A&M Heading to SEC in 2012? Tech and Others to Pac-12?
Today brings us reports that ESPN has informed Texas Tech that the only way that ESPN will televise the TT/Texas game this season is on the Longhorn Network. As a result, apparently Tech is now pursuing membership in the Pac-12 conference, likely with Oklahoma and Oklahoma State. And of course, A&M is now accelerating plans to move to the SEC (according to TexAgs.com), even though it puts this season at risk:
"The Ags did not want any distractions during football season and definitely did not want to receive the 'officiating' that Nebraska got during their farewell tour of the Big 12 last year. It looks like the timeline has been sped up."
Yep, we're rubbernecking at the train wreck we left behind. And to quote Steve Pederson: "This is why we did what we did."
10 months ago
Husker Mike
85 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Hard to say.
Rumors rumors rumors. Could be true. Or it could be as true as Peter Gammons’ tweets.
Unless the conference falls apart, I don’t think any team can leave for 2012 without giving notice as per June 30th of this year.
In the deed, the glory.
Corn Nation!
They can't.
But they were probably hoping to keep it on the down low to avoid losing 6-3 at Iowa State.
by Albino Tornado on Aug 9, 2011 4:50 PM CDT up reply actions
hey...
was this one of the signs of the apocalypse?
Go Big Red Nebraska!
Our Cobs Are Bigger Than Yours!
Corn Nation!
Twitter!
cornnation@gmail.com
by Jon Johnston on Aug 9, 2011 1:20 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Nice to see some others have bought into the "officiating scandal".
Assuming the Big 12 is done and the super-conference era is upon us, which teams, if any, should the B1G go for? Am I out of line to think we should go for Oklahoma?
by Trey Hillman's Chin on Aug 9, 2011 1:22 PM CDT reply actions
I still
don’t hate Missouri enough to not include them.
Oklahoma…. a bit south, but, hey, maybe that’s not as big an issue as it was before.
Go Big Red Nebraska!
Our Cobs Are Bigger Than Yours!
Corn Nation!
Twitter!
cornnation@gmail.com
We could take both.
The conference would even be in contiguous states.
We could do the quadrant-based rotating divisions, and our quadrant could have Oklahoma, Missouri, and maybe Iowa (although that’s not great for them necessarily).
by Trey Hillman's Chin on Aug 9, 2011 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions
Iowa State, Missouri and Oklahoma get my vote.
One low level team, one medium level team and one high level team.
one team I pity, one team I loathe, one team I respect.
It is what it is and we are who we are.
Sober (again) since January 10th, 2011.
by nateforchiefs on Aug 9, 2011 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I really don't think ISU would get an invite
B1G gains nothing. They already have Iowa, I don’t know that the Hawkeyes would want them in their conference.
Missouri gets them into a new state and markets (you might think Illinois gives them some St. Louis and NU a little bit of KC, but Mizzou helps shore those markets up), and Oklahoma gives them a current and traditional power school.
But ISU?
More out of pity than anything
It is what it is and we are who we are.
Sober (again) since January 10th, 2011.
by nateforchiefs on Aug 9, 2011 3:33 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I seriously doubt Delaney does "pity"
"My hardest job is to convince the people of Nebraska that 10-1 is not a losing season." - Tom Osborne
SPEAK for youself
I do hate MIZZO not to include them. Let the and IowaState Community College go to the Summit League. .. and pound rocks. KU is more like Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota. . . but not Mizzo. . SCREW Mizzo. .. . . I also don’t want to taint the BIG10 with the corrupt scum from Oklahoma. . .Don’t trust them at all. . . Let Rutgers, Syracuse, Kansas and Notre Dame in the Big10 but KEEP Missouri OUT. .. .they simple don’t deserve to be there. . .
by Hannah Abbott on Aug 10, 2011 3:03 AM CDT up reply actions
That's all right.
With our AAU membership, we wouldn’t really fit what the Legends and the Leaders are seeking.
;)
/nottrollingwelljustalittle
I don’t like the Domers, but this makes sense (should the B1G further expand). The Super Conference may be the only way ND joins (and I think we all know Delany will gladly accept them if they come knocking). Missouri makes sense as well.
The question could be…do the rumors in recent weeks of Missouri possibly going to the SEC hold any water? Geographically, they are in a nice position. SEC to the south in Arkansas, and Kentucky and Tennessee to the extreme southeast. B1G to the east with Illinois, north with Iowa, and northwest with Nebraska.
Does the B1G expand east? Probably…especially if they need 4 teams (to hit 16). While I think that ND and Mizzou should be targets, do they go further west to Kansas? Or try to tap that mythical NYC audience?
haha would love to Misery in the SEC
thoroughly enjoyable watching them become the ISU of the SEC and get thrashed every week they don’t play Vanderbilt.
Because they couldn't possibly beat Kentucky, Arkansas, Ole Miss, Miss. St., and Tennessee either.
Are they going to go and roll LSU, Auburn, and Florida? Most likely not. But they’re not ISU, nor would I expect them to slide to that level of “Missouri in the ’80’s and ’90’s”.
If true, think east for Big 10 expansion
ND is obvious #1, but then look to the Virginia schools and Maryland. Lock up the DC/Balto market, and Richmond and Norfolk./newport News for added bonus. This gives the BTN 2 of the 4 large east coast markets (Philly and DC).
NY market is a pipe dream. BTN isn’t getting on the basic tier there (note- ND could make this happen, not Syracuse or Rutgers).
If, and only if, ND stays independant wil the Big 10 look west.
Eh
The B1G would grab Oklahoma if they thought they could get them.
by metatron5369 on Aug 9, 2011 11:59 PM CDT up reply actions
maybe
I always kinda though of OU as a sister program to Neb. But OU’s problem is dealing with OSU and the politics associated with it.
I will say this. If OU is interested and has full control of its destiny, outside of ND and UT, I would think Delany would gladly take them over really any other oft mentioned candidate, including A&M.
Google's homepage celebrates too much shit.
Cut to Nelson Muntz...
(Points finger at Bevo) “Ha, ha! Your conference is dying!”
Isn't it awesome to be that guy that gets to say....
HEY BIG12!!!!!!! WE TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!!!
It hasn't happened yet.
Save the schadenfreud…shadenfroid…shad….oh hell, save the gloating for when we have something to truly gloat about. Until then…just watch with detached amusement.
true it hasnt happened yet, but...
all them schools are wishing it happens
Oklahoma and Maryland
Oklahoma is carefully weighting its options, expect the Sooners to go B10. It does not want to role in the mud with the SEC blockheads and the Cali mafia of the Pac-12 can be as bad as the Texas mob. Maryland is just breakin even and would die to get away from the ACC which will become the SEC roadkill.
Dikaia Upotheke - Justice Our Foundation
Oklahoma would be a great addition to the B1G west and ND to the east.
But I think 12 is just about right for conference numbers.
In the deed, the glory.
Corn Nation!
by Aaron Musfeldt on Aug 9, 2011 3:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, now that the bigger conferences are at 12...
I hope the Big 12 can stay together with or without UT; just kick UT out or UT can just go indy like ND playing three to four of those Big 12 teams like ND does with Big 10 teams without having to join the conference (UT seems to be positioning itself for this). Big 12 can go on with 9 or add and have their BCS in like the BE without the headache that UT is. I guess if it does go down, I hope the SEC stops at 14—A&M and either Missouri or WVU.
I am excited to see how the additions in both the Pac 12 and Big 10 work out this year.
"Fast Eddie: No bar?
Cashier: No bar, no pinball machines, no bowling alleys, just pool... nothing else. This is Ames, mister."
From the movie--The Hustler
GET TO THE RIM HEAT (and SKY)! ATTACK THE PAINT!
I would pick...
1: ND
2: Mizzou
3: Pitt
4: West Virginia
So I tried the Barbasol and Rotel dip and I was very dissapointed!
WVU
academics aren’t good enough… I don’t think…
Boiler Up! Hammer Down!
by JuJuan some Moore? on Aug 9, 2011 7:27 PM CDT up reply actions
Wait a minute!
I thought when Nebraska left, all the whining & complaining would leave with us & the tupperwared leftovers upstanding remaining teams’ biggest problem would be Texas A&M being a little out of key on the chorus of Kumbaya. Or Oklahoma complaining about Baylor’s sweaty palms when everyone holds hands.
Yeah, where's all that unity we heard about with Nebraska's departure?
Hmm…maybe Tom Osborne wasn’t the problem after all.
Please
no matter what happens….never quote Steve Pederson again. I just saw that line and threw up in my mouth a little bit
Sorry about that...
…but sometimes you have to remember where you were to truly appreciate where you are now.
1. Wake me when someone goes on record.
2. Don’t count out it might be 1 group keeping options if another changes conferences.
Then again, it was a “Just in case…” mentality which lead to Nebraska contacting Delany…
3. If a change does happen, look for the little dogs of the Big 12 – ?? to try to use their BCS AQ status to attract the best of the mid majors (assuming at least 6 can’t find a new home).
4. Don’t expect the Big Ten to make any changes unless a prize makes an inquiry (Texas getting around the ‘Horns network, TA&M in a real surprise, or OU becoming acceptable). Otherwise Big Ten expansion is driven by revenue – this won’t boost the revenue potential of any candidates.
5. This won’t dissuade ND from their independent status.
Options for Expansion that were listed last time around...
1. Notre Dame (they will always have an open offer out there… and it makes me sick)
2. Maryland/Rutgers/Syracuse (one of these will allow us to tap in to the DC/NY Market)
3. Pittsburgh/Missouri (both talked about because of the rivalries it sets up with current members… Pitt/PSU and Mizz/Illini… problem is, it adds nothing to the revenues coming in from BTN and this is all driven by that.)
4. North Carolina/Duke (this was talked about as recently as a few months ago… I think Delaney has ties to one of these schools and has been in talks with them. This would be more on the b-ball side of the equation, at least with Duke, but is it enough to add a large chunk of change to split the pie up between everyone. This would be a package deal.)
5. Oklahoma/Oklahoma State (I have not heard any rumors of this, but it would be a good get to land Oklahoma into the B1G… Storied program, crazed fanbase, fits in perfectly… only problem… OK State is included in the package… messes up revenue sharing monies…)
6. Texas… (Lord, I hope this doesn’t happen… with all the problems they are causing the BigXII, they seem like more of a poison than gold…Adding them, however, would add a tradition-rich school, good academics, and a whole bunch of revenue, that they would be FORCED to share equally if they were to join the B1G… I do not see this EVER happening, but it was a rumor last year.)
7. Other names that have been thrown about… Virginia (which would have to include VaTech… not happening), Tennessee (Don’t see them leaving the SEC, ever…), Vanderbilt (adding to the academic prowess of the conference, but not much else), Cincinatti/West Virginia/Louisville (these schools lack the academics to get into the conference, and add nothing to the piece of the pie… I think if any of these schools are added, the B1G screwed up!) Kentucky/Kansas/K State (Kansas and K Sate would be a package deal, meaning it is unlikely, and all three would basically be added for b-ball reasons only, and if we are going the b-ball route, I think Duke and N. Carolina is a better option.)
This is just my two cents… Feel free to tear it apart! Should be another exciting offseason, and the season hasn’t even started!!!
Boiler Up! Hammer Down!
by JuJuan some Moore? on Aug 9, 2011 7:44 PM CDT reply actions
You did very well
Among the AAU programs and ND
1/2/3/4 – Texas, TA&M, ND, Florida – the key is under the mat, let yourself in… but take your network off at the door.
5. Syracuse – could almost meet current shared revenue from BTN subscriptions
6. Rutgers – financially a lesser Syracuse
7. Georgia Tech – Marginal
When we broke down finances with Missouri known to be below the bar, everyone else came in under Missouri. GT is likely under the bar and might be below Missouri.
Non-AAU is a potential list I couldn’t want to try to break down.
OU – yes
OU + Okie Lite = no thank you
Tennessee would be an interesting addition. With B10 shared revenue climbing fast, it might be a much different picture 3 or 4 years from now.
What do you think of the North Carolina/Duke option?
Does the pull in b-ball and academics make up for the lack of football prowess? Would it be worth it to us to bring them in? Would they leave the ACC? It all comes down to $$$.
Boiler Up! Hammer Down!
by JuJuan some Moore? on Aug 9, 2011 11:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Not higjhly
I try not to predict if teams would leave their current conference.
Big Ten Expansion is all about football.
The shared broadcast revenue from a couple of televised FB games is worth more than the entire season and tournament of BB.
Even for the BTN, the Big Ten talked about increasing the inventory of FB, not BB.
Academics is a threshold, not an entry on the expansion balance sheet.
A program only needs to clear the threshold – how far they are above the bar doesn’t matter.
On the upside, it is a decent state population, but…
It is only notable if 1 program enters, with 2 it drops below average/team.
NC/Duke don’t have a large FB following, and aren’t FB brand names like Nebraska, OU, ND, etc.
College fan bases follow home teams closely – the state is split among 4 majors.
The tough part about conference expansion is that there just isn’t a lot of candidates who can bring substantially more than their portion of the shared revenue. This gets harder with each team added as the shared revenue increases.
Georgia Tech
Georgia Tech is a really interesting option. Especially since the B1G was willing to consider someone as far away as UT, but probably is a little more leery since this Longhorn Network fiasco.
GT already collaborates with the B1G schools academically in a lot of areas. Their football is good, if not great.
But most alluring of all, they would give the B1G an opening in the recruitment-rich southeast. It could make a pretty big difference in the B1G-SEC rivalry if those recruits’ families could watch them every week on the BTN, and see the Big Ten schools actually travel to them.
by Dan TrueBlue on Aug 10, 2011 9:20 AM CDT up reply actions
A lot of rumors and claimed insiders...
…outside the normal “Romors and insiders” at the time of expansion were claiming GT had approached the Big Ten. They were among the more interesting AAU candidates.
The downside – not a big following – even within their own state they are the 2nd major.
Factors such as recruiting, etc. were ruled out of the balance sheet by Delany.
They were listed because they might be a little above a program known not to make the cut (Missouri) but are probably still below it.
'Cuse is no longer an AAU school
while Neb. when down kicking a screaming, they just resigned.
Google's homepage celebrates too much shit.
by meatybob on Aug 10, 2011 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Thanks for the update
I had missed that. So much for Delany’s speach about AAU expansion.
When you open up the candidates past AAU and ND (which may be the case if expansion is revisited in a few more years), there are more candidates than I would care to look up and try to break down financially.
Texas took themselves out of Big 10 consideration when they started TLN
No Pac-12 as well for the same reason…
by Andy Ketterson on Aug 10, 2011 8:03 AM CDT up reply actions
It is only a matter of time now
The Super Conferences WILL happen. An idea liked by so many and of this magnitude will never be forgotten. TO saw this calamity coming a million miles away and that is why we are now on solid ground lying in our hammock sipping beer while we watch the Bevo Lines Resort Ship take on water.
As for additions, we need 4. They will be ND, Pitt, Syracuse, Rutgers or Maryland. I expect the B10 to move East and take up those markets. They will start taking on schools when everyone else starts moving and pressure ND to take the 16th chair. If the super conferences are forming and there is only one chair left for ND when the music stops, they will accept. This is and has been the plan for B10 for some time now. ND has had the stance that they will “wait and see” where all the chips fall before they make a decision. Why would they not take this approach for they hold all of the power. I’m sure they will work out a special clause that will allow them to bend the equal sharing rules of the B10 so they can keep their river of cash flowing.
When the dust settles
I hope the all powerful super-conferences turn their gaze towards smashing the BCS system. A tourney means more games and more $$$$ for the conferences and networks. Have conference champions decided by season records and not one game. Each conference champion gets into the tourney with the rest being wild cards. Every major college and pro sport uses a tourney to decide its champion! Heck even team sports in the Olympics use a tourney to decide who gets the gold. Its time to accept reality.
Season records won't work...
There is no way, especially when you have 16 teams in your league, to pick the champion from the regular season. The two division winners meet in the conference championship to decide who goes into the NCAA Football Tournament (I am drooling thinking about this). This tournament includes the champions from all the conferences (Including the current Non-AQ conference winner, thus eliminating the Non-AQ designation) and the remaining slots go to the top ranked teams that were not conference champions… This would include ND, BYU, etc… There would be a 16 team tournament and the initial rounds would be played at the higher seeds home field (rewarding the school’s city with extra influx of cash). Once you get to Elite 8 the games are played in the pro stadiums near the highest seed (Again, why not help out deserving host cities and get rid of the unfair automatic home field advantage for SEC and Pac 10 schools in all of these big time bowls…) And, finally, they final four and championship would be played at traditional BCS Bowl Sites. It is 4 additional games… 16 total… These kids did it in high school, so I don’t want to hear that they can’t do it now!
Thoughts?
Boiler Up! Hammer Down!
by JuJuan some Moore? on Aug 9, 2011 11:36 PM CDT up reply actions
If I'm understanding this correctly,
each team would play 4 OOC games, 7 conference games, a conference championship game, and if they make it to the end, 4 “play-off” games. Granted, only two teams would have to play a total of 16 games, but, wow, it seems a lot to ask of kids who are also going through finals. And it would take away those “breather” weeks when they get to heal and rest their bodies before the bowl games.
And the idea of hosting the elite 8 games in pro stadiums…I think that would be a logistical nightmare for the host stadiums since they would only have 7 days notice to prepare.
How would you determine the seeds…polls or records or (shudder) strength of schedule?
Don’t get me wrong, you’ve presented an interesting scenario. I’m as tired as most of us of the BCS. Just wanted to put my two cents in.
They're 18 to 22...how perfect were you at that age?
The Power of Red begins with the Passion of Walk-Ons.
I really don't think it is too much to ask them to play 16 games...
They already do it in High School if they make the championship game.
There would be a couple of weeks off between the end of the season and the beginning of the tournament for the recuperating period.
Seeds would be determined much like it is in the NCAA B-Ball tournament. Yes, there would be some controversy, but I think it would be MUCH less controversy than the BCS creates. At least the champion would be determined on the field!
Pro stadiums was just a thought… Those could also be predetermined regional games that are picked at the end of the season… Three weeks, that should be enough time to prepare, no?
Boiler Up! Hammer Down!
by JuJuan some Moore? on Aug 10, 2011 6:39 AM CDT up reply actions
FCS has a 20 team tournament.
I don’t know how many regular season games though.
I’d even be fine with a 4 or 8 team tournament. If you have 4 16-team super conferences, then winning one (with a CCG) gets you into the tournament. The conference championship games are basically just the first round of the tournament. Yes, this leaves out all but 64 schools, but I’m willing to accept that.
by Trey Hillman's Chin on Aug 10, 2011 7:24 AM CDT up reply actions
I would say it has to be AT LEAST 8...
Maybe 12 with first round byes to the 4 main 16-team conference champs…?
Boiler Up! Hammer Down!
by JuJuan some Moore? on Aug 10, 2011 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions
I prefer short and sweet
If college football has a post season tournament then I become very resistant to having conference championship games. A team could go undefeated in their conference, beat the team they are set up to play in the champ game during the regular season, and then have one horribly played game and lose the championship. To me, and in most pro sports, divisions titles are decided by season records and not one game. Conference championship games just add one more sudden death game to the equation that is unnecessary. If there is a tie, then sure have a sudden death game but otherwise lets get onto the post season. The tourney should be at most 6 teams. Anything more will be cutting into Valentines Day. Three super conference champs and 3 wild cards (I have no idea how the wilds will be chosen but I’m sure they can figure something out). The 2 Highest ranked teams get a first game bye and play the 2 winners of the other 4 teams. That means only 3 games to win it all. Thats the first 3 Saturdays in December. Everyone gets to go home for the holidays and a champion is crowned 1 week before Christmas. And for the sake of sanity lets wrap it all up within the same calender year! This is not rocket science.
No Conference Championship = A Mess
Do you know how many of the past few B1G titles have been ended in a split conference champ? You need that conference championship game to decide it… Sometimes it is split 3 ways… A mess, I tell you! A mess!
Boiler Up! Hammer Down!
by JuJuan some Moore? on Aug 11, 2011 6:09 AM CDT up reply actions
couple of schools
Worth mentioning what about TCU/and or BYU
by huskermic on Aug 9, 2011 10:26 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
Not for the B1G...
As for the super conferences… who cares… I think they get left outside looking in… (And, no, I do not consider the Big East a “super conference”… I think they will get eaten up in all this mess, just like the BigXII…)
Boiler Up! Hammer Down!
by JuJuan some Moore? on Aug 9, 2011 11:25 PM CDT up reply actions
I think most of the Big East members wished another major would take them.
…and you are also correct in that TCU and BYU weren’t worth mentioning.
OU, Oklahoma St, Mizzou, Notre Dame
Face it, OU is attached to OSU and wherever one goes, the other will follow. And they make more sense in the Big Ten than they would in the Pac-12, or even the SEC. Mizzou makes sense in the Big Ten and of course so does notre dame. The big ten would then cover basically all of the midwest, and all of the good teams in it. Makes the most sense to me. Plus the huskers would gain two old big 8 rivals back. And my bets would go on notre dame-nebraska becoming a big rivalry someday. With OU and Notre Dame included, the big ten would have 4 of the top 5 in ESPN’s prestige rankings (with nebraska and ohio state also in the top 5) and michigan and penn st ranked in the top 11. Thats quite a bulk of prestigious programs in an already deep big ten. With 16 team conferences looming, there will be no such thing as undefeated seasons, but heavyweight matchups week in and week out.
"Face it, OU is attached to OSU and wherever one goes, the other will follow."
Y’know, the more I read lines like this (and I’ve been reading that a lot lately concerning the Texas schools along with OU-OSU, KU-KSU), the more I’m understanding and accepting that (or if) Dr. Tom put the kibosh on UNO bringing football up to Division 1. While they wouldn’t be FBS members now…who’s to say in the future they wouldn’t be? And then you have situations like this, being tied to the hip to “protect” the other school and limiting choices.
OSU
Ohio-Ohio State they could care less. It would be the same here.
not necessarily...
The Ohio/Ohio State is different than the Oklahoma/OK State situation in that the politicians in the state have tied them together saying both or neither… Same with VA/VA Tech and Kansas and KSU… I thought TAMU and Texas had the same deal, so it will be interesting to see how the state legislature handles it if it does happen…
Boiler Up! Hammer Down!
by JuJuan some Moore? on Aug 10, 2011 12:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Except you forget that Nebraska football owns this state...
There was no way UNO football could ever grow to the point that it could challenge the Huskers. Let’s not forget that UNO football only drew about 1500 fans to a couple of games, and averaged less than 4k. Maverick football was hemorrhaging red ink at the rate of over $1 million a year….and it actually would have been worse if football tried to go 1-AA.
Omaha sports fans for the most part would rather drive to Lincoln or watch the Huskers on TV than spend $10 to watch the Mavs play football. 1-AA wouldn’t change those dynamics. UNO football was viable when Nebraska seemed to always play at 1 pm in the afternoon. UNO could play at 7 pm, and fans could listen to the Husker game on the radio then head to Al Caniglia Field afterwards. A few diehards could probably drive straight from Lincoln and arrive in time for kickoff in Omaha if they wanted a doubleheader. Those days are over now, thanks to television setting kickoff times two weeks before game day in the morning and in the evening. There just isn’t a way for UNO to schedule around the Huskers, and that killed UNO football.
No, I haven't forgotten
You and I don’t know the future. We can guess, but we don’t know. Does UNO continue to grow? What will they look like, say, 50 years from now. Would they still only be 1-AA? Would they actually develop a following if they got good? Particularly if the Huskers fall off the map (hey, Minnesota used to win National Championships too). Could they become an Appalachian State and knock off one of the big boys? Boise St. started out Div II. They’ve been Div I-A less than 20 years.
All very unlikely, yes. Huskers do own this state. But, far off in the future, do we end up with another 1-A school in the state, and do they end up tied to the Huskers just like Sooners-Cowboys, Longhorns-Aggies, etc. We’re a small population state, with one big-time college athletics program (sorry Creighton). And I’m ok with that.
Too many old Big-12'ers, not enough East Coast
I don’t think the B1G would be interested in 3 teams all from the Big 12 market. If OU and OSU are really so attached at the hip, I don’t think either one will get in.
And as cool as it would be for NU to get another rival in the league, Penn State needs a rival more and has been needing one for longer. Plus, pulling in one of their old rivals would do a much better job of expanding the Big Ten’s market share and the BTN’s national footprint.
by Dan TrueBlue on Aug 10, 2011 9:13 AM CDT up reply actions
None of that matters if schools like Pitt and 'cuse can't generate TV ratings.
You only gain if the schools you accept draw eyeballs. Until many of the E. Coast schools that are bandied about as expansion candidates start commanding TV ratings, it would be foolhardly to take any of them.
Google's homepage celebrates too much shit.
Raiding the ACC
The rumors I’ve heard are that the SEC wants both A&M and an unnamed team from the ACC, to keep their numbers even. If so, that’s an opening for the Big Ten to raid the ACC for the teams that they’ve been eyeing themselves.
My bet is that the Big Ten’s next grab, if that all goes down will be either:
1. Maryland. Gives Penn State a rival and expands BTN footprint into the DC market.
2. Georgia Tech. Already collaborates with B1G schools academically and gives the B1G a great opening to steal some SEC recruits.
After taking either one of those, they can grab Boston College to further lure in Notre Dame.
Finally, depending on how all that goes, they can give a second look to Mizzou to shore up the west, or Pitt to shore up the east, or Notre Dame if they get over their issues with each other.
Forget BC. They don’t bring enough to the table for the Big 10 to look past the religion. One of the problems with Notre Dame, which is even more true for BC is the lack of research dollars coming in because of restrictions on what research can be done.
GT would be interesting, but do they bring enough to the table for the Big 10 to go outside the geographic footprint? Texas does, not sure about GT.
i think GT could come if there’s addionalt eastern expansion, say MD. or VA, but then you’re looking at Va. Tech coming aboard, too. That leaves one addiotnal space, assuming ND doesn’t bite. I think that’s where a GT would come in.
If the Big Ten had wanted someone from the ACC...
…they probably would have them already.
Delany’s is adamant – Big Ten expansion looks at the merits of a candidate, primarily in shared revenue (after they clear some thresholds). He has been openly critical of expansion decisions by other conferences.
Big Ten expansion isn’t driven by what other conferences are doing, it is driven by revenue.
BC – there is a reason they are usually picked last by the bowls with ACC tie-ins (or at least well below their conference finish).
True to a point
Nobody in the ACC is a bigger national draw then Nebraska, though. Thus, after UN fell into the Big Ten’s lap, there was no need to go all armageddon.
Don’t forget, whoever the Big 10 targets gets into the Comittee on Institutional Cooperation (the academic Big 10) and will (eventually) get the benefit of collective research dollars that dwarf the BTN revenue – ask Penn State how much they love the CIC.
While whoever the Big Ten targets will have to bring eyeballs, they’ll also have to have the academic side.
Absolutely...
…and I love that the Big Ten sets a high threshold for consideration. Silve in a knee jerk reaction rattled off the top of his head 7 candidates for expansion, the PAC found 7 with a couple month search, but indications are that over several decades the Big Ten has only found 5 (PSU, Nebraska, ND, Texas, TA&M).
…but the CIC and academics are still better viewed as a threshold and not an entry on the balance sheet. The CIC helps the bottom line, but it would take a lot of CIC programs to equal the revenue of a single home football game. It just isn’t a big enough financial impact to get an interview.
You have to look at this like a university president who ultimately has say. 1: must have sterling (relatively) academics; and 2) must bring in $$ equal to the revenue split in athletics. Why academics first? Money.
Football = millions
Research $ = billions
CIC brought in 3.5 billion in federal dollars, of 6 billion total dollars (06-07).
Complicated way of saying Academics is a threshold
CIC brought in 3.5 billion in federal dollars, of 6 billion total dollars (06-07).
This is an exaggeration.
The CIC is not the main reason the Big Ten programs collect research dollars.
There isn’t a lot of shared research dollars by the CIC as an organization, and less that wouldn’t exist without the CIC.
You won’t find a single statement where it was more than a threshold.
must bring in $$ equal to the revenue split in athletics.
This is false. The Big Ten wasn’t looking to expand to stay the same – there are lots of programs that can do that.
You won’t find a single statement where they were looking for someone average.
As a blogger aptly put it, in Big Ten expansion math, the candidate needed to fill the equation:
11 + 1 = 13
Obviously the CIC doesn’t control the dollars or share “share” the dollars in the way the BTN and network football contracts do, but it serves as a way for intitutions to come together and, yes, share those dollars between those schools. Without this sharing, the money brought in would be less, which means less money for research, faculty salaries, etc.
The $ cite I gave came from the CIC website.
Again, the $ brought in was a threshold, as you put it. Whoever was brought in must be able to bring in the $ the Big 10 shares with schools. An “average” school couldn’t come close bringing in that kind of money.
Researchers in universities
don’t look at athletic conferences when finding collaborators. I’m sure the CIC has some nice academic benefits, but the impact on research dollars is minimal.
Just because CIC schools bring in a lot of research money does not mean that the CIC is the cause.
by Trey Hillman's Chin on Aug 11, 2011 10:45 AM CDT up reply actions
Welcome to the Big 10 (plus U of Chicago)
Where this does happen. Ask Penn State if they’d go back to the pre 1993 days
The CIC is not the ultimate cause that the money comes in, but it is a significant reason. Universities under the CIC umbrella are able to eaily pool resources, thus allowing them to get dollars that they otherwise would not be in the running for.
Absolutely CIC is beneficial to its members...
…and according to reports of the behind the scenes meetings, is quite a carrot to candidate universities.
Don’t count out the benefit of being a large public university in a populous state in getting research dollars – it is a far bigger factor than the gains from CIC membership. You are crediting the full amount to CIC in quoting $6 Billion.
…but if it is a factor that can overcome poor sports revenue rather than a threshold, find 1 statement made to support this made by a Big Ten official.
Before a candidate is presented to the Presidents, they have to look good on the athletic revenue balance sheet.
Nobody’s counting out a large public institution’s ability to draw research dollars. What I’m saying is those under the CIC umbrella draw considerably more dollars.
Do you really think athletics alone is driving this train for the Big 10?
This isn't the question at hand
Do you really think athletics alone is driving this train for the Big 10?
Athletics revenue is driving conference expansion with some cultural thresholds.
…but if academics is a factor that can overcome poor sports revenue rather than a threshold, find 1 statement made to support this made by a Big Ten official.
I never said that academics can trump poor sports revenue. The thresholds, both academically and athletically are higher in the Big 10 then elsewhere. That’s why you have the SEC talking about Clemson and Florida State.
Considering academics a balance sheet entry and not a threshold
means that it can overcome deficits in sports revenue.
If academics is a factor that can overcome poor sports revenue rather than a threshold, find 1 statement made to support this made by a Big Ten official.
correlation =/= causation
I have yet to see anyone actually demonstrate how the CIC helped Penn State increase their research money. If Nebraska wanted to make research more of a priority and go after more research money, they could. I can’t imagine what kind of “resources” being pooled from the Big Ten could possibly make a significant dent in research money.
I’m at a non-Big-Ten institution, and I have collaborators at Nebraska. We share resources and we write joint grant proposals, and there are virtually no administrative barriers to us doing so (certainly nothing a CIC could make any better).
Here’s some things Nebraska could do to increase their grant awards: (1) lower faculty teaching loads, (2) increase faculty salaries (at least for new faculty), (3) hire more faculty in areas that have lots of funding available, (4*) get better/unique research facilities (although on its own, I don’t think it does that much). Note that all of these require Nebraska to initially invest some money in research, and I don’t see the political will at Nebraska to do that. So, unless some of this Big Ten television money is going to be dumped into the research budget, I’m very skeptical that the move to the Big Ten does anything substantial to research at Nebraska.
- It is my understanding that the new research facilities at the old state fair grounds are being funded in part by taking some money from faculty research awards. I’m not sure exactly what form this is taking, but I do know that much of the faculty aren’t exactly happy about the research park because of issues like this. Therefore, the effect on attracting top faculty because of the new research park is probably muted for the time being. I’m not making a judgment about whether or not this is the right thing to do, I’m just saying that the CIC isn’t going to magically make Nebraska a top research institution without Nebraska making a change in its own academic culture.
by Trey Hillman's Chin on Aug 12, 2011 2:42 PM CDT up reply actions
*
That bullet was supposed to be the * note, but it auto-formatted.
by Trey Hillman's Chin on Aug 12, 2011 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions
Solid points...
CIC isn’t focused on attracting more research dollars (though cooperative research is 1 of its programs).
It started when an outsider realized that while a meeting of the Big Ten Presidents was getting press for sports, they were spending most of their time together discussing academic , administrative, and financial issues. This got them a grant to expand, and the CIC took off.
The CIC with a very small staff acts as a catalyst to initiate voluntary cooperative efforts. Once a new program is running, it is usually handed over to the staff of member institutions to continue the program.
…and as I understand, Nebraska got hosed by how they split departments into separate colleges and didn’t count agricultural research.
It's all
just idiol chatter at this point. But, if Texas continues to make everyone mad then they will soon be on their own. Which, is the way they want it. But, be careful what you wish for. Notre Dame is all by themselves and have been mostly lost in obscurity since the early 90’s and they have Catholic money backing them from all over the country and probably some from overseas. The other one in this equation is ESPN they will poop all over Texas if they can make a buck somewhere else. Marriages are always rainbows and flowers when they first get under way.
hmmmm....
good description.
I was thinking of duckies and bunnies.
Go Big Red Nebraska!
Our Cobs Are Bigger Than Yours!
Corn Nation!
Twitter!
cornnation@gmail.com
by Jon Johnston on Aug 10, 2011 10:56 AM CDT up reply actions
Personally, I would hate to see mega-conferences.
It takes the fun and the tradition out of the game. Especially for fans of schools that aren’t huge football powers (Purdue). It’s already difficult enough for us to win the conference (see 2000; weak Big Ten, shared conference title, one of Purdue’s best teams in recent memory). Sure, we’d still watch our team, but it wouldn’t be as fun or interesting knowing that we were almost guaranteed to not win the conference.
Personally, I wish Texas would go independent, the Big XII would pick up Boise State or TCU (I’m sure they can opt out of the Big East, right?) or both, find a 12th, and just flip UT the bird.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Corn Nation
Related FanShots on Corn Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE CORN NATION STORE
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
