BIG ? to add UNC and possibly UVA or Gtech?

[Groin_pull]

I still think there's a very solid argument to be made that the Big Ten is the 2nd best football conference.

Not if you're going by on-field performance. It's clearly the SEC on top...followed by the Big XII...and the Pac-12.

But as I've learned today, all that matters is cash. So the Big 10 is king.

[keefe]

UNC, VA, GT are flagship state schools with large alumni bases and high academic profiles.

Perfect for Big???.

Still doesn't explain Northwestern.

NU replaced Chicago back in the day. I would have to look it up but Chicago is still some sort of member of the Big 10. Not likely they'll bring back their football program but they could field a nasty College Bowl squad.

[mu03eng]

If it happened before, why cant they form a new association with the same exemptions...

Congress has to approve the tax exempt status.

Because the number of schools that would be left out and by extension their fanbases would be a significant number of people with congress on speed dial.  These schools' alumni would include a bunch of Harvard, Georgetown, Yale, etc grads that are currently running our country and wouldn't want their schools left out.

Probably most importantly, once people realize how much money the government COULD be making if there was no exemption, that would become a huge talking point and kill any chance of it happening.  

[Pakuni]

Raleigh market. Does have a pro team. (NHL)

SEC doesn't want Clemson has South Carolina.
SEC doesn't want FSU or Miami, has Florida.
SEC doesn't want GT, has Georgia.

SEC would like VT.

Is that you, Mike Slive?
So then will the SEC be booting Auburn (has Alabama), Vandy (has Tennessee) and Mississippi State (has Mississippi)?
The Miami market and the Florida market have little crossover. Ditto for Georgia and Tech.

The Raleigh market is deeply fractured.

[LAZER]

Not if you're going by on-field performance. It's clearly the SEC on top...followed by the Big XII...and the Pac-12.

But as I've learned today, all that matters is cash. So the Big 10 is king.

I still think the Big 10 is equal, if not better than the Big 12 and Pac on the field.  They will definitely be better than the Big 12 moving forward.

[Pakuni]

I still think the Big 10 is equal, if not better than the Big 12 and Pac on the field.  They will definitely be better than the Big 12 moving forward.

Because of the additions of Rutgers and Maryland????

[klyrish]

Duke did go to a bowl game this season.

Didn't just about every school?

[LAZER]

Because of the additions of Rutgers and Maryland????

I was thinking more long term the effects of A&M, Mizzou, and Nebraska leaving will take a toll on the conference as a whole.  But you do bring up a good point I didn't consider with Maryland and Rutgers (and possibly others) watering down the Big Ten.

[Groin_pull]

I still think the Big 10 is equal, if not better than the Big 12 and Pac on the field.  They will definitely be better than the Big 12 moving forward.

And I think the Big 10 is barely the fourth best football conference. Looks like we've reached a stalemate.

[jficke13]

Can't we all just agree that the Big ? is just the worst thing to happen to college athletics?

[LAZER]

And I think the Big 10 is barely the fourth best football conference. Looks like we've reached a stalemate.

But someone has to win!

[humanlung]

What does everyone think about picking up Wake if the ACC falls apart?  Not Duke by a long shot but a basketball focus with a decent history.

[LAZER]

Can't we all just agree that the Big ? is just the worst thing to happen to college athletics?

That I can agree on.

[TJ]

The big ten is struggling...on the field, and from a "perceived toughness" standpoint. Certainly not financially. If you think the big ten hasn't been struggling the last four years on the field, you haven't been paying attention. Things are certainly looking up, now.

UNC was really good for a couple years, you're right. And then what happened? Oh yeah, they had to blow up the program because of Butch Davis' cheating/scandal.

They've been saying for months in many Big Ten-affiliated newspapers that UNC and/or UVA would be the next shoes to drop, especially UVA because of it's strong ties (from its leaders) to the Big Ten (Michigan and OSU ties, I think).

Who is arguing against the points you made here?  What we did say was that none of what you are saying matters, because all that matters is money and the Big Teen has more of it than anyone else.

[TJ]

So money is all that matters...and the on-field product is a complete afterthought? Good to know.

What in the last decade would lead you to believe otherwise?

[TJ]

No, money is not the only measure that matters.

In terms of conference alignment, it is.

[bradley center bat]

Is that you, Mike Slive?
So then will the SEC be booting Auburn (has Alabama), Vandy (has Tennessee) and Mississippi State (has Mississippi)?
The Miami market and the Florida market have little crossover. Ditto for Georgia and Tech.

The Raleigh market is deeply fractured.

That's what insiders from the SEC have said.

Georgia already has the Atlanta market. No need for GT.

[frozena pizza]

Can't we all just agree that the Big ? is just the worst thing to happen to college athletics?

The ACC started this mess.  I would love to see them be the next victims of new mentality they created.  UVa and UNC to the Big Ten would make a lot sense for those schools and the B1G but would suck for the ACC.

[Pakuni]

In terms of conference alignment, it is.

Super, but that's not what he said.

[tower912]

What does everyone think about picking up Wake if the ACC falls apart?  Not Duke by a long shot but a basketball focus with a decent history.

Other than they have to drop football first, I would take them.  

[MU82]

I think you're getting a bit carried away here. Actually, a lot carried away. Sure, money is hugely important, and it's better to be turning big profits than not.
But I doubt you'll find many Iowa fans crowing over the football team's revenues.
Purdue fans aren't consoling themselves over the team's 12-14 record with the knowledge that the Big 10 Network is making money.
Illinois donors aren't so thrilled with the conference's bottom line that they're tripping over one another to donate to their alma mater.
Nobody will ever buy a T-shirt declaring their chosen team "NCAA Sports Revenue Champions."
Nobody will ever buy season tickets to see the athletic department bean counters go over revenue figures.

No, money is not the only measure that matters.
Which of UNC's recent 8-5 seasons is the one in which they "won big?"
And was that big eight-win season (and trip to the esteemed Meincke Car Care Bowl) worth landing on probation?

What Iowa or Purdue or Illinois fans think is irrelevant as far as the eventual formation of superconferences go. If there's one thing we've learned these last few years of conference-go-round hijinx it is this: IT IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY!

As for UNC winning big, I misspoke. For some reason, I thought their double-digit-win seasons had been more recent but they were 96 and 97. Still, it's not unreasonable to believe that had Mack Brown stayed -- or had they followed him with better leadership -- they could have done more winning.

One of the fun things about sports is that bad programs can become good programs with the right leadership. I should have stated that point more clearly.

Every conference would love to have a university of UNC's caliber. There's a reason the B1G keeps going after them hard.

[frozena pizza]

Still, it's not unreasonable to believe that had Mack Brown stayed -- or had they followed him with better leadership -- they could have done more winning.

A lot of Texas fans would be happy to give him back.

[keefe]

IIRC UNC can't go anywhere without NC State

That is not a legal matter though it may be political. The Virginia General Assembly threatened all sorts of mayhem if VT were not part of the move to the ACC. There is nothing legal linking UNC and NCSU conference affiliation but the politicians might be troublesome as they were in VA.

[Niv Berkowitz]

Because of the additions of Rutgers and Maryland????

Because OSU and Michigan are back from their 4 years of averageness. Because of Meyer and Hoke. Because you have a Nebraska team that's also very solid.

The conference may not be as deep top to bottom, but it will be like the 70s/80s again over the next few years w/UM and OSU running the place.

[keefe]

 These schools' alumni would include a bunch of Harvard, Georgetown, Yale, etc grads that are currently running our country and wouldn't want their schools left out.

Why is Georgetown on this list? Other than Clinton there are not a lot of Georgetown grads "running this country." It is a fine school but will never be elite