Does the Big 10(+) REALLY need a 12th team?

In this era of more is better, nothing is a more curious phenomenon than that of consolidation. Consolidation-- in big business AND in college football-- is what happens when bigger or better "fish" feast on their weaker brethren. In the business world, the concept is played out in what are called "economies of scale." These economies, the dismal scientists will tell you, always win out in the end because they reduce the cost of bringing goods to market while simultaneously thinning the herd of possible competition. In terms of profits-and-losses, it's a win-win, assuming your the "gobbler" and not the "gobblee."

The world of college sports has also seen its fair share of consolidation lately. Well, consolidation might not be the best word to describe power BCS conferences picking of ripe schools from other lesser-endowed conferences. The faces of the WAC, Big 12 (formerly the Big 8), Big East, and the ACC have all been altered by the power of consolidation. Whereas in the business world, the benefits of such moves are seen in higher profits, in college football in particular, the score is kept in the number of high-prize recruits secured, bowl game invites, and lucrative TV deals. We have entered the era of conference-as-business-entity, which is a far cry from their founding origins.

My conference-of-choice, the Big 10, has not been immune to this wanderlust of conference tournaments and exclusive TV rights. Exhibits A) and B): the inclusion of Penn St in the early 90's and the god-awful Big 10 network that descended on loyal fans last year. But it doesn't stop there. Last year, blogs of this ilk were abuzz with talk of adding another team, making the conference essentially the Big 12, Part Deux. This idea has been bandied about in the past, and the usual suspect has always been Notre Dame. Last year's rumor mill was a little more interesting, though, in that its front-runners carried a decidely East Coast flair: Rutgers and Syracuse. Some other possible candidates were Colorado, Missouri, Nebraska, WVU, and possibly Louisville.

While the rumors eventually ended up being nothing more than that-- rumors (for now anyway)-- it does make a person like me wonder... does the Big 10 even need a 12th team? The addition of Penn State made sense to me when I was a wide-eyed 6th grader. They're geographically co-located to most of the other schools, were formed as a Land-Grant college, and had an awesome football tradition. Perfect fit. So what if it obviated the conference's name. It worked.... or so it seemed.

I guess my basic question is this: has our last round of expansion really worked in the Big 10's favor and would another school help us all that much? After a couple of years of astronomical success, PSU has played more like P-U (losing out on many big Pa studs along the way). The ACC can certainly testify to the weird happenings that have played out since Miami, BC, and VaTech joined their ranks. The U is so terrible now that even the Marlins are making fun of them! Would adding a horrible Syracuse, flash-in-the-pan Mizzou and/or Rutgers, or past-its-prime ND really help us shake off the stigma that we're slow, plodding farm boys that can't compete with the SEC's and Pac-10's of the world? Or, would it just help line the conference's pockets, while the "product" on the field suffered as a result?

I'm not so sure I have an answer one way or another. It would be nice, though, to beat the sh*t out of The Lard-Ass from South Bend year in and year out!