<p>I think the Big Ten should freeze ND out of all non-revenue generating sports. Let ND travel hundreds of miles to get a field hockey, soccer, softball, baseball, tennis, or golf match and see how they like it. </p>
<p>Other than grabbing a Virginia or Boston College out of the ACC, I say be patient and wait. Sure, 11 teams is a problem of balance but the other major problem with balance is that there are only three premier football powers (Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State). So, even with Syracuse or Rutgers there still be be an inequity of one of those three teams getting an easier ride to the championship game.</p>
<p>While Rutgers is likely the best option out of all the schools mention, Delany really has no interest in expanding the conf. for something other than a major football school (something along the lines of a UT or ND). </p>
<p>Having Rutgers as a lower-middle of the pack team does nothing for the conference.</p>
<p>In addition, Rutgers doesn’t really bring in a new major TV market; the B10 network is already available on the various NYC area cable providers and people in NYC really don’t care about Rutgers FB. </p>
<p>Basically, the addition of Rutgers wouldn’t add enough in revenue to make up for splitting the TV proceeds by 12 schools instead of 11.</p>
<p>No way will Notre Dame join the Big Ten as long as it has its own national TV contract, which it shares with no one. Plus it gets the total take on bowl game revenues (as opposed to splitting with a conference), although this hasn’t brought in much revenue lately. If ND does get dropped by the network, it will join the Big Ten in a minute. But there’s no sign of that happening—despite years of mediocrity, ND continues to enjoy an enormous and loyal national fan base.</p>
<p>If the Big Ten does expand, it will be Rutgers. It’s a strong inroad for the Big Ten into the enormous NY/NJ media market, where only a fraction of viewers currently follow Rutgers but nonetheless Rutgers is treated as a “local” favorite, and the allure of annual Big Ten match-ups against Penn State, Ohio State, and Michigan would only add to its luster. It would also cement the Big Ten’s hold on the major Philadelphia market. Big Ten coaches would like it because it expands their recruiting opportunities in the mid-Atlantic region. Penn State would love it because it creates a natural regional rivalry that would quickly rival Michigan-Ohio State in fan appeal. And Rutgers is one of the few public universities in contiguous states that can make a plausible claim to rivaling the Big Ten schools academically—something the Big Ten cares about deeply. The suggestion above that Big Ten membership would actually help Rutgers capture a larger share of top NJ students is intriguing, and plausible as NJ is currently the largest exporter of college-level academic talent in the nation. Good for Rutgers, good for the Big Ten. Plus there’s a lot of money in it for Rutgers as the Big Ten has close to a lock on the lucrative Rose Bowl and often has at least one other team in a big-money BCS bowl.</p>
<p>Pitt is plausible academically and athletically, but Pittsburgh is a small market already partially penetrated by Penn State, so the financial advantages to the conference are less clear. Texas is too far away and probably has no interest in making the switch. Missouri is questionable academically and not a strong draw in its own mid-sized markets.</p>
<p>Correct right down the line. Pitt or Mizzu add little. RU has the potential to add considerable to B10 coverage in NY media. RU will benefit in exposure and perhaps learn how to become a big powerful state U.</p>
<p>It’s just not the case guys. I’m in CT and I get the Big 10 network now. Others have already mentioned it’s in NY so what exposure would the Big 10 pick up? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>K&S is correct. There is no way that Rutgers adds enough revenue to increase the existing eleven team’s share so it won’t happen even though I agree that academically it would be a good fit.</p>
<p>barrons- it also seems to me that PSU and the rest of the Big 10 are not as successful getting kids from NJ as they have been in the past. RU in the Big 10 opens the market again. Did you see how many kids from NJ were NFL first rounders this draft. NJ is not Fla.,Texas, or California but there is plenty of talent here.</p>
<p>UW stopped recruiting there a few years ago and we have had big fights over that on the sports boards. The current HC favors FLA and Texas and has no coaches with northeast area ties. This depsite several key starters last year were from the NJ/NY/CT area. The success rate for NJ area players at UW was very high–I think over half the recruits became starters which is really a good hit ratio. This includes star RBs Ron Dayne, Anthony Davis and PJ Hill.</p>
<p>If the B10 gets a home team in NJ I would expect lots more interest in the BTN in the northeast.</p>
<p>While FB is the economic engine for the major conferences, adding a 12th university to the Big 10 conference on that basis alone would not be a good idea. Because it is a comprehensive athletic conference consideration of all the other athletic programs need to be evaluated. How realistic would it be to transport the womens swim team or the mens fencing team half way across the country from NJ to Ia or Mn?</p>
<p>A far better match would be to poach Iowa State, WVa, Missouri or reoffer to ND.</p>
<p>originaloog- I read that it is easier for Big10 schools to get to RU than it is to get to Penn St. I guess the Boston College to the ACC would be the model for the minor sports. BC also had the problem that their minor teams faced a scheduling boycott after they left the Big East.</p>
<p>barrons- every coach favors Florida and Texas for talent. RU’s coach says he recruits the State of Rutgers- everything within a 3 hour drive of New Brunswick and a 3 hour flight to Florida. Gives him a base of about 50 million people.</p>
<p>The B10 would split into two divisions E/W or N/S maybe. The hard thing is even football divisions. East under a natural would have RU, PSU, OSU, UM, MSU, and either IU or PU. West would have the rest and looks (is) weaker. Probably not a big issue for other sports as in basketball the divisions would be pretty even. That seems to be the toughest issue.</p>
<p>Ummm . . . look at a map. Big East member South Florida is farther from Rutgers than any Big Ten school except Minnesota, and there the difference is only about 100 miles (and the Twin Cities have far more non-stop flights). Big East member Louisville is farther from Rutgers than all but a small handful of Big Ten schools. Throw in Big East basketball members Marquette, DePaul, and Notre Dame and you’re looking at substantial geographic overlap between the two conferences. I just don’t think distance is an issue here, especially if the Big Ten (+2) were to split into E-W divisions.</p>
<p>Your argument seems to be based on that since other conferences are messed up geographically so should the Big Ten. Btw, Iowa would be long trip for Rutgers as there are no direct flights and they would have to fly into Des Moines (most likely) and bus it to Iowa City from there. </p>
<p>The East-West split in the Big 10 (even with Rutgers included) would be problematic. Simply based on geography the West would include Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, Northwestern and Purdue. The East would be Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan St., Rutgers and Indiana. So other than Wisconsin, all the power football teams would be in the East. Wisconsin fans might be happy to be in the title game nearly every year but I doubt that would make up for having Iowa being the best game on their schedule. </p>
<p>Naturally, splitting two colleges in the same state (Purdue and Indiana) means they won’t play each other and that’s not going to happen. You could move Purdue in the East and put Ohio State in the West for balance purposes. That means that the Michigan - Ohio State game is history and that’s not going to happen. You could move Penn State to the West with the logic that they don’t have the traditional games anyway but the end result is that Penn State will leave the Big 10 and go back to being an independent or go into another conference (I bet the ACC would love to have the revenue PSU would bring in). How smart would bringing in Rutgers look then? </p>
<p>Of course, once a vote for Rutgers might take place, the Governor of Iowa might do a ‘Virginia Tech’ and insist that Iowa State join the Big Ten. Or the Governor of Ohio might try to get Miami University in. </p>
<p>Originaloog is correct when he points out that transporting non-revenue generating sports is a big issue. First, there are a lot of non-generating revenue sports which means a lot of teams traveling a lot of miles for limited value (to the kids or the university). The Patriot League has the same problem. The College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, MA is a long bus ride for those kids to ANY of the other schools. Get on the bus on Friday, go to your hotel room, play the game on Saturday and get back at oh-dark-hundred on Saturday night/Sunday morning. Beautiful. And my guess is that a four year starter at American University in field hockey has a few colorful words about the two trips she will have made to Holy Cross.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Obviously I’m not going to tell you what you get or don’t get but the Big Ten Network is on Comcast and I know that Comcast is a big player in New Jersey.</p>
<p>No, my point is simply that contrary to the assertion of a previous poster, membership in the Big Ten would not pose significantly greater transportation difficulties for Rutgers than its current membership in the Big East.</p>
<p>OK- we have Cablevision. I believe Cablevision has a large part of Northern NJ.
I believe the problem with how to divide the games can be worked out. Some conferences created a situation that a rival game is scheduled every year so that even if you are in East/West or North/South there is a match up every year.</p>
<p>I think the bottom line is is there is a case for $ to be made they will expand if not they will not.</p>