Big Ten Expansion: Is It Worth It from a Fan's Perspective?

I can understand if football fans of certain Big Ten teams are reveling in the fact that the Big Ten Network has brought in millions to its member schools, and expansion may increase those profits and bring along added prestige.

But purely from a college football fan’s perspective, I don’t see a lot to get excited about.

It has been reported that the Big Ten has offered very loose and informal offers to Nebraska, Missouri, Rutgers, and Notre Dame, the second time in the offseason that we’ve seen a quasi-official list reported by the media.

Now, the addition of Notre Dame is still highly unlikely, so I will presume the new Big Ten will be sans the Fighting Irish and go from there.

Nebraska would be an excellent addition to the Big Ten, and I think that school may have some interest in moving, but I still don’t think the Huskers will pull the trigger.

But let’s just assume that Nebraska, Missouri, and Rutgers are the new teams, and it will indeed be announced in July that the Big Ten is expanding to 14 teams.

And let’s say the new divisions are broken into geographic regions: West, which includes Wisconsin, Nebraska, Iowa, Missouri, Minnesota, Illinois, and Northwestern; and East, which includes Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Purdue, Michigan State, Rutgers, and Indiana.

It will be neat to see Nebraska play Wisconsin and Iowa on a regular basis, but I’m sorry, that just isn’t that big of a deal—especially now that we won’t see the Huskers play Texas and Oklahoma anymore.

And if Nebraska is sick of being stuck under the thumb of Texas and Oklahoma, why trade that for being stuck under the sway of Michigan and Ohio State?

At least Nebraska can play the Longhorns and Sooners on the field on a regular basis, whereas they could go years without sizing themselves up against the Wolverines and Buckeyes.

If you’re excited about the Big Ten expanding and becoming a powerful conference with more clout than the SEC, don’t hold your breath.

If the Big Ten expands with the aforementioned teams, we’ll get a schedule from a team like Wisconsin that will look like this:

@ UNLV

Vs. SJSU

Vs. ASU

Vs. Austin Peay

@ Minnesota

Vs. Iowa

@ Northwestern

Vs. Nebraska

@ Missouri

Vs. Purdue

@ Illinois

That is not a schedule from a team that could in any way be said to be part of any “super” conference.

The trend in modern football has been to water down schedules, and an expanded Big Ten will only make that trend even stronger.

If conference expansion and realignment bring us three to four more “big” games a season on a regular basis (Texas vs. Ohio State or Michigan vs. Nebraska), then I’ll warm up to the idea.

What I will not warm up to is the Big Ten expanding only to increase its profits, and still keeping the status quo of ever decreasing big games and lousy opponents.

You know what I’m talking about here.

Just take a look at that hypothetical Wisconsin schedule! No sane person can defend that and what we get is the defense of a Big Ten Team playing one top-15 team out of conference every four or five years, or even better, pretending like a Iowa vs. Arizona is a “big” game.

The only big advantage will be the new conference championship and the years in which a team like Wisconsin will take its turn and play a big cross-division opponent like Ohio State.

Sorry, but isn’t it pretty lame that fans should try to get excited about Wisconsin playing Ohio State every four years, when it happened more often in the “old” Big Ten?

I have no doubt that a Big Ten conference championship game will offer a big and important contest from time to time. Yet, even if it is a battle between undefeated Michigan and Wisconsin teams, is it really that big of a deal?

If the above schedule was really Wisconsin’s in 2010, they would have a hard time breaking 80 in any SOS measurement, so why respect the fact that they are undefeated? Would you put this Wisconsin schedule in the title game against an undefeated Alabama and USC?

Of course not.

What bugs me most about the Big Ten expansion is that it is motivated by money and not really in the interest of college football fans.

If I am in control at Nebraska, Missouri, or Rutgers, the added revenue from the Big Ten Network sure is enticing, but let’s not pretend that a 14- or 16-team conference is something to cheer about.

Of course, college football is big money, but the Big Ten isn’t going to add a few teams and up the ante to $30 million a year per school and out-pace the rest of the country for the next 50 years.

Technology and times will change, and the Big Ten and its flagship network will be lucky if they are making the money they are today when an SEC channel, Pac-10 channel, Notre Dame channel, and dozens of other multimedia outlets and other new football medias are pervasive throughout America.

That’s why the Big Ten is risking a whole lot by trying to hit a home run this summer.

Which is also why I don’t understand what Jim Delaney is thinking. Why bring so much volatility to the college landscape when things are as good as ever for the Big Ten? Why risk sharing the spoils with other universities that don’t fit the Big Ten academic model, and may offer little else besides average, above average, or very good football?

All along, I have favored the Big Ten adding only one team, gaining a conference championship like the three other BCS conferences, and leaving it at that.

The entity that is Big Ten football with the addition of Nebraska, Missouri, and Rutgers is not that great of a marketing giant that would rule the college landscape like some believe.

Right now, the Big Ten is riding high with its lucrative television deal. Why water down the league?

And what’s the point of being in a conference, if you’re not playing six of the 14 teams on a yearly basis? If we’re coming into an age of 16-team conferences, what’s the difference between that and having 22?

Gaining Rutgers will not bring in the NYC market, and adding Nebraska and Missouri only creates more teams to share revenue, while giving fans marginally interesting new rivalries with little television impact.

Like I said before, adding Nebraska would be an excellent addition, because it is a traditional national power and travels well. But without Nebraska, the Big Ten expansion (with teams like Rutgers, Missouri, Syracuse etc.) will be a joke.

Does anyone really believe that people in New York City care about Rutgers football? Rutgers could play in the inaugural new conference championship against Wisconsin at the new Meadowlands, and the game would struggle to bring in 50,000 through the gates.

For me, I ask two questions in regards to conference expansion as paramount concerns:

First, as I’ve mentioned before, will we see an increase in truly big games?

And secondly, will it move us closer to a playoff or better system for determining a champion?

As far as I can tell, the proposed Big Ten expansion will not bring us college football fans bigger games or move us closer to a better champion system.

And, really, this is all I want.

The conference championship game has the potential to be something big, but if we look at the current past in the ACC and Big 12, we’ll probably only get a memorable game once every three or four years.

If Texas, Nebraska, Texas A&M, and Pitt are added to the Big Ten, then I can get behind something like that because we will see a marked increase in big-time college football games each and every season.

Even though I think the idea of a 14- or 16-team conference is patently ridiculous, I’ll support anything that pits great teams against other great teams.

As it stands, adding three or four power teams is incredibly unlikely. 

The spotlight is on Jim Delaney and the Big Ten, but they better be careful. They will almost assuredly miss out on Notre Dame again, and if Nebraska declines, that could mean big problems, especially if the Big Ten insists on swelling to 14 or 16 teams.

Without Notre Dame or Nebraska, the Big Ten will be forced to add lesser programs, which will be awkward. It would also mean more teams with which to share the revenue coming in now. Even worse, it could lead to a chain reaction where other conferences add more programs—perhaps better than what the Big Ten may add—which would not only not increase revenue for the Big Ten, but perhaps cause the conference to lose money.

What we’re looking at is a very small probability of the Big Ten adding big-time programs, and if Jim Delaney cannot bring in Nebraska or Notre Dame, then this is purely an exercise in trying to gain more revenue and adding a conference champion game so that the Big Ten can feel “important.”

I don’t blame the Big Ten for trying to add a conference championship to compete with the SEC, Big 12, and ACC. Please don’t try to convince me, however, that this likely expansion should get me excited about the future of college football and the likelihood of more important and big games on television each Saturday.

As a college football fan, the likely massive Big Ten expansion is not worth all the problems it could cause in the future.