[ColoradoTree]

So, let's assume for the sake of argument that Stanford ends up in the Big Ten along with ND. Much of the national discussion is around football and basketball, but travel is going to be brutal for Olympic sports, of course, and I'm going to use women's tennis as an example of how it might look. 

In the existing schedule, Stanford has 6 conference weekends: USC/UCLA; UW/WSU; ASU/UA; CU/Utah; Oregon (sometimes paired with a non-conference match); and Cal to finish up the regular season. In the Big Ten, it looks like the current travel partners are: Ohio State/Penn State; Rutgers/Maryland; Michigan/MSU; Minnesota/Wisconsin; Northwestern/Illinois; Indiana/Purdue; and Nebraska/Iowa. They currently have a 13-match conference schedule, compared to our 9-game conference schedule. Adding UCLA/USC gets them to a 15-match conference schedule, so it's unclear if they'd still do a round-robin or if that would be the time they switch to a rotation schedule. Adding Stanford and Notre Dame makes it a 17-match schedule, which is difficult if not impossible to do with the current scheduling formats where conference play starts in March, the conference tournaments are at the end of April, and NCAAs start in early May. If the schools want to stick with a round robin, it means cutting off the last couple weeks of the non-conference schedule, which--frankly--is fine by me. But that means some cold-weather states starting conference play in February rather than March, meaning more indoor matches. 

But unlike the other travel partners, it is not feasible to play Stanford and Notre Dame the same weekend unless you are hosting them. So, what happens? One idea is that other schools host Stanford/Notre Dame the same weekend, but play away matches there as one-offs, probably adding a non-conference opponent like Pepperdine or Cal or St. Mary's or someone when they come to Stanford, the same way we handle playing Oregon currently. (Or, a one-match weekend might be a welcome respite from a grueling schedule.) Another would be to make USC/UCLA/Stanford a trio for scheduling purposes, meaning that instead of traveling Thursday late for a Friday-Saturday or Friday-Sunday or Saturday-Sunday match like we do now, our players might leave a day earlier in order to accommodate each host school playing three matches. (No legacy Big Ten school is going to want to play Stanford-UCLA-USC in women's tennis in three consecutive or 3 out of 4 days or even 3 out of 5. No way.) 

So, it might look like this in Spring 2025 (recognizing that it won't perfectly line up like this given the vagaries of the calendar):

Jan 10-12: invitational tournament somewhere like the Freeman Memorial
Jan. 17-19: a couple of warm-up matches against local teams, probably St. Mary's, UC Davis, etc.
Jan. 24-26: ITA Kick-Off Weekend
Jan. 31-Feb. 2: local non-conference matches or an idle weekend
Feb. 7-10: ITA National Indoors
Feb. 14-16: idle weekend or non-conference match--maybe Pepperdine or someone else local 
Feb. 21-23: at Minnesota/Wisconsin
Feb. 28-Mar. 2: vs. Northwestern/Illinois
Mar. 7-9: at Rutgers/Maryland
Mar. 14-16: vs. Michigan/Michigan State
Mar. 21-23: at Ohio State/Penn State
Mar. 28-30: vs. USC/UCLA
Apr. 4-6: at Indiana/Purdue
Apr. 11-13: vs. Iowa/Nebraska
Apr. 18-20: at Notre Dame
Apr. 25-28: Big Ten tournament

It's a much busier schedule than Lele prefers to schedule. And in order to be ready for conference play, you might have some early January non-conference matches rather than those invitational tournaments we usually play. It also means fewer good non-conference opponents with those spots filled by middling conference opponents. Here's where Pac-12 and Big Ten schools stacked up in the final national rankings last year:

11. Cal
13. Stanford
15. Ohio State
17. ASU
18. Michigan
19. UCLA
20. USC
37. Washington
38. Oregon
41. Northwestern
45. Wisconsin
47. Arizona
48. Notre Dame
49. Utah
53. Illinois
57. Minnesota
59. Nebraska
64. Maryland
69. Washington State

The only unranked Pac-12 school was Colorado. By contrast, six Big Ten schools were unranked: Penn State, Purdue, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan State, and Rutgers. In case you didn't know, the Big Ten is a pretty weak women's tennis conference. 

The schedule becomes so loaded with teams that do absolutely nothing for your ranking that it's difficult to rank highly unless you take care of business against the other good teams--UCLA, USC, Michigan, and Ohio State. So you probably have to scrap some of your usual warm-up matches in favor of non-conference opponents who can move the needle. You keep matches against the likes of Pepperdine and Texas, and you replace St. Mary's or UC Davis with Cal (if they'll play us) and ACC/SEC schools. You have room to schedule good non-conference teams when you play ten conference matches. You have a lot less room when you play seventeen conference matches....

---

If the reported Big Ten wishlist is true and Notre Dame doesn't want to join, then perhaps we see Oregon/Stanford join as travel partners. Flying from SFO-Eugene is about an hour and 45 minutes, so maybe that's close enough to play both the same weekend? 

Driving distances between existing Big Ten travel partners:

Columbus-State College: 5 hrs, 15 mins
Lincoln-Iowa City: 4.5 hours
Minneapolis-Madison: 4 hrs, 15 mins
Piscataway-College Park: 3 hrs, 15 mins
Evanston-Champaign: 3 hours
West Lafayette-Bloomington: 2 hrs, 10 mins
East Lansing-Ann Arbor: 1 hour, 5 mins

[ColoradoTree]

So, let's assume for the sake of argument that Stanford ends up in the Big Ten along with ND. Much of the national discussion is around football and basketball, but travel is going to be brutal for Olympic sports, of course, and I'm going to use women's tennis as an example of how it might look. 

In the existing schedule, Stanford has 6 conference weekends: USC/UCLA; UW/WSU; ASU/UA; CU/Utah; Oregon (sometimes paired with a non-conference match); and Cal to finish up the regular season. In the Big Ten, it looks like the current travel partners are: Ohio State/Penn State; Rutgers/Maryland; Michigan/MSU; Minnesota/Wisconsin; Northwestern/Illinois; Indiana/Purdue; and Nebraska/Iowa. They currently have a 13-match conference schedule, compared to our 9-game conference schedule. Adding UCLA/USC gets them to a 15-match conference schedule, so it's unclear if they'd still do a round-robin or if that would be the time they switch to a rotation schedule. Adding Stanford and Notre Dame makes it a 17-match schedule, which is difficult if not impossible to do with the current scheduling formats where conference play starts in March, the conference tournaments are at the end of April, and NCAAs start in early May. If the schools want to stick with a round robin, it means cutting off the last couple weeks of the non-conference schedule, which--frankly--is fine by me. But that means some cold-weather states starting conference play in February rather than March, meaning more indoor matches. 

But unlike the other travel partners, it is not feasible to play Stanford and Notre Dame the same weekend unless you are hosting them. So, what happens? One idea is that other schools host Stanford/Notre Dame the same weekend, but play away matches there as one-offs, probably adding a non-conference opponent like Pepperdine or Cal or St. Mary's or someone when they come to Stanford, the same way we handle playing Oregon currently. (Or, a one-match weekend might be a welcome respite from a grueling schedule.) Another would be to make USC/UCLA/Stanford a trio for scheduling purposes, meaning that instead of traveling Thursday late for a Friday-Saturday or Friday-Sunday or Saturday-Sunday match like we do now, our players might leave a day earlier in order to accommodate each host school playing three matches. (No legacy Big Ten school is going to want to play Stanford-UCLA-USC in women's tennis in three consecutive or 3 out of 4 days or even 3 out of 5. No way.) 

So, it might look like this in Spring 2025 (recognizing that it won't perfectly line up like this given the vagaries of the calendar):

Jan 10-12: invitational tournament somewhere like the Freeman Memorial
Jan. 17-19: a couple of warm-up matches against local teams, probably St. Mary's, UC Davis, etc.
Jan. 24-26: ITA Kick-Off Weekend
Jan. 31-Feb. 2: local non-conference matches or an idle weekend
Feb. 7-10: ITA National Indoors
Feb. 14-16: idle weekend or non-conference match--maybe Pepperdine or someone else local 
Feb. 21-23: at Minnesota/Wisconsin
Feb. 28-Mar. 2: vs. Northwestern/Illinois
Mar. 7-9: at Rutgers/Maryland
Mar. 14-16: vs. Michigan/Michigan State
Mar. 21-23: at Ohio State/Penn State
Mar. 28-30: vs. USC/UCLA
Apr. 4-6: at Indiana/Purdue
Apr. 11-13: vs. Iowa/Nebraska
Apr. 18-20: at Notre Dame
Apr. 25-28: Big Ten tournament

It's a much busier schedule than Lele prefers to schedule. And in order to be ready for conference play, you might have some early January non-conference matches rather than those invitational tournaments we usually play. It also means fewer good non-conference opponents with those spots filled by middling conference opponents. Here's where Pac-12 and Big Ten schools stacked up in the final national rankings last year:

11. Cal
13. Stanford
15. Ohio State
17. ASU
18. Michigan
19. UCLA
20. USC
37. Washington
38. Oregon
41. Northwestern
45. Wisconsin
47. Arizona
48. Notre Dame
49. Utah
53. Illinois
57. Minnesota
59. Nebraska
64. Maryland
69. Washington State

The only unranked Pac-12 school was Colorado. By contrast, six Big Ten schools were unranked: Penn State, Purdue, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan State, and Rutgers. In case you didn't know, the Big Ten is a pretty weak women's tennis conference. 

The schedule becomes so loaded with teams that do absolutely nothing for your ranking that it's difficult to rank highly unless you take care of business against the other good teams--UCLA, USC, Michigan, and Ohio State. So you probably have to scrap some of your usual warm-up matches in favor of non-conference opponents who can move the needle. You keep matches against the likes of Pepperdine and Texas, and you replace St. Mary's or UC Davis with Cal (if they'll play us) and ACC/SEC schools. You have room to schedule good non-conference teams when you play ten conference matches. You have a lot less room when you play seventeen conference matches....

---

If the reported Big Ten wishlist is true and Notre Dame doesn't want to join, then perhaps we see Oregon/Stanford join as travel partners. Flying from SFO-Eugene is about an hour and 45 minutes, so maybe that's close enough to play both the same weekend? 

Driving distances between existing Big Ten travel partners:

Columbus-State College: 5 hrs, 15 mins
Lincoln-Iowa City: 4.5 hours
Minneapolis-Madison: 4 hrs, 15 mins
Piscataway-College Park: 3 hrs, 15 mins
Evanston-Champaign: 3 hours
West Lafayette-Bloomington: 2 hrs, 10 mins
East Lansing-Ann Arbor: 1 hour, 5 mins

[BostonCard]

It’s a good analysis; I think it sucks any way you do it for joining the B1G, and it is not student-athlete centric.

The best way to do it is probably have four teams go to a single site for a week end, and then either play a round robin or play two matches.  You probably need an unbalanced schedule, or to have divisions.  If there are 20 teams, you have two 10-team divisions play a round robin within the division, and maybe a conference tournament.

But no question it sucks.

BC

[BostonCard]

It’s a good analysis; I think it sucks any way you do it for joining the B1G, and it is not student-athlete centric.

The best way to do it is probably have four teams go to a single site for a week end, and then either play a round robin or play two matches.  You probably need an unbalanced schedule, or to have divisions.  If there are 20 teams, you have two 10-team divisions play a round robin within the division, and maybe a conference tournament.

But no question it sucks.

BC

[Softball Fan]

I think the best way for Big 10 teams visiting Stanford and Notre Dame is to play two games on the same weekend at each school.  For example, Penn State WVB would come out to Stanford and play a match Friday night and Saturday afternoon or night.    This way no travel between games and the team can stay in the same hotel for both games. A sport like WBB might want to schedule Friday night and Sunday afternoon.

[Softball Fan]

I think the best way for Big 10 teams visiting Stanford and Notre Dame is to play two games on the same weekend at each school.  For example, Penn State WVB would come out to Stanford and play a match Friday night and Saturday afternoon or night.    This way no travel between games and the team can stay in the same hotel for both games. A sport like WBB might want to schedule Friday night and Sunday afternoon.

[Maple Leaf]

It’s a good analysis; I think it sucks any way you do it for joining the B1G, and it is not student-athlete centric.

The best way to do it is probably have four teams go to a single site for a week end, and then either play a round robin or play two matches.  You probably need an unbalanced schedule, or to have divisions.  If there are 20 teams, you have two 10-team divisions play a round robin within the division, and maybe a conference tournament.

But no question it sucks.

BC

Saying it sucks is being way too polite. 

[Maple Leaf]

It’s a good analysis; I think it sucks any way you do it for joining the B1G, and it is not student-athlete centric.

The best way to do it is probably have four teams go to a single site for a week end, and then either play a round robin or play two matches.  You probably need an unbalanced schedule, or to have divisions.  If there are 20 teams, you have two 10-team divisions play a round robin within the division, and maybe a conference tournament.

But no question it sucks.

BC

Saying it sucks is being way too polite. 

[ColoradoTree]

Alternatively, if we imagine a rump ACC (that has bled FSU, Clemson, and Miami to the SEC) joining with effectively the Pac-12 North for the A&P Conference, we have an absolute murderer's row of a women's tennis conference:

#3 UNC
#4 Duke
#5 UVA
#6 NC State
#11 Cal
#13 Stanford
#23 Wake Forest
#32 Georgia Tech
#37 Washington
#38 Oregon
#48 Notre Dame (this assumes ND doesn't go Big Ten, because the writing on the wall seems to be that if ND goes Big Ten, we come along for the ride)
#61 Syracuse
#69 Washington State

Unranked: Virginia Tech, Boston College, Louisville

I would be content with this athletic home, too. Pitt and Oregon State would be the schools not fielding a women's tennis team.

[ColoradoTree]

Alternatively, if we imagine a rump ACC (that has bled FSU, Clemson, and Miami to the SEC) joining with effectively the Pac-12 North for the A&P Conference, we have an absolute murderer's row of a women's tennis conference:

#3 UNC
#4 Duke
#5 UVA
#6 NC State
#11 Cal
#13 Stanford
#23 Wake Forest
#32 Georgia Tech
#37 Washington
#38 Oregon
#48 Notre Dame (this assumes ND doesn't go Big Ten, because the writing on the wall seems to be that if ND goes Big Ten, we come along for the ride)
#61 Syracuse
#69 Washington State

Unranked: Virginia Tech, Boston College, Louisville

I would be content with this athletic home, too. Pitt and Oregon State would be the schools not fielding a women's tennis team.

[BostonCard]

Why is “the writing on the wall” that if Notre Dame goes to the B1G, Stanford would go along for the ride?

BC

[BostonCard]

Why is “the writing on the wall” that if Notre Dame goes to the B1G, Stanford would go along for the ride?

BC

[cardcrimson]

Swimming would be pretty strong too.

Women's, #1 UVA, #2 Stanford, #4 NC State, #7 Cal, #10 Louisville
Men's, #2 NC State, #3 Cal, #5 Stanford, (#7 ASU), #8 VA Tech, #10 Louisville

[cardcrimson]

Swimming would be pretty strong too.

Women's, #1 UVA, #2 Stanford, #4 NC State, #7 Cal, #10 Louisville
Men's, #2 NC State, #3 Cal, #5 Stanford, (#7 ASU), #8 VA Tech, #10 Louisville

[chrisk]

Why is “the writing on the wall” that if Notre Dame goes to the B1G, Stanford would go along for the ride?

BC

Yes, it is far from clear that Notre Dame or the Big Ten are interested in changing their situation any time soon.

And as many have pointed out, breaking up the ACC is easier said than done. The SEC has its own integration challenges in the near future as welll without adding to it.

[chrisk]

Why is “the writing on the wall” that if Notre Dame goes to the B1G, Stanford would go along for the ride?

BC

Yes, it is far from clear that Notre Dame or the Big Ten are interested in changing their situation any time soon.

And as many have pointed out, breaking up the ACC is easier said than done. The SEC has its own integration challenges in the near future as welll without adding to it.

[cardcrimson]

The SEC has its own integration challenges in the near future as welll without adding to it.

The SEC has been integrated since Bear scheduled USC and Sam Cunningham. . . .

[cardcrimson]

The SEC has its own integration challenges in the near future as welll without adding to it.

The SEC has been integrated since Bear scheduled USC and Sam Cunningham. . . .

[dabigv13]

Thanks to modern technology, we can easily image Stanford in the Big 10! The results are somewhat disturbing however.....

[dabigv13]

Thanks to modern technology, we can easily image Stanford in the Big 10! The results are somewhat disturbing however.....

[ColoradoTree]

Why is “the writing on the wall” that if Notre Dame goes to the B1G, Stanford would go along for the ride?

BC

Oh, certainly nothing official. But I've seen reports from journalists that cover Big Ten schools that Stanford is perceived as desirable for the Big Ten as a combination of its own merits and as an inducement to get Notre Dame to join the conference to have most of its traditional rivals (and a guaranteed trip to CA every year) in the fold. There was a report quoting an anonymous ND source saying their willingness to leave the ACC and join the Big Ten for everything increases substantially if Stanford joins alongside them. And a report that Stanford had reached out to the Big Ten and even floated a reduced revenue share to make our transition more palatable for legacy Big Ten members. 

It is, of course, all very fluid. And nothing is done until it's done. And the decisionmakers aren't going on record publicly on any of this, meaning we're putting far too much weight on reporters citing anonymous sources--sources who may have their own ulterior motives to drive a certain outcome one way or another. BUT: there does seem to be a lingering sense among journalists that cover ND/the Big Ten that if ND comes on board, Stanford probably does, too. 

Certainly from my own perspective, if (1) Notre Dame said they'd join the Big Ten if Stanford came as well, and (2) the Big Ten offered us a spot, we would absolutely leap at it.

[ColoradoTree]

Why is “the writing on the wall” that if Notre Dame goes to the B1G, Stanford would go along for the ride?

BC

Oh, certainly nothing official. But I've seen reports from journalists that cover Big Ten schools that Stanford is perceived as desirable for the Big Ten as a combination of its own merits and as an inducement to get Notre Dame to join the conference to have most of its traditional rivals (and a guaranteed trip to CA every year) in the fold. There was a report quoting an anonymous ND source saying their willingness to leave the ACC and join the Big Ten for everything increases substantially if Stanford joins alongside them. And a report that Stanford had reached out to the Big Ten and even floated a reduced revenue share to make our transition more palatable for legacy Big Ten members. 

It is, of course, all very fluid. And nothing is done until it's done. And the decisionmakers aren't going on record publicly on any of this, meaning we're putting far too much weight on reporters citing anonymous sources--sources who may have their own ulterior motives to drive a certain outcome one way or another. BUT: there does seem to be a lingering sense among journalists that cover ND/the Big Ten that if ND comes on board, Stanford probably does, too. 

Certainly from my own perspective, if (1) Notre Dame said they'd join the Big Ten if Stanford came as well, and (2) the Big Ten offered us a spot, we would absolutely leap at it.

[ColoradoTree]

If we stay in the Pac-10 and that remains our conference for Olympic sports--then it's hard to view USC and UCLA leaving creates a Los Angeles-sized hole in the Stanford women's tennis schedule. We go from having a conference slate with three perennial powers to just one. We become, effectively, Pepperdine, with a conference slate that offers only opportunities to stumble, not to improve your ranking. We would have to schedule far more aggressively than we ever have before. While a Pac-10 without the LA schools seems manageable for some sports, for certain sports it will mean we have to significantly change how we do business.

Perhaps if there's some sort of formal alliance with the ACC, then we have a guaranteed few matches with ACC schools as part of that, even if it's not a new conference altogether. But we need good matches, and if we can't get them in conference, perhaps we can have a multi-year deal where Stanford/Cal head to UNC/Duke one year and host those two schools the next year.

[ColoradoTree]

If we stay in the Pac-10 and that remains our conference for Olympic sports--then it's hard to view USC and UCLA leaving creates a Los Angeles-sized hole in the Stanford women's tennis schedule. We go from having a conference slate with three perennial powers to just one. We become, effectively, Pepperdine, with a conference slate that offers only opportunities to stumble, not to improve your ranking. We would have to schedule far more aggressively than we ever have before. While a Pac-10 without the LA schools seems manageable for some sports, for certain sports it will mean we have to significantly change how we do business.

Perhaps if there's some sort of formal alliance with the ACC, then we have a guaranteed few matches with ACC schools as part of that, even if it's not a new conference altogether. But we need good matches, and if we can't get them in conference, perhaps we can have a multi-year deal where Stanford/Cal head to UNC/Duke one year and host those two schools the next year.

[BostonCard]

I have to believe that most/all sports will continue to schedule UCLA and USC as non- conference opponents.

BC

[BostonCard]

I have to believe that most/all sports will continue to schedule UCLA and USC as non- conference opponents.

BC

[ColoradoTree]

I have to believe that most/all sports will continue to schedule UCLA and USC as non- conference opponents.

BC

We'll certainly want to (in most sports, I presume), but as I showed in the exercise at the top of this thread, a superconference schedule is very, very tight. We'll have more room in our schedule, but there aren't going to be many windows where they can play us. The dynamic may be UCLA/USC saying "we can squeeze you in mid-February or not at all," and maybe Coach Forood wants to give her players a break that weekend or that's the only weekend we can play another team we're keen on playing. 

And if a Pac 10-ACC formal alliance comes into being, our free weekends may be taken up with UNC-Duke or UVA-Va Tech or Georgia Tech-Clemson, etc.

[ColoradoTree]

I have to believe that most/all sports will continue to schedule UCLA and USC as non- conference opponents.

BC

We'll certainly want to (in most sports, I presume), but as I showed in the exercise at the top of this thread, a superconference schedule is very, very tight. We'll have more room in our schedule, but there aren't going to be many windows where they can play us. The dynamic may be UCLA/USC saying "we can squeeze you in mid-February or not at all," and maybe Coach Forood wants to give her players a break that weekend or that's the only weekend we can play another team we're keen on playing. 

And if a Pac 10-ACC formal alliance comes into being, our free weekends may be taken up with UNC-Duke or UVA-Va Tech or Georgia Tech-Clemson, etc.

[BostonCard]

I would imagine that USC no UCLA will lobby hard to minimize conference matches in the Big-Ten they can maximize their flexibility of scheduling non-conference opponents.

BC

[BostonCard]

I would imagine that USC no UCLA will lobby hard to minimize conference matches in the Big-Ten they can maximize their flexibility of scheduling non-conference opponents.

BC

[ColoradoTree]

I would imagine that USC no UCLA will lobby hard to minimize conference matches in the Big-Ten they can maximize their flexibility of scheduling non-conference opponents.

BC

Oh, absolutely. They are now joining a conference with a lot more dead weight, tennis-wise, then the conference they're leaving. Their own prospects for NCAA success go down with a full round robin, because they'll have fewer high-quality matches. So, they're absolutely incentivized to reduce the number of Big Ten conference matches.

Whether they'll be successful is another question, as a lot of Big Ten tennis programs are probably excited about a trip out to Southern California and the recruiting opportunity it gives them, so they'll be disinclined to give up an every-other-year trip out west. And even if USC/UCLA are able to push the Big Ten to rotate conference matches, there will be years where they miss out on one of the few consistently decent-to-very-good teams in the Big Ten, like Ohio State, Michigan, and Northwestern. But at least they'd probably get one of those in the latter rounds of the Big Ten tournament.

[ColoradoTree]

I would imagine that USC no UCLA will lobby hard to minimize conference matches in the Big-Ten they can maximize their flexibility of scheduling non-conference opponents.

BC

Oh, absolutely. They are now joining a conference with a lot more dead weight, tennis-wise, then the conference they're leaving. Their own prospects for NCAA success go down with a full round robin, because they'll have fewer high-quality matches. So, they're absolutely incentivized to reduce the number of Big Ten conference matches.

Whether they'll be successful is another question, as a lot of Big Ten tennis programs are probably excited about a trip out to Southern California and the recruiting opportunity it gives them, so they'll be disinclined to give up an every-other-year trip out west. And even if USC/UCLA are able to push the Big Ten to rotate conference matches, there will be years where they miss out on one of the few consistently decent-to-very-good teams in the Big Ten, like Ohio State, Michigan, and Northwestern. But at least they'd probably get one of those in the latter rounds of the Big Ten tournament.