GWPFFL BrianW Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 Let me get this straight... so what you are telling me is that the academic requirements for a prospective football player are harder in the Big 10 than the SEC?? hmmmm... I didn't know that. I think the main point is that the Big Ten was originally created as an academic conference. No I certainly don't think that adding Penn State was done so to simply make Big Ten academics better, but to have entry into the Big Ten, they have to make the grade. As the original poster pointed out, first and foremost you have to be a member of the Association of American Universities. Oddly enough, only 2 of the 12 current SEC schools would be able to be members of the Big Ten under it's current structure. That would be Florida and Vanderbilt. That is all I'm saying. There's no doubt, the only reason for expansion is for more money, but the point is, unlike the SEC or ACC, the Big Ten can't just close their eyes, and invite any school to join, because we need to expand our football league to get a cash cow for a Championship Game. The school has to meet requirements both on and off the field. Once agian, I have little doubt that, the main reason to have Penn State join the league was to bolster the league in football, but Penn State meets any and all academic requirements to be in the league, and as Kid Cid pointed out, they don't have to take a backseat to any school on or off the field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted February 10, 2010 Share Posted February 10, 2010 I think the main point is that the Big Ten was originally created as an academic conference. Perhaps the Big 10 decision makers should read Marketing Myopia by Theodore Levitt. The essential idea put forth was that too many businesses think like the old buggy whip makers, with a far too narrow an analysis of what their business is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameltosis Posted February 10, 2010 Share Posted February 10, 2010 Perhaps the Big 10 decision makers should read Marketing Myopia by Theodore Levitt. The essential idea put forth was that too many businesses think like the old buggy whip makers, with a far too narrow an analysis of what their business is. post of the year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted February 10, 2010 Share Posted February 10, 2010 on a related not, the Pac 10 is looking into possibly adding 2 more teams - which I am in favor of. Leading candidates would be one of the following I think, not manyother scenarios that would work. BYU/Utah - winner winner Col/Col State - not bad 2nd option Fresno St, UNLV, Nevada don't cut it athletically and academically Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timmypg Posted February 10, 2010 Share Posted February 10, 2010 I heard Boise St talk a while ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted February 10, 2010 Share Posted February 10, 2010 I heard Boise St talk a while ago. doesn't fit the Pac 10 - other than football it is a JV outift. BYU/Utah makes perfek sense- covers Utah, and has the built-in natural rivalry and both are solid enough academically Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted February 11, 2010 Share Posted February 11, 2010 doesn't fit the Pac 10 - other than football it is a JV outift. BYU/Utah makes perfek sense- covers Utah, and has the built-in natural rivalry and both are solid enough academically Perfect world... BYU and Colorado would be my choice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted February 16, 2010 Share Posted February 16, 2010 (edited) According to this very long but convincing analysis, Texas is the no-brainer candidate from both UT and Big 10 POV. It's all about the Benjamins and both sides stand to gain a mint. Edit: This blog claims discussions have been opened. Edited February 16, 2010 by Ursa Majoris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 According to this very long but convincing analysis, Texas is the no-brainer candidate from both UT and Big 10 POV. It's all about the Benjamins and both sides stand to gain a mint. Edit: This blog claims discussions have been opened. If this would happen ... WOW! ...would REALLY suck for the Big 12... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 If this would happen ... WOW! ...would REALLY suck for the Big 12... Yeah, especially because the biggest non-ND fish out there that isn't already in a BCS conference is probably....TCU? And no disrespect to the Horned Frogs - apparently a great school, good football tradition, good program going currently - they ain't UT.* * - this is not news Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 Wow, I'm not sure what I think about this. On one hand, I think UT would dominate in the Big-10, which is obviously good. On the other hand, it would preclude me from taking short(er) trips to go see them play when on the road (not to mention this would kill the Red River Rivalry). But then again, it would allow for some trips back to the midwest, which would be awesome. I don't know, I kinda don't see it happening. But who knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 Wow, I'm not sure what I think about this. On one hand, I think UT would dominate in the Big-10, which is obviously good. On the other hand, it would preclude me from taking short(er) trips to go see them play when on the road (not to mention this would kill the Red River Rivalry). But then again, it would allow for some trips back to the midwest, which would be awesome. I don't know, I kinda don't see it happening. But who knows. This could still be a non-conference game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Square Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 This could still be a non-conference game. Nebraska vs. Oklahoma used to be one of the biggest games every year in college football. I would say that rivalry compares to the red river rivalry. Now, Oklahoma and NU are still in the same overall conference but in different divisions and they still don't play it every year. I'm just saying that there is no way it stays the same if they leave. At some point it'd be moved to every other year at best IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Nebraska vs. Oklahoma used to be one of the biggest games every year in college football. I would say that rivalry compares to the red river rivalry. Now, Oklahoma and NU are still in the same overall conference but in different divisions and they still don't play it every year. I'm just saying that there is no way it stays the same if they leave. At some point it'd be moved to every other year at best IMO. For years UT was in the Southwest Conference while OU was in the Big 8. That was a hugh rivalry then; its a hugh rivalry now. If UT moved to the Big 10, they'd (imo) still play the game as a non-conference game each year ... and it's still be hugh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 For years UT was in the Southwest Conference while OU was in the Big 8. That was a hugh rivalry then; its a hugh rivalry now. If UT moved to the Big 10, they'd (imo) still play the game as a non-conference game each year ... and it's still be hugh. Someone who remembers history! I haven't read the articles, but I find this difficult to believe as a UT alum. Sure, it'd allow the Big10 to break into 2 conferences but I don't see how UT drops OU and eATMe. So that'd lock them into those 2 non-conference games each year, THEN a full Big10 sched. The alumni won't go for it. I think that now the UT has become Mack Brown, Inc. and gotten their program on track for the forseeable future someone will point out they need to let this train ride before taking it elsewhere. Otherwise, it'd be too much too quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.