Weighing in on Big Ten expansion

The talk of Big Ten expansion buzzing in the Midwest has reached a crescendo. Despite the league’s best intentions to keep the process covert, rumors of invitations and discussions with university presidents are flying in the press. No one on the outside knows exactly what the hell is happening inside Big Ten headquarters, or when all the deliberation will bare fruit, but today a potential timeline has been set.

ESPN is reporting that “[t]he Big 12 has drawn a line in the sand for at least two member schools” in the mix of Big Ten expansion talks:

The conference, amid a chorus of story lines that would all significantly change the face of big-league college sports, has imposed a deadline of Friday for Nebraska and Missouri to state their intentions on whether they intend to bolt for the Big Ten, with the possibility of an extension for a decision by next Tuesday, The Austin American-Statesman has reported, citing two sources.

Officials in Lincoln and Columbia have until 5 pm Friday to inform Big 12 brass they do not intend to leave for the Big Ten.

Like a kind of regional flea flicker, the proverbial ball is officially moving. By 5 pm (probably Central) Friday, the fuzzy future of college sports in the heartland will potentially become much clearer.

Fittingly, the Quiet Man has been quiet on Big Ten expansion. But after reading today’s news I decided it’s time to weigh in with my two cents worth.

Here’s what the situation is. Ever since adding Penn State as its 11th school in 1990, the Big Ten has been looking to grow by at least one. Conference officials courted Notre Dame in the late-‘90s, but the Irish trustees balked and expansion talks were silenced until the last two years. Driven mostly by potential revenue increases (what debate in this country isn’t based on that?) from boosting subscriber numbers for the Big Ten Network, conference officials voiced interest in expanding the Big Ten to anywhere from 12 to 16.

Needless to say, changing the conference name, though sad, would be necessary. At least you’d think. Mad props to any graphic designer who could redesign the conference logo with a hidden “12,” “14,” or “16.”

Many schools have been named potential expansion candidates, but the most likely are Rutgers, Missouri, Nebraska, and Pittsburgh. Notre Dame is also in the mix, and was rumored to have received an invitation last month along with Rutgers, Mizzou, and Nebraska. The slew of outside candidates includes UConn, Maryland, Syracuse, West Virginia, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Georgia Tech (for whatever reason), Texas, and Iowa State.

Tom and I had a short discussion about expansion when I was back in Iowa City. It was our usual idealist talk. Tom has become somewhat of a conspiracy theorist in regards to Big Ten expansion, and sees a benefit from adding Pitt or annexing the Big 12 North, minus Colorado. He’s played a number of scenarios, toying with the grand apocalypse of Big 12 and Big East dissolution at the hands of the Pac 10 and Big Ten, turning the entire college sports world on its head. The chaos created by ACC expansion in 2004 and 2005 would no doubt be overshadowed by the maelstrom of raiding the Big 12 and Big East.

Candidate by candidate, here’s what I think.

Rutgers: No. The only case for Rutgers is the opening of the New York City-Northern New Jersey cable market for the BTN. As I said, cable revenue is driving expansion, and the Big Ten (publicly?) stated it is only interested in expanding to states and markets outside the conference’s current reach. In terms of increased television earnings (which is not a guarantee; the BTN had to duke it out with Midwestern cable providers to be seen even in Big Ten hometowns), it’s a win for the conference. I’m unsure of the academic advantage, but, to be frank, academics has taken a far back seat in these talks. I don’t want to be too harsh on Rutgers, but I think its major sports programs are below Big Ten par. Their women’s basketball program has made a name for itself (thanks to Vivian Stringer and, more recently, Don Imus), but the men’s program is non-existent. Football-wise, Rutgers has been improving. They’ve redeveloped and expanded their stadium, Greg Schiano (a member of JoPa’s coaching pedigree) is attracting talent to Piscataway, and the fan base is growing. But is it Big Ten compatible? Maybe. The potential is there, and Big Ten officials may be hoping to snatch up a burgeoning contender, but it could all go wrong at The State University of New Jersey.

Pitt: No. My only problem with Pitt (besides their somewhat ugly football jerseys) is the fact they do not have their own football stadium. They closed and demolished Pitt Stadium in 1999 and have been roommates with the Pittsburgh Steelers since 2000. I hate NFL stadiums the same way I hate airports: they are soulless corporate event centers. Most NFL teams have gladly razed or rebuilt their historic stadiums to effectively play in malls with football fields. Pro ball venues lack all the tradition and atmosphere college stadiums have. Bad move, Pitt. I hope it keeps you from moving to the Big Ten because the conference does not like schools without their own stadiums. Minnesota’s experiment with The Dome didn’t work, so I hope the conference learned its lesson (though that situation was a little different). However, Pitt would make a great basketball contribution, and a renewal of the Pitt-Penn State rivalry would be beneficial. However, Pittsburgh obviously falls within the current Big Ten market and may not garner any more television revenue for the league.

Mizzou: Yes. Culturally, Missouri is a little more southern than it’s northern and eastern neighbors, but the state fits in the Big Ten’s desire for geographic continuity. If nothing else, it fits in my desire for geographic continuity. I’ve been told it’s a great school academically, and its major sports programs are well-established and annual contenders in the Big 12. Adding Mizzou extends the Big Ten’s reach into another state, opening the Kansas City and St. Louis markets for the BTN. (Shamefully, it would be the first former slave state included in the conference.)

Nebraska: Yes. Adding the Huskers satisfies geographic continuity and extends the conference’s regional reach. The football aspect is a no-brainer, and Nebraska’s basketball programs are decent despite not making much noise (they have a great, traditional barn for an arena, though). According to Scott Dochterman’s Nebraska expansion profile for the CRG, despite bringing “very few unique intangibles that the Big Ten covets, such as population base and demographic potential for growth…[o]utside of Notre Dame, Nebraska is the most attractive candidate strictly because of football.” With its former rivalry between Oklahoma choked off by the Big 12’s divisional structure, the Huskers have no reason not to accept an invite to the Big Ten.

Notre Dame: Yes. Though trying hard to keep its football independence (except for hockey, ND competes in the Big East for all other sports), I think it would be beneficial for both the Big Ten and ND to tie the knot. (Bad analogy, since it would probably be considered polygamy.) Although South Bend lies within Indiana, home to the Hoosiers and Boilermakers, ND brings a national fan base to the conference; Irish fans all over the country would be clamoring for BTN subscription, and who’s going to ignore them? ND is the best academic expansion candidate, and its other sports programs are national contenders. With three annual football rivalries with Big Ten schools, I think it would be in ND’s interest to join the conference, especially since Big Ten officials have talked of suspending those match-ups if the school balks again. ND, I think, will eventually have to join a conference, and the Big Ten is the best fit unless it wants to totally commit to the Big East.

Whatever the reasons for inviting the outside contenders (UConn, Maryland, Syracuse, West Virginia, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Georgia Tech, and Texas), I don’t want to hear it. None of those schools fit within the Big Ten’s Midwestern tradition. The same goes with Rutgers. UConn, Maryland, and Syracuse are too east coast; West Virginia, Vandy, Kentucky, and GT are too southern and well established in both their regions and conferences; and Texas is the big anomaly. Though a former member of the Confederacy, it’s not the south. Though located in the middle of the country, it’s not Midwestern. (It is, I think, considered a Great Plains state.) Though west of the Mississippi, I wouldn’t consider it part of the west, or even southwest, either. It’s Texas, and the Longhorns are probably the lynchpin determining the future of the Big 12.

Ideally, if the Big Ten expands I want it to maintain a Midwestern identity. Geographically, Nebraska, Mizzou, and ND fit. As do Kansas, K-State, and Iowa State, which is why I’m not adverse to the Big Ten completely raiding the Big 12 North, minus Colorado. The Sunflower State schools would bring to the Big Ten their basketball tradition and dominance, as well as their revitalized football programs. Iowa State, a potential orphan if the Big 12 were to collapse, offers a similar package and would unite Iowa into one Big Ten happy family. (It would be very awkward at first to think of the Cyclones as conference brethren.) However, if you add ND to a Big 12 North annexation, the Big Ten would potentially grow to 17 and become a college sports behemoth. I don’t want the conference to get too big.

Whatever happens, it seems the dominos will begin falling on Friday.