*B10 Expansion Poll: Your Top Pick (Round 1.1)

[Southside 1,914]

 

Whittled the candidates down to 20 (board poll limit) based on the previous polls. 

I've included their resumes in the options so you won't need to look back at other thread. 

Unless we get a team with 50% or more (or at least close to it), I'll likely cut down candidates and do a round 1.2. runoff. 

Once we have a clear #1, I'll move on to #2, but start with a smaller list.  

At this point, we know ND has an invite. So simply not going to fog things up by including them.

In short, we'll do a pecking order without them. 

[Southside 1,914]

 

I chose Baylor as my #1. 

Checks every box. Strong FB, MBB, and WBB. Elite market. 

Not AAU but respectable academics. Better than Oregon who is another one of my favs. 

UNC is up there for me too, but UNC and Duke would likely be a package deal. Love Duke in BB, but FB doesn't add much. UNC is at least respectable in FB. And if I can't get UNC alone, probably would rather just take Clemson.

Voted FL market. It's elite too. 

[5fouls 94]

I voted Stanford.  Every conference team cant be a football standout.  The fact is that Stanford has more National Championships across all sports than any other school.  And, it grabs the Bay Area tv market.  

To me, it's pretty simple.  Add ND and 3 west coast schools to get to 20.  Break conference into four separate 5 team pods.

UNC loses a LOT of value if not packaged with Duke.

[Southside 1,914]

17 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

I voted Stanford.  Every conference team cant be a football standout.  The fact is that Stanford has more National Championships across all sports than any other school.  And, it grabs the Bay Area tv market.  

To me, it's pretty simple.  Add ND and 3 west coast schools to get to 20.  Break conference into four separate 5 team pods.

UNC loses a LOT of value if not packaged with Duke.

Saw your similar post in the other thread so responding to both. 

Stanford has a lot of great qualities no doubt. But their FB and BB have both declined. But more importantly, the realignment looks to be 99% about football TV and market capture. Stanford FB stands are pitiful at times, and their overall fan enthusiasm is pretty low. Read that their viewership was more about national viewers, and less about the Bay (USC and UCLA are watched just as much there). Having UCLA and USC more or less captures Cali, and has the national kicker as well. I would not be shocked at all if they did end up in the B10 though. Maybe a little surprised. 

But this is all about personal preference, so let your Stanford flag fly :-) 

[HoosierHoopster 6,023]

9 hours ago, Southside said:

Saw your similar post in the other thread so responding to both. 

Stanford has a lot of great qualities no doubt. But their FB and BB have both declined. But more importantly, the realignment looks to be 99% about football TV and market capture. Stanford FB stands are pitiful at times, and their overall fan enthusiasm is pretty low. Read that their viewership was more about national viewers, and less about the Bay (USC and UCLA are watched just as much there). Having UCLA and USC more or less captures Cali, and has the national kicker as well. I would not be shocked at all if they did end up in the B10 though. Maybe a little surprised. 

But this is all about personal preference, so let your Stanford flag fly :-) 

Naah I’m with Fouls. Stanford’s bball hasn’t been that strong recently - can say the same about IU (of course). Wouldn’t slant the pick based on immediate history, Stanford has tremendous history across multiple sports. It immediately would be the flagship academic program, NWU is ours now but Stanford would take the BIG into the elite academic conference tier along with a number of its sports teams.
 

The Bay area is a great market, and right now UCLA and USC are isolated coming into the B1G. I’d like to see 2 more teams from the WC — Oregon and WA are also good picks, but Stanford is a hell of a prize

[5fouls 94]

10 hours ago, Southside said:

Saw your similar post in the other thread so responding to both. 

Stanford has a lot of great qualities no doubt. But their FB and BB have both declined. But more importantly, the realignment looks to be 99% about football TV and market capture. Stanford FB stands are pitiful at times, and their overall fan enthusiasm is pretty low. Read that their viewership was more about national viewers, and less about the Bay (USC and UCLA are watched just as much there). Having UCLA and USC more or less captures Cali, and has the national kicker as well. I would not be shocked at all if they did end up in the B10 though. Maybe a little surprised. 

But this is all about personal preference, so let your Stanford flag fly :-) 

It can't ALL be about football.  Overall health of the conference has to be considered.  Let's say the Big Ten makes it all about Football and to get to 20 they add Notre Dame, Oregon, Clemson, and Oklahoma State.  Those are probably the 4 best realistic football options out there.  Who does the group of teams hurt?  It hurts schools like Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan State, etc. that have to do everything right to compete with OSU, Michigan and PSU today.  Add 4 more top shelf programs into the mix and whatever opportunities the Iowa's of the world had before, they are much less now.

Having 2 of the 4 additions be football-centric makes sense (Notre Dame and Oregon).  Have the other two additions be about something else.  Stanford raises the academic profile and has a strong overall athletic program.  Washington (or Cal, if you prefer) would add a 5th team on the West Coast to help balance out the schedule and reduce travel.

Quite frankly, the thought of adding a team like Clemson to the Big Ten is crazy to me.  The school brings nothing outside of football (maybe a little baseball) to the table.  

You simply can't have 16 of the 20 football teams in the conference be national title threats  It simply does not work that way.  

 

[go iu bb 4,786]

1 hour ago, 5fouls said:

You simply can't have 16 of the 20 football teams in the conference be national title threats  It simply does not work that way.  

That's why I'm not too worried about IU get kicked out of the conference. Outside of football they do add a lot to the conference. In football they give the top teams a game they can win. 

[Southside 1,914]

5 hours ago, 5fouls said:

It can't ALL be about football.  Overall health of the conference has to be considered.  Let's say the Big Ten makes it all about Football and to get to 20 they add Notre Dame, Oregon, Clemson, and Oklahoma State.  Those are probably the 4 best realistic football options out there.  Who does the group of teams hurt?  It hurts schools like Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan State, etc. that have to do everything right to compete with OSU, Michigan and PSU today.  Add 4 more top shelf programs into the mix and whatever opportunities the Iowa's of the world had before, they are much less now.

Having 2 of the 4 additions be football-centric makes sense (Notre Dame and Oregon).  Have the other two additions be about something else.  Stanford raises the academic profile and has a strong overall athletic program.  Washington (or Cal, if you prefer) would add a 5th team on the West Coast to help balance out the schedule and reduce travel.

Quite frankly, the thought of adding a team like Clemson to the Big Ten is crazy to me.  The school brings nothing outside of football (maybe a little baseball) to the table.  

You simply can't have 16 of the 20 football teams in the conference be national title threats  It simply does not work that way.  

This is all about keeping up with the SEC and TV contracts. 

The B10 doesn't need help with academics. The FB money funds the other sports, so that's really the true help if we're being honest. 

Clemson BB isn't great, but isn't horrible either. They are currently ranked higher than Ohio St, Wisconsin, and several other B10 schools. 

And like I said on Stanford, they have a lot of great things. But their fans are ultra low enthusiasm. Especially students. Stanford gives away student tickets (to students) for free, and that still doesn't help. The players call the stadium "The Library" lol. Nice market, horrible fans. Many articles written about the topic if interested. 

The B10 will likely stop at 20. Saying though that having 16 FB teams does not work is silly. The SEC is clearly heading that direction. No reason the B10 can't. 

But like I said. This is all personal preference polling/voting. Everyone has different opinions. I'm sure very few will get it right (picking the next 4 teams). 

[Southside 1,914]

7 hours ago, HoosierHoopster said:

Naah I’m with Fouls. Stanford’s bball hasn’t been that strong recently - can say the same about IU (of course). Wouldn’t slant the pick based on immediate history, Stanford has tremendous history across multiple sports. It immediately would be the flagship academic program, NWU is ours now but Stanford would take the BIG into the elite academic conference tier along with a number of its sports teams.
 

The Bay area is a great market, and right now UCLA and USC are isolated coming into the B1G. I’d like to see 2 more teams from the WC — Oregon and WA are also good picks, but Stanford is a hell of a prize

Like I said above about Stanford, great market, bad fans. Ever seen the empty stands during a prime time FB game. Happens a lot. It's embarrassing. 

We simply don't need help academically. We do need help with TV revenue if we're to keep up with the landscape. That revenue funds the other sports and many other things. 

I have no clue how it all turns out. I just know I'm being realistic when I say this is 99% of keeping up with the SEC and about TV revenue. So I'm simply being realistic about my predictions. 

[HoosierAloha 29,887]

I wonder what impact the Big 1.o + USC/UCLA would have on those weaker fan bases. I know quite a few IU grads in the Bay Area that would attend an IU away game at Stanford. Would being in the Big 1.o raise fan support?


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

[Southside 1,914]

29 minutes ago, HoosierAloha said:

I wonder what impact the Big 1.o + USC/UCLA would have on those weaker fan bases. I know quite a few IU grads in the Bay Area that would attend an IU away game at Stanford. Would being in the Big 1.o raise fan support?


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

ND plays Stanford every other year (rotate with USC) I have friends on the WC that go every year (Stanford and USC) to cheer for ND. Both are critical of the blue hairs at ND, but say Stanford fans are next level horrible. I remember McCaffrey talking about Stanford fans on several occasions. Even when they were good, and even when they played big games, the fan enthusiasm has been very poor in general. Just doubt B10 entry would do much. I do think it will help with USC and UCLA though. 

[HoosierHoopster 6,023]

21 hours ago, Southside said:

Like I said above about Stanford, great market, bad fans. Ever seen the empty stands during a prime time FB game. Happens a lot. It's embarrassing. 

We simply don't need help academically. We do need help with TV revenue if we're to keep up with the landscape. That revenue funds the other sports and many other things. 

I have no clue how it all turns out. I just know I'm being realistic when I say this is 99% of keeping up with the SEC and about TV revenue. So I'm simply being realistic about my predictions. 

I think statements like we don’t need help academically are opinions not fact. The flip side of that is we’re plenty fine right now on money- football, OSU, UM, etc, and academically we have 1 elite school in NWU, with good academic schools below it but Stanford is top tier and while discounting it based on football fan support you’re just ignoring its depth across multiple sports including its strong sport history. Stanford is a special school, Clemson? Major yawn.

[Southside 1,914]

2 hours ago, HoosierHoopster said:

I think statements like we don’t need help academically are opinions not fact. The flip side of that is we’re plenty fine right now on money- football, OSU, UM, etc, and academically we have 1 elite school in NWU, with good academic schools below it but Stanford is top tier and while discounting it based on football fan support you’re just ignoring its depth across multiple sports including its strong sport history. Stanford is a special school, Clemson? Major yawn.

I think academically speaking, we have 8 teams now inside the top 50, and only one outside the top 100 (Nebraska). I'd have to compare to the other P5 conferences, but I'd guess that's pretty good. Maybe the best in P5. So perhaps closer to fact than opinion. 

And we know that expansion is mostly about TV money. I think we can take that as fact since we picked the two schools that were about as extreme as can be geographically speaking (vs our existing footprint). So regardless, we know what the priorities are. And like I said, Stanford is blessed to be located in a big market, so they have that going for them. 

Clemson a major yawn? Perhaps if you're a water polo fan. ND and Clemson have been called the two biggest dominoes by ESPN and most media I've seen. Vegas has them as one of the favorites to get snatched up. Doesn't mean Stanford won't be the pick though.

[HoosierHoopster 6,023]

46 minutes ago, Southside said:

I think academically speaking, we have 8 teams now inside the top 50, and only one outside the top 100 (Nebraska). I'd have to compare to the other P5 conferences, but I'd guess that's pretty good. Maybe the best in P5. So perhaps closer to fact than opinion. 

And we know that expansion is mostly about TV money. I think we can take that as fact since we picked the two schools that were about as extreme as can be geographically speaking (vs our existing footprint). So regardless, we know what the priorities are. And like I said, Stanford is blessed to be located in a big market, so they have that going for them. 

Clemson a major yawn? Perhaps if you're a water polo fan. ND and Clemson have been called the two biggest dominoes by ESPN and most media I've seen. Vegas has them as one of the favorites to get snatched up. Doesn't mean Stanford won't be the pick though.

We have 7, 3 of which are below 45, the ACC has I believe 7 in the top 40, the B1G is not the best of the P5 academically (a football conf block anyway). However with USC and UCLA joining that will add 2 top 25 academic schools (the PAC 12 has the most top 25 academic ranked schools), so that certainly makes the B1G better academically. But man you’re being so over the top dismissive lol, water polo seriously? Clemson sucks at bball, among other sports. Yes, yawn, unless again we’re all about football, but again the B1G is already pretty much loaded for bear in football. The Bay area is an excellent tv market, there’s money there. No idea how this ends up working out, if it’s purely football then it will be a football school — but no i don’t think it’s unrealistic to be looking at other factors than how strong a school’s football program / football money is

[Southside 1,914]

1 hour ago, HoosierHoopster said:

We have 7, 3 of which are below 45, the ACC has I believe 7 in the top 40, the B1G is not the best of the P5 academically (a football conf block anyway). However with USC and UCLA joining that will add 2 top 25 academic schools (the PAC 12 has the most top 25 academic ranked schools), so that certainly makes the B1G better academically. But man you’re being so over the top dismissive lol, water polo seriously? Clemson sucks at bball, among other sports. Yes, yawn, unless again we’re all about football, but again the B1G is already pretty much loaded for bear in football. The Bay area is an excellent tv market, there’s money there. No idea how this ends up working out, if it’s purely football then it will be a football school — but no i don’t think it’s unrealistic to be looking at other factors than how strong a school’s football program / football money is

In short, we're good academically any way you look at it. It's not something we're in desperate need to improve. 

I'm not being dismissive. I'm simply saying football and TV revenue are driving expansion. And football/TV revenue is what funds all the Olympic sports. 

Clemson's BB Torvik rank is currently 54. Not great, but better than 7 of the current 14 B10 schools. So it's not like their BB program would weigh us down lol. Their FB market however would drastically increase our FB TV contract value. 

And like I've said, Stanford could end up one of the teams. I've got them grouped in "well rounded" bucket, so it's not like I'm totally writing them off. For me, they don't move the needle like other teams. If I'm taking another team from the West, it would be Oregon before Stanford or anyone. 

Most importantly, it's just my preference and opinion. I think Stanford is in decline. If you like Stanford, and see them differently, or have a higher eval than I do, that's great too. 

Here's a decent article from the Stanford Daily

https://stanforddaily.com/2020/03/31/at-least-the-seats-are-red-why-is-stanford-stadium-often-empty/

One on recruiting

https://www.si.com/college/stanford/recruiting/danny-noonan-says-lack-of-atmosphere-at-stanford-games-played-major-role-in-son-maverick-committing-to-nebraska

[Five Prime 1,076]

I haven't been following it all but is the premise someone NOT named Notre Dame?  Because that's the clear #1-choice-no-brainer.  

If so, it's gotta be UNC unless you can get Texas.  A Florida team would be very close to the top as well.  OTOH it makes sense to bring in a couple more Pac 12 teams to lessen the travel blow to USC and UCLA. 

This isn't an easy answer and it almost assuredly would be at minimum a pair.  In fact, it would be more relevant to group universities in pairs and vote on those.     

[Five Prime 1,076]

Notre Dame/Stanford

UNC/Virginia/(Duke?)

Clemson/Georgia Tech(?)

Florida St/Miami

Oregon/Washington 

 

[Southside 1,914]

6 minutes ago, Five Prime said:

I haven't been following it all but is the premise someone NOT named Notre Dame?  Because that's the clear #1-choice-no-brainer.  

If so, it's gotta be UNC unless you can get Texas.  A Florida team would be very close to the top as well.  OTOH it makes sense to bring in a couple more Pac 12 teams to lessen the travel blow to USC and UCLA. 

This isn't an easy answer and it almost assuredly would be at minimum a pair.  In fact, it would be more relevant to group universities in pairs and vote on those.     

I purposefully left ND out as we know the B10 has already extended an offer. They are easily the top prize right now. 

I agree there's a "pairing" aspect at play with some, but not all. And I'd say the pairing aspect might work against some teams. Rumor is that UCLA and UCLA worked as a pair and wanted to stay together. They are somewhat the jewels of the PAC, so not a hard decision. ND though throws a wrench into that, as they're not going to come as a pair, so we know if they come, we'll have at least one more standalone. There's also rumor that UNC is high on the B10 list, but Duke not so much. Personally I'd take that package deal, but I also wouldn't be shocked if UNC were to leave without Duke. We also know FSU has talked to the Big10 already, along with what's been reported about OR and WA. Not sure OR and WA are working together as a pair, but wouldn't doubt it. 

So if ND comes, I think chances increase for a standalone team like FSU, Clemson, Baylor, etc. If ND doesn't, the odds of packages go up. 

[5fouls 94]

The Big Ten is NOT going to leave USC and UCLA out there all by themselves.  

[Southside 1,914]

45 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

The Big Ten is NOT going to leave USC and UCLA out there all by themselves.  

I agree. But that doesn't necessarily mean more Cali schools. Could mean Baylor, WA, Oregon, or any other schools West of our footprint. It's quite possible Nebraska will end up in a Western B10 division if we go to 20 and 4x5. 

Also, I found Barta's comments on expansion interesting. He acted like the B10 had no plans to increase beyond USC, UCLA, and it's pending invite to ND at this time.