• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

Jump to latest Follow Reply

Which Teams Should the Big Ten Add? (please limit to four selections)

  • Boston College

    Votes: 32 10.2%

  • Cincinnati

    Votes: 19 6.1%

  • Connecticut

    Votes: 6 1.9%

  • Duke

    Votes: 21 6.7%

  • Georgia Tech

    Votes: 55 17.6%

  • Kansas

    Votes: 46 14.7%

  • Maryland

    Votes: 67 21.4%

  • Missouri

    Votes: 90 28.8%

  • North Carolina

    Votes: 39 12.5%

  • Notre Dame

    Votes: 209 66.8%

  • Oklahoma

    Votes: 78 24.9%

  • Pittsburgh

    Votes: 45 14.4%

  • Rutgers

    Votes: 40 12.8%

  • Syracuse

    Votes: 18 5.8%

  • Texas

    Votes: 121 38.7%

  • Vanderbilt

    Votes: 15 4.8%

  • Virginia

    Votes: 47 15.0%

  • Virginia Tech

    Votes: 62 19.8%

  • Stay at 12 teams and don't expand

    Votes: 27 8.6%

  • Add some other school(s) not listed

    Votes: 25 8.0%
  • Total voters
    313
Sort by date Sort by votes
If we're going to talk about offseason stuff like this during the offseason, we should also put a mechanism in place to expel underperforming teams in favor of recent success. Using LJB's examples, Nebraska would likely be kicked out in favor of Wisconsin sometime around 2010 (if Wisconsin hadn't gotten in previously, that is).

Cut the super league down to nine teams (argue over which 9 all you want). Play 4 home games, 4 away games, and 4 outside the conference. Bottom 3 teams get the boot every year, and 3 new teams are chosen.
Or.. 2 divisions of 9 each. 4 home within your division, 4 away within your division, 4 outside of conference, and then a championship game, and maybe play 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3, 4 vs 4, etc. In the #7, #8, #9 games, the loser gets kicked out and replaced by new teams.
 
Upvote 0
Zurp said:
If we're going to talk about offseason stuff like this during the offseason, we should also put a mechanism in place to expel underperforming teams in favor of recent success. Using LJB's examples, Nebraska would likely be kicked out in favor of Wisconsin sometime around 2010 (if Wisconsin hadn't gotten in previously, that is).

Cut the super league down to nine teams (argue over which 9 all you want). Play 4 home games, 4 away games, and 4 outside the conference. Bottom 3 teams get the boot every year, and 3 new teams are chosen.
Or.. 2 divisions of 9 each. 4 home within your division, 4 away within your division, 4 outside of conference, and then a championship game, and maybe play 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3, 4 vs 4, etc. In the #7, #8, #9 games, the loser gets kicked out and replaced by new teams.
Click to expand...

I like this, but I would work relegation slightly differently. Relegation should not be automatic. If a team has been top-2 in their division for a decade and has one down year, relegating them would probably mean replacing them with an inferior team. I would have some means where consistency over time could keep a team from being relegated for a bad break.

Also, facing the fact that this isn't just a new league, but rather a new top division in CFB that happens to be so exclusive that it's the size of a conference. All transfers from lower-division schools are immediately eligible, unless they've had transferred to the lower-division school from another top-division school less than one season ago. I could also be persuaded to accept a one-time transfer rule within the new top division.


.
.
.


Wow

It's amazing what meaningless drivel spews from this keyboard when I have to sit in on interviewer training for two hours. None of this will ever be considered... But we're still more than a month away from starting the countdown thread so...
 
Upvote 0
Zurp said:
If we're going to talk about offseason stuff like this during the offseason, we should also put a mechanism in place to expel underperforming teams in favor of recent success. Using LJB's examples, Nebraska would likely be kicked out in favor of Wisconsin sometime around 2010 (if Wisconsin hadn't gotten in previously, that is).

Cut the super league down to nine teams (argue over which 9 all you want). Play 4 home games, 4 away games, and 4 outside the conference. Bottom 3 teams get the boot every year, and 3 new teams are chosen.
Or.. 2 divisions of 9 each. 4 home within your division, 4 away within your division, 4 outside of conference, and then a championship game, and maybe play 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3, 4 vs 4, etc. In the #7, #8, #9 games, the loser gets kicked out and replaced by new teams.
Click to expand...

I like this idea much better than the "Super League" concept, you don't have to worry about booting anybody out every year:

Currently:

ACC has 14 teams
SEC has 14 teams
B1G has 14 teams
PAC-12 has 12 teams
Big XII has 10 teams.

Dissolve the Big XII and move 2 teams to the B1G, 2 teams to the ACC, 2 teams to the SEC, and 4 teams to the PAC-12; and create 4 "Super Conferences". These four conference champions are the 4 teams in the CFPs.

DaddyBigBucks said:
It's amazing what meaningless drivel spews from this keyboard when I have to sit in on interviewer training for two hours. None of this will ever be considered... But we're still more than a month away from starting the countdown thread so...
Click to expand...

It's actually amazing the meaningless discussions on this board when there isn't a whole lot of real Buckeye football news to discuss.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
ScriptOhio said:
Currently:

ACC has 14 teams
SEC has 14 teams
B1G has 14 teams
PAC-12 has 12 teams
Big XII has 10 teams.

Dissolve the Big XII and move 2 teams to the B1G, 2 teams to the ACC, 2 teams to the SEC, and 4 teams to the PAC-12; and create 4 "Super Conferences". These four conference champions are the 4 teams in the CFPs
Click to expand...

Hmm.

SEC gets TCU and Baylor
ACC gets Texas Tech and West Virginia
B1G gets Kansas and Oklahoma
PAC gets Kansas State, Iowa State, Oklahoma State, and Texas

This in no way would ever happen. B1G would more than likely get ISU and Kansas based off location.

However, what about @ORD_Buckeye favorite team? Cincinnati
 
Upvote 0
Jake said:
Oregon? Talk about recency bias. Their all-time winning percentage is .570.

Bleepin' Tennessee is .671, they have 6 NCs compared to 0 for the Ducks, 177 more wins, and 3 more conference championships. LSU puts the Ducks to shame as well.

Someone was trying too hard to include the PAC 12.
Click to expand...
Not to mention that Tennessee has a 100K+ stadium that they fill despite recent lack of success vs 56K Autzen Stadium.
Zurp said:
If we're going to talk about offseason stuff like this during the offseason, we should also put a mechanism in place to expel underperforming teams in favor of recent success. Using LJB's examples, Nebraska would likely be kicked out in favor of Wisconsin sometime around 2010 (if Wisconsin hadn't gotten in previously, that is).

Cut the super league down to nine teams (argue over which 9 all you want). Play 4 home games, 4 away games, and 4 outside the conference. Bottom 3 teams get the boot every year, and 3 new teams are chosen.
Or.. 2 divisions of 9 each. 4 home within your division, 4 away within your division, 4 outside of conference, and then a championship game, and maybe play 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3, 4 vs 4, etc. In the #7, #8, #9 games, the loser gets kicked out and replaced by new teams.
Click to expand...
I think there are only 24 schools whose football programs pay their own way. A super conference should stipulate that the team must be capable of making a profit consistently - in which case Nebraska is in and probably the only team in the PAC that can pay its own way is USC. As mentioned in another post - Autzen Stadium only holds 56K and Husky Stadium 73K - Gonna be tough to make the grade with houses that small.
 
Upvote 0
ScriptOhio said:
Dissolve the Big XII and move 2 teams to the B1G, 2 teams to the ACC, 2 teams to the SEC, and 4 teams to the PAC-12; and create 4 "Super Conferences". These four conference champions are the 4 teams in the CFPs.
Click to expand...

I'm not crazy about it. 16 teams in a conference - 2 divisions of 8? 4 divisions of 4? If it's 2 divisions of 8, you play the other 7 teams in your division, and 1-2 teams in the opposite division. Is there a protected team in the opposite division? If so, it's going to take a long time to play everyone in the opposite division. What's the point of being considered to be the same conference? Other than opening the playoffs against that division champion every year, that is. And that's the other thing I don't like: I'll use Northwestern as an example. In 2018 I think it was, they were 8-4 and won the Big 10 west. There is no boofing way that I will ever support a system that lets a 4-loss team into a 4-team playoff. And that's what it will be. It will be an 8-team playoff, and if they happen to beat Ohio State that year (hindsight says that didn't happen, so no harm, no foul, but it's always a possibility; Ohio State got crushed by Purdue that year, for the love of fuck), they're in a 4-team playoff.

I know I'm pushing this into the "Playoffs" discussion, and I apologize. But I don't like the idea of any conferences being written into the system as being better than other conferences. Yes, we all agree that these four super conferences will be better than the conferences/teams left out. But there should be some way for Southeast Alaska State to be allowed in, if they've shown they can win these games.
 
Upvote 0


Auburn coach Bryan Harsin has an interesting perspective on the debate, since he just arrived from Group of Five power Boise State. Harsin explained his stance on possible CFP expansion Wednesday during an appearance on the Paul Finebaum Show.

“That’s been a topic of conversation for a while now, and I would support (expansion)," Harsin said. "I think ultimately it will head that direction. And I’ve said this before: Any team that has won all their games should have a chance to play for it all. Whether that’s a four-game, six-game, eight-game, whatever that model is, as long as it stays within the time frame where our student-athletes have a chance when the season ends that they have a break, where they have a chance to just decompress. I always think that’s the balance there, is how much does that season lead into the next school semester and back into the work that you’re gonna do.

"We’re kinda doing that now with the national championship game but I think we’ll head that direction at some point. It’s gonna continue to be a conversation and there’s gonna continue to be various opinions on that. But if that’s the model we work towards in the future, and if that’s gonna give us the best teams to play for the championship at the very end, then that’s the model we’ll support. The goal is just to be in it at the end of the day.”

Just sayin': Yeah right, some team in a lower conference (or an independent) with a 100% cupcake schedule goes 12-0 so they should get a spot in the CFPs. Apparently Bryan Harsin is an idiot, because that's a joke.
 
Upvote 0
ScriptOhio said:


Auburn coach Bryan Harsin has an interesting perspective on the debate, since he just arrived from Group of Five power Boise State. Harsin explained his stance on possible CFP expansion Wednesday during an appearance on the Paul Finebaum Show.

“That’s been a topic of conversation for a while now, and I would support (expansion)," Harsin said. "I think ultimately it will head that direction. And I’ve said this before: Any team that has won all their games should have a chance to play for it all. Whether that’s a four-game, six-game, eight-game, whatever that model is, as long as it stays within the time frame where our student-athletes have a chance when the season ends that they have a break, where they have a chance to just decompress. I always think that’s the balance there, is how much does that season lead into the next school semester and back into the work that you’re gonna do.

"We’re kinda doing that now with the national championship game but I think we’ll head that direction at some point. It’s gonna continue to be a conversation and there’s gonna continue to be various opinions on that. But if that’s the model we work towards in the future, and if that’s gonna give us the best teams to play for the championship at the very end, then that’s the model we’ll support. The goal is just to be in it at the end of the day.”

Just sayin': Yeah right, some team in a lower conference (or an independent) with a 100% cupcake schedule goes 12-0 so they should get a spot in the CFPs. Apparently Bryan Harsin is an idiot, because that's a joke.
Click to expand...


He's still thinking like a mid-major guy. Give him a year or two, and he'll forget where he came from. If it does go to 8, I'm all for the highest ranked mid-major getting in just so that Saban can send them off to get their shinebox every year, and we can dispel the notion that they ever deserved to belong.
 
Upvote 0
ORD_Buckeye said:
He's still thinking like a mid-major guy. Give him a year or two, and he'll forget where he came from. If it does go to 8, I'm all for the highest ranked mid-major getting in just so that Saban can send them off to get their shinebox every year, and we can dispel the notion that they ever deserved to belong.
Click to expand...

The playoff should go to 6 or 8 teams, IMO. It would put an emphasis on winning your conference, or (at worst) getting to your CCG.

6 TEAMS- All P5 conference champions & the highest ranked G5 conference champion, putting an emphasis on WINNING YOUR CONFERENCE.
8 TEAMS- All P5 conference champions, highest ranked G5 conference champion, 2 highest ranked at CCG losers.
 
Upvote 0
NYG21254246 said:
The playoff should go to 6 or 8 teams, IMO. It would put an emphasis on winning your conference, or (at worst) getting to your CCG.

6 TEAMS- All P5 conference champions & the highest ranked G5 conference champion, putting an emphasis on WINNING YOUR CONFERENCE.
8 TEAMS- All P5 conference champions, highest ranked G5 conference champion, 2 highest ranked at CCG losers.
Click to expand...

USC won their conference last year. They completely sucked.

How does that make the playoff better?

Also, why reward the Wisconsin model of winning a bad division and penalize really good teams that happen to be in the same division as a Bama or Ohio State? Loser of the CCG isn't always the 2nd best team in the conference.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top