The Big 10 Evolution Debate – The Verdict

July 3, 2009

Read Loyal Homer’s argument to add another team to the Big 10 and Bleacher Fan’s argument to avoid another team.



To me, it’s interesting how this debate has evolved. What began a strict question discussing the specific pros and cons and possibilities of the Big Ten conference adding another team for an even 12 evolved into a debate about the value of a championship game.

Being a traditionalist myself, I find Bleacher Fan’s argument to be very appealing. Like many other Sports Geeks out there, this Sports Geek loves the Big Ten and all of the crazy traditions that Bleacher Fan recounted so well. My favorite bizarre Big Ten tradition is the Illibuck Ohio State and Illinois fight over. That’s why it pains me to award the victory for this debate to…

LOYAL HOMER!!!!!

Loyal Homer made THE point of the debate, a point that I haven’t been able to shake while contemplating how to write this verdict: A championship game isn’t solely about money. A business professional will say it is a no brainer to add a team, and a championship game, because the opportunity to make gobs and gobs of money exists. However, is money alone reason enough to potentially change the longstanding, deeply beloved traditions unique to the Big Ten conference? No.

However, Loyal Homer is not making an argument for another team and a championship game solely on the grounds of financial gain. I agree that it’s not a money issue but a respect issue.

For the Big Ten conference to earn the national respect Loyal Homer argues they’ve forfeited because of several consecutive poor BCS showings, adding a championship game helps. One of the benefits for the SEC, for example, is that it is clear in the national picture which team is the conference’s best and belongs in the BCS. Sure, the Big Ten has had at least two teams in the BCS for two consecutive years, and that has earned them a significant payday. Last season, the first team to make it to a BCS game in the Big Ten, Penn State, earned a fat $18 million bucks. The second team to make it to the BCS in the Big Ten, Ohio State, earned a $4.5 million dollar award. That’ll buy a lot of buckeye candy. But money is something the Big Ten has. Respect is what it needs.

In the end, the Big Ten is not forced to abandon all of their traditions, as Bleacher Fan intimates. In reality, some concessions will have to be made. Some jugs and bucks and buckets will not be contested EVERY year, but they won’t be completely forgotten and phased out, either.

The most important aspect of adding a team and a championship game for the Big Ten is supremacy. Not only will a supreme champion receive national publicity and the full efforts of a conference’s marketing power as they enter the BCS, the conference will remain relevant at the end of the season. A major drawback to the current construction of the Big Ten football season is the fact that they disappear as the other major conferences begin to play their most interesting, relevant games. The last Big Ten game of the season is before Thanksgiving with THE Game, while the SEC, ACC, and Big XII all play national, heavily hyped championship games in early December. The Big Ten gains nothing by being absent from the national dialogue, but they gain a lot by playing their bowl game 20-30 days after their season ends, instead of the now customary 40+ day layoff BCS teams have been forced to endure.

12 Comments | The Big 10 Evolution Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

The Big 10 Evolution Debate – The SEC Isn’t the Answer to Everything!

July 2, 2009

Read the debate intro and Loyal Homer’s argument that the Big 10 must add another team.



Sometimes it makes sense to “leave well enough alone.” Just because you CAN change something doesn’t mean you SHOULD (would anyone care for a New Coke?!).

Nowhere in sports is tradition more important than in college football. Whether its Notre Dame players slapping the “Play Like A Champion Today” sign or cadets standing arm-in-arm after the Army-Navy game to sing the respective anthems of their branch of service, these are the moments that link modern-day players and fans with ancestors from more than 100 years ago.

Likewise, there is no conference where tradition is more important than the Big Ten. College football’s oldest conference is home to some of football’s greatest traditions, such as dotting the ‘i’ in the Script Ohio, the Pink Locker Room, and the saying, “Those who stay will be champions.”

The Big Ten also claims some of college football’s biggest and oldest rivalries, such as The Old Oaken Bucket, The Little Brown Jug, and, of course, the greatest rivalry in sports – Ohio State vs. Michigan (also known simply as, “THE Game”).

Adding another team simply to implement a championship game is not needed! First, the addition of a new school would impact scheduling for all the Big Ten schools. Most likely, the conference would be split into two divisions, and each team would have room on their schedule for only two or three non-division opponents. What would that split mean for those rivalries? In a North/South split, would Ohio State play Michigan every year? If an East/West split was adopted, could Penn State play Minnesota for the annual Governor’s Victory Bell? Tradition would suffer.

Loyal Homer speaks to revenue gained, but the Big Ten conference is already the second highest revenue earner (behind the SEC) in college football. They are so successful, in fact, with the current financial formula that the Big Ten boasts three schools among the top 10 in revenue.

Let’s consider other potential sacrifices to tradition that would be made in order to accommodate this new team and championship game:

  • “THE Game” between Ohio State and Michigan is the greatest rivalry for two reasons. First, the passion (read: hatred) shared between the two schools. Second, the game is often for more than just bragging rights. Nearly every year it has conference and national championship implications. Adding a championship game after it would GREATLY diminish the value of the rivalry. It would become “just another game” with no significant impact on the season’s outcome.
  • The ‘best’ team doesn’t ALWAYS win. Consider the Big XII championship game. Some examples: in 2003 #15 Kansas State upset #1 Oklahoma and in 2007 #9 Oklahoma upset #1 Missouri. In the SEC, #13 Georgia upset #3 LSU in 2005. The best team on a particular day is NOT always the best team of the season. If the best team won every game, then every year would result in an undefeated champion… that just doesn’t happen.
  • The possibility of a repeat game exists, rendering the previous game worthless. Consider 2006, when #1 Ohio State played #2 Michigan. Ohio State won and earned a National Championship bid. WHAT IF there was a conference championship game and Ohio State played Michigan AGAIN. IF Michigan beat Ohio State, would they be conference champ just because they won on the right day?

Loyal Homer boasts of Florida’s conference championship performance, claiming it propelled Florida to the national spotlight. The Big Ten (and PAC-10) has managed just fine WITHOUT that exposure. Ohio State has played in three National Championships in the past seven seasons. Michigan won the National Championship in 1997, and USC (albeit not from the Big Ten) has also made two appearances in the past seven years DESPITE lacking a conference championship.

To alter tradition for money would be like changing the lyric to “Take Me Out To The Ballgame” to “Buy me some peanuts and Taco Bell…” because of a new sponsorship deal. Sometimes, generating revenue is not worth the sacrifice of tradition, especially when the current system works.

P.S. The SEC is NOT the best conference, Loyal Homer… it IS the most OVERRATED, though!

1 Comment | The Big 10 Evolution Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Bleacher Fan

The Big 10 Evolution Debate – No Respect Until Another Team and a Championship Game

July 2, 2009

Read the debate intro and Bleacher Fan’s argument that the Big 10 should avoid adding another team.



Before I begin, I just want to say that I, like Sports Geek, am also looking forward to the college football season… or football in general for that matter. Don’t get me wrong, I love baseball. It still remains the national pastime to me. But, it’s tough to beat those fall weekends every year.

On to the debate…

The Big 10… or as I call it, the WEAK 11, most definitely needs a championship game. And to do that, they need to add another team to make it feasible to split the league up into divisions like the ACC, Big 12, and SEC do.

Let’s take a look at the SEC. In my opinion it’s the best conference in college football from top to bottom (right, Bleacher Fan?). I live right in the heart of SEC country. I’m almost exactly in the middle of Athens, Georgia and Gainesville, Florida, so I follow the SEC very closely.

The SEC added a conference championship game back in 1992, with Florida playing Alabama. Since its inception, Florida has played in the game a total of nine times. I think it’s safe to say that the Florida Gators have drastically increased their national profile since 1992. Three national titles (1996, 2006, 2008) go along way toward establishing a following like the one the Gators currently enjoy. Playing in the championship game helped them become a usual suspect when discussing the national championship.

Let’s use the 1996 Florida Gators as an example. Quarterback Danny Wuerffel’s Gators lost at the end of the regular season to rival Florida State 24-21. However, after defeating Alabama (in Gene Stallings‘ last season) 45-30 in the championship game, they were able to get the rematch with the Seminoles thanks to the University of Texas’ upset of Nebraska in the inaugural Big 12 Championship game. Arizona State, which was ranked #2 in the nation at the end of the regular season, was contractually obligated to play in the Rose Bowl (and that is a debate for another day)! Ohio State knocked off Jake Plummer’s Sun Devils (the late Pat Tillman was also on this team), while the Gators absolutely destroyed the Seminoles 52-20 in the Sugar Bowl, thus allowing the Gators to jump all the way to the top of the polls to claim the championship!

Without the conference championship game, it is highly unlikely the Gators would have had a chance to play for the NATIONAL championship.

I also think the Big 10 needs to add another team to restore its national reputation as a powerful conference in football. Fair or not, the whippings Ohio State has taken in the 2006 and 2007 BCS Championship games really put them, and the conference, in a negative light.

Adding another team to the Big 10 also brings in another market to the conference. Yes, the ACC conference championship game hasn’t exactly been a big draw, as Sports Geek noted. But, adding Virginia Tech, Miami – and especially Boston College – has brought more markets to the conference and will also help the conference members recruit new areas. Imagine the Clemson Tigers getting headlines in the local Boston papers for playing the Boston College Eagles.

I really see no downside to adding another team. Are the members of the Big 10 scared of this? They have been coasting by on their cupcake schedules long enough. They need a conference championship game to give them a true test. It’s time they step up so they can be considered one of the elite conferences!

Leave a Comment » | The Big 10 Evolution Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Loyal Homer

The Big 10 Evolution Debate – Should the Big 10 Add Another Team?

July 2, 2009

Read Loyal Homer’s argument to add another team to the Big 10 and Bleacher Fan’s argument to avoid another team.



Another year of exciting college football is nearly upon us. We’re also just starting to hit the peak of the “the Big 10 should add another team to the conference” season, too. It, like the bowl games, is an annual tradition everyone in the Midwest has come to know and love.

This year’s version of the topic was started by none other than the venerable Penn State head football coach Joe Paterno. In between stories about first-hand encounters with dinosaurs and how he consoled Adam after Eve offered him an apple, he said Division I football’s oldest conference deserves its own time in the spotlight with a championship game to decide who wins the conference, rather than the current system of an imbalanced schedule and a litany of tiebreakers (Penn State litany Lions?).

Of course, one of the bigger issues with this topic is what the heck to call the conference if they do add another team. I have a sneaking suspension it would be completely creative, out of the box thinking. Something fancy like, “Bigger 10” or “Big Dozen.” Marketing geniuses over there.

Truthfully, there are schools willing and able to play in the Big 10 from other Midwestern conferences like the MAC, who boast at least one good team pretty much every year… and even have two automatic bowl bids (but, who doesn’t?). The seemingly perfect option of adding Notre Dame is off the table, according to JoePa (and it’s wise to believe him… or he’ll chase you down as you run off the field like a ref who made a bad call).

Adding another team to the Big 10 does have some obvious advantages. For example, the conference can add a lucrative conference championship game and make some extra cash for the conference as a whole. The Big 10 has always been a television ratings draw, and would probably sell out a championship football game, unlike their counterparts in the ACC (though I’m guessing the 28,000 that attended last year had a great time).

But, of course, this issue is more complicated than just getting a championship game. If only there was a website that offered smart fans the chance to understand both sides of a complex sports issue and forecast how that issue might be logically resolved? WAIT A MINUTE!! Have you heard of The Sports Debates??? That is a great site. Tell your friends.

For today’s debate, our friend the Loyal Homer will argue that the Big 10 must add another member to the conference – no matter who that is – because the upside is too great to ignore. Loyal Homer is an SEC expert, too, so there’s good precedent to cite.

Our other good friend, Bleacher Fan, will argue that the Big 10 must avoid the temptation of adding another team to the conference – no matter who it is – because they simply do not need to do it.

Make a good case, and pay attention to the details – trust me.

7 Comments | The Big 10 Evolution Debate | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Sports Geek

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.