T1B

Notre Dame, pussing out of the big games and ducking the big boys, is finalizing an agreement to play Miami in Soldier Field in 2012.

What about a return trip to Miami?

Van wrote:Joining the Big 10 means you'll have no idea when you may ever win your conference.

Funny you say that, seeing that OSU has gone to a BCS Bowl every year since 2005. Multiple league championships. Nope, you never know who will win the Big 10.

Details on a series haven't been announced. But there they go, trying to schedule a run at the BCS by adding "the likes of Nevada, SDSU and the service academies".

Hey Killian you fucker...leave OSU out of your pissing match! :D

Killian wrote:

Van wrote:Joining the Big 10 means you'll have no idea when you may ever win your conference.

Funny you say that, seeing that OSU has gone to a BCS Bowl every year since 2005. Multiple league championships. Nope, you never know who will win the Big 10.

That's Ohio St. I'm talking about ND, and they're no Ohio St. Ohio St knows they'll win Big 10 titles. ND? They would have no clue as to when they might ever win one.

<-----

Killian wrote:Details on a series haven't been announced. But there they go, trying to schedule a run at the BCS by adding "the likes of Nevada, SDSU and the service academies".

Excluding Navy, have they dropped the service academies from their schedule? Have they scheduled any more cupcakes? Instead of Miami, who are entirely meh these days, have they scheduled Ohio St, Texas, Bama, Florida or OU?

More to the point, are they more interested in scabdicking their way into the BCS via their sweetheart deal with the BCS or even joining the Big Yeast, or are they vigorously clamoring to get into the Big 10 where they'll have to beat out Ohio St, Penn St, Michigan and Iowa every year in order to win a conference title?

When ND joins the Big 10, that's when I'll be impressed. As long as they continue to attempt to ease their win into the BCS via their sweetheart deal, they'll remain a second-tier program who are merely resting on their laurels.

Van wrote: or OU?

OU and ND are reported to play in 2012 and 2013...though neither school has officially confirmed it. not sure exactly what that means or doesn't mean.

Van wrote:That's Ohio St. I'm talking about ND, and they're no Ohio St. Ohio St knows they'll win Big 10 titles. ND? They would have no clue as to when they might ever win one.

<-----

Good point. A new coach never comes in and makes an immediated impact and changes who wins a league.

Sin,
Jim Tressel
Pete Carroll
Bob Stoops
Steve Spurrier
Urban Meyer
Nick Saban

So while right now, yes, OSU knows they will likely win the league, that shit can change in a season or two. Like it did for all of the coaches listed above.

Van wrote:Excluding Navy, have they dropped the service academies from their schedule? Have they scheduled any more cupcakes? Instead of Miami, who are entirely meh these days, have they scheduled Ohio St, Texas, Bama, Florida or OU?

They've already started doing that. In the 80's, they played at least 2 service academies every year. In the 90's, 6 out of 10. In the 2000's, 4 out of 10. But yeah, they schedule multiple service academies every year. Switching out Air Force for a team like Temple, Toledo or another MAC school gets them more points in your book, than playing one of the academies. Seeing as how the academies are considerd cupcakes, that's who they would replace them with.

As KC said, ND is in talks to finalize a game with OU, and there is also talks with Bama.

Van wrote:More to the point, are they more interested in scabdicking their way into the BCS via their sweetheart deal with the BCS or even joining the Big Yeast, or are they vigorously clamoring to get into the Big 10 where they'll have to beat out Ohio St, Penn St, Michigan and Iowa every year in order to win a conference title?

How are they scabdicking their way into the BCS? As Terry has pointed out, their schedule, at worst, is middle of the road for the Big 10. Would that change when they do join the Big 10? And go ahead and tell me their sweetheart deal. I don't think you would ever see a 1 or 2 loss ND team play for the NC, or a 4-5 loss ND team in the BCS. The conferences have the sweetheart deals.

Van wrote:When ND joins the Big 10, that's when I'll be impressed. As long as they continue to attempt to ease their win into the BCS via their sweetheart deal, they'll remain a second-tier program who are merely resting on their laurels.

Well, they better get right on it. Because impressing you and others is what really matters. Forget having schedules that are tougher than most of the Big 10. And yep, they're a second tier program with a sweetheart deal. Again, do you care to explain the "sweetheart" deal?

I’m all for bashing Notre Dame, but I don’t think you can do it based on their strength of schedule. I know Sagarin isn’t a be-all end-all, but the past 5 years ND’s SOS has been 14, 18, 24, 50 and 37. USC on the schedule has generally meant they had a Top 5 team on the schedule every year except 2009. And the fall off in the SOS the past couple of years has been due in part to the fall off of programs like Michigan and Purdue.

I’m a Big 10 honk but I realize that due to scheduling quirks, a Big 10 team could slide through an entire season without playing a Top 10 team. So could USC.

I agree. Lotta ND-related things I've taken issue with, but SOS hasn't been one.

Killian wrote:

Van wrote:That's Ohio St. I'm talking about ND, and they're no Ohio St. Ohio St knows they'll win Big 10 titles. ND? They would have no clue as to when they might ever win one.

<-----

Good point. A new coach never comes in and makes an immediated impact and changes who wins a league.

Sin,
Jim Tressel
Pete Carroll
Bob Stoops
Steve Spurrier
Urban Meyer
Nick Saban

So while right now, yes, OSU knows they will likely win the league, that shit can change in a season or two. Like it did for all of the coaches listed above.

Yes, and until Kelly actually does for ND what those other coaches did for their teams, ND would have no clue as to when they could ever win a Big 10 title.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Charlie Weis supposed to do that too, following Ty Willingham?

Now if ND joins the Big East, it'd be safe to say that they would have a reasonable expectation of winning that conference sooner rather than later.

Killian, ND's sweetheart deal with the BCS is well documented. They receive money whether they get in or not, and the simple fact that people still speculate on ND getting a BCS bowl bid should they go 9-3 is all you need to know. No other three-loss teams are ever getting a BCS bowl bid unless:

-They won their BCS conference.
-They play in the Big 10, where Satan can jam Illinois into a Rose Bowl.

ND hasn't deserved their recent BCS bowl bids, and no one else but ND would've received them.

Come to think of it, hell, ND should join the Big 10. As long as Jim Delany is running things, there would be plenty of opportunities for ND to get a Rose Bowl bid without even winning the conference. All they need to do is finish second in the conference, with no more than three losses.

Yep, ND, get your asses in the Big 10!

And every ND fan that is out there is against them recieving money every year from the BCS. That deal alone, cost ND in the ball park of $7M over the last 5 years. Being independent is sink or swim, and Kevin White didn't understand that.

When has ND ever gotten a BCS bid with 3 losses? And when that conversation comes up, it's a 2 second conversation. "Should ND go to a BCS game?" "No." They have to meet the BCS rules, just as every other team does. Other teams are spoken of when they have 3 losses, and the conversation ends just as quickly. Do you have any specifics about their deal, outside of the money aspect?

If ND didn't deserve to go those years, who did? Who did they pass over, that was more deserving to go?

Sam,

That's why more and more people are starting to think that this is a bluff by the Big 10 to get either ND or Texas. Adding those teams would dillute the conference more than it would help it. While Nebraska appears to be on the way back, it's not certain. And neither is Missouri and Rutgers staying where they are in terms of success.

Sudden Sam wrote:The Sporting News article I was looking for was in the most recent issue. They had pros and cons for 5-6 schools that would seem like logical targets of the Big Ten. The only reason I could see the Big Ten considering schools like Syracuse and Rutgers was their membership in the Association of American Universities, which is a big factor in the Big Ten's thinking (obviously prowess as a football school ain't item #1).

http://www.aau.edu/about/article.aspx?id=5476

Although it carries less weight than the football factor, another solid reason is what Syracuse brings to the table with its elite roundball program.

I'm a little surprised that Kansas isn't or wasn't ever in the Big 10 mix (or speculation). AAU member, one of the bluest of blue blood hoops programs and Mangino and Glen Mason both had top 10 type teams at KU in the last 15 years. KU's football history isn't stellar (neither is Mizzou's, really), but it shows you CAN win at KU. Access to KC market, etc. Not sure what Mizzou offers that KU doesn't.....and I think you could make an argument that KU is the superior choice based on the elite nature of KU basketball. unless there's a kind of KU-KSU package type understanding in the Sunflower state.

King Crimson wrote:Not sure what Mizzou offers that KU doesn't.....and I think you could make an argument that KU is the superior choice based on the elite nature of KU basketball.

That's pretty much all KU has is basketball.

Mizzou has 20 scholarship athletic programs and is competitive in most. Aside from football and hoops... track and field, wrestling, baseball (not this year), softball, swiming and diving, gymnastics, etc.

And besides that, our cheerleaders are way hotter.

Missouri brings the KC and STL TV markets.

What Wags said, KC. Kansas has only six men's team sports. Trust me, the whole "Why Mizzou over KU?" scenario has been beaten to death for weeks in these parts.

And Kills is right. If Mizzou DOES indeed accept an invite to join the 10, then Pinkl better dust off his old Illinous-Indiana-Ohio recruiting travelogue, cuz the kids from the Longhorn state ain't gonna come anymore. There are currently 30 Texas Tigers on Mizzou's roster, and each one of 'em has a Texas-sized chip on his shoulder for being deemed not worthy enough to play his football Saturdays in Austin. It's part of the reason why these kids come to Mizzou: To beat Texas and prove Mack WRONG!

thanks for the info, i didn't know that about KU men's sports. I guess i overestimated KU's presence in the KC market, and from what i've been told here and from MU fans over the years is that STL is "already" a Big 10 market (in regard to playing Illinois in STL). Another reason MU was able to pull some Texas kids was the career of Chase Daniel. As that fades, less interest in the Lone Star State for MU football. I know for fact, that a lot of peeps in Texas really followed Daniel. A bunch of UT and ATM grads work with my sister at SMU, and they were all closet MU fans when Daniel was there. Esp, against OU in 07 and 08.

Let me ask MU people: it seemed like at first (and i know in maybe this thread or others) that I posted that i had been reading on MU boards (i've registered at Tigerboard since 00, though i don't go there much anymore).....that MU has had a secret wish for the Big 10 for a long time and displeasure with the balance of power in the Big XII going out of KC and south of the Red River. ....much like here in Boulder, CU to Pac 10 has been a staple of off-season bbs talk for a decade.

responses here, i recall, were "no way....got to keep the rivalry with KU" etc. But, now, seems like most MU fans are very much in favor.

Van wrote:Killian, ND's sweetheart deal with the BCS is well documented. They receive money whether they get in or not, and the simple fact that people still speculate on ND getting a BCS bowl bid should they go 9-3 is all you need to know. No other three-loss teams are ever getting a BCS bowl bid unless:

-They won their BCS conference.
-They play in the Big 10, where Satan can jam Illinois into a Rose Bowl.

Exactly who has been speculating on ND receiving a BCS bid at 9-3? The simple truth is that only one team has ever received an at-large BCS bid with 3 losses, and it wasn't ND. I think you know what conference that team plays in.

ND hasn't deserved their recent BCS bowl bids, and no one else but ND would've received them.

In each of their 3 BCS seasons, ND finished ahead of at least one other team that qualified for the BCS.

2000: ND #11, Purdue unranked (note that BCS ranked only Top 15 teams at that time, note further that ND beat Purdue head-to-head).
2005: ND #6, Georgia #7, West Virginia #11, Florida State #22 (if the BCS were a pure meritocracy, ND would've made the BCS that year).
2006: ND #11, Wake Forest #14 (note also that Oklahoma leapfrogged ND in BCS standings in the final week of the season by the slimmest of margins).

ND didn't get a BCS bid in 2002, despite finishing ahead of one team that did qualify for the BCS (#9 to Florida State's #14) and beating that team head-to-head.

Oh, and your standards as to who is "deserving" of a BCS bid are well-documented in here. If we applied those standards, there wouldn't be enough teams left to fill all the BCS bids.

That's true.

King Crimson wrote: Let me ask MU people: it seemed like at first (and i know in maybe this thread or others) that I posted that i had been reading on MU boards (i've registered at Tigerboard since 00, though i don't go there much anymore).....that MU has had a secret wish for the Big 10 for a long time and displeasure with the balance of power in the Big XII going out of KC and south of the Red River. ....much like here in Boulder, CU to Pac 10 has been a staple of off-season bbs talk for a decade.

responses here, i recall, were "no way....got to keep the rivalry with KU" etc. But, now, seems like most MU fans are very much in favor.

Not this Tiger.

Ok, so clearly I was wrong... But I don't take back a single word that I posted on Page 1 of this thread. Yeah, KC, it's the rivalries and traditions... But it's much more than that too. I simply hate the thought of losing what Big XII presence we have left in this town.

Make no mistake: If Mizzou bails on the XII, this town can kiss the conference basketball tournament goodbye forever. No way in hell that the Tejas schools will permit its continuation in a city located in a state that is no longer a conference member, regardless of its proximity to KU and the other North schools. Instead of bending elbows with Iowa State fans in Westport or mixing it up with Poke fans in the hospitality tents of the Power & Light District, I'll be tuned into a satellite feed of my Tigers playing in some strange, far-away foreign venue called "Conseco Field House" or "United Center".

In addition, on the odd year that Jerrah permits His game to played in a building other than his Palace-in-Dallas, I'll miss being able to trot out to Arrowhead to watch the Sooners turbo-clock the piss out of some poor, rummy Northern-school-come-lately in the OU Invitational, errr, the Big XII Conference Championship Game.

Hey, I GET the economics of Mizzou contemplating this move and the sentiment of many Tiger fans to finally "get over" on the conference (read: Texas), but I still HATE the thought of Missouri leaving. I just don't have the where-with-all to scratch out a check big enough to get them to stay....

King Crimson wrote:thanks for the info, i didn't know that about KU men's sports.

Death by a thousand cuts.

The only thing KU really offers anyone in terms of viewership outside KC is Chicago, which is useless to the B10 discussion.

I have heard the St.Louis-is-really-a-Big-10-city argument for over a decade now but always chalked it up to KC resentment over StL getting the first two or three northern Big XII CCGs. Or just resentment in general because of the way StL basically had been running the Missouri state government for the latter half of the last century... and that may still be true for all I know.

http://twitter.com/davebirkett

I doubt this will put an end to the speculation, but this is interesting. I would love it if ND had the balls to call the Big 10's bluff and see if they actually pick up the other teams mentioned. Or if they stay at 11 like some have started to believe.

I don't think the Big 10 is bluffing but I do believe they are trying to force ND to join the league. Should ND fail to apply for admission into the conference, I think the Big 10 will pick up 3 other teams right now and then hope that ND will join at a later date when the league goes from 14 to 16 teams. I haven't heard or read this scenario anywhere but that is what I would do if I were the commissioner. I don't believe the Big 10 is bluffing or that they will remain at 11 teams.

Delany said at a presser earlier today that this thing could be dragged out another 18 months. Ugh. But we can't be certain until Adel's sources chime in.

Degenerate wrote:...Or just resentment in general because of the way StL basically had been running the Missouri state government for the latter half of the last century... and that may still be true for all I know.

Werd.

Pity Quantrill didn't have a second town left in him to burn....

Mace wrote:I don't think the Big 10 is bluffing but I do believe they are trying to force ND to join the league. Should ND fail to apply for admission into the conference, I think the Big 10 will pick up 3 other teams right now and then hope that ND will join at a later date when the league goes from 14 to 16 teams. I haven't heard or read this scenario anywhere but that is what I would do if I were the commissioner. I don't believe the Big 10 is bluffing or that they will remain at 11 teams.

I tend to agree with this. That being said, the carrot the Big Ten offers is of limited value to ND compared to the other schools in the mix. And I question the Big Ten's ability to bring the stick with any degree of effectiveness.

The only possible stick in the Big Ten's arsenal, as to ND, is the possibility of destroying the Big East and disrupting the rest of ND's athletic department in the process. If the Big Ten goes to 14 teams and that includes Missouri and Nebraska, that means that they won't take more than one Big East team. Taking Rutgers from the Big East won't kill that conference. Neither will taking UConn or Syracuse. Pitt? That would cause more damage than the other schools. But I'm not sure that Pitt wants to risk losing annual matchups against ND, West Virginia or both. Perhaps even more to the point, Pitt offers less than the other Big East schools in the mix when it comes to expanding the BTN footprint.

I suppose it's possible that the Big Ten could drop an existing member in order to pick up a second Big East member (e.g., Northwestern for Syracuse, or Minnesota for Pitt). But with all the rumors that have been circulating about Big Ten expansion, one that has been conspicuously absent is the possibility of the Big Ten dropping one or more existing members. So I have to think this is a longshot at best.

Btw, as to the Big East, I've heard rumors that BC is in discussions about possibly leaving the ACC and returning to the Big East. My source on this is an internet website (ND Nation), so take it fwiw. But as others have pointed out, there are a number of very informed posters on that website. If true, that certainly would strengthen the Big East.

Truman wrote:

Degenerate wrote:...Or just resentment in general because of the way StL basically had been running the Missouri state government for the latter half of the last century... and that may still be true for all I know.

Werd.

Pity Quantrill didn't have a second town left in him to burn....

Pity he lived as long as he did.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Btw, as to the Big East, I've heard rumors that BC is in discussions about possibly leaving the ACC and returning to the Big East. My source on this is an internet website (ND Nation), so take it fwiw. But as others have pointed out, there are a number of very informed posters on that website. If true, that certainly would strengthen the Big East.

I've heard that too, but I don't know if they'd come back now that the ACC has signed that nice new tv deal with ESPN.

MuchoBulls wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Btw, as to the Big East, I've heard rumors that BC is in discussions about possibly leaving the ACC and returning to the Big East. My source on this is an internet website (ND Nation), so take it fwiw. But as others have pointed out, there are a number of very informed posters on that website. If true, that certainly would strengthen the Big East.

I've heard that too, but I don't know if they'd come back now that the ACC has signed that nice new tv deal with ESPN.

The post I'm referencing came within the last few days, although I don't know how old the info in that post was. As I understand it, the rub with the ACC is travel costs for non-revenue sports.

I figured their travel budget was higher than every other team in the league, but now they are looking at higher revenue streams that should offset those travel costs.

Geographically it makes sense for them to be back in the Big East, but the incoming dollars will speak louder.

MuchoBulls wrote:I figured their travel budget was higher than every other team in the league, but now they are looking at higher revenue streams that should offset those travel costs.

Geographically it makes sense for them to be back in the Big East, but the incoming dollars will speak louder.

Although the other side of the coin, which I've also heard, is that they're seeking a new long-term deal with ND. The present one expires after this season.

Of course, the ND game is BC's Super Bowl, so they want to renew it badly. Although ND has never done this before, I suppose it's at least possible, if ND considers Big Ten expansion to be a threat to the Big East, that they'll make a new deal contingent on BC joining the Big East.

And before anybody gets on my back over that, I realize that most schools would tell ND to pound salt if ND tried to make a deal contingent on the other school's conference membership. But BC very well may be the exception to that rule.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Of course, the ND game is BC's Super Bowl, so they want to renew it badly. Although ND has never done this before, I suppose it's at least possible, if ND considers Big Ten expansion to be a threat to the Big East, that they'll make a new deal contingent on BC joining the Big East.

And before anybody gets on my back over that, I realize that most schools would tell ND to pound salt if ND tried to make a deal contingent on the other school's conference membership. But BC very well may be the exception to that rule.

That does make a great deal of sense.

The more I think about it, the more I come to the conclusion that talk of the Big Ten going to 16 is little more than a big game of chicken between the Big 10 and ND. I can't see the Big 10 going to 16 unless either ND or Texas is onboard, and neither seems very likely to me.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:The more I think about it, the more I come to the conclusion that talk of the Big Ten going to 16 is little more than a big game of chicken between the Big 10 and ND. I can't see the Big 10 going to 16 unless either ND or Texas is onboard, and neither seems very likely to me.

Exactly. Adding 3 or 5 "meh" teams wouldn't really help the Big 10 financially and would mean less money for the 11 teams already in the Big Integer.

On a different note, you have to be happy that ND is playing Miami again. I know you've wanted that for some time.

Sudden Sam wrote:Yeah, heard that Texas A&M doesn't wanna go to the Pac 10, so they're trying to work a deal for them and Oklahoma to come to the SEC.

while it's become clear (from the orangebloods article that's out there) that ATM and UT are no longer carrying a legislative mandate to stay together, I think OU and OSU are still a package deal. but, if OSU has a Pac invite and not left in the newly reformed Missouri Valley or leftovers in the MWC or C-USA....that may temper the less than subtle threat Poke lawmakers were working vis a vis OU's state funding if the Sooners were to jump ship without OSU. Article in the Daily Oklahoman about this a week or so ago.

that raises a question, does the Pac still want OSU, Tech, etc. if they can't get OU and ATM? How does Tech fit in...? If the huffing and puffing about academics from the Pac was legit, why not at least Baylor over Tech? BU is a decent school with an improving and fairly rounded AD (elite 8 in men's hoops, FF in women's), Tech is Tech without Leach and RMK.