Reason The Big 10 Can’t Expand #3: No Suitable BCS Teams

Table Of Contents

Part 0: Intro
Part 1: OSU & UM
Part 2: Available Mid-Major Programs
Part 3: No Suitable BCS Teams
Conclusion: Just Win Baby

Big 10 Expansion

Previously, we talked about the calls to expand the Big 10. In the next several posts, we’ll be going through the reasons the Big 10 can’t really expand. In Part 2 we talked about how the Big 10 can’t expand by pulling up a Mid-Major. Today, we’ll look at the possibility of adding an existing BCS team to the conference. Geographically, there are two possibilities for finding a suitable BCS team, the Big East conference and the Big 12 North Division.

Possible BCS Teams: Big East

The Big East already has 2 teams in current Big 10 states ( Cincinnati and Pittsburgh ) and two, Louisville & West Virginia, that are extremely close to the other Big 10 schools. The other Big East teams are too far away to consider adding. Adding one of those 4 would have the same pros as adding a MAC team. Namely, the low impact on teams travel and the existing relationship to local high schools for recruiting. Also, out of the 4 schools, 2 have been fairly consistent on the national stage ( Pittsburgh and West Virginia ). The other two are new to the national scene, having been added from Conference USA when 3 Big East teams moved to the ACC in 2004. These 4 teams would all be solid additions to the Big 10 conference.

Going over the Big 10 vs. Big East record since 1998, we can see that it is a bit better than the MACs record. The Big 10 is 22-11 vs. the Big East during that time, 11-4 since 2005 season. However, a 0.266% winning percentage is only slightly better than the MAC. This is not encouraging especially since the Big East has more resources than the MAC and has the added benefit of annual BCS exposure.

Now, as we did with the MAC, let’s turn to stadium capacity and attendance. For those 4 teams, we can see that the average capacity their stadiums is 50,512. Compared to the Big 10′s 74,143, it’s much higher than the MACs 29,864, but it’s still almost 50% less than the Big 10. Their average 2008 attendance is also 44,770, 25,000 less than the Big 10, but much, much higher than the MAC teams average attendance.

Attractiveness Of Joining The Big 10

While these 4 teams from the Big East seem like a good fit, the bigger issue is would they jump from the Big East into the Big 10? Let’s take a look at one possible alignment of the new Big 10 ( With OSU and UM in different divisions ):

• North
  • Michigan
  • Michigan State
  • Minnesota
  • Wisconsin
  • Northwestern
  • Iowa
• South
  • Ohio State
  • Penn State
  • Illinois
  • Indiana
  • Purdue

The above is just one possible alignment. Regardless which direction the Big 10 officials would take, it’s hard not to argue that Michigan and Ohio State are, historically, the top teams in the Big 10. There’s also solid teams in Penn State, Iowa, Purdue, Illinois and Wisconsin. In fact, since 2000, 7 out of the 11 big ten teams have won or shared the Big 10 title. To bring another team into the Big 10, you’d be asking them to compete against two consistent national powers ( OSU & UM ) and several consistently solid schools like Penn Status, Illinois and Iowa. This new school would either be in the same division as two national powers, one national power or a handful of 2-3 other solid, nationally relevant teams. Plus, you’d be asking a brand new team to compete against the history of the Big 10 on it’s own soil. That includes recruting relationships, fan bases and history. Certainly, that’s a big pill for an incoming school to swollow.

Compare this to the new Big East and you’ll see that 3 out of the 4 teams named above have won the Big East and a spot in a BCS bowl in the last 4 years. 2009 shapes up to be another year with no clear front runner for the Big East crown. This gives any of the teams ( except maybe Syracuse ) a realistic shot at a BCS bowl every year. Compared to the Big 10 and having to fight Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State among others, the Big East providers an easier route to not only the conference crown but a BCS Bowl. It’s unlikely that any of the Big East teams would be too thrilled with moving to the Big 10.

It’s doubtful that the Big East conference would allow another exodus for the second time this decade. In fact, The Big East coaches have recently began to campaign for adding a 9th member to the conference. All in all, adding a Big East seems doubtful and unlikely.

Possible BCS Teams: Big 12 North

There are two teams from the Big 12 North that make a natural fit for inclusion in the Big 10: Iowa State and Missouri. Iowa State is in an existing Big 10 state and already plays Iowa every year as one of their non-conference games. ISU is actually 3-4 vs. Iowa since 2002, so the series has remained competitive. Unfortunately, ISU isn’t exactly a high profile team. Nor is it a consistent winner, having won over 7 games only once ( 2000 ) in the last 30 years.

Missouri is an interesting and attractive option. They have played a yearly rivalry with Illinois, “The Arch Rivalry“, since 2002. However, reports are surfacing that this would be ending after the 2010 season. Missouri is also a good school academically and would fit in with other Big 10 schools in that regard. Using the above alignment, they would slide into the last slot in the Big 10 South division. Overall, Missouri would make a natural choice for addition to the Big 10.

However, the issues with adding Missouri are some of the same ones we’ve already echoed. Joining the Big 10 for Missouri, like one of the Big East teams mentioned above, would be difficult to justify. Right now, Missouri is in the Big 12 North, arguably the weaker of the two Big 12 divisions. While Kansas State and Nebraska have traditionally ruled that division, Missouri is coming off back to back titles and appearances in the Big 12 championship game. With their new coach and new spread offense, they are currently on the rise in terms of national stature. While the Big 12 South is quite an intimidating force, Missouri has an easier time reaching the championship game where it is right now than to have to face Ohio State every year for the division crown. They also have high profile in-conference games against Nebraska & Kansas State every year, and Texas & Oklahoma every few years. Winning any of those games instantly puts Missouri high in the rankings. In the end, it’s hard to imagine how joining the Big 10 helps Missouri and it’s easy to come up with a few ways it actually hurts them.

Wrapping it up

After ISU and Missouri, there’s no other BCS teams that make geographic sense to add to the Big 10. Any other solid, available team would either be too far away ( Boise State ) or wouldn’t improve the national stature of the Big 10 ( Temple or Western Kentucky ). Tomorrow we’ll circle back and see if the reasons the Big 10 wants to expend are valid or could even be solved through expansion.

Reason The Big 10 Can’t Expand #2: Available Mid-Major Programs

Table Of Contents

Part 0: Intro
Part 1: OSU & UM
Part 2: Available Mid-Major Programs
Part 3: No Suitable BCS Teams
Conclusion: Just Win Baby

Big 10 Expansion

Previously, we talked about the calls to expand the Big 10. In the next several posts, we’ll be going through the reasons the Big 10 can’t really expand.

Possible Targets For The Big 10

Ok, so let’s say the Big 10 officials have decided that the points in Part 1 are of no concern. The next major question is what team to bring into the conference. There are two possible routes to take:

• Take a Mid-Major, Non-BCS team
• Take an existing BCS conference team

We’ll look at the first option today and the second option tomorrow.

Note: We’re ignoring the possibility of Notre Dame here. It will never happen as long as they have their own TV contract and access to the BCS money. There’s simply no incentive for Notre Dame to join the Big 10. In fact, they’ve already turned down the Big 10 once before.

Take a Mid-Major, Non-BCS team

Since the Big 10 traditionally plays the Mid-Atlantic Conference ( MAC ) in it’s non-conference schedule, let’s start there. There are several pros to pulling up a MAC team. Geographically, it’s a natural fit. Out of the 13 MAC teams, 12 reside in a state with an existing Big 10 team.

The lone school from outside of an existing Big 10 state is Buffalo (New York).

Because of this proximity, these teams likely have an existing relationship with the local high schools. This would help in terms of recruiting. Road games also wouldn’t add much to the travel schedule of teams since they’re already places Big 10 schools go to now. Most, if not all, schools also have a good academic reputations. This would certainly fit the model of the other Big 10 schools.

However, there also are several cons. Since 1998, the Big 10 is 133-16 against teams from the MAC. While 7 of those MAC wins have come within the last 3 years, that’s still an abysmal 0.107% winning percentage against the Big 10. To be fair, that doesn’t mean that the trend would continue if a team moved from the MAC to the Big 10. If a MAC team is suddenly in the Big 10, it’s plausible to assume that the recruiting would rise up to match the rest of the teams and the playing field would begin to level after a few years. However, it would be a bumpy first few years. Competitively, it’s not far fetched to see one or more winless seasons for the new team. This would hardly increase the national respect for the Big 10 like expansion was supposed to.

A bigger issue would simply be one of stadium size. Big 10 stadiums average a capacity of 74,143. The MAC, on the other hand, has an average stadium capacity of 29,864

The average MAC stadium capacity is actually skewed a bit because Temple plays at Lincoln Financial Field (“The Linc”), where the Philadelphia Eagles play. That stadiums capacity is 68,532, more than double the next highest MAC stadium capacity. Removing that outlier drops the average capacity ~11% to 26,641.

The lowest capacity in the Big 10, Memorial Stadium, belongs to the Indiana Hoosiers, with a capacity of 47,130. On the flip side, the highest capacity by a stadium in the MAC (that’s not “The Linc”) is Kelly/Shorts stadium, home to Central Michigans and a capacity of 30,255.

Having an average capacity of roughly 1/3 of the Big 10 average would likely be a show-stopper. It would adversely limit the amount of revenue that home games could generate. If they were pulled up, a new MAC team would need to fund the development and construction of a new stadium. Don’t forget that with a new stadium comes new parking, roads and other infrastructure to handle the influx of traffic and crowds. No easy task given the economical climate and the possible losing that’s going to happen until the new team becomes competitive.

Unfortunately, without a new stadium, they would be unable to hold most Big 10 schools traveling fans, let alone their own. What will happen when 50,000 Ohio State fans show up for a game? Many Big 10 schools travel quite well, and even the ones that don’t regularly bring 20,000+ fans to their games.

When we turn our attention to actual attendance, the differences between the MAC and the Big 10 teams become even more obvious. The average Big 10 stadium attendance in 2008 was 70,514. The average MAC attendance was a paltry 16,888, a number almost 1/4 of the Big 10. This could turn “home” games into proverbial road games for the new team. It is possible to think that with its new status as Big 10 member, attendance and interest would rise. However, since most of the MAC teams are already from existing Big 10 states, some of which have two Big 10 schools already in state ( Michigan & Indiana ), it’s unlikely to think that fans have not already aligned themselves with an existing Big 10 school. This, combined with the likely initial losing seasons, doesn’t really provide an opportunity to jump from rooting for an existing Big 10 school and start rooting for the new team.

While we talk about the MAC above, these issues are hardly MAC specific. There are other Mid-Majors conferences in the country. However, none will have the few pros MAC teams do ( proximity and recruiting familiarity ) and all have the same cons with regard to stadium capacity and attendance that the MAC does.

Ok, so picking up a Mid-Major won’t work. What about an existing BCS conference team? Tomorrow, we’ll look at the possibility of assimilating an existing BCS team and the attractiveness of joining the Big 10.

Reason The Big 10 Can’t Expand #1: OSU & UM

Table Of Contents

Part 0: Intro
Part 1: OSU & UM
Part 2: Available Mid-Major Programs
Part 3: No Suitable BCS Teams
Conclusion: Just Win Baby

Big 10 Expansion

Previously, we talked about the calls to expand the Big 10. In the next several posts, we’ll be going through the reasons the Big 10 can’t really expand.

Ohio State vs. Michigan

The history of the Big 10 has been defined by one matchup: Ohio State vs. Michigan. Between the two schools, they have won 75 league titles, with 33 of those being outright titles.

To give you an indication of just how far ahead those two schools are, consider that Ohio State has 17 outright titles and Michigan has 16. That’s almost more outright titles than total Big 10 titles claimed by the #3 team, the University of Minnesota ( 18 titles & 7 outright ).

Even though the Big 10 has a rotating schedule, since 1935, the two schools play every year on the last regular season weekend for the Big 10 with 3 exceptions ( 1942, 1986, and 1998 ). While the teams had always been rivals, the rivlary was gained national attention with “The Ten-Year War” ( 1969 – 1978). The two schools, with Woody Hayes leading Ohio State and former Ohio State assistant Bo Schembechler leading Michigan, dominated the Big 10. They shared the conference title 6 times, with Ohio State winning it outright twice and Michigan once. Michigan also shared the title in 1978 with Michigan State. Since 1935, the annual game between the two schools has decided the Big 10 Championship an astounding 23 times. The game has had an influence on the conference championship an additional 24 times. Most recently, the 2006 meeting between the two schools pitted two 11-0 teams, ranked #1 & #2, against each other with a spot on the BCS National Title game on the line. In fact, as we alluded to earlier, even after the game there was some discussion of keeping both teams ranked #1 & #2 and making the BCS National Championship a rematch. Clearly, these are the two premier programs in the Big 10 by a wide margin.

As Ohio State and Michigan have risen in national prominence, the Big 10 has also benefited. The Ohio State vs. Michigan game has typically taken center stage nationally. With all eyes focused on the two teams and the Big 10 as a whole, the game has indirectly been seen as a barometer for the quality of football in the Big 10.

The Single Point Of Failure

However, this reliance the Ohio State vs. Michigan game also makes it one of the biggest obstacles in expanding the Big 10. If the Big 10 were to expand to two divisions, the conference officials would be faced with a difficult decision:

• Put Ohio State and Michigan in different divisions – In order to avoid having one loaded division, the two most successful teams would be put in different divisions. This would balance out the conference, putting one team in each division. However, it wouldn’t guarantee that the two schools would meet every year. This would completely do away with one of the best rivalries in sports. Also, it would certainly be unacceptable to the fans of both schools.
• Put Ohio State and Michigan in the same division – This would ensure the two teams meet every year. However, it would also dampen the significance of each meeting because the winner would, at best, win the division. The winner would still have to play another team for the conference crown. This wouldn’t be a huge deal except, as stated before, the two teams have dominted conference play. So the risk here is a uncompetitive conference championship game between Ohio State or Michigan and a less than dominate team from the other division. This has recently been the plight of the Big 12, with Texas and Oklahoma, of the Big 12 South, dominating the Big 12 North team they play in the Big 12 Championship game.
• Put Ohio State and Michigan in different divisions, but designate each as the others “standing rival” – This is something that teams in the SEC do. Teams designate a permanent rival from the other division to play every year. This would ensure that Ohio State & Michigan meet ever year. Unfortunately, this would result in many of the same issues discussed above. This solution also adds another issue not present in the first either scenario above. With a “standing rivarly” and the teams in two divisions, it’s highly probably that the two teams will then meet twice a year, once in the regular season and once in the Big 10 Championship Game. This would likely dilute the rivalry game as potentially meaningless, given that there could be a rematch a few weeks later.

Splitting the conference would damage the single biggest rivalry in the Big 10. It would also upset the two fans of both schools, since the rivalry is so ingrained and meaningful. This isn’t to say that other conferences haven’t had to deal with the above issues. However, no other conference has had a rivalry of such magnitude and also representing such dominant teams in conference play.

What’s In It For Them?

Since the expansion of the conference would need to be backed by the relevant parties at each school, the other 9 teams in the conference would need to make a case that they would benefit from the expansion. Given that Ohio State and Michigan are two of the biggest and most successful teams nationally, one has to question what exactly they would gain from expanding the conference. From their point of view, it would be hard pressed to see how a Big 10 Championship Game would help either school. Right now, they have a relative monopoly on the conference title. If the two teams continue to play each year, they would then have another game against the champion of a rival division. This would also be after their big rivalry game and could result in a letdown loss. Overall, it would only make it more difficult for either team to win the conference crown.

Backed Into A Corner

The Big 10 has been defined and dominated by Ohio State and Michigan. Breaking up or altering that rivalry would potentially run the risk of disrupting a lot of Big 10 history as well as hurting one of the biggest draws the Big 10 has. From our point of view, this is clearly the biggest obstacle in moving forward with expanding the Big 10.