I am not a huge fan of the Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany. I've found him in the past to be excessively rigid, dogmatic and a hectoring sort of individual. This is not to say that he has not done good things, but I am not a fan of the man from what I have seen at a distance.
So I went into the reading of his white paper on freshman ineligibility (titled "Education First, Athletics Second") with a healthy dose of skepticisim. Granted, when he started talking about the idea of a "Year of Readiness" I had no clue exactly how much thought had gone into it.
I have to admit...I was surprised.
Not by the level of thought that was put into the paper, but by my inclination to agree with the points being made and actually being in support of the idea.
Even though my background is in higher education administration, I have had the pleasure of spending time around business majors and business professors. In addition, I have plenty of friends who work in business, marketing, advertising.
As a communications major, and as a cynical person, I believe that nothing good can ever come from the words, "youth demographic." Especially as it relates to sports.
So imagine my surprise when I read a story in Michigan Today, which contained those ill fated words in connection to...a costumed mascot at the University of Michigan. From athletic director Dave Brandon:
"I'm struck by the fact that when opposing teams come to our stadium, and they bring a mascot, all of our young fans are lined up to see if they can get a picture taken with it, whether it's the Penn State Nittany Lion or Sparty," Brandon told Michigan Today. "That's a little annoying to me.
"You can't get your picture taken with a Block M. Mascots are really embraced by the youth demographic and we want to take advantage of that, for all the reasons that are obvious...Our history and our tradition is great for those of who were there to experience it, or remember it...but there's a generation coming up and you've got to connect with them and keep them excited."
I'm not like ESPN's Michael Wilbon, who detests most mascots and would rather see them banished from the sports landscape. My alma mater has a costumed mascot, Truman the Tiger. Named after President Harry Truman, who was from the state of Missouri. I've been down with Truman for about a decade and a half at this point.
Mascots can be fun, mascots can be entertaining for the kids. I know that when I take my son to events out here at UNLV, he likes seeing Hey Reb around and giving him a high five.
So I totally get what Brandon is talking about.
But I agree with Michigan alum and NFL Network broadcaster Rich Eisen. Michigan should be a mascot free zone.
Part of what makes Michigan, well, Michigan are the maize and blue colors, "The Victors" fight song, the winged helmet (which was not originated at Michigan but is a part of the iconography of the school) and the distinct lack of a mascot.
Nine of the twelve Big Ten schools have on field mascots. Hell, newcomer Nebraska has two with Lil Red and Herbie Husker. Illinois used to have one until the NCAA forced Chief Illiniwek into retirement (and that's a whole other story). So the clear lack of a mascot is a relatively unique position in the conference and on a national level as well.
You know what I think will make Michigan football exciting for the "youth demographic" that Dave Brandon is desperate to reach? It's not a mascot, or "retro-inspired uniforms" or finally playing a night game (although that may help a little bit more than anything else).
It's winning. (Duh!)
Win.
Win often and win big. Beat Ohio State. Beat Nebraska. Beat Michigan State and Penn State. Win your division, win the conference and compete not for Rose Bowl appearances, but for actual BCS Title game appearances.
Because not having a fuzzy mascot like Willy the Wolverine (an attempt that some enterprising Michigan students tried in the 1980s) isn't what will lose you traction with the almighty "youth demographic."
Not having won a national title since 1997 is a much, much bigger ailment.
I've had to go underground from the sports blogging scene because work/home life/blogging balance wasn't happening. Having my allergies flare up wasn't happening, either.
So naturally, when I head off for my mini-sabbatical, all hell decides to break loose. Of note to me:
1) The NCAA's new celebration rule, which I will get to tomorrow. Suffice to say, it won't be pretty.
2) The Big Ten conversation regarding expansion? Yeah, the time linemay be accelerating a bitwon't be accelerating after all, contrary to media reports.
Although no word came out of yesterday's meeting of the conference commissioners the time line isn't accelerating, that hasn't stopped, well, everyone who has access to a blog from chiming in. Check out this post from Rock M Nation (thanks, Bill C.!) for a list of what people have written over the last 24 hours or so.
As usual, I am fashionably late to the party, but let's take a look at what might happen if the Big Ten does decide to expand and idiotically chooses to go with a 16 team model.
Why do I think a 16 team model idiotic? Well, when you're trying to divide something up, it's much easier to swallow having to share with 11 other people than with 15 other people. Be it food or cash, no one really likes to share. Why else would ND be so adamant about touting their independence in football?
Oh, and a 16 team conference in football was tried once. It was just about 20 years ago that the Western Athletic Conference was 16 teams large. (Note that I said "large" and not "strong.") After three years of this super-conference, eight schools said screw it and split off to form the Mountain West. It was too unwieldy.
Granted, geography played a role in that, as the old Super WAC stretched from Oklahoma to Hawai'i. That kind of travel wouldn't exist for the super-conferences of this era, but I find it hard to believe that tension wouldn't eventually rip these leagues apart
I don't know many marriages that exist as a form of gold digging lasting that long, do you?
Let's being by getting the ball rolling by projecting who the Big Ten would take to raise their number to 16. They would need to add five teams, and while Notre Dame insists (for now) that they have no desire to join a conference unless their hand was forced, we will honor their wishes and leave them out of this little reindeer game.
The Big Ten would then look westward to the Big 12 North and pluck two teams: Missouri and Nebraska. Missouri brings the St. Louis TV market, decent academics and also a slice of Kansas City. Nebraska brings a lot of football tradition and the entire Sea of Red plus the state of Nebraska.
From the Big East, the Big Ten would offer Pittsburgh, Rutgers and Syracuse bids.
Meanwhile, on the west coast, the Pac-10, who is also looking to expand, might decide to go all in as well and jump from ten teams to sixteen. For the Pac-10, as they try to negotiate a new television contract, I think that what will matter most is trying to get the league recognized outside of the Pacific time zone.
The easiest way to do that might be to expand beyond the Rocky Mountains. Rumor has it that if the Pac-10 goes to twelve teams, that Utah and Colorado are the preferred targets.
However, if you're going to add more teams, why not shoot for the moon and invite four rivals from the now staggering Big 12? Forget about adding Boise State and TCU or BYU if you're the Pac-10; if you want to be relevant, go after the big fish and invite Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State? That would increase the profile of the league on the fields and courts and increase the visibility by now having a conference with brand names that spans across three time zones.
(Let me be clear here if you haven't already figured it out: I am completely guessing here. I have no inside information; this is all a product of an extremely fertile imagination trying to guess at what would be the most catastrophic scenario for some conferences.)
Now let us turn our attention to the south. I don't think that there is any way that the Big Ten and Pac-10 would expand and the SEC would stand pat. I just can't see that happening.
This is an arms race, and you'd better believe that the SEC will keep up. But I don't see them having to reach far to poach teams.
Dear ACC:
We would like Florida State, Clemson, The U and Georgia Tech. K, thanks, buh bye.
Love,
The SEC
Which would leave us with this Big Ten:
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Michigan
Michigan State
Minnesota
Missouri
Nebraska
Northwestern
Ohio State
Penn State
Pittsburgh
Purdue
Rutgers
Syracuse
Wisconsin
somehow trying to fit a "6" into their logo
the Pacific-16:
Arizona
Arizona State
California
Colorado
Oregon
Oregon State
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Stanford
Texas
Texas A&M
Utah
UCLA
USC
Washington
Washington State
and the new SEC (no name change necessary):
Alabama
Arkansas
Auburn
Clemson
Florida
Florida State
Georgia
Georgia Tech
Kentucky
LSU
Miami (FL)
Ole Miss
Mississippi State
South Carolina
Tennessee
Vanderbilt
These three conferences would be at the top, and a decimated Big 12, an almost dead Big East, the three independent schools, a damaged ACC and the Mountain West minus the team that broke through the BCS glass ceiling.
In Part II, we will look at what the options are for the rest of the BCS leagues and the Mountain West, and wonder what Notre Dame will do?
It's funny that I wrote a piece talking about four FBS conferences that I thought were searching for respect on a national level, and most of the comments address one conference that I didn't discuss:
The somewhat lamentable Big Ten.
Was it oversight on my part?
Nope.
I think the Big Ten gets a proper amount of respect given the current state of the conference:
Wisconsin is trending down
Michigan hit rock bottom last season and has to prove that they are on the road back
Michigan State lost some senior leadership and needs to prove that last year was not a fluke
Ditto Northwestern
Illinois has some work to do, although Juice Williams and Rejus Benn have the potential to be a dynamic pitch-and-catch duo.
Purdue and Indiana are afterthoughts at this point
I personally don't trust Minnesota and Iowa to be consistent at this point
Which leaves us with Ohio State and Penn State.
The lasting image for Penn State right now is Mark Sanchez and the Trojans running roughshod over the Nittany Lions. Couple that with one of the weakest non-conference schedules I've ever seen, and I feel like the Penn State season basically comes down to the Ohio State game.
Ohio State's task is tougher: They have to beat USC. No excuses. The game is in the Horseshoe, and USC's quarterback (if it's Matt Barkley or Aaron Corp) will be starting their first road game ever.
That is the game that can help raise the Big Ten's image; it rests on the backs of the Buckeyes to bring honor to the clan.
Update 8/28/09: ESPN.com's Pat Forde examines the Big Ten's respect issue.
