You are hereMizzou, Syracuse lead Big Ten derby
Mizzou, Syracuse lead Big Ten derby
With the Big Ten talking expansion the second question is, does it change its name at 12? It’s a stretch but Big Ten is a strong brand. I say stick with it.
The first question, of course, is – assuming Notre Dame isn’t in the mix – who starts the conference dominos falling?
Here’s a list of possibilities based on location, athletic rep and market value. Others can debate the academic reputations:
1. Missouri
I’d make the Tigers a co-favorite. Mizzou nicely fits the geographic footprint, brings national profile major sports, and it makes sense for those in black and gold who look East.
The downside: Forget about recruiting Texas. Lone Star kids pick Big 12 North schools on the promise of returning a couple of times a year. Missouri would have to make that up in non-conference scheduling, and even then it probably wouldn’t fly.
Another consideration for Missouri is how relocation would impact travel and expense in sports other than football and basketball.
1. Syracuse
The other co-favorite. It would give the Big Ten another basketball power, but the big advantage is growing the conference in the New York market. There’s plenty of Orange flavor in the Big Apple.
Among the cons: Crappy football home and that’s kind of a big deal in the Big Ten. And is this who Joe Pa wants? Don’t underestimate the power of one person’s or school’s voice. Virginia Tech is in the ACC and not Syracuse because Virginia went to bat for the Hokies.
3. Pittsburgh
Solid choice, and unlike Missouri and Syracuse the Panthers wouldn’t stretch the league’s footprint. They share the football stadium with the Steelers and play in a new basketball arena.
But Pitt doesn’t bring media and market share that Penn State doesn’t already own.
4. Rutgers
The closest program to New York, and more of a NY draw than Syracuse. But the Scarlet Knights don’t bring as much stature as the others.
5. Texas
Because what Texas wants….
6. Nebraska
Big Ten would love its football.
7. (Tie) Cincinnati, Louisville, Iowa State, West Virginia, Connecticut and anybody else.
Posted in
Hi Blair, Syracuse as a co-favorite for B10 expansion is misleading and shows limited knowledge of the Big East Schools. Out of the Big East schools, Rutgers University is better positioned to join the B10 for numerous reasons.
Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, is a large public institution with significant expenditures in research and development and is similar to many of the other B10 schools compared to the smaller private Syracuse University.
Rutgers is also more closely aligned to the NY TV market and has a much larger Alumni base in the City than Syracuse, due to proximity. During important games (ie 2006 Louisville game or 2007 USF game), the Empire State Building is exhibited in Scarlet for ESPN. Rutgers will provide a better opportunity to enhance the B10 Network as a basic cable service for the metropolitan area (NJ, NY and South Conn.) compared to Syracuse and upstate NY. B10 games in NYC and Northern NJ will become a big deal and a tough ticket, because the alumni groups of B10 schools have large contingents in the NYC area.
As for stature of the programs, Rutgers is playing in its 5th consecutive bowl game, albeit minor bowls, compared to Syracuse who has not been to a bowl game in a long time due to the GRob era which was a complete disaster. Coach Schiano was offered and turned down both the Michigan and Miami HC positions and is growing the Rutgers football program into a winning program. Historically, Rutgers is the birthplace of College Football, playing the first college football game against Princeton.
DON'T CARE ABOUT COLLEGE FOOTBALL. It's about Big East basketball and professional sports. I've heard that over and over throughout these discussions about who can compete with MU going to the B10. If the only argument for Syracuse is basketball and NYC TV market, I don't think it's enough. I don't think Syracuse would want to leave their conference for basketball purposes, plus, they'd immediately be a bottom feeder in football in a high profile conference.
Lure UK away from the SEC. Yeah, yeah, they have been in the SEC forever, but their football program and their Mens Basketball program would be a better fit for the Big 10. Further, they would have a much greater regional rivalry with Ohio St. and Indiana they than do with anyone in the SEC.
It certainly isn't the way Joe Pa. would want to expand but I bet the ADs at THE OSU and IU and Purdue would be pretty interested.
Makes a lot more sense than BC in the ACC.
Is a legendary football power?
I agree that the Big 10 is trying to pressure ND. I also think Mizzou is trying to pressure the Big XII and I doubt they will actually move.
I think that the reason for successful recruiting in Texas by MU has to do with two things. First the Tigers have put together a nice little run in recent years under the current regime. Secondly Texas recruits still get to travel back to their home state for games by going to a Big XII school like MU and most importantly to them they will be seen on TV in their home state because that is what is shown there on ABC Saturday night and the rest of the Big XII TV games. The Big Ten network is available but obscure in this part of the country, actually many have to pay extra for this channel. It will not be the same exposure in KC either. If MU goes to the Big Ten, what October game is going to be shown in the KC area on ABC on Saturday nights? The obvious answer is the BIG XII game, as it has been and as it should be. I really believe that this is not a good move for MU when one rationally thinks things out. The fan base with out its long standing schedule and rivalries will become lethargic and apathetic in a fairly short amount of time. Other than the small amount of rabid all things Texas haters who will be briefly happy by this move, I am not sure who else is made happy or benefits in the long run
Here are some real rational thoughts regarding the Texas recruiting argument. As discussed in the following post by Chris on the Missouri to Big 10 website (www.big10mizzou.com), the Texas recruiting agrument is baseless for the following reasons:
"This year, arguably our best recruiting class ever, Mizzou has 1 recruit in the top 100 of Texas recruits.
James Franklin #37
The Big XII North, collectively, has five total recruits in Texas's top 100.
The Big XII South, collectively, has... well I'm not going to count because it's damn near everyone.
So here is the predicament for you passionate naysayers. Either Texas recruiting is extremely valuable, which means we're never going to compete with the south, or the athletes we get from Texas are diamonds that we mine and we can get them regardless of whether we play in Big XII or Big Ten."
Sign the petition for Mizzou to join the Big 10 at
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/mizzou2bigten/
Not sure what the recruiting rankings have to do with anything here or certainly what my previous post discussed. Recruiting rankings are extremely subjective and more often than not just a list based on where the player is committed to or being recruited by. I won't even bother to list the names of recent MU greats who came to the Tigers from Texas, because if you are truly a Tiger fan you know who they are as well as I and everyone else does.I get the feeling that much of this is still about a perceived lack of respect and stewing in anger over it all. If you want better bowl invitations try winning the conference for a change. At least some history of winning would help. It is not going to be any different in the big ten in that regard. Not everyone can be Oklahoma or Ohio State. If some how the foregone conclusion of MU admittance into the big ten doesn't work out perhaps you can start a little blog and petition for admittance into the MAC.
If Mizzou were to bolt to the Big 10, the Pac 10 might extend an invitation to Colorado. Were both schools to leave, it would be a devastating loss to the Big 12. And, they deserve it. Many of us are uncomfortable with the political influence of the Texas schools. It has changed the nature of the conference. The Texas schools, in my opinion, have tried to keep their Southwest Conference culture intact, which causes the Big 12's center of gravity to lean toward Dallas. Maybe that's for the best because the Oklahoma schools have natural geographic rivals in Texas.
But, I think MU and CU leaving would set the other Big 12 north schools adrift and looking to make other conference affiliations.
I'm not sure MU fans on this side of the state would be all that happy with MU in the Big 10. No conference championships would be held in KC and the MU/KU rivalry would lose it's importance. But, for those of us who have an unbridled hatred for the state of Texas, any change would be welcome.
Hey Blair. It is an open discussion right? Well then, from a cohort or colleague, consider this caveat.
I don't see a change to the Big 10 hurting MU recruiting in Texas because of the Big 10 Network showing a bunch of games all over the country. And, we're talking about scheduling SMU or Houston or the like in the non conference, maybe even TCU.
Also, checking the travel distances, many are as close as Lubbock or Boulder, etc.
How many other Big 10 schools recruit Texas? None on a consistent basis. If Mizzou goes to the Big 10, which it won't, then the texas base will dry up.
My own opinion, is that this is a ploy to get Notre Dame. Nobody else is being considered. It is Notre Dame or nothing!
Hello KC, from the Holy City of the Old South,
Mizzou to the Big 10? Are you kidding? I know that everything's up-to-date out there- HOWEVER -
ND and Pitt are lengedary FOOTBALL POWERS. Mizzery
and Mizzou are "DEVINE" partners.
Keep your BIG 12 job whilst you can. TCU will make
the football world miss you NOT!
Cheers and "Hook em" from Charleston!
SwampfoxSC