• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

Just for a change of pace - Oregon and Washington?

EastOfEden

Junior Varsity
15 Year Member
Both Washington and Oregon visited the BIG conference headquarters in Chicago for a week or so in August. Since then, radio silence.

I for one think there is something cooking there and it's just waiting for a propitious time to be announced. That would about lock it up for the BIG expansion for a couple of years I would think.

I know it's not as hot a topic as who the next NUHC will be, but my guess is that the NU selection will not be leaked until a couple of days before it's announced, but I suspect we'll hear more on the expansion futher in advance of the desired announcement day. PR guys will decide whether that is before or after the season finishes. My further uninformed feeling is that the CA people are wrestling with Berkeley and political pressure to squeeze that school into the package.

Nothing suggests that ND is still in play, since that talk started months and months ago and nothing but negative sounds have surfaced on it. I guess they could have slipped into the Chicago offices easily, but one would think they would have been noticed.
 

fjbfour

Moderator Emeritus
Staff member
Lifetime Member
Seeing as how we've already crossed the bridge into crazytown with conference alignments, I'm all 'N' with UO and UW joining up. Sounds like fun.
 

DuckTownHusker

Blackshirt Sith Lord
10 Year Member
The California bureaucrats are trying to stop UCLA, or force a deal where UC-Los Angeles has to also take UC-Berkeley (Cal) along for the ride.

USC and Stanford are private, so they can do whatever they like.

I'm down with the idea of Stanford and Notre Dame, but I really don't want Cal. They would add zero value to the equation. It's like when the Big 8 expanded and we got UT and A&M (good) and then got saddled with taking two more Texas schools (meh).

I have no idea how Big the B1G gets, but personally, I would pursue the following targets (in pairs), assuming Notre Dame is off the table:

17-18: Oregon and Washington
19-20: FSU and Miami
21-22: Stanford and Colorado
23-24: Georgia Tech and North Carolina

The first move is more about brand names and mutual interest. I don't think we gain all that much in terms of recruiting with the Pac NW. Selfishly, though, I'd get to watch more Husker games here in Eugene (personal win!).

The following moves are about land grabs. Florida, then SF + Denver, and finally Atlanta + Charlotte / Raleigh-Durham. Those markets all offer lots of viewership (both incoming teams and other B1G ex-pats living there), and are also solid recruitment gains, especially the cooridor from Carolinas down to Florida.

I think Clemson winds up SEC. Probably FSU too, but I'd make a big (B1G?) push for the Seminoles. Actually, among that list only FSU and Miami are Non-AAU schools, but the conference has shown that to be negotiable (see: Nebraska) if the new school is bringing a strong brand to the table. Remember, the Golden Domers aren't AAU either, and nobody would bat an eye at the Irish joining the conference if they wanted to.
 

Hville

Varsity
5 Year Member
The California bureaucrats are trying to stop UCLA, or force a deal where UC-Los Angeles has to also take UC-Berkeley (Cal) along for the ride.

USC and Stanford are private, so they can do whatever they like.

I'm down with the idea of Stanford and Notre Dame, but I really don't want Cal. They would add zero value to the equation. It's like when the Big 8 expanded and we got UT and A&M (good) and then got saddled with taking two more Texas schools (meh).

I have no idea how Big the B1G gets, but personally, I would pursue the following targets (in pairs), assuming Notre Dame is off the table:

17-18: Oregon and Washington
19-20: FSU and Miami
21-22: Stanford and Colorado
23-24: Georgia Tech and North Carolina

The first move is more about brand names and mutual interest. I don't think we gain all that much in terms of recruiting with the Pac NW. Selfishly, though, I'd get to watch more Husker games here in Eugene (personal win!).

The following moves are about land grabs. Florida, then SF + Denver, and finally Atlanta + Charlotte / Raleigh-Durham. Those markets all offer lots of viewership (both incoming teams and other B1G ex-pats living there), and are also solid recruitment gains, especially the cooridor from Carolinas down to Florida.

I think Clemson winds up SEC. Probably FSU too, but I'd make a big (B1G?) push for the Seminoles. Actually, among that list only FSU and Miami are Non-AAU schools, but the conference has shown that to be negotiable (see: Nebraska) if the new school is bringing a strong brand to the table. Remember, the Golden Domers aren't AAU either, and nobody would bat an eye at the Irish joining the conference if they wanted to.
A lot of speculation from all the posters but I’ll comment on one of yours. Miami and Florida state. On the surface this seems a little crazy but maybe not.

I do believe the ACC has a decent chance of getting split up. I doubt the SEC is wanting all 3 schools from Florida. Would those two come in as a pair? I’m not sure. Possibly if it also included a North Carolina and another ACC team. I doubt Clemson would come as they see themselves in the SEC. Just afraid Miami and Florida state would feel to isolated on their own in the B1G.
 

Hville

Varsity
5 Year Member
I’m definitely a no go on anything with Cal. I’m already afraid of delving deeper into the west coast due to politics and how it could affect football going forward. I bring that out with a disclaimer that we can’t talk about politics on this board but if anyone wants my thoughts on how I feel it has to do in regards to football pm me.
 

Cornhuskers7

Red Shirt
The California bureaucrats are trying to stop UCLA, or force a deal where UC-Los Angeles has to also take UC-Berkeley (Cal) along for the ride.

USC and Stanford are private, so they can do whatever they like.

I'm down with the idea of Stanford and Notre Dame, but I really don't want Cal. They would add zero value to the equation. It's like when the Big 8 expanded and we got UT and A&M (good) and then got saddled with taking two more Texas schools (meh).

I have no idea how Big the B1G gets, but personally, I would pursue the following targets (in pairs), assuming Notre Dame is off the table:

17-18: Oregon and Washington
19-20: FSU and Miami
21-22: Stanford and Colorado
23-24: Georgia Tech and North Carolina

The first move is more about brand names and mutual interest. I don't think we gain all that much in terms of recruiting with the Pac NW. Selfishly, though, I'd get to watch more Husker games here in Eugene (personal win!).

The following moves are about land grabs. Florida, then SF + Denver, and finally Atlanta + Charlotte / Raleigh-Durham. Those markets all offer lots of viewership (both incoming teams and other B1G ex-pats living there), and are also solid recruitment gains, especially the cooridor from Carolinas down to Florida.

I think Clemson winds up SEC. Probably FSU too, but I'd make a big (B1G?) push for the Seminoles. Actually, among that list only FSU and Miami are Non-AAU schools, but the conference has shown that to be negotiable (see: Nebraska) if the new school is bringing a strong brand to the table. Remember, the Golden Domers aren't AAU either, and nobody would bat an eye at the Irish joining the conference if they wanted to.
I wouldn't be surprised if expansion for the B1G is in a holding pattern until we see if UCLA is given permission to come. If they aren't, I can see the B1G resending their invitation and giving it to Oregon or Washington (or even Stanford). I agree on not bringing Cal. We already have a couple of teams in the conference that offer little value. UCLA is not worth the baggage of filling up a valuable spot with Cal.

I think teams 17-20 are right on the money. If you take Oregon and Washington (assuming you have USC and UCLA), you further cement your footprint on the West Coast. I agree, those schools might not add a ton of value from a recruiting standpoint, but they are very valuable brands and well rounded athletic programs.

Florida State and Miami are the next logical choice. If the SEC is going to bow to Florida and keep those two schools out of the conference, we might as well scoop them up. It would greatly weaken the ACC, making it easier in the future to grab other assets from the conference. Plus, it would solidify the B1G as a nationwide conference with teams in the northeast, southeast, midwest, southwest, and northwest. Plus, it is further in-roads to the valuable Florida/Southeastern recruiting, which keeps things more competitive with the SEC.

21-24 is where I'd have some arguments. I like Stanford a lot. They have been down the last few years in football, which I know is what most people look at, but they are really good in a number of other sports, especially Olympic ones. Obviously they are an incredible academic school and bring a lot of money/connections to the table. Similarly, I like UNC for a lot of the same reasons. B1G is one of the strongest basketball conferences already. Adding a team like UNC would further develop that.

I'm not a fan of adding Colorado or Georgia Tech. I understand how they fit the academic requirements, but I think they fall short of the athletic ones. If we are looking to steal another ACC team, I'd be looking at Duke, Clemson, or even NC State or Virginia. If we take the five PAC schools mentioned above, I'd personally prefer us go after one or two of the Big 12 schools like Oklahoma State, Baylor, Kansas, etc.
 

Cornhuskers7

Red Shirt
A lot of speculation from all the posters but I’ll comment on one of yours. Miami and Florida state. On the surface this seems a little crazy but maybe not.

I do believe the ACC has a decent chance of getting split up. I doubt the SEC is wanting all 3 schools from Florida. Would those two come in as a pair? I’m not sure. Possibly if it also included a North Carolina and another ACC team. I doubt Clemson would come as they see themselves in the SEC. Just afraid Miami and Florida state would feel to isolated on their own in the B1G.
Beyond Florida not wanting them in the conference, I've been confused why the SEC wouldn't want both Miami and Florida State. Those are easily the two most valuable brands and programs in the Southeast that aren't already in the SEC. Bringing them in would have less to do with hurting the ACC and more with protecting yourself against the B1G. The B1G has shown they don't care about geographic constraints. Leaving two juicy assets sitting for them to take exposes you to the B1G gaining a footprint in your most valuable state.
 

Mr.Bennett

Recruit
2 Year Member
If the Big wants to get to 24 I'd rank potential adds (not in terms of likeliness):

1. Notre Dame
2. North Carolina (elite brand, elite academics)
3. Washington
4. Florida State
5. Oregon
6. Virginia
7. Georgia Tech
8. Miami (elite brand, elite academics, no fan base)
9. Stanford
10. Missouri (would they switch?)
11. Arizona State or Arizona
12. Utah
13. Boston College - above the next two, would help build the B1G hockey brand
14. Syracuse/UConn - would help build the BIG basketball brand - women's too
15. TCU/Houston - pure Texas land grab.

Schools like Cal, NC State, and Virginia Tech would have some stand-a-lone value, but that would only come into play if the state legislators attached them to the bigger school. NC State might be worth taking if it meant getting NC. I don't think UCLA is worth taking Cal.

Colorado market sounds interesting, but truth told the BIG already has it. Denver has tons of fans of Nebraska, Michigan, OSU, etc. Actually very few Buff fans. No need to grab the struggling athletics with ok academics.
 
Last edited:

Cornhuskers7

Red Shirt
If the Big wants to get to 24 I'd rank potential adds (not in terms of likeliness):

1. Notre Dame
2. North Carolina (elite brand, elite academics)
3. Washington
4. Florida State
5. Oregon
6. Virginia
7. Georgia Tech
8. Miami (elite brand, elite academics, no fan base)
9. Stanford
10. Missouri (would they switch?)
11. Arizona State or Arizona
12. Utah
13. Boston College - above the next two, would help build the B1G hockey brand
14. Syracuse/UConn - would help build the BIG basketball brand - women's too
15. TCU/Houston - pure Texas land grab.

Schools like Cal, NC State, and Virginia Tech would have some stand-a-lone value, but that would only come into play if the state legislators attached them to the bigger school. NC State might be worth taking if it meant getting NC. I don't think UCLA is worth taking Cal.

Colorado market sounds interesting, but truth told the BIG already has it. Denver has tons of fans of Nebraska, Michigan, OSU, etc. Actually very few Buff fans. No need to grab the struggling athletics with ok academics.
I think Georgia Tech is too high on the list. Other than that, I don't see many issues with it. I think once you get past Stanford, you cut your loses and quit asking people. Mizzou hasn't really added anything to the SEC. I don't think they'd add much to the B1G. Every other school on that list past them would not be good additions.

Is there a reason you left out Baylor/Texas Tech? You put TCU/Houston for the Texas land grab, but I think Baylor/Tech offer more value as athletic programs. Unless your argument is securing the Dallas/Houston television markets? Which I don't think adding TCU or Houston actually does. I would put Baylor and Oklahoma State up toward that Mizzou range.
 

wcbsas

All Big 10
20 Year Member
I’m definitely a no go on anything with Cal. I’m already afraid of delving deeper into the west coast due to politics and how it could affect football going forward. I bring that out with a disclaimer that we can’t talk about politics on this board but if anyone wants my thoughts on how I feel it has to do in regards to football pm me.
Agree ... Cal adds nothing ... no more eyeballs, no more historical success and no nothing in football or basketball.

They bring more problems than positives. And if UCLA's bid depends on taking Cal ... then drop UCLA, take Stanford or Oregon instead.
 

wcbsas

All Big 10
20 Year Member
I think Georgia Tech is too high on the list. Other than that, I don't see many issues with it. I think once you get past Stanford, you cut your loses and quit asking people. Mizzou hasn't really added anything to the SEC. I don't think they'd add much to the B1G. Every other school on that list past them would not be good additions.

Is there a reason you left out Baylor/Texas Tech? You put TCU/Houston for the Texas land grab, but I think Baylor/Tech offer more value as athletic programs. Unless your argument is securing the Dallas/Houston television markets? Which I don't think adding TCU or Houston actually does. I would put Baylor and Oklahoma State up toward that Mizzou range.
Georgia Tech gets you deep into SEC territory and the Atlanta market ... they're a bigger brand than TCU, Houston or Texas Tech. The state of Texas is still UT centric followed by aTm ... TCU and TTU definitely do not bring any one specific market and I don't think Houston does either.
 

wcbsas

All Big 10
20 Year Member
If the Big wants to get to 24 I'd rank potential adds (not in terms of likeliness):

1. Notre Dame
2. North Carolina (elite brand, elite academics)
3. Washington
4. Florida State
5. Oregon
6. Virginia
7. Georgia Tech
8. Miami (elite brand, elite academics, no fan base)
9. Stanford
10. Missouri (would they switch?)
11. Arizona State or Arizona
12. Utah
13. Boston College - above the next two, would help build the B1G hockey brand
14. Syracuse/UConn - would help build the BIG basketball brand - women's too
15. TCU/Houston - pure Texas land grab.

Schools like Cal, NC State, and Virginia Tech would have some stand-a-lone value, but that would only come into play if the state legislators attached them to the bigger school. NC State might be worth taking if it meant getting NC. I don't think UCLA is worth taking Cal.

Colorado market sounds interesting, but truth told the BIG already has it. Denver has tons of fans of Nebraska, Michigan, OSU, etc. Actually very few Buff fans. No need to grab the struggling athletics with ok academics.
I would have Oregon 3rd, Georgia Tech 4th and Virginia below Miami and Stanford. I do not think Miami should be high either because they do not bring a lot of eyeballs watching games.
 

Mr.Bennett

Recruit
2 Year Member
I think Georgia Tech is too high on the list. Other than that, I don't see many issues with it. I think once you get past Stanford, you cut your loses and quit asking people. Mizzou hasn't really added anything to the SEC. I don't think they'd add much to the B1G. Every other school on that list past them would not be good additions.

Is there a reason you left out Baylor/Texas Tech? You put TCU/Houston for the Texas land grab, but I think Baylor/Tech offer more value as athletic programs. Unless your argument is securing the Dallas/Houston television markets? Which I don't think adding TCU or Houston actually does. I would put Baylor and Oklahoma State up toward that Mizzou range.
I think you may be sleeping on the AZ/ASU/Utah. Utah has solid teams, UA and ASU have teams with great potential. The states have growing populations and all are solid academically. They should prob be ahead of Mizzou.

As for the no TTech/Balyor, I view those schools as being very limited geographically. Waco is pretty much smack dab between Austin, College Station, and Dallas. It has a limited alumni base and will never play more than 5th or 6th fiddle in the major metros in TX. TTech can own west Texas, but I'm not sure that's an area worth owning. Plus there academics are poorly ranked. TCU's academics are a step ahead, and if things broke right they wouldn't own Dallas, but they'd be in the discussion. Houston's academics aren't as strong as TCUs, but they too could become a major player there.
 
Last edited:

Cornhuskers7

Red Shirt
Georgia Tech gets you deep into SEC territory and the Atlanta market ... they're a bigger brand than TCU, Houston or Texas Tech. The state of Texas is still UT centric followed by aTm ... TCU and TTU definitely do not bring any one specific market and I don't think Houston does either.
Does Georgia Tech get you the Atlanta market, though? Feel like Georgia Tech is a more established version of TCU or Houston. Yes, they are located in the Atlanta market, but Georgia is THE team.
 

Cornhuskers7

Red Shirt
I think you may be sleeping on the AZ/ASU/Utah. Utah has solid teams, UA and ASU have teams with great potential. The states have growing populations and all are solid academically. They should prob be ahead of Mizzou.

As for the no TTech/Balyor, I view those schools as being very limited geographically. Waco is pretty much smack dab between Austin, College Station, and Dallas. It has a limited alumni base and will never play more than 5th or 6th fiddle in the major metros in TX. TTech can own west Texas, but I'm not sure that's an area worth owning. Plus there academics are poorly ranked. TCU's academics are a step ahead, and if things broke right they wouldn't own Dallas, but they'd be in the discussion. Houston's academics aren't as strong as TCUs, but they too could become a major player there.
I can see your argument about the Arizona schools. They are large and do have potential. They are also good in some sports, even though they are lacking in football. I'm not sure the academic elitists in the B1G would sign onto them, but I do agree they have more potential value than Mizzou.

Texas Tech isn't an attractive option, but they have a more established program and base than TCU or Houston. They are definitely out in the middle of nowhere. I also agree that Baylor doesn't gain you any of the markets in Texas, but then again, no school other than Texas or A&M give you those. That said, it does give you some recruiting in-roads to Texas. Baylor has also quickly become one of the top athletic programs. They've had a ton of success in football in recent years, even with coaching changes thrown in. They've won national titles in men's and women's basketball, as well. I'd argue Baylor is the 3rd fiddle in Texas. They are nowhere close to UT/A&M, but have clearly separated themselves from Tech and the other schools in Texas.
 
Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site


GET TICKETS

Save 10 percent or more on gas.

Top