Best one I've read yet...

http://www.offtackleempire.com/2011/9/19/2435122/the-big-ten-expanding-to-16-teams-its-time-to-work-your-b1g-quads

2 things right off the bat that stood out to me

1-ND isn't going to just join the B1G that easily

2-you're going to put KU and Mizzou in the B1G and not put them in the same division?

SportsAndLady;904904 wrote:2 things right off the bat that stood out to me

1-ND isn't going to just join the B1G that easily

2-you're going to put KU and Mizzou in the B1G and not put them in the same division?

I think that it was just for the purposes of "filling the conference". In other words, I don't think he focused too much on what teams would be part of the conference, just the way the conference would work should it expand to 16 teams.

OhioStatePride2003;904911 wrote:I think that it was just for the purposes of "filling the conference". In other words, I don't think he focused too much on what teams would be part of the conference, just the way the conference would work should it expand to 16 teams.

Just seems like he put things together without actually thinking realism.

Like if I just said:

Okay how about this...B1G add Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, and Connecticut.

And BOOM! An expansion idea!!

SportsAndLady;904922 wrote:Just seems like he put things together without actually thinking realism.

Like if I just said:

Okay how about this...B1G add Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, and Connecticut.

And BOOM! An expansion idea!!

I dunno, I think it was well thought out. Regardless of who the teams are, if the B1G does indeed expand to 16 teams, I like the format and the way it'd workout. I think all conferences, not just the B1G, should look into the idea of setting it up this way. Like he writer said, if you just have an "East & West" in your conferences, you essentially just have two conferences with the same name. I like the quad idea. It'd be set-up pretty much the way the entire NFL is right now with the rotating divisions and what not.

Interesting idea, but I would rather have Cincy over Uconn....but I get why he said UConn, so the BIG could have that tv market which is actually the thing driving all of this expansion.


What makes me laugh is the little guys jumping into these bigger conferences....ie TCU going to Big East and now that move just looked stupid because all the big football schools are leaving.

OhioStatePride2003;904937 wrote:I dunno, I think it was well thought out. Regardless of who the teams are, if the B1G does indeed expand to 16 teams, I like the format and the way it'd workout. I think all conferences, not just the B1G, should look into the idea of setting it up this way. Like he writer said, if you just have an "East & West" in your conferences, you essentially just have two conferences with the same name. I like the quad idea. It'd be set-up pretty much the way the entire NFL is right now with the rotating divisions and what not.

The quads also have the same potential problem that the NFL runs into with only 4 teams in a divison. You could have a very bad team be the champ of a quad by default. Look at the NFC west last year. You will have years when a 5-4 team (or worse) wins one of the quads.

4 team pods have already been discussed in the event the Pac 12 goes to 16.

karen lotz;904973 wrote:4 team pods have already been discussed in the event the Pac 12 goes to 16.

WAC used this system when they went 16 as well. It's about the only way to manage it.

Al Bundy;904953 wrote:The quads also have the same potential problem that the NFL runs into with only 4 teams in a divison. You could have a very bad team be the champ of a quad by default. Look at the NFC west last year. You will have years when a 5-4 team (or worse) wins one of the quads.

Just because a team has the best record within their division/pod/quad doesn't make them division/pod/quad champions, according to the NFL that is.

OQB;904945 wrote:Interesting idea, but I would rather have Cincy over Uconn....but I get why he said UConn, so the BIG could have that tv market which is actually the thing driving all of this expansion.


What makes me laugh is the little guys jumping into these bigger conferences....ie TCU going to Big East and now that move just looked stupid because all the big football schools are leaving.

TCU will probably end up in the same Conference as Baylor, Kansas, Iowa St, maybe a few others along with the rest of the Big East. I'd imagine they are fairly happy with that. Still much better than where they were.

wildcats20;904993 wrote:Just because a team has the best record within their division/pod/quad doesn't make them division/pod/quad champions, according to the NFL that is.

In the NFL, if you have the best record in the division, you win the division. The Seahawks were 7-9 last and won the division. If the Big Ten went to the quads, you will have years that 5-4 (or worse) will win a quad.

I like all but #4. I'm not sure I grasped #2 right but couldn't you have some double dipping meaning #1 and 2 etc from the east may have already played the west?

Al Bundy;905007 wrote:In the NFL, if you have the best record in the division, you win the division. The Seahawks were 7-9 last and won the division. If the Big Ten went to the quads, you will have years that 5-4 (or worse) will win a quad.

The Raiders went 6-0 in the AFC West last year(maybe 2 years ago). That is having the best record IN the AFC West. But they were not AFC West champs.

wildcats20;905019 wrote:The Raiders went 6-0 in the AFC West last year(maybe 2 years ago). That is having the best record IN the AFC West. But they were not AFC West champs.

Not the best divisional record, the best overall record.

Al Bundy;905032 wrote:Not the best divisional record, the best overall record.

I know.

I just don't think you would see too many really bad teams winning a pod or whatever it would be called.

I mean take the teams listed as they are...
B1G West: Iowa(8-5), Kansas(3-9), Minnesota(3-9), Nebraska(10-4)

B1G North: Connecticut(8-5), Michigan(7-6), Michigan State(11-2), Wisconsin(11-2)

B1G East: Indiana(5-7), Notre Dame(8-5), Penn State(7-6), Purdue(4-8)

B1G South: Illinois(7-6), Missouri(10-3), Northwestern(7-6), Ohio State(12-1)


Now those are overall records from last year. But the WORST overall record for a winner would have been 10-4. I just don't think we would see bad teams win a division.

wildcats20;905054 wrote:I know.

I just don't think you would see too many really bad teams winning a pod or whatever it would be called.

I mean take the teams listed as they are...
B1G West: Iowa(8-5), Kansas(3-9), Minnesota(3-9), Nebraska(10-4)

B1G North: Connecticut(8-5), Michigan(7-6), Michigan State(11-2), Wisconsin(11-2)

B1G East: Indiana(5-7), Notre Dame(8-5), Penn State(7-6), Purdue(4-8)

B1G South: Illinois(7-6), Missouri(10-3), Northwestern(7-6), Ohio State(12-1)


Now those are overall records from last year. But the WORST overall record for a winner would have been 10-4. I just don't think we would see bad teams win a division.

The East winner would have been 8-5

Al Bundy;905089 wrote:The East winner would have been 8-5

Yeah, I'm blind.

But 8-5 is still not horrible. And honestly, I think that division would be won with a better record most years.

wildcats20;905092 wrote:Yeah, I'm blind.

But 8-5 is still not horrible. And honestly, I think that division would be won with a better record most years.

Most years yes, but some of the quads aren't very deep. I would just hate to see system that would become too watered down. I think you would have a ton of internal fighting even trying to estabilish who is in what quad.

Al Bundy;905099 wrote:Most years yes, but some of the quads aren't very deep. I would just hate to see system that would become too watered down. I think you would have a ton of internal fighting even trying to estabilish who is in what quad.

I definitely agree with that.

LSUfreek=GOAT

What's the benefit in further expansion?

The only reason to expand further is money. Who is it that will bring in more money?

More TV money will come from Notre Dame but I still don't know if they want to be in a conference.

Ku?? Missouri??? aren't we talkin' small change there? I don't see any reason to add them for the sake of filling out slots.

Missou is going to the SEC anyway

Con_Alma;905561 wrote:What's the benefit in further expansion?

The only reason to expand further is money. Who is it that will bring in more money?

More TV money will come from Notre Dame but I still don't know if they want to be in a conference.

Ku?? Missouri??? aren't we talkin' small change there? I don't see any reason to add them for the sake of filling out slots.

I'd argue that bringing in Missouri and kansas adds two pretty damn good markets: Kansas City and St. Louis. Remember, expansion is about dollars, and having the BTN in bigger markets is going to add dollars for everyone.

If it's inevitable that leagues will be 16 teams (I mostly don't like the idea of super conferences), then I'd prefer the Big Ten get Kansas, Missouri, Notre Dame and one other. UConn probably doesn't fit because of its size (athletic department), so that 16th school isn't likely to be as strong as some of the others. I'm assuming Texas isn't a candidate because they will want to run everything like they do in the Big 12 and the Big Ten won't agree to that.

My preference would be to stop at 14 by adding Notre Dame and Missouri -- or if ND insists on staying Indy, then add Missouri and Kansas and call it a day. Then you'd have two 7-team divisions that would play six division games each year, have one cross-over rival that stays on the schedule, two crossover games that rotate, and three out of conference games.