The Big Ten Expansion

College Search & Selection
181

<p>

</p>

<p>the big ten could add toledo as the 12th team and see no significant declines in revenue. simply, after you add a conference championship game in football you only need to come up with about $10 million to break even. add the eight additional football games and 15 additional basketball games that would, at worst, be shown on the btn every year. and another fan base of eyes 24/7. thats significant ad revenue. throw in another low tier bowl game and youre not too far from breaking even. then divide by 12.</p>

<p>rutgers and syracuse would both bring non-trivial new markets to the big ten network and thus would CLEARLY make the conference money as a 12th member. the question is merely HOW MUCH rutgers and syracuse would bring. the btn struggled to reach an agreement with comcast in pennsylvania despite the huge draw of penn state football. rutgers football (and basketball) is a significantly smaller draw in new jersey. that move thus has the potential to be a pretty big flop. similarly, the same questions exist about syracuse outside sparsely populated western new york. as a result, a school like missouri, which would bring its entire state at in-market carriage rates is the safest bet. but it clearly has less upside than either syracuse or rutgers.</p>

<p>the calculus changes significantly once you start talking about 14 or 16 teams, however. without the benefit of new revenue from a conference championship game, a 13th or 14th team is going to have to generate significant money on its own. texas (with tag-a-long a&m) and the 14th of your choice would do that. syracuse and some combination of notre dame, rutgers and uconn might, as well… the new york city market would then be in real play. that city is worth north of $20 million per year to the big ten (after splitting revenues with fox) in carriage rates alone.</p>

182

<p>If Rutgers gets in the Big 10 the fan interest in the NY/NJ market goes up significantly.</p>

183

<p>Big ten should add Notre Dame. Toledo isn’t well-known enough and Rutgers isn’t ideal in terms of location or academics.</p>

184

<p>irishevan, Notre Dame is not interested in the Big 10, though I agree that Toledo is not a good fit.</p>

185

<p>if it wasnt clear, i mentioned toledo to illustrate the point that the big ten could come close to breaking even by adding just about anyone.</p>

<p>further…</p>

<p>rutgers is about as good as youre going to get in terms of location. keep in mind that with the exception of notre dame, new revenue is going to be generated by adding a team in a state currently without a big ten team. as such, after missouri, rutgers is about as good geographically as it gets. academics there are more than fine, too.</p>

<p>and notre dame is interested (they were interested in 2003 and have more incentive to affiliate in football now than then). unfortunately, many of their major donors are adamantly against a move.</p>

186

<p>Sorry ericatbucknell I should have read your post more carefully. I think Notre Dame probably wouldn’t join the Big Ten for the sake of tradition but I think it would actually be the better move financially.</p>

187

<p>Thinking moving to the Big Ten is better financially is small time thinking. At ND donors are where the big money is at, not TV contracts. The prestige lost by losing independence would forever damage the program. As long as NBC allows the Irish to continue their farce of national importance, Notre Dame shouldn’t join a conference.</p>

<p>As for Ohio State and Michigan no longer being as dominant, stop fooling yourselves. Even if they went from winning 4 out of 5 times to winning 3 out of 4 times, that’s still complete dominance. Even the next best program PSU who has only been in since the 90’s has had a poor showing.</p>

188

<p>

</p>

<p>While there wouldn’t be a decline in revenue, adding a team that doesn’t bring in significant new TV revenues (mainly thru cable carriage fees) would mean that each current member school would see a drop in its share of the B10 pie and that is a total deal-breaker.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s exactly the problem w/ RU and SU - esp. in light of how difficult it was for the Yankees and Mets to get their cable networks onto the expanded basic packages in the NY metro area (and the Yankees and Mets each have larger, more ardent fan bases than both RU and SU together).</p>

<p>The trifecta of RU, SU and UConn can’t even deliver the NYC market; one of those schools individually won’t either.</p>

189

<p>

</p>

<p>The danger is if the move to superconferences (14 or 16 teams) occurs - that would mean less OOC games and the likelihood that more and more of ND’s schedule would be filled w/ the likes of Navy, Army, etc.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Since 1995, PSU, Northwestern, Wisc., Iowa, Illinois and Purdue have won at least one conf. title - the only schools which have not are Minny, Indiana and MSU.</p>

<p>Otoh, how many schools other than UT and OU have won the B12 title over the past 15 years?</p>

190

<p>BaghDAD:</p>

<p>“Bottom of the ACC too weak? Maryland the same rank as Choke State U…”</p>

<p>[YouTube</a> - 2010 Ohio State Rose Bowl Highlight Video](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIBd1lg2KNg&feature=related]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIBd1lg2KNg&feature=related)</p>

<p>Sorry for the little interruption! Please continue the discussion… :)</p>

191

<p>I agree with others that ND has little need to join the Big Ten as long as ND is able to maintain its national identity and reputation. Furthermore, I would hardly call their football a farce as they beat two of their three Big Ten opponents they played last year. Ironically, their one loss was to the Big Ten’s worst team last year (U Michigan). </p>

<p>The best thing that could happen to the Big Ten would be to add a little competition in football. Right now, it’s B-O-R-I-N-G. Ohio State wins every year. No other school is close to consistently matching the Buckeyes and the results are sooooo predictable. Other than the parties, why bother going to the games?? Contrast that with other conferences that have multiple contenders and that makes for a much more dynamic and interesting season. Btw, I don’t think that Rutgers or any of the other leading contenders have even the slightest chance to change this status quo. </p>

<p>If the Big Ten could somehow get U Texas, that would be a tremendous improvement on the league. But I don’t know many Texans that have a lot of interest. Texans really don’t care about the Big Ten and much more enjoy their local rivalries and also watching their brethren in the SEC. To most Texans that I know, the Big Ten is sooo yesterday and the only school that they really pay any attention to is Ohio State.</p>

192

<p>Winning the B10 title is hardly the only goal anymore. With a typical year of two major bowls and several good ones you don’t need to win the B10 to be good. Wisconsin, PSU and Iowa have stronger teams again so there are plenty of good games during the season. The B10 also had a much better bowl season and will have about 4 teams starting in the Top 20 this year. And that’s with a down Michigan team.</p>

193

<p>hawkette, your assessment of Big 10 sports is insulting. The Big 10 is very strong. Just because Michigan is down and PSU has respect and loyalty for its aging head coach does not mean the Big 10 is done for. </p>

<p>Three years ago, Michigan beat Florida in the Sunshine state. Michigan also beat Florida in the Sunshine state 7 years ago. Michigan also beat Alabama in the Orange Bowl, and Auburn and Arkansas in the Citrus Bowl. Michigan went 6-1 vs SEC teams, all of them were among the top 4 in the conference when they played them and all of them were played in Florida (SEC country). Michigan only played Texas once in its history; 2004 Rose Bowl I believe. Michigan led 31-21 entering the fourth quarter and Lost the game 37-38 thanks to a last second kick by Texas. All of this happended in the 2000s, so we aren’t talking ancient history. It is only a matter of time before Michigan returns to its winning ways. PSU has had a couple of down years, as has Wisconsin, but we are still talking about successful programs. Best of all, in terms of income generation, the Big 10 rules.</p>

<p>Notre Dame’s faculty would love nothing more than to join the Big 10. Academically, they stand much to gain from a relationship with academic powerhouses such as Chicago, Michigan, Northwestern, Wisconsin and UIUC. Financially, Notre Dame would lose very little, if anything. But the alumni are very proud of their Independent status, so it won’t happen.</p>

<p>I will take your word about Texas alums. I am surprised though. Academically and culturally, UT/Austin have more in common with Michigan/Ann Arbor or Wisconsin/Madison than with any Big 12 school.</p>

194

<p>Sorry, Alex, I’m not anti-Big Ten, but I don’t think that U Texas is a great fit. </p>

<p>As for your alma, U Michigan is pretty awful right now in the major sports, so spare us the history lesson. Presently the school is not playing a meaningful Big Ten role in the major sports of football and basketball other than its ability to bring viewers for TV viewership. Maybe this will change in the future (and I’m sure you will say that it will). I don’t know and don’t really care. </p>

<p>By contrast, Ohio State is consistently dominating the football conference. barrons may be right that in today’s football world with all of the bowl games, that may not be as important as before. As for his comments on the quality and reliability of college football polls, I would give them about as high a mark as I would give to the PA voters. :eek: Generally, they stink. </p>

<p>For the record, here are the Champions in Big Ten football for the last 10 years:</p>

<p>2009: Ohio State
2008: Ohio State & Penn State
2007: Ohio State
2006: Ohio State
2005: Ohio State & Penn State
2004: U Michigan & U Iowa
2003: U Michigan
2002: Ohio State & U Iowa
2001: U Illinois
2000: U Michigan & Northwestern & Purdue</p>

<p>Notice any pattern in recent years?? I stand by my earlier comment that it’s pretty boring to see the same school at the top almost every year. </p>

<p>Btw, I don’t think that U Texas has much in common culturally with most of the Midwest and certainly not Michigan. Texas is a thriving state that is attracting population and jobs more than almost any state in the USA. Its economy is diversified and serves as the home of multiple world leaders in energy, technology, agriculture and retailing. </p>

<p>As for the Midwest, like most other parts of the USA, Texans don’t give it a lot of thought. Plus, if you go to Texas, you’ll find that most folks don’t really care a lot about CC concepts like academic prestige and Peer Assessment scores. In the Texas economy, that plus a buck might buy you a cup of coffee.</p>

195

<p>Hawkette, I was not comparing states, I was comparing universities and college towns. Ann Arbor, Austin and Madison are not typical towns in their respective states.</p>

196

<p>Alexandre,</p>

<p>The reason why Notre Dame (football) does not want to join the Big Ten has nothing to do with the pride of alumni, it’s because that financially Notre Dame is such a strong brand name that they can easily prosper in collegiate athletics without joining a conference and becoming hampered down with set conference schedules and conference compliance procedures. Notre Dame can make tons of money by arranging games arbitrarily with opponents at neutral sites with the NBC contract for example (and play 7-8 true home games a year). Moreover, Notre Dame in its smaller sports is already well-established in the Big East, and moving those sports out would also be tenuous. Notre Dame gains nothing more financially in the Big Ten than they do being independent, if not less.</p>

197

<p>ND won’t gain financially by joining the Big 10…nor will it lose. Notre Dame currently makes as much out of Football as Michigan, OSU, PSU and Wisconsin.</p>

<p>[Notre</a> Dame AD: Irish won’t join Big Ten - Sporting News staff reports - College Football - Sporting News](<a href=“http://www.sportingnews.com/college-football/article/2009-12-17/notre-dame-ad-irish-wont-join-big-ten]Notre”>http://www.sportingnews.com/college-football/article/2009-12-17/notre-dame-ad-irish-wont-join-big-ten)</p>

<p>Finances aren’t an issue. And rivalries with USC, Navy and BC can easily be maintained. The alums just don’t want it to happen.</p>

<p>And like I said, the ND faculty would love to be associated with the CIC. All that stands in the way are the alums.</p>

198

<p>

</p>

<p>hawk - methinks you should stick to posting attendance figures.</p>

<p>An upperclass-laden ND team (filled w/ 4* recruits) barely beat MSU and PU (granted, they could have very well beat UM, a bottom-tier team), both of which finished 4-4 in the B10.</p>

<p>ND would be a middling team, at best, in the B10 last season.</p>

<p>For the upcoming season, ND would be lucky to win 1 game against a B10 opponent.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Uhh, since 1995 - PSU, Northwestern, UM, Iowa, Wisc., Illinois and Purdue have all won at least one B10 title (the only schools not to so are MSU, Minny and IU).</p>

<p>Otoh, how many schools other than UT and OU have won the B12 during that period?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Hmmm, in polls on various UT sites, the voting is nearly 50/50 w/ a slight edge to joining the B10; even the UT student paper came out w/ an editorial calling for serious consideration of the issue.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.dailytexanonline.com/top-stories/benefits-of-the-big-ten-1.2179669[/url]”>http://www.dailytexanonline.com/top-stories/benefits-of-the-big-ten-1.2179669&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>And aside from OU and A&M, UT alums are more excited abot playing dOSU, PSU, UM, UW and Iowa than the likes of Kansas, KSU, Mizzou, CO, ISU, etc.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually, they would in TV revenue (the future of college FB, as well as most other sports, is on cable, not network TV).</p>

<p>Even the ND AD recently made a carefully worded statement that ND would remain independant as long as it remained financially feasible.</p>

<p>The biggest danger for ND is if superconferences made up of 14 or 16 teams come to fruition; meaning less OOC games and more programs like Army and Navy on the ND schedule.</p>

199

<p>Superconferences won’t hurt Notre Dame. Every school would still trip over themselves to play them OOC. The only danger of Super-conferences is if the BCS breaks completely away from the NCAA and demands Notre Dame join a conference to be eligible to participate. There will never be a time when a conference turns down Notre Dame joining.</p>

200

<p>^ Yes it would.</p>

<p>Superconferences mean more conferences games and hence, less ability/flexibility to schedule OOC games and less willingness to schedule a good team like ND (if they ever get back to that point) due to a tough conf. slate getting even tougher.</p>