Harvey Perlman on Expansion

[huskerpony]

A bit NU heavy, but some interesting insight from the BCS head honcho:

http://www.omaha.com/article/20100424/B ... -mega-chip

[The PonyGrad]

Interesting. Not the usual uninformed fluff.

Thanks for the link.

[Water Pony]

I agree.

My prediction is Nebraska, Missouri, Notre Dame, Syracuse and Rutgers willl be invited to the Big Ten/Sixteen. Monster move.

[EastStang]

Given our past experience in the WAC-16, a sixteen team model may be unmanageable. That makes 7 in division games and one out of division game or do you split to four divisions and alternate divisions? All of that gets pretty ugly as we saw. The Airport five, BYU, UT, Wyo, AFA, CSU wanted to play each other every year and everyone wanted to play BYU and AFA for the attendance. How do you divide up the new Big Ten? Would Illinois be happy giving up games pretty much every year with Michigan and OSU for games with Nebraska, Rutgers and Minnesota? Where do you pare off old Big Ten teams to eight teams? Who are the bastard step-children. Certainly Penn State would be one of them. But after that it gets ugly. Purdue and Indiana? Michigan and Michigan State? Minnesota and Wisconsin? Or do you split up historical rivals? And would NE be happy getting to host PSU or OSU or Michigan every 16 years? You can see how fault lines might form over that. Or do you go into 4 team bundles? NE, Mizzou, PSU, Rutgers; Michigan, MSU, OSU and ND; Purdue, Indiana, Illinois and NW; Minn. Wisc. Iowa, ISU.

Then as the NE guy said, you get into the question of the buy-in, buy-out price for a team like NE. NE doesn't have a lot of TV's, compared to say Michigan, Ohio, NYC, or PA. So, they'd have to probably pay to play. But a team like Rutgers may get a low buy-in because they bring in NY/NJ TV sets. Again, its all about TV dollars.

[Stallion]

the real issue that most- but not all- are missing. Does this 16 Team Super Conference have the power to DEMAND 2 automatic BCS slots. If it doesn't then is it really worth it? Only one writer I have seen bring this up. Obcviously, the other conferences like the SEC, Big 12, ACC and the PAC 10 aren't going to roll over and give up those precious few at-large BCS slots just because the Big 10 decided to go to 16 UNLESS they too are guaranteed 2 BCS automatic slots. And 16 votes are not a majority of the make-up of the BCS for the Big 10 to force its hand. Does Ohio St. really want a 1/16th chance of a BCS bid AND now have to win a Conference Championship to get the Big 10's one BCS slot. Aren't they doing better under the old system of getting their weak-ass teams into the BCS. I still would not be surprised to see the Big 10 stop at 12 for this reason.

[Garret]

Stallion,

The *major* flaw in your last post is that the Big 10 had *two* teams in BCS bowls last year and BCS conferences regularly get 2 teams in BCS bowls each year. Have you already forgotten about the at-large team provision?

The Big 10 does NOT need to demand a second automatic spot...all they need is to ask to stop the limit on at-large team selection from artificially limiting any conference to 2 maximum BCS spots. If that limit had not been there last year, the Big 10 would have had *3* teams in BCS bowls last year. A 16-team conference could legitimately demand that limit be taken away.

Your point that a BCS AQ Conference can only get its conference champion in a BCS bowl game has never been the case in the history of the BCS system...so, I'm confused as to what argument you were trying to make.

[huskerpony]

I think he is saying they would be guaranteed 2 spots with the possibility of a 3rd getting an at-large spot. I have heard a few people mention this. That would trigger the SEC to expand to 16 as well in that case. And I agree they are most likely to just expand to 12. I thought Perlman's point about Congress getting involved if things get too crazy was hinting at this. Although if they do go 16, I have a bad feeling Nebraska will be going.

East--Nebraska wouldn't have to pay to get in. The Big 10 Network makes 60% of its revenue off of advertising and 40% from subscribers. Nebraska gets the second highest ratings of all potential expansion teams behind Notre Dame, so actually brings in more money than a Missouri or a Rutgers. Plus, the network is already on in Nebraska, Missouri, and I assume parts of NJ, so the number of subscriptions doesn't increase that much. However, Nebraska could potentially have enough pull to get it into Denver. Lots of Nebraskans there, and parts of western Nebraska are in the Denver market. The other thing would be that Nebraska fans travel, so the schools that don't sell out their stadiums would love the ticket revenue Nebraska brings them.

[EastStang]

I thought the Big Ten teams pretty much sold out all the time. Perhaps for their 1-AA games some of the teams might not sell out. But for conference games, I thought attendance was not a problem (except perhaps for Northwestern). I thought Perlman was saying that Nebraska would have to write a check to join and a check to leave the Big XII. Maybe I misread that part of the article.

[Stallion]

yeah Garrett my point which I made above is that they have somehow been getting 2 sorry-ass BCS teams in anyway in the Big Televen -so if they won't be guaranteed 2 spots why go to 16 when one of those teams WILL lose in the Big 10 Championship Game which most likely will eliminate them from the BCS. It almost certainly would have eliminated the 2nd pushover BCS teams in all of these years. So basically they are going to likely get 1 BCS team-they'll still suck and get beat in big games-the Big 10 ain't getting access to any major new recruiting areas because of the proposed expansion-

[huskerpony]

I thought the Big Ten teams pretty much sold out all the time. Perhaps for their 1-AA games some of the teams might not sell out. But for conference games, I thought attendance was not a problem (except perhaps for Northwestern). I thought Perlman was saying that Nebraska would have to write a check to join and a check to leave the Big XII. Maybe I misread that part of the article.

Oh. I see what you are saying. Yeah, that wasn't very clear in the article. My understanding is that there is a buyout to get out of the Big 12--you only get 50% of your tv revenue share for the 2 years until you leave. And any new members in the Big 10 wouldn't get any share of the tv revenue from the network for the first few years (as well as not getting any ownership share of the network.) So there is a significant cost to making the switch on both sides of the move--which I suppose you could look at as paying.

However, I would assume that to get any of the big dogs to join, the Big 10 will have to bend on some of the revenue issues. (Notre Dame and Nebraska aren't going to join unless it is very financially beneficial.)

[Water Pony]

A scenario for the two Super Conference would have Nebraska and Missouri fill in the west for the Big XVI with ND, Syracuse and Rutgers in the East. A variance is four divisions of four.

The SEC would take both OK schools, along with TX and A&M for their 16 members. This would reunite them with Arkansas within the SEC, protect Red River Rivalry, recruiting in Texas. Monster Number Two.

Big XII takes the best of MWC and CUSA, including both TCU and SMU, especially if PAC 10 is reluctant to take UT and/or BYU. Colorado and UT were my orginal picks for PAC 10/12.

[Stallion]

I personally don't think there is much of a chance UT would consider the SEC for more than 5 minutes. But Big 10 going to 16 may just make the both the SEC and PAC 10 considerably stronger on the field where it counts. SEC could tie down the fertile South so that no players will ever want to leave. PAC 10 could join the synergy of both California and Texas. Big 10 will still get embarrassed on gameday. (It's just not any fun making fun of the Big Televen without the General anymore)

[SWC Grey Hair]

Texas would never go to the SEC because of low academic perception of SEC. They will only go to PAC 10 if they leave Big 12 as long as A&M could go to either SEC or PAC 10.

[smuuth]

UT isn't going anywhere that it isn't a big-dog who can win on talent alone at least 8-9 games a year in the revenue-producing sport of football. why would it mess with a great thing like it has going for it now. I believe only Ohio State is anywhere close in total revenue. Revenue equals better coaches and facilities which equal better recruits which equal wins which equal higher rankings and attendance and more revenue......Kind of like comparing the yankees with the rangers. Really unfair advantage.

[Stallion]

Exactly, Aggies belong in SEC with the root-Hogs, Cajuns and Old Reb. Texas is a real university with a strong academic record that it wouldn't want to be tarnish by associating with such vocational schools.