Hold on college football fans...a whole lotta shakin goin on

[May Day 10]

this is terrible IMO.

[Joe Miner]

I don't know.....according to local radio here its not looking good at all, they say the big ten believes it already has the St. Louis market with Illinois, and now Nebraska has given them the KC market. They are sadly mistaken if they think Illinois gives them the Stl market.....Saint Louis is almost purely Mizzou people with a few Illini sprinkled in.

 

I don't think I've heard any non-speculative stories saying that the Big 10 no longer wants MU.

 

It's speculation from the media based on the fact they've heard rumors that Nebraska is leaving, and haven't heard any about MU yet.

 

No rumors = MU not leaving = MU not invited = MU not wanted.

 

MU was given a deadline of Friday by the Big 12 to decide. The Big 10's official offer won't come until MU basically jumps ship and commits. The Big 10 doesn't want an official offer out there to possibly be rejected. MU isn't as big of a name in football as Nebraska, so they really don't have the balls to jump without a Nebraska safety net. Once Nebraska makes it official, MU will likely follow.

 

No matter what rumors are swirling around, I'm pretty sure that the Big 10 knows that Illinois doesn't pull in a large % of the St. Louis market. They want St. Louis, a portion of KC, and mostly the rest of MO, and will take MU whenever MU grows a pair and jumps ship.

 

They're even dumber if they think Nebraska gives them any significant portion of the KC market.

 

KC market:

1) KU

2) MU

3) K-State

...

...

...

way down the list) Nebraska

[Aplusfool]

I agree with this 100% you are going to soon have 16 teams in 1 conference. THe college football season is only 12 games, which means all the teams in that conference will not play each other, so what is the point of having a power conference if all teams dont play each other and you cant find out who is better than who.

 

The NFL is a 16 week season but has 32 teams. They could have 2 divisions as an example. I kinda like it.

[bbb]

Why can't UB make a move up? Top 50 TV market...largest state U in New York...AAU member school...many alums in the NYC area. Lacking in facilities and athletic tradition but certainly not any worse than a USF or ECU or Memphis.

 

PTR

 

One scenario is the ACC going to 16 and picking up Lousiville, Cincy and UB (I'm sure because of the TV market)

[Ramius]

I actually just got out here to K-state for a conference/workshop, and all the buzz on the local news and papers is that if things break down in the Big 12, KU and K-State are a package deal to either the Big East, or possibly the Mountain West, with the Mountain West making a push to be a BCS conference.

[sullim4]

I think something like this would work for the Big 10 if they expanded to 16 (and the Big East fell apart):

 

East:

Penn State

Ohio State

Michigan

Michigan State

Indiana

Purdue

Notre Dame

Rutgers OR Syracuse (depending on whether they value FB or BB more)

 

West:

Wisconsin

Iowa

Minnesota

Nebraska

Missouri

Illinois

Northwestern

One other Big 12 team. Kansas?

[DarthICE]

Whatever happens OU, Texas and OSU (OK STATE) Will all go together.

[Lv-Bills]

I think something like this would work for the Big 10 if they expanded to 16 (and the Big East fell apart):

 

East:

Penn State

Ohio State

Michigan

Michigan State

Indiana

Purdue

Notre Dame

Rutgers OR Syracuse (depending on whether they value FB or BB more)

 

West:

Wisconsin

Iowa

Minnesota

Nebraska

Missouri

Illinois

Northwestern

One other Big 12 team. Kansas?

If there is any kind of crossover play or conference championship game, there is no way in the world Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State and Notre Dame would be in the same division. They would not want those teams finishing 1-4 every year. Plus, your western division is horrible.

 

I also don't think Syracuse would be in the picture here either. Pittsburgh would be a great fit in the Big Ten and would give the Big Ten most of PA's market solidly along with a Penn State - Pitt rivalry game. Pitt will get strong consideration if the Big Ten goes to 16.

[Ramius]

Yeah, except that would essentially be going to tell yourself to go !@#$ itself. Try learning how the NCAA is set up and governed. The NCAA is corrupt? Whatever. You have no clue, just like many of the writers, talking heads and bloggers who have you brainwashed. Greedy? The NCAA just signed an 11.8 billion dollar with Turner Sports and CBS. Guess where more than 96 percent of that money goes to? More than 1,000 NCAA-members institutions. It helps schools you've never heard of, sports that aren't on your television and student-athletes who are, indeed, students.

 

The NCAA is one of the most arrogant, corrupt institutions that there is. Their sole purpose is to exploit the student athlete to make as much money off of them as possible.

[sullim4]

If there is any kind of crossover play or conference championship game, there is no way in the world Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State and Notre Dame would be in the same division. They would not want those teams finishing 1-4 every year. Plus, your western division is horrible.

 

I also don't think Syracuse would be in the picture here either. Pittsburgh would be a great fit in the Big Ten and would give the Big Ten most of PA's market solidly along with a Penn State - Pitt rivalry game. Pitt will get strong consideration if the Big Ten goes to 16.

 

Rutgers would get them the NYC market, that's why I included them. Pitt overlaps a lot of the PSU market anyway, I'm not sure what that would get them beyond what you mentioned.

 

I don't see how you can have Michigan, Michigan St, Ohio State, Penn State, and Notre Dame in different divisions. There will be mandates to see these teams play each other every year - ND already plays UM and MSU every year, UM plays all 4 most years, so does MSU. Ohio State and PSU are the eastern most teams in the conference now - you can't stick them in a division with Nebraska and Missouri. While it might not matter for football and basketball, it will matter for smaller sports where you have athletes that focus more on the academic side of things and less on athletics.

 

Of course, this all goes out the window if they somehow weasel Texas to join them instead of bolting for the Pac 10.

[Cynical]

Yeah, except that would essentially be going to tell yourself to go !@#$ itself. Try learning how the NCAA is set up and governed. The NCAA is corrupt? Whatever. You have no clue, just like many of the writers, talking heads and bloggers who have you brainwashed. Greedy? The NCAA just signed an 11.8 billion dollar with Turner Sports and CBS. Guess where more than 96 percent of that money goes to? More than 1,000 NCAA-members institutions. It helps schools you've never heard of, sports that aren't on your television and student-athletes who are, indeed, students.

 

Get a clue yourself. Feel free to explain how an organization that gets to write the rules, interpret the rules, and can choose to ignore it's own rules is NOT corrupt.

[eball]

What? As a Mizzou allumn I take offense to that....Missouri is a great school academically.

I'm starting to believe the other guy.

[Thoner7]

Why doesnt the Big 12 just add a school? Nebraska is not the power it once was, and in todays day and age going to the Big 10 is a downgrade IMO. (Football at least)

 

But why would the Big 12 fall apart? Just add two teams and be the Big 12. Loosing Colorado is almost a blessing to the Big 12, try like hell to add ND, that prob wont work but there are hundreds of schools that could join that conference. Add TCU, BYU, New Mexico, Loisville, UTah, or Houston - all of those teams are just as good as Colorado has been recently, and would be fine additions to the conference in football at least. They would all die for the opportunity too.

[Indy Dave]

Get a clue yourself. Feel free to explain how an organization that gets to write the rules, interpret the rules, and can choose to ignore it's own rules is NOT corrupt.

 

You have it all figured out. That's exactly how it happens. You too, Ramius. Carry on.

[Cynical]

You have it all figured out. That's exactly how it happens. You too, Ramius. Carry on.

 

When Bama got slapped with sanctions back in the early part of the decade, the NCAA admitted to violating it's own rules and regulations in regards to the investigation of Alabama and the student athlete involved. When Alabama appealed the decision citing said admission of rule and regulation violations, the NCAA appeals board (shockingly) said tough nuts.

 

The NCAA wrote the rules, the NCAA interpreted the rules, and the NCAA chose to ignore their own rules.

 

So, yes, that is "exactly how it happens."

 

And if the NCAA truly gave a crap about the student-athletes, why are they only allowing juniors and seniors to transfer from USC (and out of the conference) without penalty?

 

Why not remove all restrictions, and let all the student athletes impacted transfer without penalty?

Edited June 11, 2010 by Cynical

[Indy Dave]

This article has facts, not excuses

 

As to your other question, I can only guess that juniors and seniors can transfer without sitting out because of the postseason ban. Others have time to either transfer (and sit out a year) or stick it out at USC and eventually play in the postseason (towards the end of their collegiate career). As for transferring within the league, that is a Pac-10 rule, not an NCAA rule. Like all of these decisions, they are made by committees made up exclusively of adminstrators from NCAA member schools. So if SC, or your Tide, has issues with the penalties, their beef is with their peers. Or you know, they could avoid all of this by not blatantly cheating.

 

When Bama got slapped with sanctions back in the early part of the decade, the NCAA admitted to violating it's own rules and regulations in regards to the investigation of Alabama and the student athlete involved. When Alabama appealed the decision citing said admission of rule and regulation violations, the NCAA appeals board (shockingly) said tough nuts.

 

The NCAA wrote the rules, the NCAA interpreted the rules, and the NCAA chose to ignore their own rules.

 

So, yes, that is "exactly how it happens."

 

And if the NCAA truly gave a crap about the student-athletes, why are they only allowing juniors and seniors to transfer from USC (and out of the conference) without penalty?

 

Why not remove all restrictions, and let all the student athletes impacted transfer without penalty?

[timstep]

One theory is that the moving and shaking is to prep for what will end up being four super conferences of about 60 teams, and this is where it gets interesting:

 

These 60 teams will leave the NCAA.

 

Sound ridiculous?

 

They can easily leave and form their own organization, call it the College Football Alliance, with it's own governing body. Trust me, these teams see that they are the money makers, and sharing revenue among fewer schools while instituting a playoff system would increase that even more. They know the frenzy caused by the basketball tournament, and want to tap into that.

[mob16151]

I can't comment on this. I still miss the old Southwestern Conference.

[BobbyC81]

This whole thing sucks in my opinion. I went to Purdue, I am a Big Ten guy, and this blows big time. The Big 12 was a good conference, and now the Big Ten has started a mess. Texas in the Pac-10 doesn't even make freakin' sense.

 

Nebraska to the Big 10 (12). Colorado to the Pac-10 (Soon to be Pac-16). More (crap) to come.

 

 

I agree. Traditions are being sacrificed again for the almighty dollar. So, when they figure out who goes to what bowl games, will it be the Pac 16's 15th team vs the Big 14's 13th place team??

[Cynical]

This article has facts, not excuses

 

 

Seriously, you do not have a clue if you believe that article discusses all the facts pertaining to what happened from 1993 onward.

 

It does not even come close.

 

Do you know what Langham did to become ineligible?

Do you know what steps the University took in attempt to verify Langham's eligibility?

 

Bama's probationary period was scheduled to run out on 1997. Means graduated from HS in 1999.

How did Bama get listed as repeat offenders, and get put into position of '"looking down a gun barrel" at the death penalty' if the probation period ended? (Hint: It didn't. The probation was extended in 1997.)

 

Did you know the Tennessee HC Phil Fulmer was the NCAA secret witness that testified against Bama?

 

How come the University of Kentucky got slapped with a one year bowl ban and 3 years of probation, yet Tennessee, UGA, Memphis, and Arkansas got nothing? (It was revealed that at least 3 coaching staffs were directly involved in trying acquire Means)

 

How does a HC know who is and who is not involved from other schools?