Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[VBSJ]

If those seven Big East basketball-only schools really do split off from the Big East, it would just speed up everything. The seven schools evidently would make less money with the new TV deal.

Connecticut and Cincinnati would be left out to dry, but who really cares.

 

[Buckeye513]

At the very least, they would add another perennial top 10 recruiting power to the B1G. At the moment it's just us and scUM. They would also provide a pipeline to a demographically thriving area, ripe with blue chip recruits. This might not be too important for us, since we already recruit Florida well, but if a program like Indiana manages to go from recruiting 10 2* and 10 3* recruits every year, to 5 2* and 15 3* recruits, overtime that can really change the talent level and depth of a program.

It's tough to compete against the SEC when they recruit like

and we recruit like

SEC schools pull kids from the south. Big Ten schools pull kids from the mid-west. This has been going on forever and the Big Ten has competed just fine with the SEC historically and this century.

Star ratings also mean jack shit to me. Jamal Marcus was the 70th ranked DE on Scout last year yet had offers from Florida, Georgia, and USC. Taivon Jacobs is the 71st ranked WR and has offers from Florida State, Notre Dame, and West Virginia. They both received offers from Ohio State.

 

[ulukinatme]

It's tough to compete against the SEC when they recruit like

You talkin' about oversigning/greyshirting?

 

[bassbuckeye07]

To put things in perspective, Ohio State's total expenditures on research in 2011 were $832 million. The total athletic revenue was 48.7 million. How much extra revenue would adding FSU really bring in, and would this justify lowing academic standards.


http://research.osu.edu/osu-research/profile/

http://businessofcollegesports.com/2011/05/31/ohio-states-football-budget/

First off opening the Florida market to B1G network and cable subscriptions can't hurt.

I do not believe that Ohio States research dollars would be hurt by adding FSU nor would they suddenly boom because Virginia was added. I already know that the medical facility and research wing of Ohio State is more powerful than the athletic department.

All i'm saying is I want a sexy football school in the mix now that we picked up flagship schools on the east coast


Ohio State is just fine whether the conference has 8 or 18 members....its Ohio State....The B1G is lucky to have Ohio State. Ohio State's brand carries the B1G to an extent. I look at conference expansion as other schools wanting to affiliate themselves with Ohio State athletically and the rest of the B1G academically

 

[JBaney45]

BC is of no benefit to the CIC & FSU would be a drain until they got up to speed. Georgia Tech is of course a home run.

Would GT (plus Maryland & Rutgers) be enough to get them to relent on BC & FSU? I dunno.

This is about sports..if FSU were West Virginia or Kent State or some other 3rd rate academic school then fine, but they aren't that bad. If we assumed Rutgers and Maryland would be getting their athletic department together when we let them in, why not let FSU in under the assumption their academics will continue to improve? The latter is much more likely. I love the idea of putting a stamp right into SEC country with those 2 schools.

The CIC should barely be brought into this discussion, what they do is greatly f'ing exaggerated.

 

[Mike80]

This is about sports..if FSU were West Virginia or Kent State or some other 3rd rate academic school then fine, but they aren't that bad. If we assumed Rutgers and Maryland would be getting their athletic department together when we let them in, why not let FSU in under the assumption their academics will continue to improve? The latter is much more likely. I love the idea of putting a stamp right into SEC country with those 2 schools.

The CIC should barely be brought into this discussion, what they do is greatly f'ing exaggerated.

Except the people that matter in inviting the schools (the school Presidents) are deeply involved in the CIC and want to see it succeed, hence, if anyone is going to be invited, they have to be a school that will benefit the CIC and get the president's approval.

In other words, it's not about sports and it needs to be brought up on meaningless message board conversations because it matters very much to the process. If you're going to talk about it, you need to bring up everything that is relevant to the discussion.

 

[JBaney45]

Except the people that matter in inviting the schools (the school Presidents) are deeply involved in the CIC and want to see it succeed, hence, if anyone is going to be invited, they have to be a school that will benefit the CIC and get the president's approval.

In other words, it's not about sports and it needs to be brought up on meaningless message board conversations because it matters very much to the process. If you're going to talk about it, you need to bring up everything that is relevant to the discussion.

Bullcrap, explain to me how FSU hurts the CIC? We certainly didn't invite Nebraska for their stellar academic reputation, they were barely in the AAU and now aren't. FSU is basically on par with them rankings wise.

This is about athletics, it's an athletic conference. The CIC is a nice little bonus that the Big Ten has, but it's impact is marginal at best.

 

[Mike80]

Bullcrap, explain to me how FSU hurts the CIC? We certainly didn't invite Nebraska for their stellar academic reputation, they were barely in the AAU and now aren't. FSU is basically on par with them rankings wise.

This is about athletics, it's an athletic conference. The CIC is a nice little bonus that the Big Ten has, but it's impact is marginal at best.

Re-read this thread and get back to me. Hell look at what the Big Ten did last month and get back to me.

The Big Ten isn't the SEC, these decisions aren't made in a vacuum where athletics are the only thing driving the boat.

 

[JBaney45]

Re-read this thread and get back to me. Hell look at what the Big Ten did last month and get back to me.

The Big Ten isn't the SEC, these decisions aren't made in a vacuum where athletics are the only thing driving the boat.

The Big Ten added Maryland and Rutgers for east coast exposure TV dollars.
We added Nebraska for football.

Never did they say "Oh we need another school to share research with, let's bring them to the conference"


If FSU were going to seriously commit to joining we'd take them. You don't add Virginia over FSU to the Big Ten because you want to have some sort of academic relationship with them. If that's so important you can go share all the research that you want without having an athletic relationship with them. Hell we still let the U of Chicago in our grouping and we haven't been affiliated with them in sports for 60+ years.


Sure there is a standard, we don't want glorified community colleges like an Auburn or something driving our bus. But is FSU really that bad of a school? Most university rankings say differently, and honestly there isn't a reason to believe that they won't continue to improve like many big ten schools (including us) have recently.

 

[Mike80]

The Big Ten added Maryland and Rutgers for east coast exposure TV dollars.
We added Nebraska for football.

Never did they say "Oh we need another school to share research with, let's bring them to the conference"


If FSU were going to seriously commit to joining we'd take them. You don't add Virginia over FSU to the Big Ten because you want to have some sort of academic relationship with them. If that's so important you can go share all the research that you want without having an athletic relationship with them. Hell we still let the U of Chicago in our grouping and we haven't been affiliated with them in sports for 60+ years.


Sure there is a standard, we don't want glorified community colleges like an Auburn or something driving our bus. But is FSU really that bad of a school? Most university rankings say differently, and honestly there isn't a reason to believe that they won't continue to improve like many big ten schools (including us) have recently.

So you're privy to the discussions between the school presidents?

 

[JBaney45]

So you're privy to the discussions between the school presidents?

And you are?

I read between the lines. We had a chance to add Missouri and we took Nebraska. Nebraska is the worst academic school in the Big Ten yet we took them when a superior school wanted in.


The Big Ten started this conference expansion bit and the goal behind it wasn't about academics. Again I'm not saying there isn't a standard, you have to be careful about who you invite to the table to work alongside you. But a lot of this is window dressing and I don't buy for a second that they believe the right call is to add 4 more teams without getting a significant football power among them. If FSU wants to get on board with us they'll get on board.

 

[zincfinger]

And you are?

I read between the lines. We had a chance to add Missouri and we took Nebraska. Nebraska is the worst academic school in the Big Ten yet we took them when a superior school wanted in.


The Big Ten started this conference expansion bit and the goal behind it wasn't about academics. Again I'm not saying there isn't a standard, you have to be careful about who you invite to the table to work alongside you. But a lot of this is window dressing and I don't buy for a second that they believe the right call is to add 4 more teams without getting a significant football power among them. If FSU wants to get on board with us they'll get on board.

Baney, I agree with you on your points about the CIC being overblown, and that the effects of conference expansion on research funding are largely mythological. And, while I don't know how important AAU membership is to the current BigTen presidents, I do think its importance is really only one of prestige, not of anything practical or tangible.

That said, there is one difference between adding Nebraska vs. hypothetically adding FSU. Nebraska was always a very good geographic and cultural fit with the traditional BigTen. FSU is neither. Maybe CFB is moving into an era when those things don't matter. But I could see those factors making a school like FSU one of minimal interest for the BigTen.

 

[Steve19]

Here are some thoughts.

1. It's a LOT easier to turn around a football program than it is to build a high-level research culture at a low performing university.
2. Athletic departments have structure. You hire an AD, the AD hires coaches, the coaches hire assistants, and the players do their thing. Throughout the structure, people report to people. People can be instructed to do things.
3. A research culture can take years to develop. Faculty do the research that interests them or for which they have funding. They have to negotiate peer-review networks, who assess whether their research makes original and important contributions. A major thrust of academic research in recent years has been the need to collaborate with other very bright people, who are conducting such research with success.

Personally, I am working with (or can think of people I'd like to work with) at every B1G university, Rutgers, Maryland, several ACC schools and just about every CIC member. One of my colleagues was just at Nebraska. I can't think of anyone that I'd like to work with at Florida State.

If I were a CIC school, I'd be looking at their modest research budgets, low ability to contribute, and other liabilities when I was asked to have them hanging around trying to enter my research projects and live off my funding.

Athletics are a very, very small part of what universities do. Fans make the mistake of seeing that differently, faculty and administrators who determine policy and budgets do not.

 

[JBaney45]

Baney, I agree with you on your points about the CIC being overblown, and that the effects of conference expansion on research funding are largely mythological. And, while I don't know how important AAU membership is to the current BigTen presidents, I do think its importance is really only one of prestige, not of anything practical or tangible.

That said, there is one difference between adding Nebraska vs. hypothetically adding FSU. Nebraska was always a very good geographic and cultural fit with the traditional BigTen. FSU is neither. Maybe CFB is moving into an era when those things don't matter. But I could see those factors making a school like FSU one of minimal interest for the BigTen.

I definitely see where you are coming from with that, personally I would have liked to keep that midwestern culture as a driving factor when it came to adding more schools. It just seems like that got thrown out when we brought Rutgers and Maryland on board and the rest of the countries moves seem to be forcing our hand.

 

[zincfinger]

Personally, I am working with (or can think of people I'd like to work with) at every B1G university, Rutgers, Maryland, several ACC schools and just about every CIC member. One of my colleagues was just at Nebraska. I can't think of anyone that I'd like to work with at Florida State.

If I were a CIC school, I'd be looking at their modest research budgets, low ability to contribute, and other liabilities when I was asked to have them hanging around trying to enter my research projects and live off my funding.

Perhaps it depends on your field of study, but there are excellent researchers at FSU. We collaborated with one when I was at OSU, and the guy's top of his field. Maybe they're not as numerous as at some of the higher rated research schools, but it's not as if people are down there rubbing sticks together, trying to invoke the magic light spirit.

But you're right that research funding revolves around the individual lab, moreso than around the University. As such, no one is poaching on your research dollars unless you choose to collaborate with him, CIC or not.

And I'm not sure the key to success is all that different. If you want a top-flight football program, and you have reasonable resources, you have to spend the money to hire a top-flight coach with a track record of success. Similarly, if you want top-flight research programs, and you have reasonable resources, you have to spend the money to hire top-flight research professors with a track record of success. I agree that it's less centralized, however.