Updating the Big Ten Stuff Without...You Know...Much Of An Update

Lots of stuff out there, but not much substance on the whole Pitt to Big Ten thing.

Apparently, USA Today (which cites the oft-quoted E.J. Borghetti Twitter thing)thinks this all got started with a post by Ben Maller, radio host for Fox Sports. His post, though, didn't come until after the recent message board explosion and of course, no sources are quoted.

Chicago Trib says nothing to the rumors, according to 'a conference source.'

Third parties are chiming in, too, mentioning a Big Ten expansion could open the door for a non-BCS school like Memphis.

Apparently, The Big Ten, when asked about it, has offered the obligatory 'No comment.'

I'm assuming that Pitt isn't coming out and definitively saying it's not happening this week in order to keep the obvious follow-up questions (i.e. if not now, when) from being asked as they anticipate they could be one of the schools in the running. But if the athlete meeting, which appears to have taken place (though no one is sure of the susbstance) really WASN'T about the Big Ten, why wouldn't athletes say what it was about?

Anyway, there's also the talk out there that Pitt will be leaving later, just not now. Although, no sources on that, either.

ADD ON: Missed this earlier, but Bob Smizik of the PG also says the Big Ten was not mentioned at the recent athlete meeting.

Revisiting Big Ten Expansion

Looks like there's been quite a bit of activity on talk about Big Ten expansion. I realllly wanted to avoid bringing this one back since the original talk of expansion hit the street a while back - at least until something substantive came out. If I made a post every time something was discussed on a message board, this would be a 24-7 job.

The only reason I am making a post is because an actual journalist (someone who actually is in direct contact with the school) had a pretty definitive statement on the issue - that would be Paul Zeise of the PG.

Now, this isn't to say the message board stuff or other 'rumors' aren't true. I have no idea. But this is the first actual journalist - someone who does this for a living - I've seen come out and say what they've heard.

Personally, like I said before, it would likely mean more money for Pitt and even more prestige in the football area. But competing would be that much harder in the Big Ten and instead of having the chance do what Cincinnati did this year - go undefeated and compete for a national title - Pitt would have a much harder time winning the Big Ten. Ohio State and Penn State have been national powers for many years, Iowa looks like they could be on the right track, and you've still got Wisconisn, Michigan (who won't be down forever), MSU, and others to deal with.

Get this clear - I'm in no way saying Pitt could never contend with any of those teams. I'm merely stating the obvious - to beat all of those teams in one year to get to a National Championship would be infinitely more difficult than trying to run the table in the Big East.

I've done my homework out there as far as gathering opinions and I'm sure I'm in the minority on this one. But I would see it as a bad move.

The only thing is that Pitt may be FORCED to make this move if the Big Ten is going to raid more than one team. The conference can survive losing a Rutgers or Syracuse. But losing three teams would force everyone else in scramble mode and who knows where that would end up. So if the Big Ten is taking more than one, Pitt may have to make that move.

The other side of this as well is it's going to hurt basketball. The Big Ten is not terrible, but they're certainly not the drawing card of the Big East. Pitt has a fairly established connection in the NY/NJ/DC area. That's not to say we won't be able to get any of those kids, but the allure of the Big East will certainly help.

In a nutshell, I'm against this unless Pitt's hand is forced.