Is that conference realignment's faint heart beat that I'm hearing?

[pj]

You talk of UConn as if it is Eastern Connecticut State. Build up our athletic programs? We are cluttered in the Gampel rafters with national championship banners.

I was thinking mainly of football, secondarily other sports like hockey. Basketball is of course in good shape, although attendance and enthusiasm have been a bit down in recent years.

 

[HuskyFan16]

GopherHawk I hear what your saying about TX being upstaged by Tech, but I am not sure that they would be allowed into any other conference with the LHN, and I really don't think that is some thing that they would want to (or ESPN would let them) drop considering the investment.

Also Frank, I hear what your saying about Big Name teams being what matters for TV...but that cannot be as essential to most of the conferences anymore. Each power conference has its teams that will give ESPN its fill. But most have to be concerned in future expansion with the viability of their own cash cows - the conference networks. The money there to be had is in coverage fees, in fact most of the games on the BTN are not the ratings grab games.

 

[pj]

Frank is of course right about the scheduling issue; the only real scheduling problem is with odd numbers such as 15.

I think UConn brings a lot to the B1G financially and in terms of opportunities to engage with alumni in the Northeast / NY / New England. The BTN needs inventory and UConn would bring it; UConn would especially help in basketball but the large market and the extra northeast games have their own value. Money and the opportunity to play in NY/NE would be worth as much as a diminution in frequency of games against Michigan. (Evidence that this consideration won't be decisive: If you're in the off division with 16 teams you play Michigan 2 times in 8 years on a 9-game schedule, with 14 teams you play Michigan 3 times in 7 years on a 9-game schedule but 2 times in 7 years on an 8-game schedule; so a 9-game schedule with 16 teams isn't much different than the 8-game schedule with 14, which the Presidents just approved.) The AAU issue will be solved in a few years.

I think the big problem with getting into the B1G is having the right partner, and having an odd number of partners.

 

[uconNYC]

16 teams allows for 4 pods of 4 teams with every team playing each other at least once every 2 years.

 

[frankthetank]

Frank, thanks for spooning our medicine with a delicate hand.

No problem.

To the extent that there's any action in power conference expansion in the near future, it's with the Big 12. That's where you guys need to position yourselves. As stubborn as Texas might be, they ought to know well enough that WVU can't just sit out east all alone in perpetuity (although if there is anyone wouldn't give two craps about that, it would be Texas), so that's the most realistic route out of the AAC. That means showing how/why UConn would (1) bring revenue immediately to that league when it's the one league without any conference network in place or aspirations to have one and (2) be a better addition than Cincinnati, BYU and/or a UNLV program that has a new football stadium in Vegas.

 

[pj]

16 teams allows for 4 pods of 4 teams with every team playing each other at least once every 2 years.

Yes, that improves significantly on the 14 team league in terms of letting other schools play Michigan frequently. You have to have some method for determining which two teams get to play in the league championship.

 

[Rumrunner]

Can you list some examples? I'm not asking that to be confrontational, but it's your implication that Brandon doesn't wield as much power as someone in his position would usually possess. In fact, coming from the business side of things, if he approached his President and told her, "this is a good decision business-wise for Michigan and the Big Ten", one would think that that recommendation would carry more weight than if he was just a lifer AD.

Remember, it isn't only UConn fans that are claiming that scheduling is easier with 16 games, or that we somehow are making up out of whole cloth that some in the Big Ten (including stakeholders) claim that the Big Ten is still on the prowl for markets and inventory. What it boils down to is you disagree with the Michigan AD. If Brandon had said this before the GOR was made public by the ACC, you'd be the first to jump all over his comments because of the positive implications for UNC, UVA, FSU, or whatever ACC school that you personally wanted the Big Ten to add.

Yes, it's about business, but it also means that he's not quite as schooled in the nuances and politics of academia. So, he has often spoken out in more aggressive terms than what the Big Ten university presidents are really willing to do, and those are the guys that are the decision makers.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I think inventory will matter, in both sports. Football isn't such a big problem because with 7 games a weekend there is plenty of content even if 2 or 3 are on ABC/ESPN. Basketball is a big issue during the week for the BTN. There will be multiple nights with just 1 or even 0 games during the winter months, and there will be a lot of Rutgers/Minnesota/Northwestern/Penn State games that no one will watch. Maryland helps a little, but this isn't the same Maryland of 10 years ago.

The problem for UConn and the Big 10 is that it will be like, not love, by the Big 10.

As for the Big 12, I see Cincinnati as a travel partner for WVU and BYU as an all sports or even a football only. There is no Sunday problem with BYU if there are no other sports in the league, and the travel is not a big deal either if it is just football.

 

[Afroabe224]

As a UConn to B1G realist, I think the biggest issue is having a solid partner to join. I think UConn could add marginal value as a 16th school but we need the B1G to have a solid value 15th school before we could be in the conversation. The only viable options for them now are in the Big 12 so until there is shifting there, we are in trouble (the AAC).

 

[UConn Dan]

Yes, that improves significantly on the 14 team league in terms of letting other schools play Michigan frequently. You have to have some method for determining which two teams get to play in the league championship.

You still have 2 divisions of 8 teams each but the 4 team pods within those divisions rotate.

Year 1
East
Pod A
Pod B

West
Pod C
Pod D

Year 2
East
Pod A
Pod D

West
Pod B
Pod C

And so forth...

 

[Gurleyman]

I like the four pods idea. Then we can go from "Leaders" and "Legends" to maybe:

Leaders
Legends
Lepers
Lemurs

 

[nelsonmuntz]

It is completely idiotic to say that 16 isn't easier to schedule than 14. 4 pod's is much easier and more symmetrical than 2 divisions of 7. That said, I don't think that scheduling will drive any decisions.

I also don't think 15 vs. 16 is that big an issue for any league. If the incremental program brings value, they will add 1 program. The Big 10 went with 11 for about 20 years. It is a little trickier with 2 divisions, but I don't see the Big 10 feeling obligated to find a partner school just because they want to add someone.

All that matters is TV value. Better programs have more TV value, so it is in UConn's interest to be very good, but ultimately TV is all that matters. Does UConn bring the Big 10 more value that it costs the conference. If the hurdle is $30MM, I don't think so. If the hurdle was $10 or $12, I think UConn has a chance. I don't know if the Big 10 is interested in tiered memberships, but that is the only way UConn gets in that league.

 

[UConnJim]

It is completely idiotic to say that 16 isn't easier to schedule than 14. 4 pod's is much easier and more symmetrical than 2 divisions of 7. That said, I don't think that scheduling will drive any decisions.

I also don't think 15 vs. 16 is that big an issue for any league. If the incremental program brings value, they will add 1 program. The Big 10 went with 11 for about 20 years. It is a little trickier with 2 divisions, but I don't see the Big 10 feeling obligated to find a partner school just because they want to add someone.

All that matters is TV value. Better programs have more TV value, so it is in UConn's interest to be very good, but ultimately TV is all that matters. Does UConn bring the Big 10 more value that it costs the conference. If the hurdle is $30MM, I don't think so. If the hurdle was $10 or $12, I think UConn has a chance. I don't know if the Big 10 is interested in tiered memberships, but that is the only way UConn gets in that league.

Disagree. UConn and the state of Connecticut control their own destiny here. If the Big 10 says we need $30 million per year from the Big 10 Network in Connecticut for UConn to join the Big 10, I am sure that we would see a $2.50/month fee for the BTN for Connecticut cable subs.

If UConn is hoping for a Big 10 bid in the next 10 years, there are four things that need to happen:

1) Continue to produce winners.
2) Obtain AAU status.
3) Expand the football stadium and build the fan base.
4) Commit to making UConn pay for itself through the BTN cable fees.

 

[pj]

For the longest time I thought UCONN would be in the B1G. I sorry to say I think the shift is in. I believe the B1G did homework on OU for a reason. UT can not be happy with the way the SEC has turned out for A&M. They are expanding the stadium to 102,000 just to be bigger than UT. UT may start to fear being an equal or #2 in Texas. A league with just OU as a proud football counterpart isn't working. UT will need to play tOSU, Neb, Wis, Penn State and UM to keep up with A&M's schedule.

Look for OU and UT to break for it. Either to the PAC or B1G.

UT will not stand for A&M one upping them. They must put them in their place soon.

If that's the case, then UConn's fate may depend on which way Texas jumps. If they go B1G, then presumably B1G takes 4 B12 schools (texas/tt/oklahoma/kansas), SEC takes two more (osu + 1), and then maybe UConn and WVU to the ACC (Cincy, USF, UCF, and other B12 schools are competitors).

On the other hand, suppose Pac takes Texas/TT/OU + 1, leaving Kansas for the B1G, UConn might come in to the B1G with Kansas.

 

[pj]

Disagree. UConn and the state of Connecticut control their own destiny here. If the Big 10 says we need $30 million per year from the Big 10 Network in Connecticut for UConn to join the Big 10, I am sure that we would see a $2.50/month fee for the BTN for Connecticut cable subs.

If UConn is hoping for a Big 10 bid in the next 10 years, there are four things that need to happen:

1) Continue to produce winners.
2) Obtain AAU status.
3) Expand the football stadium and build the fan base.
4) Commit to making UConn pay for itself through the BTN cable fees.

I agree that UConn can produce enough money to justify a B1G invite. You don't have to generate all $30 mn within Connecticut though. UConn adds value in New York and New England, and the content UConn brings adds value throughout the BTN territory. If half the value has to be provided within Connecticut, then a $1.25 fee is enough which is easily do-able. For comparison, ESPN is $5.

 

[pj]

OU is a possible long-range option for the Big Ten, although I still think the Grant of Rights for all leagues is a stumbling block. The Big Ten itself doesn't have any desire to challenge the strength of Grant of Rights arrangements since it has one itself.

The GoR is an obstacle to moving from one TV network to another, but not necessarily between conferences on the same network.

Suppose a team moves from ACC to SEC, both ESPN properties. They've assigned their media rights to the ACC, who has assigned them to ESPN. The SEC teams have assigned their media rights to ESPN. So nothing changes! Meanwhile, the ACC is still required to pay the school $20 mn/year or whatever the ACC payout is for the media rights (to SEC games) that they've transferred to ESPN. ESPN doesn't care whether it got the rights from the ACC or the SEC, it will televise the games however it likes. The ex-ACC school has to live with ACC payouts rather than SEC payouts for a while, that's the only real difference; otherwise, they're in the new conference, and as far as fans and players are concerned, it is identical to them being a normal SEC member.

Odds are the conferences would work out some deal in which the media rights and payout responsibilities were transferred to the new conference, just to simplify contracting. The money transferred to settle would be very small.

Even if a team moved across networks, eg ACC to B1G, the GoR wouldn't necessarily totally preclude the move. The content would be diminished in value, because ESPN can't market B1G games as well as Fox/BTN can, so both ESPN/ACC and Fox/B1G would be losers. Yet the ACC would still have to pay the ex-ACC team $20 mn per year. Again, both sides would have incentives to work this out; but the worst case, that they don't, isn't terrible for the school -- they still get an ACC payout and play B1G games.

This is why it was essential for the ACC to keep their exit fee in addition to the GoR. It is also why the ACC school vote for the GoR was unanimous, while the vote for the high exit fee wasn't. The GoR costs the schools nothing if they move, while the exit fee is a major barrier to leaving.

The function of the GoR is really to force a larger re-negotiation when teams move. It brings the networks into the negotiation, and that is why ESPN was willing to sweeten the ACC pot in exchange for the GoR. I don't see it as a huge barrier to re-alignment. Nevertheless until there have been some moves done and deals made, there may be some legal uncertainty around them which slows realignment down.

The B12 is in a special situation, as its media rights are shared by multiple networks. So the contracts must be quite complex and have various exit/termination clauses for different scenarios. I think it's a near certainty that if enough B12 schools want to move, the GoR will be dissolved. It just means that a sizeable number of B12 teams have to find new homes simultaneously. That's possible with Pac, SEC, and B1G all interested.

 

[frankthetank]

I agree that UConn can produce enough money to justify a B1G invite. You don't have to generate all $30 mn within Connecticut though. UConn adds value in New York and New England, and the content UConn brings adds value throughout the BTN territory. If half the value has to be provided within Connecticut, then a $1.25 fee is enough which is easily do-able. For comparison, ESPN is $5.

Guys, I understand that you're going to put UConn in the most positive light possible (which is what you should be doing as fans), but to suggest that any of this is easily doable is far from the truth. $1.25 per subscriber per home is more than what the Big Ten is getting in places like Columbus and Lincoln where college football games literally get NFL-level ratings. Those are areas where a cable company will go out of business if they don't carry the BTN because that specific channel is that important. Are people seriously arguing that this is going to be the case even in just the state of Connecticut (much less the rest of the NYC market)? That's what this argument is stating.

Look - if any of this were as easy as you describe that the Big Ten can simply waltz in and start printing money with a simple addition, UConn would have been added a long time ago. The fact is that it's not anywhere near that easy. Potential isn't going to work here - UConn actually has to *show* that it's going to draw the types of TV ratings that could conceivably force basic carriage. The numbers are not proven for *football*. (Not men's basketball. Not women's basketball. What matters is *FOOTBALL*)

Once again, the Big 12 is UConn's realistic shot at a power conference for the next decade. That's who you need to be selling yourselves to. If UConn can hit on all of the academic and football TV ratings metrics over the next decade, then maybe its fortunes will change with respect to the Big Ten, but to suggest that it's close today isn't realistic. AAU status is far from a certainty for any school and BTN basic carriage isn't a certainty, either (unlike in places like North Carolina if the Big Ten waits for UNC or going for FSU or Oklahoma if the Big Ten is willing to look at non-AAU schools).

 

[coachcap]

Guys, I understand that you're going to put UConn in the most positive light possible (which is what you should be doing as fans), but to suggest that any of this is easily doable is far from the truth. $1.25 per subscriber per home is more than what the Big Ten is getting in places like Columbus and Lincoln where college football games literally get NFL-level ratings. Those are areas where a cable company will go out of business if they don't carry the BTN because that specific channel is that important. Are people seriously arguing that this is going to be the case even in just the state of Connecticut (much less the rest of the NYC market)? That's what this argument is stating.

Look - if any of this were as easy as you describe that the Big Ten can simply waltz in and start printing money with a simple addition, UConn would have been added a long time ago. The fact is that it's not anywhere near that easy. Potential isn't going to work here - UConn actually has to *show* that it's going to draw the types of TV ratings that could conceivably force basic carriage. The numbers are not proven for *football*. (Not men's basketball. Not women's basketball. What matters is *FOOTBALL*)

Once again, the Big 12 is UConn's realistic shot at a power conference for the next decade. That's who you need to be selling yourselves to. If UConn can hit on all of the academic and football TV ratings metrics over the next decade, then maybe its fortunes will change with respect to the Big Ten, but to suggest that it's close today isn't realistic. AAU status is far from a certainty for any school and BTN basic carriage isn't a certainty, either (unlike in places like North Carolina if the Big Ten waits for UNC or going for FSU or Oklahoma if the Big Ten is willing to look at non-AAU schools).

Frank: UConn has proven that it will draw ratings & drive carraige. When the athletic department sold its rights to the SNY network, that network had little coverage in the state outside of Fairfield County. Once that contract was signed, SNY was put onto mst cable systems in the State in short order, something the Mets had been trying to get done for ages.

 

[Rumrunner]

And where Nebraska residents get 12 days of content per year.

You have no idea about the reach of UConn sports in Connecticut. None. Zip. Nada.

It isn't just 12 football games a year in Connecticut.

It's 40 men's basketball games.

It's 40 women's basketball games.

It's a brand that is unmatched.

And anyone that knows anything about UConn fans, there is very little cross over between men's and women's. Go to a UConn girl's game frank. Tell me if you see the same people at the hoops game.

And this isn't speculation. Ask SNY. Those who belittle UConn as a viable media entity as it pertains to the state of Connecticut are crazy. Why did SNY grab MORE UConn content after they first started its partnership? As coachcap stated, how did SNY suddenly appear in the 700k cable households in connecticut? That "negotiation" took a matter of days. Days. Not weeks.

Frank, when you understand UConn's IMG contract, its sponsorhips (hint: UConn has one of the largest, if not largest, single entity sponsorship thru webster bank than any other school) you'd probably change your tune.

While you rightfully state that UConn fans will put UConn in the most positive light, until you admit your bias that your dream of UNC, UVA, Fl State has been dashed and that the Big Ten must now "settle" for less, you too, are infected with bias. That's not a bad thing. You're just upset that UNC and UVA didn't want the Big Ten.

Guys, I understand that you're going to put UConn in the most positive light possible (which is what you should be doing as fans), but to suggest that any of this is easily doable is far from the truth. $1.25 per subscriber per home is more than what the Big Ten is getting in places like Columbus and Lincoln where college football games literally get NFL-level ratings. Those are areas where a cable company will go out of business if they don't carry the BTN because that specific channel is that important. Are people seriously arguing that this is going to be the case even in just the state of Connecticut (much less the rest of the NYC market)? That's what this argument is stating.

Look - if any of this were as easy as you describe that the Big Ten can simply waltz in and start printing money with a simple addition, UConn would have been added a long time ago. The fact is that it's not anywhere near that easy. Potential isn't going to work here - UConn actually has to *show* that it's going to draw the types of TV ratings that could conceivably force basic carriage. The numbers are not proven for *football*. (Not men's basketball. Not women's basketball. What matters is *FOOTBALL*)

Once again, the Big 12 is UConn's realistic shot at a power conference for the next decade. That's who you need to be selling yourselves to. If UConn can hit on all of the academic and football TV ratings metrics over the next decade, then maybe its fortunes will change with respect to the Big Ten, but to suggest that it's close today isn't realistic. AAU status is far from a certainty for any school and BTN basic carriage isn't a certainty, either (unlike in places like North Carolina if the Big Ten waits for UNC or going for FSU or Oklahoma if the Big Ten is willing to look at non-AAU schools).

 

[CTMike]

All the SNY stuff is very positive within the state of CT. Frank seems to be telling it like it is on a national level. It's tough to hear, but now is not the time to slap ourselves on the back and say job well done on SNY. We have to keep fighting and clawing for relevancy nationally.

 

[Rumrunner]

UConn-SNY Deal Ignites Cable Tussle
Sept. 1, 2010

"Regional sports networks are very expensive," Cohan said, "and we have to balance that cost with the desire for our subscribers to have the network."

The price to cable systems of running regional sports networks, industry analysts say, is usually many times the cost of other popular cable networks. With YES, NESN and ESPN already a must in Connecticut, SNY was not considered vital in areas that don't have a lot of Mets fans. "There wasn't a lot of interest before [the UConn deal]," Cohan said.


Cox Reaches Agreement With SNY, Will Televise UConn Saturday
September 10, 2010

Frank, how you like them apples?

 

[Rumrunner]

Oh wait, Frank. That's right, UConn would be lucky to get basic carriage of the BTN in Connecticut because ratings aren't proven, eh? Frank, it will be easier to admit you're wrong than dig your hole any further.

You may be right that UConn has no appeal to the Big Ten. But to come here and claim that UConn is an unknown prospect with respect to its media reach in Connecticut is just plain, flat out wrong. It's moronic. You have stepped into UCONN's wheelhouse on this issue. It is the very best thing that UConn has going for it. At this point, you'd be better serve to inform yourself a little further.

Conn Huskies Surge in Popularity on SNY
December 5, 2012

With UConn Huskies football and the Men’s and Women’s basketball programs all sharing the same TV home for the first time, SNY has announced that television ratings for those programs have increased significantly across the board in the Hartford-New Haven Designated Market Area (DMA).

In its inaugural season on SNY, the undefeated UConn Women’s basketball program has already experienced growth in popularity as the team’s television ratings have increased 14 percent in the Hartford-New Haven DMA. SNY’s Women’s basketball coverage is averaging a 5.14 household rating through the first five games of the season, compared with the first five regional telecasts that aired last season. The network’s highest household rating of the 2012-13 season occurred on Nov. 23, when the Huskies defeated Marist College at the Paradise Jam tournament, and garnered a 5.86 household rating. SNY’s next UConn Women’s basketball telecast is on Thursday, Dec. 6 when the Huskies, ranked 2nd in the country, take on 10th ranked Penn State at 7 p.m.

The Men’s Basketball program is also off to a blazing start on SNY, averaging a 4.88 household rating in the Hartford-New Haven DMA for the 2012-13 season. The rating represents a 24 percent increase compared to the same period last year (3.92 household rating). The UConn Men’s basketball program’s next telecast on SNY is Friday, Dec. 7 at 7 p.m.

The UConn Huskies Football team also experienced significant television ratings gains this season by posting a huge 50 percent increase versus the 2011 season on SNY (3.10 household rating vs. 2.07 household rating). SNY’s highest rated UConn football game registered a 3.90 household rating when UConn defeated Louisville on Nov. 24.

“We’ve always believed that creating a single destination – one that provides consistency as well as the most comprehensive, in-depth coverage for UConn fans would result in increased visibility and popularity,” said Steve Raab, President of SNY. “We knew we would deliver UConn a broader national audience, but these substantial ratings gains across all of our UConn properties on a local level are another great development. We are excited about the potential to grow the brand even more as we continue our partnership with the University.”

 

[pj]

Frank, you're completely missing that in the new conference network world, basketball brings in as much or more revenue as football. It is every bit as important. Having 3x as many games, and having games spread over the whole week, more than makes up for each game being individually less valuable.

UConn got over $0.10 per cable household in Connecticut for women's basketball alone as a single property. Men's basketball and men's football are each more valuable; soccer, hockey, baseball, and other sports add value too; and the rest of the BTN content adds significant value. I think it's very plausible that the BTN would get $1.25 per household in Connecticut if they had UConn. And UConn would add $0.10 per household to carriage rates in New England and New York. UConn basketball is a big brand in New York and New England.

I think AAU status and perception are the major barriers to B1G entry, not financial value. The addition of Rutgers took away one barrier, lack of geographic proximity. UConn needs to join the AAU and increase its student body and show growth in the football program. A little luck in the form of an available partner, such as Rutgers had with Maryland, would help.

I don't see the B12 as a likely destination for UConn. ACC will grow to 15-16 before the B12 adds UConn. But the AAC contract gave ESPN UConn's rights cheaply. So UConn needs to create interest from the B1G to force ESPN/ACC to bite. One way or another, it will come down to B1G vs ACC, and UConn will be in one or the other.

 

[frankthetank]

Frank, you're completely missing that in the new conference network world, basketball brings in as much or more revenue as football. It is every bit as important. Having 3x as many games, and having games spread over the whole week, more than makes up for each game being individually less valuable.

UConn got over $0.10 per cable household in Connecticut for women's basketball alone as a single property. Men's basketball and men's football are each more valuable; soccer, hockey, baseball, and other sports add value too; and the rest of the BTN content adds significant value. I think it's very plausible that the BTN would get $1.25 per household in Connecticut if they had UConn. And UConn would add $0.10 per household to carriage rates in New England and New York. UConn basketball is a big brand in New York and New England.

I think AAU status and perception are the major barriers to B1G entry, not financial value. The addition of Rutgers took away one barrier, lack of geographic proximity. UConn needs to join the AAU and increase its student body and show growth in the football program. A little luck in the form of an available partner, such as Rutgers had with Maryland, would help.

I don't see the B12 as a likely destination for UConn. ACC will grow to 15-16 before the B12 adds UConn. But the AAC contract gave ESPN UConn's rights cheaply. So UConn needs to create interest from the B1G to force ESPN/ACC to bite. One way or another, it will come down to B1G vs ACC, and UConn will be in one or the other.

I'm well aware that basketball can be fairly important for the success of a conference network and have argued as much. The contract for the new Big East coming in as high as it did for basketball (and no football) was also instructive.

However, in the case of the Big Ten, football is still the key even if you have a good basketball product. In the case of Maryland, which is probably more of a basketball school, it's still important that it has a long football history and, maybe even more critically, a location in the heart of some of the best football recruiting grounds outside of the Sun Belt. (New Jersey happens to be another one of those places, too.)

UConn has attributes to sell. However, what I think too many people here are doing is thinking that such attributes are first and foremost in what the Big Ten is (or should be) looking for. Yes, the Big Ten wants to make a lot of TV money, but its brand is also inextricably linked to old school football tradition (where even if you're not a football power, you better have a long history to draw upon). People are missing that the Big Ten doesn't just want money - it wants *old* money. That is as big of a barrier for UConn in this case as the lack of AAU status (and it's something that won't ever change except for the passage of time).

I've been telling anyone that would listen for months upon months that the ACC is much stronger than people gave it credit for. In particular, I didn't think UNC wanted to move at all, which would then weigh heavily on schools like UVA and GT. So, while it would have be fun to see the Big Ten add some other ACC schools, I certainly didn't expect it to occur (unlike a lot of WVU-based rumor mongerers). With those ACC and Big 12 schools off the table, I just don't see how further Big Ten expansion is realistic at this point. This is a league that waited at 11 schools for 20 years before expanding again. They're willing to wait again. There is ZERO urgency to expand now. I can't emphasize that enough.

 

[djct1999]

honestly, i dont buy any of this. to say the big 10 waited 20 years is archaic. in the past few years, the landscape has changed so much. its like comparing albert pujols to lou gehrig. the bottomline is this...........its a race to get to 16-18 teams, its a race to lock in heavily populated markets, and its a race to strengthen the product of the individual tv network. this is far from over, and 1 or more conferences will still act sooner rather than later. i dont' even buy that the rent needs to massively expand. look at the stadiums at most middle tier schools in big 10, big 12 and acc, their capacities are between 40-60k. that is easily doable for uconn. what prevented uconn from realignment had less to do with tradition, facilities, academics etc. and more to do with politics. once that subsides, uconn is not only the most attractive school left, its even more attractive than some of the schools already selected.

the way i chose to see it, is that all three leagues need uconn. the big 10 to lock in the northeast, the acc to establish a more sustainable northern presence and to not allow syracuse and pitt become the next bc, and the big 12 for ultimate survival and partner wvu( a horrible decision) with fellow big east brethren.