Big Ten Could Expand to 14 or 16

The Chicago Tribune is reporting that Big Ten officials are discussing expanding to 14 or even 16 teams - and that the one-team deal we've all been assuming may be too small for a conference with these grand ambitions.

That would be a huge deal - no major football conference plays with more than 12 teams (SEC, Big 12 are at that number). The Big East plays with 16 teams in basketball, and they have trouble with that system.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say I like 14. It's not unwieldy, but it would allow the Big Ten to add three high-quality schools that would improve the conference's standing nationwide. The general assumption, by the way, is that Notre Dame is still not interested.

So who's a good fit? TOSSS has long advocated adding Pittsburgh, and we stick by that. Others in the mix seem to be Missouri, Iowa State, Rutgers and Syracuse - adding all five gets the Big Ten to 16 teams.

The question then turns to conference alignment - and at bigger numbers it gets easier. Consider these Big Ten East and West alignments:

• East: MSU, Michigan, Pittsburgh, Penn State, Rutgers, Syracuse, Indiana, Purdue
  
• West: Ohio State, Missouri, Iowa, Iowa State, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern

I'm putting Ohio State in the West because otherwise the B-10E is too stacked, especially in the minor sports where Michigan, Penn State and OSU are often three of the strongest. They've got a huge athletics budget, and frankly could handle the increased commuting costs.

If we go to 14 schools, just drop Syracuse and Iowa State, and the alignments still work great. And if it's 12, then just keep Pitt as the only newbie and the numbers still work fine. But looking at these potential alignments, one can see how 14 or 16 might be a better number than 12.

A Top-Five Mascot

The Washington Times has decided to rate the top mascot brands in college athletics, and wouldn't you know it but a familiar face found its way into the top five.

Yep, sitting there at number four is our very own Sparty. Here's the Times' rationale:

Though the school's nickname has been the Spartans since 1925, the brawny, foam rubber incarnation didn't appear until 1989. Sparty has been a dominant force since, winning best mascot at the Universal Cheer and Dance Association College Nationals three times. EA Sports recently conducted a poll to see which mascot would become the first nonathlete to grace the cover of its NCAA Football 09 edition, and Sparty won by more than 75,000 votes.

Sparty was bested by that annoying Notre Dame leprechaun, the Duke Blue Devil, and Otto the Orange from Syracuse. Florida State's Chief Osceola came fifth.

And to that I say: Are you kidding me, Washington Times, a freakin' orange? Over the guy Muscle and Fitness Magazine named "Buffest Mascot" in America? The only thing likely to come of a battle between Otto and Sparty is juice.

Outrage aside, I can forgive the Times for their misstep. See, they don't have much college football in the D.C. area. And the best D-1 program the Times covers is Maryland, whose idea of a fearsome mascot is a turtle.