nebraska bring to the table? they have not did anything for quite some time in football. they have nothing in basketball or baseball and are located out in BFE where it is harder now to recruit. i just do not see this as a good move for the big ten. 10 years ago, maybe, but not now.
here are there finishes since being the powerhouse back in the early 90's.
2009 10-4 #14
2008 9-4 NR
2007 5-7 NR
2006 9-5 NR
2005 8-4 #24
2004 5-6 NR
2003 10-3 #18
2002 7-7 NR
2001 11-2 #7
2000 10-2 #7
1999 12-1 #2
1998 9-4 #19
1997 13-0 #2
1996 11-2 #6
1995 12-0 #1
1994 13-0 #1
1993 11-1 #3
Edited by labatts69, 12 June 2010 - 08:21 PM.
Fantasy Baseball -RCBL
#9 Guest_95 Z Out_*
Posted 15 June 2010 - 07:33 AM
#10
Posted 15 June 2010 - 08:57 AM
#11 Guest_95 Z Out_*
Posted 16 June 2010 - 01:14 PM
The buzz about conference realignment has quieted for now, but look for more in the coming months or years. There is too much money at stake for too many schools for there not to be more moves.
#13
Posted 20 June 2010 - 10:29 PM
no kidding
even in their worst decade they have the 3rd highest win percentage in the big 10 over that same time frame. Only the Bucks are higher and Wisconsin is a hair above them for the 2nd spot.
#14
Posted 21 June 2010 - 12:13 AM
2 To say Nebraska brings nothing in baseball is wrong. In the 2000s, the current group of Big Ten teams have made exactly ZERO College World Series appearances. In fact, you have to go back to Michigan in 1984 to find the last time the Big Ten was represented in Omaha. Nebraska has 3 appearances in the last 10 years alone. 2001, 2002, 2005. Sure they may not have the history, and they still aren't a powerhouse. But unless you expand all the way west to California or go south, you aren't getting a powerhouse. They'll fit nicely in a bunch of sports. And although they aren't the powerhouse in football they used to be, I expect them to come in and be one of the top 3 or 4 teams yearly right away. They add a bunch to the conference. Were there better options? Probably. Could the Big Ten really afford to wait on those options, just to be rejected(like they probably would have)? I don't think so. Nebraska is a nationally respected program and wanted to move. I say it was a great move.
Edited by dhsdawg06, 21 June 2010 - 12:15 AM.
#15
Posted 22 June 2010 - 02:35 PM
2009 10-4 #14
2008 9-4 NR
2007 5-7 NR
2006 9-5 NR
2005 8-4 #24
2004 5-6 NR
2003 10-3 #18
2002 7-7 NR
I see 5 years of NR=No Rating. They have not been in the top 10 in how many years? Not the powerhouse they once were. Look at their schedule also. They have not beaten a ranked team in the regular season since #24 Texas A&M back in 06-07. They only play on average 3 ranked opponents during regular season over those years. The most being 5 in '02 and 1 in '04. Sorry, didn't dig into bowl games but could if I get the time later.
Fantasy Baseball -RCBL
#16
Posted 23 June 2010 - 08:55 AM
2008 9-4 NR
2007 5-7 NR
2006 9-5 NR
2005 8-4 #24
2004 5-6 NR
2003 10-3 #18
2002 7-7 NR
I see 5 years of NR=No Rating. They have not been in the top 10 in how many years? Not the powerhouse they once were. Look at their schedule also. They have not beaten a ranked team in the regular season since #24 Texas A&M back in 06-07. They only play on average 3 ranked opponents during regular season over those years. The most being 5 in '02 and 1 in '04. Sorry, didn't dig into bowl games but could if I get the time later.
They're not the powerhouse they once were. But how many decades in a row can you win 10-13 games every year before you slip up? Take out the nightmarish 4 seasons with that former Raiders coach and they're back on their 9-10 wins a season. Again if you look at the last decade Nebraska is basically tied for 2nd in the Big 10 in winning %. Even with as down as they've been recently. Their football team is even more valuable than the Buckeyes according to forbes.
If you don't think they bring anything to the table you should be asking everyone in the Big 10 except the Bucks to leave the table.
#17
Posted 23 June 2010 - 11:26 AM
If you don't think they bring anything to the table you should be asking everyone in the Big 10 except the Bucks to leave the table.
please go back to the initial post to where it was said they bring alot to the table and I responded. I post stats that argue the other way clearly. I am not saying either way that it was a good or bad move to add them I was simply saying that as of the past decade or so they are not bringing all that much. Winning % doesn't mean that much if you can only beat mediocre teams and not win against quality ranked opponents as I also had stats to prove that.
Fantasy Baseball -RCBL
#18
Posted 23 June 2010 - 12:34 PM
ok i went back and read it again. again it's still not very accurate.
I can only think of two teams that would make me and every other Big 10 fan happier and that is ND or Texas. And neither are an option. And even then Nebraska profits more than ND as far as football goes.
Money. Lots of it.
A national following and brand name.
A team that will make the conference better and will probably be among the top teams in the conference yearly.
What defines anything? National titles? Bowl wins? 8-9-10 win seasons? I mentioned earlier they've won enough games in the last decade to be 2nd out of Big 10 teams. If they haven't done anything then 10 other members haven't done anything either.
Yeah the hoops team is nothing. You're wrong in baseball as theyve had 3 trips to the CWS in the last 9-10 seasons. Wrestling is very good. Girls basketball and volleyball will be among the best. Let's not kid each other though. None of this even matters. Football is the prize.
I don't know what you're talking about here. The Buckeyes, Penn State, Michigan, and now Nebraska are big enough names to recruit nationally. There won't be anything hard about going anywhere in the country and landing good prospects.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users