NCAA- Goodbye, Big East?

[Shea Zellweger]

SEC radio this afternoon did a lot of talking about the BCS turning into four "Superconferences." I've heard this bandied about before, but not quite in this form. Paul Finebomb's guest claimed that the Big Ten will be courting Syracuse, West Virginia, and Pittsburgh (and in doing so make a pass at Notre Dame), and possibly Rutgers. In order to compete, he postulated that the SEC would then try to pick up a couple teams from the ACC (Maryland, Florida), and a couple more from the Big 12 (Texas/A&M, Oklahoma/State).

Now, I can understand why, from a business standpoint, the Big Ten would want to do such a thing, and in turn why the SEC would want to do so, but I cannot for the life of me figure out how this would benefit Syracuse, Pitt, or WVU. The Big East already has a lucrative contract with ESPN and a few other networks (I live in SEC country and watched 20 Syracuse regular season games last year), and several automatic bids in bowl games despite being a clearly inferior conference in football in recent years. Moving to the Big Ten would not be likely to help them out on the basketball end, and it seems like they'd be less likely to see Bowl games, and therefore Bowl game revenue.

I know I don't generally bother with the business of sports, so I could be missing something here. Am I missing something here?

[Greg Farra]

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/sports/stories/2010/05/04/tv-money-at-heart-of-conference-expansion.html

Show me the money.

[Jim Poteet]

SEC radio this afternoon did a lot of talking about the BCS turning into four "Superconferences." I've heard this bandied about before, but not quite in this form. Paul Finebomb's guest claimed that the Big Ten will be courting Syracuse, West Virginia, and Pittsburgh (and in doing so make a pass at Notre Dame), and possibly Rutgers. In order to compete, he postulated that the SEC would then try to pick up a couple teams from the ACC (Maryland, Florida), and a couple more from the Big 12 (Texas/A&M, Oklahoma/State).

Now, I can understand why, from a business standpoint, the Big Ten would want to do such a thing, and in turn why the SEC would want to do so, but I cannot for the life of me figure out how this would benefit Syracuse, Pitt, or WVU. The Big East already has a lucrative contract with ESPN and a few other networks (I live in SEC country and watched 20 Syracuse regular season games last year), and several automatic bids in bowl games despite being a clearly inferior conference in football in recent years. Moving to the Big Ten would not be likely to help them out on the basketball end, and it seems like they'd be less likely to see Bowl games, and therefore Bowl game revenue.

I know I don't generally bother with the business of sports, so I could be missing something here. Am I missing something here?

In all likelihood there will be four 16-team superconferences for a total of 64 "big time" teams. The conference will eventually tell the NCAA to take a hike and will negotiate their own deal in football, basketball and baseball. Last weeks Sports Illustrated had an article about this scenario. It will happen sooner or later. It is all about money. Each of the 64 schools would probably have TV revenue of 40+ million per year. That is why Syracuse, Pitt and WVU will be interested.

[Shea Zellweger]

In all likelihood there will be four 16-team superconferences for a total of 64 "big time" teams. The conference will eventually tell the NCAA to take a hike and will negotiate their own deal in football, basketball and baseball. Last weeks Sports Illustrated had an article about this scenario. It will happen sooner or later. It is all about money. Each of the 64 schools would probably have TV revenue of 40+ million per year. That is why Syracuse, Pitt and WVU will be interested.

alright, that's what I was missing.

Now... is there a reason these conferences would not want to absorb some more notable schools (ie, TCU, BSU)? The folks on the radio seemed to think it would just be the "big six" rearranged into the "super four."

[Ryan Scott]

In all likelihood there will be four 16-team superconferences for a total of 64 "big time" teams. The conference will eventually tell the NCAA to take a hike and will negotiate their own deal in football, basketball and baseball. Last weeks Sports Illustrated had an article about this scenario. It will happen sooner or later. It is all about money. Each of the 64 schools would probably have TV revenue of 40+ million per year. That is why Syracuse, Pitt and WVU will be interested.

And it's not just rumor anymore either, there was a big deal around here in KC last week when the KU athletic director came out and said it specifically - they're hoping to eventually abandon the NCAA. I suspect that will also be the point they start paying the players something (officially, anyway) as well.

The bigger question is, with 64 teams getting in on this deal, which of the current 73 "BCS" teams gets the boot? We have to drop nine. I assume the non football teams would be the first to go - Georgetown, Villanova, URI, St. John's, DePaul, Providence, Marquette, Seton Hall. That still leaves two schools out in the dark.

I wonder if a school like Wake Forest gets left out because of how small the student body is? Or do they just go with a school like Rutgers that's hasn't been a real power.

[Ryan Scott]

If it happens, the SEC and Big-10 will get first pick of teams. The SEC can grab Texas, A&M, Oklahoma, and OK St. The Big 10 can get Missouri, Syracuse, ND, Pitt, and WVU.

The ACC picks up Connecticut, Louisville, and two of (Cincinnati, South Florida, Rutgers); The PAC-10 takes Kansas, KState, Tx Tech, Nebraska, and two of (Baylor, Colorado, Iowa State).

It's actually not too difficult to work out.

[Jim Poteet]

alright, that's what I was missing.

Now... is there a reason these conferences would not want to absorb some more notable schools (ie, TCU, BSU)? The folks on the radio seemed to think it would just be the "big six" rearranged into the "super four."

Yes, there is a reason. If you add up the football playing colleges in the six BCS conferences plus Notre Dame, you have over 64 teams. Since when are TCU and BSU notable schools. They don't bring the "money,"

[Shea Zellweger]

Yes, there is a reason. If you add up the football playing colleges in the six BCS conferences plus Notre Dame, you have over 64 teams. Since when are TCU and BSU notable schools. They don't bring the "money,"

I was under the impression that TCU "travels well."

[Ryan Scott]

I was under the impression that TCU "travels well."

I was informed of this during Bowl season. TCU doesn't have the fan base of most schools and they have few living graduates (comparatively) to bring in the $$. When you're looking at potentially dropping schools like Rutgers and maybe Colorado, dropping even more schools to bring in Boise State or TCU doesn't make much sense.

[Shea Zellweger]

I was informed of this during Bowl season. TCU doesn't have the fan base of most schools and they have few living graduates (comparatively) to bring in the $$. When you're looking at potentially dropping schools like Rutgers and maybe Colorado, dropping even more schools to bring in Boise State or TCU doesn't make much sense.

I haven't heard anything about dropping Rutgers. Actually, I've heard several folks on local stations speculate the Big Ten will go after Rutgers to get a share of the NYNJ market.

[Ryan Scott]

I haven't heard anything about dropping Rutgers. Actually, I've heard several folks on local stations speculate the Big Ten will go after Rutgers to get a share of the NYNJ market.

That might be true, but one of the Big East schools with football isn't going to make it through, same with the Big-12.