<p>
</p>
<p>Hmmm . . . looks like the Badgers have 9 losses so far this year, of which 2 are to St. Cloud State, 2 to Minnesota, 1 to Minnesota State-Mankato, and 1 to Minnesota-Duluth. Gotta get some of those Minnesota schools off Wisconsin’s schedule, huh barrons? ;-)</p>
<p>Leprechaun</p>
<p>A leprechaun (Irish: leipreach</p>
<p>Yup, I’d much rather lose to BC or Cornell or even Michigan than St. Cloud. I think schools of similar overall stature shoul play each other. I also HATE some of our OOC football games. Wofford??? Austin Peay?? Payday for those schools to balance their sports budget but how can the players get up for such a game? NCAA should ban those games.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>FIRST ROUND: 3/19 (This Friday!!)</p>
<p>*Ohio State (No. 2 seed / Midwest Region)</p>
<p>vs. No. 15 UC Santa Barbara in Milwaukee, Wisc.</p>
<p>*Purdue (No. 4 seed / South Region)</p>
<p>No. 13 seed Siena in Spokane, Wash.</p>
<p>*Wisconsin (No. 4 seed / East Region)</p>
<p>vs. No. 13 seed Wofford in Jacksonville, Fla.</p>
<p>*Michigan State (No. 5 seed / Midwest Region)</p>
<p>vs. No. 12 seed New Mexico State in Spokane, Wash.</p>
<p>*Minnesota (No. 11 seed / West Region)</p>
<p>vs. No. 6 seed Xavier in Milwaukee, Wisc.</p>
<p>The 2010 NCAA Tournament Bracket:</p>
<p>[Printable</a> bracket: 2010 NCAA tournament - chicagotribune.com](<a href=“http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/chi-2010-ncaa-bracket-htmlpage,0,4960352.htmlpage]Printable”>http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/chi-2010-ncaa-bracket-htmlpage,0,4960352.htmlpage)</p>
<p>~ lol Go Big Ten lol~</p>
<p>If these nos. are accurate, it appears that all that talk about UT athletics not needing more $$ is hogwash.</p>
<p>Per The Daily Texan -</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[The</a> Daily Texan - The real relationship between UT?s academic and athletic budgets](<a href=“http://www.dailytexanonline.com/university/the-real-relationship-between-ut-s-academic-and-athletic-budgets-1.2140563]The”>http://www.dailytexanonline.com/university/the-real-relationship-between-ut-s-academic-and-athletic-budgets-1.2140563)</p>
<p>Pitt can’t afford to be left behind</p>
<p>Tuesday, March 16, 2010
By Ron Cook, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette</p>
<p>You think Pitt shouldn’t at least look into the possibility of joining the Big Ten Conference?</p>
<p>You think it automatically will be better off staying in the Big East?</p>
<p>Think again.</p>
<p>You might change your mind after you read what former Big East commissioner Michael Tranghese said Monday.</p>
<p>“The whole expansion thing with the Big Ten is very, very unnerving. … If the Big Ten comes and takes multiple teams from the Big East, I think the Big East is in trouble. It’s a tough situation because I don’t think there’s anything the Big East can do to prevent it. I think everyone is sort of sitting on pins and needles.”</p>
<p>That includes the powers that be at Pitt.</p>
<p>“I think they will be OK,” Tranghese said. “I am not as worried about Pitt as I am some of the others. But that’s easy for me to say because I’m not sitting in [chancellor] Mark Nordenberg’s chair or [athletic director] Steve Pederson’s chair. If the Big Ten does expand and you get left behind, it can have a significant impact on the football program.”</p>
<p>Tranghese, who stepped down in June after 19 years as the Big East commissioner and 30 years with the conference, made his comments on the “Vinnie and Cook” show on 93.7 The Fan. They came just a few days after West Virginia football coach Bill Stewart talked openly of the Big East disbanding during an interview with a Parkersburg, W.Va., television station. And they came only a week after Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick mentioned for the first time the possibility of the Irish giving up their independent status and joining a football conference.</p>
<p>“I believe we’re at a point right now where the changes [in college athletics] could be relatively small or they could be seismic,” Swarbrick said. “The landscape could look completely different. This is as unstable as I’ve ever seen it.”</p>
<p>The primary reason is that the Big Ten and Southeastern Conferences have distanced themselves from the four other major conferences because of their rich television contracts. Now, the Big Ten is talking of expanding to 12, 14 or even 16 teams so it can split into two divisions and make even more money by having a conference championship game in football. Although the Big East does better financially than any conference in men’s basketball, Tranghese acknowledged, “The real money in college athletics is in football.”</p>
<p>That’s why Pitt can’t afford to be, using Tranghese’s words, “left behind” in a watered-down Big East.</p>
<p>That won’t be a problem if the Big Ten decides to add just one team, say a Notre Dame or a Missouri from the Big 12 Conference. That would leave the Big East intact and in a position to survive. Tranghese said the league has made enough of a resurgence since bringing in Louisville, Cincinnati and South Florida as football schools in 2004 to replace Atlantic Coast Conference defectors Miami, Boston College and Virginia Tech that it should get a big increase in its next television contract.</p>
<p>But what if the Big Ten decides to expand by three or five teams and raids the Big East? The answer is easy from Pitt’s standpoint: It had better be one of the schools that the Big Ten takes. There is no rebuilding the Big East again. There are no schools out there that would make sense to bring in. Don’t even think about Notre Dame. “That’s never going to happen,” Tranghese said. “Notre Dame is never going to play football in the Big East.”</p>
<p>Leaving the Big East wouldn’t be as punitive for Pitt or any other of the conference’s universities as some have speculated. Tranghese said there is a $5 million penalty. “Would a school pay it if they were invited [by the Big Ten]? Yes,” he said. “Over time, they’re going to make up that money many times over. I don’t think it’s a deterrent.”</p>
<p>What would be more of an issue, Tranghese said, is that any departing school would have to give the Big East 27 months notice. That would lead to what he called an “awkward” situation, but it hardly seems enough to be a deal-breaker.</p>
<p>All of this must be extremely difficult for Nordenberg, who wasn’t available for comment Monday. If you cut him, he bleeds Big East. “The league would not have survived [in '04] without his involvement,” Tranghese said.</p>
<p>It’s fair to think Nordenberg’s preference is for Pitt to remain in the Big East. That might not be possible, though. He’s smart enough to know he has to do what’s right for his university.</p>
<p>Pederson refused to comment specifically about the Big East vs. the Big Ten when reached at his office Monday, saying, “Speculation by us right now is counterproductive.” But he did talk about the tremendous strides Pitt has made as an academic institution under Nordenberg – “It’s like having an Ivy League record” – and as an athletic department. “I feel very strongly that this university is well-positioned on all fronts.”</p>
<p>To be attractive to the Big Ten? Sure.</p>
<p>To survive in a depleted Big East, should it come to that? Not nearly so much.</p>
<p>Link: [Pitt</a> can’t afford to be left behind](<a href=“http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10075/1043132-87.stm]Pitt”>http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10075/1043132-87.stm)</p>
<p>Tressel re-ups for two more</p>
<p>No new money in pact extended to Jan. 31, 2015 </p>
<p>Wednesday, March 17, 2010 2:55 AM
By Ken Gordon</p>
<p>THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH </p>
<p>JONATHAN QUILTER | DISPATCH
Jim Tressel will be 62 when his new deal ends.</p>
<p>The question of how long Jim Tressel will coach Ohio State football remains intriguing, even after Tressel received a two-year contract extension, which the school announced yesterday.</p>
<p>The extension, which Tressel and athletics director Gene Smith signed on March 9, keeps Tressel under contract through the 2014 season, expiring on Jan. 31, 2015.</p>
<p>There is no new money in the deal. Instead, in both 2013 and 2014, Tressel will be paid the same amount, $3.727 million, that he is due in 2012, the final year of the previous contract.</p>
<p>He will be paid $3.472million this season and $3.602 million in 2011.</p>
<p>Neither Tressel nor Smith was available for comment, but Smith said in a statement that Tressel indicated he is satisfied with his salary, which ranks him as the highest-paid coach in the Big Ten and among the top half-dozen or so coaches nationally.</p>
<p>“Jim has never once come to me about compensation,” Smith said. “He is aware of the financial situation we all face in athletics, and I am thankful for his service and loyalty to the goals of the department.”</p>
<p>Tressel is 57 years old and will be 62 when this deal expires. In the past, he has hinted at not wanting to coach until old age.</p>
<p>When his contract was last reworked, in 2008, a clause was added that stipulated that when Tressel stepped down, OSU would give him a tenured faculty position. It was the first time Tressel’s post-coaching plans had been addressed.</p>
<p>In the deal announced yesterday, that clause was replaced with one that promises Tressel an associate athletics director position, at a salary of $150,000.</p>
<p>There is no penalty if Tressel steps down before the contract expires.</p>
<p>“I feel a responsibility to do this as long as I feel I can do it as well as I can,” Tressel told The Dispatch in February. “Now, I haven’t got to the point where I ask myself, ‘Is my ego getting in the way? Am I giving this everything that it deserves?’”</p>
<p>Tressel is 94-21 (.817) in nine seasons at OSU. He has won or shared six Big Ten titles, including the past five, and his team won the 2002 national title. The Buckeyes have lost in two other national title games under Tressel.</p>
<p>One benefit of extending his contract is that it reassures recruits. With three years remaining on his deal, Tressel could not guarantee incoming players that he would coach their entire career.</p>
<p>“It does matter, because a kid wants to know that the coach recruiting them is going to be on the other side of the stage when he graduates,” said Jeremy Crabtree, national recruiting analyst for Rivals.com. “The fact that (Tressel’s contract status) is not a factor can be a big selling point for Ohio State.”</p>
<p><a href="mailto:kgordon@dispatch.com">kgordon@dispatch.com</a> </p>
<h2>Source: [Tressel</a> re-ups for two more | BuckeyeXtra](<a href=“http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/sports/stories/2010/03/17/tressel-re-ups-for-two-more.html?sid=101]Tressel”>http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/sports/stories/2010/03/17/tressel-re-ups-for-two-more.html?sid=101)</h2>
<p>This Big Ten Expansion issue can be dragged on for the entire year… I am getting bored. So, I figure to post some Big Ten related sports news in this thread only. All you Big Teners are welcomed to update your favorite team’s news either athletic or academic here as well.</p>
<p>Since I’m from Michigan I’d rather update the academic side of things. Sports are too depressing around here lately.</p>
<p>Quote:</p>
<p>“Notre Dame, Rutgers, and Boston College”</p>
<p>“Steve Daece said on the radio this morning in Des Moines that his sources in the Michigan athletic dept say that these are the three teams they think will likely be announced in 2 - 3 months (adds ND and all they bring along with TV sets and research dollars in the Boston and NY market) and BC has never really fit into the ACC anyway.”</p>
<p>Source: [HawkeyeReport.com</a> - Message Boards](<a href=“http://iowa.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=804&tid=132360214&mid=132360214&sid=940&style=2]HawkeyeReport.com”>http://iowa.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=804&tid=132360214&mid=132360214&sid=940&style=2)</p>
<hr>
<p>2 East Coast teams ought to make PSU (Joe Pa) & ND (BC Rival) happy!! lol</p>
<p>^ Interesting. Hadn’t thought about BC. It’s got the academics as well as the athletics, it opens up another major market, and as a traditional rival of Notre Dame may help bring ND into the fold. Adding these three also makes the Big Ten more of a “national” as opposed to a Midwest-only conference; that’s also been one of ND’s hang-ups, not wanting to have their footprint shrunk to the Midwest.</p>
<p>Bad geographic fit, though. I’m not sure the geography even works for Penn State, which is actually closer to Columbus (320 mi) and Ann Arbor (416 mi) than to Boston (439 mi). East Lansing (454 mi) and South Bend (478 mi) aren’t appreciably farther from Penn State than BC is. On the other hand, BC’s already quite far from a lot of ACC schools—Boston to Tallahassee is about 1300 miles—so from their perspective the geographic fit is no worse than their current set-up.</p>
<p>By adding Rutgers, Big Ten would extend its footprint to NJ & part of NY, and BC would provide the entire New England area (ME, VT, NH, RI, MA & CT = 14.5 million people), and ND could still play USC as OOC game to retain its influence on the West Coast. </p>
<p>Perhaps as a mean to silence its opposing alumni & fans, ND had agreed to be part of the Big Ten only if its major Catholic rival - Boston College (5 years history with the ACC) would also be invited to join?!</p>
<hr>
<p>^^wow, bclintonk and I think alike! lol~</p>
<p>Academically speaking, BC is definitely the best school than almost all of our previously discussed candidates besides ND since Cornell is a no-go. :)</p>
<p>If ND has their way the third team would be Cuse, not Rutgers. Rutgers does help further secure the Philly market, but Cuse would be more willing to play home games in the Meadowlands, is a private school which the Irish like, and has much more storied athletics. Playing big games in the Meadowlands is something the Big Ten really wants, because they think that will help get them into the NYC market.</p>
<p>Believe me if the Big 10 makes playing in the Meadowlands a condition for Rutgers gaining membership RU will play in the Meadowlands.</p>
<p>Rutgers not getting invited to the B10, and then NJ letting syracuse play in the meadowlands. Lol.</p>
<p>Good point L.</p>
<p>Syracuse is a small market and doesn’t carry any more weight in the NYC-NJ market than Rutgers does; probably less. Rutgers has about 400,000 living alums, most of them in the NY-NJ media market. I think Syracuse’s chances of being invited to join the Big Ten are slim to none.</p>
<p>And to think that Rutgers is presently mirred in an expensive and incomplete [revised again] campus football stadium renovation/expansion that is quite unpopular among NJ politicians and more than a few students and alumni who remain upset about Rutgers cutting non-revenue sports a couple of years ago.</p>
<p>The Syracuse MSA is pretty small, but the fan footprint for football (Syracuse is NYS’s oncly BCS team) is much larger, extending from Albany to Buffalo and the Pennsylvania border to Canada. Altogether about 6,000,000 people in that area. Of course, the lousy brand of football for the past 5-6 years has dampered entusiasm for the team, but they appear to be in the midst of a turn-around.</p>
<p>While NYC area interest in Syracuse football is marginal, SU owns the Big Apple in college basketball. The recent BE tournament took a significant financial hit when Syracuse was bounced from the tourney after one game. Syracuse men’s basketball, along with its perennial national champion lacrosse team are two plusses for the Orange’s candidacy. Its women’s team is gaining national notice as is its fairly new women’s ice hockey team (which placed a member on the Olympic women’s team). I would imagine men’s hockey would be added if SU became a Big Ten member.</p>
<p>Academically, SU is compatible with the Big Ten and the school’s chancellor previously held administrative positions at Michigan and Illinois, which shouldn’t be overlooked. Culturally, much of Upstate NY shares more in common with the Great Lakes states than the east coast.</p>
<p>BTW, Syracuse already has a multi-year agreement to play Notre Dame in the Meadowlands. SU would never play all of their games there, but one or two annually is a possibility. </p>
<p>I think SU’s chances are much better than slim to none if the Big Ten goes to 14 or 16 teams. Rutgers probably has the nod if they add one team.</p>
<p>Using NJ politicians as the judges of anything is shaky ground. NJ state government ranks right with California and Illinois for both corruption and ineptitude. I have no idea what is wrong with the stadium–it looks fine on TV. I know they had some construction issues but that’s NJ state government for you too.</p>
<p>“I would imagine men’s hockey would be added if SU became a Big Ten member.”</p>
<p>Hudson Valley 51, College Hockey is not a lil’ 11 sport, the member teams (MI, OSU, MSU, Wisc) play against Lake Superior State, Ferris State, Miami (OH), etc. in the CCHA.</p>
<p>Syracuse women’s hockey sounds like a Title IX move…</p>