Cracks in the B1G?

[1SEIACLONE]

This whole process started with the formation of BTN and the money that it could provide for the member schools. Once their plan was in place, it made sense to start stealing schools from other conferences to continue to grow the size of the conference to continue to bring in ever increasing piles of money for the schools. Before BTN, movement was random at best, Arkansas leaving the SWC for the SEC, Penn State moving from independent to the B10. Even the ACC taking schools from the Big East was done to get those schools into a more football centered conference and away from a basketball center one that the Big East was. Once BTN starting rolling in the money, the larger brands quickly realized just how much money they could make if they could move to the B10 or SEC, which dwarfed what they were ever going to make in the B12, P12 or ACC. But to say that the B10 was just following the MO already set does not tell the entire story. They were the conference pioneering what was happening to give them an advantage over the other conferences. They got stronger while the other schools got weaker, except for the SEC schools.

 

[HFCS]

Meh. We've won 9 of the last 10. Rivalry?

I grew up an Iowa fan on the border in 80s/90s and I hated Nebraska 100x more than any team Iowa regularly played.

 

[AuH2O]

Yeah but the SWC was pretty much on the verge of collapse all by itself when that happened.

Correct. It was the first big domino, but SWC was dying already.

The first real poaching was def the ACC taking Miami and VT and to a lesser extent the others.

The Big East wasn’t very good at that time, but it was viable as a power conference in football with VT and Miami. It was the first big move and literally started the death of a power conference in football. It hung on to BCS status, but when you have Rutgers and UConn battling at the top, you knew it’s days were numbered.

 

[AuH2O]

This whole process started with the formation of BTN and the money that it could provide for the member schools. Once their plan was in place, it made sense to start stealing schools from other conferences to continue to grow the size of the conference to continue to bring in ever increasing piles of money for the schools. Before BTN, movement was random at best, Arkansas leaving the SWC for the SEC, Penn State moving from independent to the B10. Even the ACC taking schools from the Big East was done to get those schools into a more football centered conference and away from a basketball center one that the Big East was. Once BTN starting rolling in the money, the larger brands quickly realized just how much money they could make if they could move to the B10 or SEC, which dwarfed what they were ever going to make in the B12, P12 or ACC. But to say that the B10 was just following the MO already set does not tell the entire story. They were on of the school pioneering what was happening to give them an advantage over the other conferences. They got stronger while the other schools got weaker, except for the SEC schools.

This really isn’t true. At the point the ACC poached these schools, the Big East was a better football league than the ACC. ACC was FSU, and pre-national title contender Clemson and a bunch of basketball schools.

It was more like the ACC poached them to gain more legitimacy in FB. ACC was a pretty garbage football conference at the time. There were so many basketball only schools in the Big East, and other than Syracuse and Temple, the schools that had football were much more football schools than basketball schools at that time.

 

[1SEIACLONE]

This really isn’t true. At the point the ACC poached these schools, the Big East was a better football league than the ACC. ACC was FSU, and pre-national title contender Clemson and a bunch of basketball schools.

It was more like the ACC poached them to gain more legitimacy in FB. ACC was a pretty garbage football conference at the time. There were so many basketball only schools in the Big East, and other than Syracuse and Temple, the schools that had football were much more football schools than basketball schools at that time.

ESPN had one of their shows on the Big East and how strong they were at bb, and how it was a mistake to bring in the more football playing schools when they expanded. It shifted everything away from their bread and butter which was mbb. They also were talks to bring in Penn State, but the bb schools thought that would push them more to a football direction. The thought according to the program that by bringing in the football schools, they could isolate the ACC and surpass them as a conference in both football and bb. It backfired when the new schools they brought in jumped to the ACC because they did not like playing the smaller bb schools in the NE. The Big East had become the premier mbb league with Georgetown, Villanova and others winning titles, one year they had 3 of the final 4 teams in the final four. As strong as Duke and N. Carolina and even Maryland were they could not compete with what the Big East was throwing there top to bottom in conference play in bb.

 

[2speedy1]

This really isn’t true. At the point the ACC poached these schools, the Big East was a better football league than the ACC. ACC was FSU, and pre-national title contender Clemson and a bunch of basketball schools.

It was more like the ACC poached them to gain more legitimacy in FB. ACC was a pretty garbage football conference at the time. There were so many basketball only schools in the Big East, and other than Syracuse and Temple, the schools that had football were much more football schools than basketball schools at that time.

To me the issue is I feel like the Big East was never really stable from the time it was formed in '91. So it always feels like it was on the verge of collapse from inception. It was a conference started very late by mashing a bunch of independents together, that never really had a history of being together. Sure a lot played each other regularly but not really worked together. Then you add in the Basketball only schools and it just never had much stability.

The conference had been together for barely a decade when the ACC came calling. The first really long term established school that had a long term conference relationship was the B1G taking Nebby. Soon followed by the other 3 defectors. That to me was the first real poaching of a school that really was established in a conference long term. I do realize the b12 was not formed until the 90s but it was basically just a continuance of the Big8.

 

[Gonzo]

Right. I gave you several examples of the additions of the B12 creating (or maintaining for BYU vs Utah) regional rivalries.

So, it sounds like you agree with the paragraph you quoted from the article then.

Nah. There weren't any roots-regional rivalries with the additions of WVU or UCF when they were added.

If the Big 12 could've added any of those blueblood brands like USC, Oregon, or even non-bluebloods UCLA and Washington, it would have, without any regard for regional rivalries with existing members.

 

[Gonzo]

This really isn’t true. At the point the ACC poached these schools, the Big East was a better football league than the ACC. ACC was FSU, and pre-national title contender Clemson and a bunch of basketball schools.

It was more like the ACC poached them to gain more legitimacy in FB. ACC was a pretty garbage football conference at the time. There were so many basketball only schools in the Big East, and other than Syracuse and Temple, the schools that had football were much more football schools than basketball schools at that time.

This. Raiding another conference and poaching its member schools was an unprecedented move. The B1G had never done it. The SEC had never done it (I don't count Arkansas because the SWC was already on the verge of collapse). The ACC started all of this in the early 2000s.

 

[FinalFourCy]

Nah. There weren't any roots-regional rivalries with the additions of WVU or UCF when they were added.

If the Big 12 could've added any of those blueblood brands like USC, Oregon, or even non-bluebloods UCLA and Washington, it would have, without any regard for regional rivalries with existing members.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

I can understand why you’re so butthurt over the article. The BIG is becoming a sterile made-for-TV-conference. As those conferences get further away from tradition, they tend to evolve into things like unequal revenue sharing. Adding more schools will even further make it the BIG in name only.

 

[CascadeClone]

Don’t spread that noise. We started it in the 1900s when the Big12 got Texas and A&M!!!

"the 1900s"

that's gonna sting for a lot of us around here

 

[CascadeClone]

Whether you believe its likely or not, if unequal revenue becomes a thing in the B1G, would anyone be surprised if it was Ohio State that led that charge for it?

They are a top 5 "who killed CFB" villain in my mind. Right up there with TV money and Sankey.

 

[Rural]

Why does Iowa have three protected rivalries with one being Nebraska?

 

[madguy30]

To me the issue is I feel like the Big East was never really stable from the time it was formed in '91. So it always feels like it was on the verge of collapse from inception. It was a conference started very late by mashing a bunch of independents together, that never really had a history of being together. Sure a lot played each other regularly but not really worked together. Then you add in the Basketball only schools and it just never had much stability.

The conference had been together for barely a decade when the ACC came calling. The first really long term established school that had a long term conference relationship was the B1G taking Nebby. Soon followed by the other 3 defectors. That to me was the first real poaching of a school that really was established in a conference long term. I do realize the b12 was not formed until the 90s but it was basically just a continuance of the Big8.

Maybe you're referring to a different form of it but I just looked it up and it was formed in 1979.

It added Miami, WV, etc. in 1991.

The OG Big East was some intense basketball back in the day.

 

[Clonehomer]

Whether you believe its likely or not, if unequal revenue becomes a thing in the B1G, would anyone be surprised if it was Ohio State that led that charge for it?

They are a top 5 "who killed CFB" villain in my mind. Right up there with TV money and Sankey.

Jim Delaney should be on that list. He’s more responsible than Sankey IMO. Sankey played well in the environment that Delaney created.

 

[Gonzo]

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

I can understand why you’re so butthurt over the article. The BIG is becoming a sterile made-for-TV-conference. As those conferences get further away from tradition, they tend to evolve into things like unequal revenue sharing. Adding more schools will even further make it the BIG in name only.

Lol...

Iowa/Minnesota
Minnesota/Wisconsin
Michigan/Michigan St.
Ohio St./Michigan
USC/UCLA
Penn St./Ohio St.
Indiana/Purdue
Illinois/Northwestern
Michigan/Penn St.
Wisconsin/Iowa
Washington/Oregon
Iowa/Illinois
Michigan/Minnesota
Oregon/USC

Every one of these games has either been played for at least 75-100+ years, or is a newer regional rivalry between national power programs. But sure, no tradition or intrigue anymore in the B1G. Lol.

 

[FinalFourCy]

Whether you believe its likely or not, if unequal revenue becomes a thing in the B1G, would anyone be surprised if it was Ohio State that led that charge for it?

They are a top 5 "who killed CFB" villain in my mind. Right up there with TV money and Sankey.

Is this even a question? They’re arguably the most watched brand.

I’m not sure that wouldn’t make Ohio St a villain. Maybe an antihero

It’s actually beneficial to half the P4. Ending the country club socialism model.

 

[FinalFourCy]

Lol...

Iowa/Minnesota
Minnesota/Wisconsin
Michigan/Michigan St.
Ohio St./Michigan
USC/UCLA
Penn St./Ohio St.
Indiana/Purdue
Illinois/Northwestern
Michigan/Penn St.
Wisconsin/Iowa
Washington/Oregon
Iowa/Illinois
Michigan/Minnesota
Oregon/USC

Every one of these games has either been played for at least 75-100+ years, or is a newer regional rivalry between national power programs. But sure, no tradition or intrigue anymore in the B1G. Lol.

Again, whatever helps you sleep at night. In this case, only including a small fraction of the schedule, and before further realignment takes some of those away too.

Ignorance is a bliss for you, no doubt.

 

[Gonzo]

Again, whatever helps you sleep at night. In this case, only including a small fraction of the schedule, and before further realignment takes some of those away too.

Ignorance is a bliss for you, no doubt.

Lol, whatever you say.

Good luck against Arizona. I know the rivalry and hatred runs deep in that regional brawl.

 

[Cloneon]

Something not mentioned is the strategy of this so-called leak. 'Alternatives' need to be created to substantiate the potential threat of revenue sharing. Of course everyone has been talking about a Super conference for a long time now. But if it has no teeth, the threats are merely hot air. And hot-air almost always comes back around to haunt you. If the next comment is something like Alabama, Ohio State and ESPN have met to discuss monetary options in the future, THEN we have hypothetical teeth.

 

[JM4CY]

Again, whatever helps you sleep at night. In this case, only including a small fraction of the schedule, and before further realignment takes some of those away too.

Ignorance is a bliss for you, no doubt.

There's so many games that are played and this is such a small percentage. Also, to include a chunk of those games as "tradition" or whatever is pretty hilarious. No one gives a crap about some of those matchups.