I read this somewhere, can't remember the source, but anyway ... if the Big 10 adds Missouri, Pitt and Rutgers, it can still be called the Big 10 because 10 states will be represented among the 14 teams (Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Missouri, New Jersey and 2 each in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Indiana and Illinois).

I know, not exactly brain busting, but it would alleviate some of the concerns of renaming the conference ... sorry if this is old news, I just read this, and seemed equally simple and brilliant.

I hadn't even thought about it. Nice point.

BigAppleBuckeye wrote: I read this somewhere, can't remember the source, but anyway ... if the Big 10 adds Missouri, Pitt and Rutgers, it can still be called the Big 10 because 10 states will be represented among the 14 teams (Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Missouri, New Jersey and 2 each in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Indiana and Illinois).

I know, not exactly brain busting, but it would alleviate some of the concerns of renaming the conference ... sorry if this is old news, I just read this, and seemed equally simple and brilliant.

Technically, there is only nine states.


#1 Ohio
#2 Iowa
#3 Minnesota
#4 Wisconsin
#5 Missouri
#6 New Jersey
#7 Pennsylvania
#8 Indiana
#9 Illinois

Remember....WE OWN MICHIGAN. Ok ok 10.

^^^ Doesn't Michigan lead the series?

If OSU can win the next 15 years in a row, then they will "own" Michigan.

B10 Presidents Meeting tomorrow to discuss expansion!

http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/04/big-ten-reps-to-talk-expansion-in-dc-on-sunday.html

goosebumps wrote: ^^^ Doesn't Michigan lead the series?

If OSU can win the next 15 years in a row, then they will "own" Michigan.

See, it can't be both ways, either we use the past and relish it, or we forget about it.

or you look at it since the modern era of football (plastic helmets) began and look at the record...who gives a shit about what they did with those lameass leather helmets

BigAppleBuckeye wrote: I read this somewhere, can't remember the source, but anyway ... if the Big 10 adds Missouri, Pitt and Rutgers, it can still be called the Big 10 because 10 states will be represented among the 14 teams (Ohio, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Missouri, New Jersey and 2 each in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Indiana and Illinois).

I know, not exactly brain busting, but it would alleviate some of the concerns of renaming the conference ... sorry if this is old news, I just read this, and seemed equally simple and brilliant.

Not.
Gonna.
Happen.

When the Big Ten expands, it will probably be adding Notre Dame (I say blech, but I can't see them turning down the academic millions that would come with membership, and the better athletic $$ this time.)

The other two will hopefully be Texas and Texas A&M as a package deal. If for some reason ND says no again (my preference), I'd bring in Missouri.

With the Texas schools and Missouri you'd add some major TV markets (all of Texas, St. Louis and Kansas City), along with some pretty good academic institutions.

Pittsburgh and Rutgers bring ZERO to the equation in financial potential, which is why I don't see them being invited.

Rutgers does not being much on the field, but they do bring in 7.8M new subscribers to the Big Ten Network, which I think is the big reason why they are being considered. The thought is also they would draw more interest for the Big Ten Netowrk for the millions of viewers across the river in NYC.

Very few people in the NYC area care about Rutgers (football or otherwise), there aren't many that care about college sports in general excluding the Michigan/Ohio St./Penn. St./Texas, etc. alums that live there. The New Jersey and northeast area therefrom focuses predominantly on pro sports. Rutgers would be a terrible addition to the Big 10. Mediocre football program (notwithstanding Schiano's efforts) with a crap recruiting base, awful basketball program and an administration aloof to the sports program generally.

Speaking of the Big Ten network...did you guys know that it is available in Vancouver, as are the Detroit local channels?

UA5straightin2008 wrote: or you look at it since the modern era of football (plastic helmets) began and look at the record...who gives a shit about what they did with those lameass leather helmets

Typical OSU response...havent both teams always used the same equipment? Every game counts.