So Jim Delany Liked Babar Too
There's a movie I watched a lot as a kid called Babar. It was based off of a TV show, although I just learned that five minutes ago. The one thing I remember most about that movie, other than the shot of the rhino army preparing to decimate the elephant city, is a song called The Committee. It exists nowhere on the internet except in languages I don't understand. Here is one of them:
That song is all I could think about during the non-news that swept the entire college football blogosphere into a frenzy this week. Jim Delany basically translated and rewrote the above youtube video into this press release that shouldn't have been blockquoted on any website anywhere:
The COP/C believes that the timing is right for the conference to once again conduct a thorough evaluation of options for conference structure and expansion. As a result, the commissioner was asked to provide recommendations for consideration by the COP/C over the next 12 to 18 months.
Am I the only one actually reading what that says? If your boss told you he would "conduct a thorough evaluation" of the prospects of giving you a raise in the "next 12 to 18 months," would you punch him? If you asked a girl out and she gave the same answer, would you really run to a computer start blogging about it?
Because that's what happened. CQ did a run-through of teams we have evaluated on this site 1,000 times, mgoblog called this press release "Big Ten Expansion For Serious." Everyone from Dr. Saturday to the newest SBN generality BCS Evolution had something to say.
But if there weren't any legit fighters besides Notre Dame before that press release, why are there a handful of them now? The median Big Ten school ranks somewhere around 15 on the national list of revenue generating athletic departments (note: not just football). What that means, then, is someone needs to be above or right at 15 to not dramatically lower average revenue, with an offset being the $4-$5 million championship game.
But $4-$5 million is not a very big slice of the pie, not even close, and while the TV contract will get bigger with a 12th team, it will also get split 12 ways instead of 11, so the "you have to raise the average" mandate still stands.
But the thing is none of the schools being mentioned are anywhere close to 15th on the revenue list:
41st Maryland
45th Rutgers
46th Missouri
54th Syracuse
61st Pittsburgh
63rd Iowa State
And money aside: who on that list really excites you? There's a group here that is interested in Pitt, and that's fine, but probably not enough to overcome the ADs realizations that they (1) wouldn't add any new TV market to the conference, which matters as much as keeping up average revenue, and (2) would severely bring down average revenue.
And to go further, the general reaction out of 'Cuse to all of this is "heck no," Rutgers hinges on the NYC market that--even when successful on the field--they don't deliver, and Missouri is interested but can we get any more bland and boring no we can't.
Until I see a press release that actually has some news in it, I'm still not sure how anyone can seriously consider any Big Ten expansion strategy except Notre Dame or bust.
Update: As further proof that this whole thing is a media hog feeding, the Chicago Tribune, which isn't the Bleacher Report, is actually running an article citing unnamed "sources" that the Big Ten could grow to 14 teams, or 16 teams, or 150 teams.
Why? Because above mentioned double-secret source said: "Anything is possible." Why that statement needs to be off the record is baffling enough, but Teddy Greenstein, who wrote this nonsense, got no other quotes.
So someone he knows who may or may not be connected to anything gave a completely vague comment about leaving options open, in response to a press release that was a completely vague statement that something may or may not happen three years from now, and BAM: fill-in-the-blank headline writing that contains no constructive information whatsoever.
38 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
And that was
psupride with the FANSHOT, in case you don’t read them.
I know about your diabolical plan.
You know, I kinda skimmed through this post like people skim through the fanshots
It took me some time before I realized just why I had no idea what that video was on about.
"Jeff Brooks....OHHHH! haHA!" - Gus Johnson
by ReadingRambler on Dec 17, 2009 2:34 PM EST up reply actions
That video is my consolation prize
for 15 minutes last night of trying to find the English video. Like all consolation prizes, it sucks, but like all consolation prizes, they represent effort in spent in vein and are hard to part with.
I know about your diabolical plan.
I'm pretty sure
Effort spent with your vein does not meet pseudo-family friendly requirements.
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
Oh..I've wasted my life.
Or at least the last two days.
Don’t you want us all in a blogging frenzy? I mean 480+ comments, it’s like Christmas in December!
I say let's rock the Orange Bowl, because nobody will remember in five years anyway.
This all reminds me of something Jtot said a while ago...
I wish I could recall his exact phrasing, although I probably wouldn’t post it anyway.
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 17, 2009 2:27 PM EST up reply actions
Or you'd spell it wrong and the point would be lost
I say let's rock the Orange Bowl, because nobody will remember in five years anyway.
Something like that
"Andrew Jones....SEND IT IN, BIG FELLA!" - Bill Raftery, 4/2/09
by ReadingRambler on Dec 17, 2009 2:32 PM EST up reply actions
my interpretation of 'it is what it is?'
This is the most flawed pretend-logic going today See if you can spot the bullshit difference:
’You’re either in or you’re not’
‘It is what it is’
‘You either are or you are’
1) is the fraud people use to give off an air that they are asserting an unassailable stance. As if framing a situation in between two absolutes like this gives a point more weight. Btw, it was made popular earlier this decade by that prince of Aristotelian logic, George W. Bush. Applying this mechanism to recruiting is the most ridiculous of farces.
2) is the device used to make people feel like they’re making a statement of some substance by saying absolutely nothing at all. Made famous in the past few years by professional athletes bored with the standard cliches they had been forced into by repetitive and equally boring media inquiries.
3) is some shite I just made up. Could be the next famous anti-disambiguation to make rounds if it were proffered and marketed by someone cooler than I. Maybe I’ll write Afroman and see if he’d be interested in building it into his next jingle. Or really stretch it and see if I can use it to compare commitment of high school recruiting to the commitment of marriage.
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
by jtothep on Dec 17, 2009 3:59 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
No, that's not it
"Jeff Brooks....OHHHH! haHA!" - Gus Johnson
by ReadingRambler on Dec 17, 2009 4:11 PM EST up reply actions
It's a pacifier
It’s like ever 3-4 years when we start the “Who’s going to be the next HC at Penn State” talk. That conversation has been going around since the 70’s. It generates lots of topics for debate, it’s generally harmless, and at the end of the day we’re almost more happy just to wonder what if then we are to actually see anything change.
So this is our pacifier, the hazy belief that somewhere behind closed doors, a magical and wonderful change is begining to occur. Maybe it’s Notre Dame. Maybe it’s Texas. Maybe Tony Dungy will be our next head coach. It’s so much fun to pretend.
"We hugged as grown men do. It was a great moment. Then, it was business as usual." -- LJ Sr.
I heard we are adding 3 teams
Missouri, to open up the borders to Oklahoma, who will be added to open up the borders to Texas.
It all makes a lot of sense, my anonymous source tells me so.
hmmmm
When I first read this, I thought it meant that for the first time they were going to be seriously looking for someone besides Notre Dame.
I wonder to what degree where a program ranks on a list of revenue generation matters…because that must be greatly influenced by the conference, right? Is Northwestern relatively highly ranked on that list? Isn’t the only reason because they belong to the big11?
I think the announcement means we’re looking at expansion again, and we’re telling you about it. I think they’re telling the public for two reasons: 1) expect a new team in 12-18 months; 2) we’re going to give nd alumni 12-18 months to decide whether they want to be a part of the conference…they have first rights, but if they don’t take it now, they might never get it…
This is not the right reading of things? Also, babar rocks.
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
the "ND you are on notice"
is the only constructive thing I can think of this being for. But I still think it’s a bluff. The BT would be better off waiting 5-10 years for ND than picking someone who is going to lower revenue just to spite the irish. With 11 teams, the Big Ten still makes more money per school than every other conference…why do they want to shake all of that up?
I know about your diabolical plan.
why is a team besides ND going to lower revenue?
Isn’t that what the whole “adding penn state was an unqualified success” prejoinder was about? I tend to think that the argument is that you improve the revenue going to say maryland by having them join the big11.
I just think your list (and the link to the list doesn’t work) of the revenue generating programs doesn’t really tell you anything b/c revenue is so determined by the conference you’re in. And so I think there’s an argument to be made that Maryland, though lower than the average big11 team in revenue generation now, would increase overall revenue to the big11/12 b/c, in addition to the big11 champ game, the rising tide of the big11, so to speak, would lift Maryland’s boat.
This argument might be wrong, mind you, but it wouldn’t surprise me if the 11 university presidents collectively believe that they can turn the shy girl at the party into a hottie and improve the revenue of a relatively poorly generating team simply through their affiliation with it. So isn’t the question really: which potential team is the cute girl that nobody thinks is cute because she’s wearing glasses? [for some reason I think this rules out pitt.]
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
Well, Penn State was making way more money, and had a way bigger following, than any of the teams on the list right now besides ND. PSU was one of the rare remaining “top programs” that wasn’t affiliated.
So isn’t the question really: which potential team is the cute girl that nobody thinks is cute because she’s wearing glasses?
As fun as it is to shake things up, there is no guarantee that one of these exists.
I know about your diabolical plan.
And fun fact about Maryland
Their stadium holds 54k and surrounds something called “Capital One Field”. No joke.
I know about your diabolical plan.
I go to 2 or 3 maryland games a year
(a friend is an alum and has season tickets), and so I know that, yes, Maryland football is in the JV compared to Penn State. The stadium is tiny, the tailgating is small and innocent, and the program is not exactly attracting a lot of attention in the region. On the other hand, its next to impossible to get tickets to a maryland basketball game in the acc season.
Maryland opens up the DC tv market, and is one of the few, if not the only, programs east of Penn State in the mid-atlantic/northeast to have the potential to really grow. Would Maryland football definitely grow if it joins the big11? Maybe, maybe not. Could it grow? Certainly….
Do Delaney and the presidents think that the chance of it growing, combined with incresaed tv revenue in dc, the big11 champ game, the competitve difference it makes to the conference, and the strenght of its hoops program is worth the risk? I don’t know, but its not implausible at all—you could even argue that its likely.
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
For the record, if we can’t get ND and have to expand, Maryland is my pick. Add in the fact that DC is filled with BT alums, and it’s a decent compromise IMO.
But I still think adding a (non-ND) team is too big a risk, when we are admittedly relying on a program to miraculously grow revenue when evidence of this happening doesn’t exist (ie ACC, BE, ect), especially considering the BT ain’t broke, as they say.
I know about your diabolical plan.
I don't know what I think of the risk
so I don’t know whether or not they should add a non-ND team. If they had to, I guess I’d say UMD, too, but I’m open to the cuse and pitt, too, though for some reason I perceive it as harder to grab a team from the big east, though I doub that’s true. I really don’t want Mizzou or Iowa State; but Nebraska would be cool.
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
The other factor
I wouldn’t say this isn’t necessarily all about money. Remember, Alvarez and Paterno both complained that the Big Ten is at a competitive disadvantage because the Big XII and SEC play another two weeks after our season is over. Last year we were at the end of the line of one loss teams, and this year Iowa wasn’t getting any respect while they were undefeated. Delany and the University Presidents may realize they have to leave some money on the table in order to regain that competitive advantage.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
Correction
The first sentence should read, “I wouldn’t necessarily say this is all about money.”
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
I get it, but Delaney isn't doing anything that would hurt cash.
Dude just doesn’t care about anything but the bottom line.
"I'm colonel cool! And I'm the captain on this rocket to the stars!"
But
He’s also looking down the road. The Big Ten is getting used to having two teams in the BCS every year. He wants to protect that at all costs because it’s an extra 4.5 million in the conference coffers. As the Big Ten becomes more and more irrelevant at the end of the season, the threat to that at large BCS bid becomes more ominous.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
Isn't it an extra 15 million (or thereabout, the difference between a BCS payout, 17.5 million, and the lowest paying bowl game the big ten plays in)?
by PSUinBOSSton on Dec 17, 2009 5:02 PM EST up reply actions
That’s only for the first team from a conference. Second team gets way less, like Mike said around $4.5.
I know about your diabolical plan.
I read it as code for
“The back door channels are open. Any interested schools should feel free to discreetly make inquiries.”
Nobody covers non-news coverage
Better than you, Kevin!
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
Speaking of wonderfully creative French kid's books

Asterix is the man!!!
Do I know what rhetorical means?
Yes, read the books ... at least to your kids
My, I felt old when posters mentioned they only new Babar from the movie, not the TV show. The books, of course, predated all the video. Get ‘em for your kids, they’re fantastic. Good starting point:
If this is a ND bluff
then we have just given the rest of the country 18 months to prepare a pre-emtive strike.
I think we're going about this whole "possible expansion"
thing the wrong way. We want ND, right? There are 11 of us. And we surround them. I say we just declare war and take them. Who’s going to come to their defense?
In all seriousness, you know this whole media frenzy is a by-product of us all being bored. If Delany said that in week 3 of the season, we would’ve shushed him for talking during a game and told him to get back to us when he actually had something to relate. Plus, a little pre-bowl Big 10 national attention isn’t all bad.
It never gets to be easy
LOLZ @ Pitt
Rutgers athletic department makes more money than you. I’m sure there are legitimate reasons, but ha.

by 



























