Conference Realignment

Status
Not open for further replies.
#351      
NEIlliniFan
ILL_INI said:
Oh, I must be ignorant, too. Please enlighten me on what research funding is tied to their athletic conference affiliation that they would be walking away from.

You would think Texas would have joined the Big Ten years ago to get a slice of the pie. The academia there probably spend too much time reading southern bloggers.
Click to expand...
Well, there's a lot more we as lay people don't know re research funding than we do know.

That being said, here's what can be found easily:
https://btaa.org/research

$10 billion/year is by far the most in the country
https://gradschool.umd.edu/admissio...-cic-membership/big-ten-cic-facts-and-figures

Note on that 2nd link what other two academic systems are listed and who isn't.

So, both Michigan & Ohio State would be walking away from the research funding structure provided by the B1G Academic Alliance. Yes, they could pursue research funding independently (and may well do some of that now). But I don't see the SEC being of much help in that area.
 
#352      
Calvin
Epsilon said:
Losing ScuM and tOSU would be big losses for the conference.
Click to expand...

+1 Having elite teams in the conference makes every game more worth watching. tOSU may beat up most of the other teams, but it's a good yardstick for everyone else. I hope Kevin Warren is up to the task. If everyone in the conference is looking at their own revenue figures, it's easy to lose site of what's best for the conference and the long term model.
 
#353      
gibb52
My dream scenario:

TAM is disgusted that they have to stomach UT again and really PO'd that the SEC went behind their back to do it. They jump to the B1G. That sends an EQ all over college athletics as the B1G has done the unheard of and poached a school from the SEC. UNC and UVA don't want to be left with scraps so they announce they are jumping to the B1G asap as well, and they convince Clemson and FSU to come too.

The B1G extends another invite to ND but ND does ND things and demands special treatment like they always do. For one last time the B1G extends a giant middle finger to the Domers and takes KU instead.

A 20 team mega conference that can stand toe to toe with the SEC and don't bother to ask who the premier BB conference is.

An added bonus is that ND is left scheduling MAC and Sun Belt teams along with the Academys.

What's your dream scenario?
 
#354      
Lincster27
NEIlliniFan said:
Well, there's a lot more we as lay people don't know re research funding than we do know.

That being said, here's what can be found easily:
https://btaa.org/research

$10 billion/year is by far the most in the country
https://gradschool.umd.edu/admissio...-cic-membership/big-ten-cic-facts-and-figures

Note on that 2nd link what other two academic systems are listed and who isn't.

So, both Michigan & Ohio State would be walking away from the research funding structure provided by the B1G Academic Alliance. Yes, they could pursue research funding independently (and may well do some of that now). But I don't see the SEC being of much help in that area.
Click to expand...
I have to believe that the $10.2 billion number is the sum of funded research across all of the institutions, and is not awarded/coordinated through the B1G. Clearly, there are initiatives that the Academic Alliance collaborates on, but I doubt that the conference itself is putting money into research on member campuses. The B1G membership includes several of the top research universities in the world, so it's not surprising that that the amount of research dollars reported by member institutions would be north of $10 billion. If the University of Ohio State, and Michigan University (h/t Kevin Warren) walk away from the B1G, their research opportunities would not be diminished in any way.
 
#355      
mattcoldagelli
Feel like it is worth pointing out the rather obvious fact that - much like independence for ND fans and alums - being the type of institution that would not chase football money to *the SEC* is a very significant part of the identity of Michigan fans and alumni.

(Again, Buckeyes are crazy, they would not have these hangups.)
 
#356      
gibb52
mattcoldagelli said:
Feel like it is worth pointing out the rather obvious fact that - much like independence for ND fans and alums - being the type of institution that would not chase football money to *the SEC* is a very significant part of the identity of Michigan fans and alumni.

(Again, Buckeyes are crazy, they would not have these hangups.)
Click to expand...
The Buckeyes are certainly delusional, I'm not convinced they are delusional enough to jump to the SEC. But I've been wrong before.
 
#357      
Calvin
The idea that the SEC could be its own division of football strikes me as hyperbole. There are way too many power teams outside the SEC. Just going back to 2000, you have national champs in Clemson, tOSU, Ok, USC, etc.

That said, SEC football is a religion.
 
#358      
ILL_INI
NEIlliniFan said:
Well, there's a lot more we as lay people don't know re research funding than we do know.

That being said, here's what can be found easily:
https://btaa.org/research

$10 billion/year is by far the most in the country
https://gradschool.umd.edu/admissio...-cic-membership/big-ten-cic-facts-and-figures

Note on that 2nd link what other two academic systems are listed and who isn't.

So, both Michigan & Ohio State would be walking away from the research funding structure provided by the B1G Academic Alliance. Yes, they could pursue research funding independently (and may well do some of that now). But I don't see the SEC being of much help in that area.
Click to expand...
You better contact the Vice Chancellor of Innovation and Research for the glaring omission of the BTAA.

Featured Funding Opportunities | Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research and Innovation (OVCRI)

research.illinois.edu research.illinois.edu

On your first link, do you think all of the books and faculty listed also came from the conference? On the second link, don't you think $10B is a little rich for what they show under research? Under the About section of the BTAA, you'd think that there would be a lot more about research.

The reply by @Lncster27 seemed much more reasoned than your guess. I'm sure a simple email to BTAA would clear everything up for you.
 
#359      
NEIlliniFan
ILL_INI said:
You better contact the Vice Chancellor of Innovation and Research for the glaring omission of the BTAA.

Featured Funding Opportunities | Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research and Innovation (OVCRI)

research.illinois.edu research.illinois.edu

On your first link, do you think all of the books and faculty listed also came from the conference? On the second link, don't you think $10B is a little rich for what they show under research? Under the About section of the BTAA, you'd think that there would be a lot more about research.

The reply by @Lncster27 seemed much more reasoned than your guess. I'm sure a simple email to BTAA would clear everything up for you.
Click to expand...
I don't care, one way or the other.

I merely provided links for others' perusal.

And pointed out the SEC isn't listed in the second link.

No more, no less
 
#361      
Serious Late
It feels like the SEC is exploring the possibility of a new "D1". Build out a 28-34 team league (or whatever it may end up looking like) and play exclusively amongst yourselves.

At a certain point, it doesn't make sense to go grab all the top schools and still pretend they are peers with the scraps left in other conferences. OSU and Michigan aren't leaving for the SEC, but I would be concerned if they were leaving for a beast of another nature.
 
#362      
Champaign Toast
Plenty of comments on how Kevin Warren will do the "wrong thing". I'm interested in responses to the question: what would Jim Delany do in response to the recent developments, were he still Big Ten commissioner?

Would he see that a potential move of Clemson and Florida State to the SEC requires a fight with fire against fire and signals the end of the ACC as we know it--and respond by luring USC, Stanford, Oregon, Duke, Georgia Tech, and Miami to craft a football giant to rival the SEC, a research behemoth to rival the Ivy League, and a geographic footprint without rival?

*Stanford vs Northwestern vs Duke would be a fun triangular battle of the prestigious private schools.

**The argument that the proposed 12-team college football playoff gives Notre Dame less incentive to join a conference is quite sensible. Winning a conference championship game will not be as important as a way to gain a playoff spot as in the 4-team playoff. So, ND might not have any hard feelings about this realignment fiasco. At the least, there are a lot of Big 12 teams looking for a non-conference game these days.
 
Last edited:
#363      
illini80
Champaign Toast said:
Plenty of comments on how Kevin Warren will do the "wrong thing". I'm interested in responses to the question: what would Jim Delany do in response to the recent developments, were he still Big Ten commissioner?

Would he see that a potential move of Clemson and Florida State to the SEC requires a fight with fire against fire and signals the end of the ACC as we know it--and respond by luring USC, Stanford, Oregon, Duke, Georgia Tech, and Miami to craft a football giant to rival the SEC, a research behemoth to rival the Ivy League, and a geographic footprint without rival?

*Stanford vs Northwestern vs Duke would be a fun triangular battle of the prestigious private schools.

**The argument that the proposed 12-team college football playoff gives Notre Dame less incentive to join a conference is quite sensible. Winning a conference championship game will not be as important as a way to gain a playoff spot as in the 4-team playoff. So, ND might not have any hard feelings about this realignment fiasco. At the least, there are a lot of Big 12 teams looking for a non-conference game these days.
Click to expand...
No idea how Delany would proceed. However, he had a very strong track record of making excellent long term decisions. Warren has a track record of short sighted, poorly thought out decisions. He hasn’t been there long enough to have any long term track record, but nothing he has done gives any confidence it will be a good one.
 
#365      
mattcoldagelli
Joel Goodson said:
($): https://theathletic.com/2729861/202...d-consider-raiding-its-old-friend-the-pac-12/

Good article. BIG raids Pac-12 and adds 6 of their schools: USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, Cal and Stanford. 4 5 team pods for football only. Food for thought, for sure.
Click to expand...
It's more plausible than I expected upon seeing the link.

I don't know what to make of the Pac-12 - they've obviously got deep roots and have been in a "we need to hang together mode" for some time, but I feel like as a conference they've made a few missteps (primarily around TV) and have some athletic departments that are scuffling.
 
#366      
TheChief4Life
Champaign Toast said:
The argument that the proposed 12-team college football playoff gives Notre Dame less incentive to join a conference is quite sensible. Winning a conference championship game will not be as important as a way to gain a playoff spot as in the 4-team playoff. So, ND might not have any hard feelings about this realignment fiasco. At the least, there are a lot of Big 12 teams looking for a non-conference game these days.
Click to expand...
I can't remember where I saw it, but I think I read that one of the proposals of going to a 12-team playoff actually made it harder for Notre Dame to get invited without a conference affiliation. Unfortunately, I don't remember where I saw that, and am too lazy to do research. I just want to fan flames. :)
 
#368      
TheChief4Life
mattcoldagelli said:
It's more plausible than I expected upon seeing the link.

I don't know what to make of the Pac-12 - they've obviously got deep roots and have been in a "we need to hang together mode" for some time, but I feel like as a conference they've made a few missteps (primarily around TV) and have some athletic departments that are scuffling.
Click to expand...
To me, the Pac-12 is the wildcard in all of this. If the Pac-12 cannot hold their conference together, then I think the door swings wide open for 20-team conferences. The ACC is in a better position to remain mostly intact, in my semi-educated opinion, so they aren't the grabbing grounds some of us on this thread are making them out to be.
 
#369      
altenberger22
Champaign Toast said:
Plenty of comments on how Kevin Warren will do the "wrong thing". I'm interested in responses to the question: what would Jim Delany do in response to the recent developments, were he still Big Ten commissioner?

Would he see that a potential move of Clemson and Florida State to the SEC requires a fight with fire against fire and signals the end of the ACC as we know it--and respond by luring USC, Stanford, Oregon, Duke, Georgia Tech, and Miami to craft a football giant to rival the SEC, a research behemoth to rival the Ivy League, and a geographic footprint without rival?

*Stanford vs Northwestern vs Duke would be a fun triangular battle of the prestigious private schools.

**The argument that the proposed 12-team college football playoff gives Notre Dame less incentive to join a conference is quite sensible. Winning a conference championship game will not be as important as a way to gain a playoff spot as in the 4-team playoff. So, ND might not have any hard feelings about this realignment fiasco. At the least, there are a lot of Big 12 teams looking for a non-conference game these days.
Click to expand...
It's amazing how we've now had nearly every "Big Ten" perspective shared over the past week. We're either (a) a research-driven conference, (b) a football-driven conference, (c) a basketball-driven conference, or of course (d) a money-driven conference.

Of all the notions thus far shared, I sort of like the idea of combatting the SEC's 20-team behemoth with the additions of UCLA, USC, Stanford, Duke, North Carolina and Virginia/Clemson! Ultimately, you'd have to believe we'd then simply out-think the SEC leadership! However, I do also think the geography and time zones would be somewhat difficult to overcome by attempting to stretch coast-to-coast. (Perhaps that's where Bezos, Branson and Musk come into play......)
 
#370      
TheChief4Life
altenberger22 said:
It's amazing how we've now had nearly every "Big Ten" perspective shared over the past week. We're either (a) a research-driven conference, (b) a football-driven conference, (c) a basketball-driven conference, or of course (d) a money-driven conference.

Of all the notions thus far shared, I sort of like the idea of combatting the SEC's 20-team behemoth with the additions of UCLA, USC, Stanford, Duke, North Carolina and Virginia/Clemson! Ultimately, you'd have to believe we'd then simply out-think the SEC leadership! However, I do also think the geography and time zones would be somewhat difficult to overcome by attempting to stretch coast-to-coast. (Perhaps that's where Bezos, Branson and Musk come into play......)
Click to expand...

I think (d) is not exclusive from (a), (b), or (c). At the end of the day, money will be the biggest slice of the decision pie. The question is where does the importance of how we get that money fall? That's where the big debate between "add any old school because it's football/basketball contributions" vs. "add any old school because they are an AAU school; athletic be damned" begins. The best case scenario is adding a school that satisfies all criteria. the problem is that they're already in the ACC and Pac-12.

This is why instability in the Pac-12 and ACC helps the B1G. In my opinion, though, stability in those two conferences helps the bigger collegiate athletic picture.
 
#371      
Buck Turgidson
Joel Goodson said:
($): https://theathletic.com/2729861/202...d-consider-raiding-its-old-friend-the-pac-12/

Good article. BIG raids Pac-12 and adds 6 of their schools: USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington, Cal and Stanford. 4 5 team pods for football only. Food for thought, for sure.
Click to expand...
I've been warming up to the idea of Pac12 adds since this weekend (the commenters at Frank the Tank's Slant are pretty creative). Not sure about the geographically-mixed 'pods' but the PAC schools mentioned fit the B1G in terms of tradition and research / academics.

If you suspend the idea that there has to be pure scheduling equity across the entire league, it's not hard to see west coast teams mostly playing each other with a few 'crossover' games with current B1G teams. Think of marquee match-ups between the USCs, Oregons, OSUs and Michigans, plus a few Illinois/Cal type games to level a bit the travel reqts. A clever person could come up with a schedule that works even if better teams play the other better steams more often, which drives value for CFP implications.

Remember how we skirted pure scheduling equity last year so OSU could get into the playoff?

The question to me is would Warren and the other B1G leaders do this absent PAC agreement...and would Kliavkoff be willing to do this to keep the PAC relevant
 
#372      
mattcoldagelli
Yeah, for all the hand-wringing about who "fits the B1G profile" among these Big XII and ACC, those top-tier PAC-12 schools are the platonic ideal of what we're talking about. This isn't breaking news - after all, this is why these two conferences have had their informal partnership in place for so long - but simply ruling these out because of travel seems like extremely small potatoes vs. what's gained, and has been pointed out - it's certainly manageable, especially for football.
 
#373      
champaignchris
mattcoldagelli said:
Yeah, for all the hand-wringing about who "fits the B1G profile" among these Big XII and ACC, those top-tier PAC-12 schools are the platonic ideal of what we're talking about. This isn't breaking news - after all, this is why these two conferences have had their informal partnership in place for so long - but simply ruling these out because of travel seems like extremely small potatoes vs. what's gained, and has been pointed out - it's certainly manageable, especially for football.
Click to expand...
Right. Everybody except the “State” schools - Arizona St, Oregon St and Wash St - are exactly what the Big 10 is looking for in terms of expansion partners.
 
#374      
Roundball Sage
In the new landscape of College Sports, the Big Ten will have to remake itself to remain relevant in an ongoing SEC takeover over college athletics.

For generations, The Ten has been a Rust Belt State association of primarily old industrial areas. But like the Rust Belt itself, this area has been eclipsed by the dynamic South where people and top businesses are moving to and top athlete recruits are flocking to.

The Big Ten is going to have to break out and open up to become National or it will accept secondary status. ‘Regional’ and Rust Belt isn’t going to cut it anymore.

Pick any assortment of top National programs to go after and do it now. The Rust Belt was a great place to be centered for a couple generations when it was a powerhouse. But time moves on, and the future belongs to those with the vision and energy to grab it. And including the West and South is a MUST.

The best news in this is that Illini have in place right now the right guys to read the landscape and take advantage of it. With the current AD and football and roundball head coaches, these guys have the savvy to lead things in the right direction. Can you imagine if all this was going on ten years ago? The Illini would be in a seriously challenged position to say the least.
 
#375      
Pikeillinifan
I'd say the best approach would be to merge with the Pac and have west/east divisions with some crossover games - more for football and basketball. Would even be great for baseball, golf, softball, volleyball too.

Obviously not that simple but would really open up new markets and give us some strong brands.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back