Black Shoe Diaries: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: SB Nation MMA Rankings for August 2010

Pitt And Why Calling Something Reliable Doesn’t Make It So

Empty-pitt_medium

 

Obligatory Yellow Out photo and now obligatory discussion about things I've been reading in the internets that claim Pitt is a signed, sealed, delivered member of the Big Ten.

I've dug up everything I can find in actual information here, attempting to cancel out the noise, and this, my friends, is the rock this rumor is founded upon:

Here is what popped up on Bleacherreport.com, normally a pretty reliable outlet, just a few hours ago:

Wait...

Star-divide

The rest of this un-linked blog post from a Kansas City Star stepchild is a quote from an actual bleacher report article that is no-followed here:

"According to several reports, including personal statements by student athletes on Twitter, Pittsburgh athletic department officials held closed door meetings with all of the University's student athletes last week about the potential move.

Pitt message boards lit up with the news and the validity of the rumor, and though not verified by the University or the Big East or Big Ten, the rumor was somewhat reinforced when those Pitt athletes who posted about the meeting on their Twitter accounts were forced to remove the posts."

Well...

  • No one, to my knowledge, has the names or actual tweets from the athletes mentioned by Bleacher Report. They are mentioned in the original story as "reports" and aren't referenced in the rest of the work. And since they are conveniently deleted there is no way to prove them wrong unless I was RSSing a bunch of Pitt athletes.
  • The Bleacher Report writer gets his facts mixed up before he gets out of the third paragraph.  He says as part of his teaser:
    Delaney, who repeatedly referred to conference expansion talks as a "back-burner" issue, was asked by the COP/C to provide recommendations for consideration over the next 12 to 18 months. Now, if the plethora of rumors swirling around the Internet are true, Delaney's "back-burner" issue is about to be brought to the forefront in a big, big way.
    Yet the actual report about Big Ten expansion expressly stated the opposite of this just a couple of months ago:
    "A back-burner issue," he has called it.

    Not anymore. According to a league official, the Big Ten will release a statement Tuesday saying the matter has moved to the front burner. 
  • And something else is strange about the structure.  Our buddy Kristofer Green introduces these new deleted and unverifiable tweets as the spark behind a rumor, but then halfway down the story attempts to re-report actual news that supersedes  any rumors:
    This weekend, many outlets are reporting that Pittsburgh has indeed decided to accept the Big Ten's invitation and will formally announce the move to the Big Ten on Thursday, Feb. 4, a coincidental (or not) day after National Signing Day.
    What outlets? If there are many, than why are you naming none?  And why bury the lead?
  • The rest of  Kristofer's archive consists almost entirely of power rankings, previews, and posts detailing something called The Bleacher Creature College Football Poll.  He doesn't appear very widely read and there is nothing that suggests he's ever done any original reporting or established himself as the kind of guy who has "outlets" behind closed doors.

The only other mildly interesting "report" from "outlets" shows up on a free Scout board, and uh, it's not exactly convincing:

Well, enough with the preamble. I have heard from what I deem to be a reliable source that the Pitt to big ten rumors have much more substance than many on this board understand. Gene Parmesan one of my favorite posters in particular believes that Pitt is not even thought of. Well, Just minutes ago I received a message stating "Pitt to Big Ten Announcement this Friday". I trust this source and believe in his contacts. I also have been wrong on some things before and was reluctant to post this. But I am willing to go out on a limb here. I don't necessarily believe the announcement will come this friday, but I do have enough voices telling me this is likely going to happen.

[...]

I may be eating a lot of crow with egg stuck to my face for this might just be the offspring of talking heads, but too many people I trust have told me.

    The other headlines I'm getting as of Sunday night: Rumor: Pittsburgh to Join Big Ten, Pittsburgh to Big Ten Rumors Heating Up,  If It's on the Internet, It's True, and Pitt To The Big Ten? So Says...Someone...I Think....
So in summary: a guy who works for the Kansas City Star posted an unlinked quote on a newspaper "blog" referencing a Bleacher Report article from a guy who has never broken a single bit of news in his life.  That quote was then rampantly and recklessly spread on twitter and other message boards, with more conflicting facts but no verifiable sources.  And here we are, the same place we were two days ago.

0 recs  |  Comment 177 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

More from Black Shoe Diaries

Wishes And Ponies And Stuff

Mar 2009 by Run Up The Score - 330 comments

The SEC Speed Truth

Jun 2008 by BSD - 38 comments

Comments

Display:

I don't know

All I know is that I’d be surprised if the guy put a date out there, so soon, that if he’s wrong completely ruins his credibility. Perhaps he doesn’t care, or perhaps he’s too dumb to realize he’ll look like an idiot if he’s wrong, but I’m going to sit here waiting for Feb. 4 regardless.

God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...

by fugimaster24 on Feb 1, 2010 8:37 AM EST reply actions  

It's also curious

why a so-called OSU blogger was so closely following Pitt tweets.

I know about your diabolical plan.

by Kevin HD on Feb 1, 2010 8:45 AM EST reply actions  

Also, LOL from Pitt Blather comments

This is also not news:

As a bleacherreport.com writer I can tell you firsthand that you can not consider it a reliable source. Its a place for fans to speculate with little regard for standard journalistic practices.

I love that site and there are some great columnists there, but no great journalists.

I know about your diabolical plan.

by Kevin HD on Feb 1, 2010 8:49 AM EST reply actions  

From the PItt AD's twitter feed
Now hear this: rumors on Internet message boards should be read for amusement purposes only, and not consumed as responsible journalism.

I know about your diabolical plan.

by Kevin HD on Feb 1, 2010 8:51 AM EST reply actions  

I think this story is BS, too...

…but that is an odd non-denial.

394–129–3

by mushdamma on Feb 1, 2010 9:17 AM EST up reply actions  

OH

I don’t know…for sure, I do know that sPITT “people” love to mess with us at all times, even though most of US don’t give a crap about them…just may be a BS story as you said, period. You know, for the glory, for the rumors…they fuel the fires.

by DerryPharmer on Feb 1, 2010 9:24 AM EST up reply actions  

What's strange

is the two idiots who started this one are OSU bloggers.

I know about your diabolical plan.

by Kevin HD on Feb 1, 2010 9:26 AM EST up reply actions  

Nobody has denied my Texas/OU/Nebraska report either...

And the two “reports”, such as they are, don’t appear to be much different.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 10:07 AM EST up reply actions  

You could read that statement pretty cryptically

And say that there’s still a chance we hear something Thursday

God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...

by fugimaster24 on Feb 1, 2010 11:12 AM EST up reply actions  

Not a bad thing

This wouldn’t be bad for us. It would give us a nature in-state rival we have history with and connect us to the rest of the conference.

For the big 10, it gives them a pretty decent basketball program to add to an already impressive list of basketball schools.

It doesn’t give the Big Ten a new media market (ala Rutgers, Syrcuase).

I for one would be happy to play Pitt the last game of every year, like back in the day (except don’t make it during the Thanksgiving holiday so the students will actually come).

Big Ten Titles for everyone.

by QBsneak12 on Feb 1, 2010 8:53 AM EST reply actions  

No please make it the thanksgiving holiday

So transplants like myself will go.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 11:22 AM EST up reply actions  

Agreed about having the in-state rival, but

would this hurt PSU’s recruiting at all? I mean, if Pitt can add “we are in the Big Ten, too” to whatever else they offer (pro-style offense, facilities…ok, ok, I guess I really don’t know what else they offer, but some kids are into it, whatever it is), it would seem to make Pitt a bigger player in terms of recruiting, at least in Western PA.

by Common Man on Feb 1, 2010 12:44 PM EST up reply actions  

Eh

It won’t help them recruit against us as long as we stomp their guts in every year.

Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.

by 06Lion on Feb 1, 2010 12:49 PM EST up reply actions  

it might help them a bit

but I dunno if it would really hurt PSU all that much. Maybe in the beginning, but then in a few years, unless Pitt can become and remain competitive on a yearly basis, it would be more like Michigan with UofM and MSU, with MSU (Pitt) just getting UofM’s (PSU’s) leftovers.

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 1, 2010 1:02 PM EST up reply actions  

Nah...

It makes sense if you’re trying to make a super conference and go for 14 and even 16 teams. Pitt fits the mold of a Big 10 school athletically and academically. However, if the stated goal is more eyeballs for the BTN, they’re decidely low on the list. But if you plan on adding other schools, it certainly doesn’t hurt to add Pitt and set the Big East back even further as a football conference.

God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...

by fugimaster24 on Feb 1, 2010 11:14 AM EST up reply actions  

But are we really competing with the Big East? I mean they are routinely playing on Thr and Fri nights just to get on TV.

I know about your diabolical plan.

by Kevin HD on Feb 1, 2010 11:19 AM EST up reply actions  

I like the move from a "big picture" stance

Pitt adds some national name recognition, a solid academia, and gives the big ten another quality conference team. It fits on every level except for the whole “grow the Big Ten network” deal. I think we have seen the big ten network grow on its own in the past three years, and will continue to grow if the product continues to improve.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 11:24 AM EST up reply actions  

You have to has the balance sheets to know this, but I doubt, even with a successful bball team, that Pitt raises the average revenue of the conference.

I know about your diabolical plan.

by Kevin HD on Feb 1, 2010 11:37 AM EST up reply actions  

I think that is a correct assumption Kevin

But how does adding any team raise your average revenue? Penn State does not share its ticket income, parking revenue, or merchandise sales with the Big Ten. So why would we expect Texas, Mizzou, or Pitt to do the same? I also do not think any team we add will up shared revenue. Let’s face it you make money from the Bowl Games, and TV. The current TV contracts will not be renegotiated until they are up in a few years. They will be in a better bargaining position, but not necessarily able to command a price. I think the best way for the Big Ten to up revenue is to add a legit school that can help sell the normal week to week product, while also keeping costs to a minimum. Pitt helps add a local team, who is currently strong in football and basketball, who can help bring a conference championship (see $$$), while also keeping costs down, and exciting fan interests.

I know we like to joke about Pitts stadium, but really when you play some of the Big East teams what do you expect? Outside of Rutgers, Syracuse, and WVU the travel is horrendous for most visiting fans, then when you look at the names of Rutgers, and Syracuse you can see they do not attract interests based on name alone. I would pose that Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State could sell out all of those games on visitor travel alone.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 12:26 PM EST up reply actions  

Here is the thing about any Big East team

You have to assume that by joining the Big Ten their attendance would increase. Pitt has played series with Michigan State and Iowa the last few years, and I can tell you, they weren’t the talk of the town. Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, would all be big games. Penn State would be protected, but OSU and Michigan would not, and they would be on the oppisite side of the ledger along with Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnestoa and Indiana.

Does that really make Heinz Field a week to week sell out? I doubt it.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 12:30 PM EST up reply actions  

I still think that they would increase exponentially by joining the big ten

I also think that they would play one team from the other side every single year, then have a two year rotation with the other side. With that said you make the leagues like this with the teams automatic play in italics

Division A
PSU (MSU)
OSU (Michigan)
Pitt (Iowa)
Indiana (Minnesota)
Illinois (NW)
Purdue (Wisconsin)

Division B
Michigan
MSU
Northwestern
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Iowa

This configuration could take a little adjustment but this is basically the SEC formula. It works for them, why not us?

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 1:28 PM EST up reply actions  

Michigan and Ohio State will not be split.

You can’t have them play the last week of the season, then again in the champioship game, that would be a total joke and make us look like idiots. There would be games where they would play the last wek of the season, and because they are in diffrent divisions, they would know they were playing again in a week.

They either have to move that game to October (fine by me) or stay on the same side of the ledger.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 1:31 PM EST up reply actions  

You dont have to have the game at the end of the year

Florida plays LSU every single year, and then they play in the conference championship at the end of the season, you rearrange the schedule and let things play out that way.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 2:17 PM EST up reply actions  

Right

but we’re talking about Florida, LSU and the SEC. Which are bastions of thought, equity and reason when comapred to Michigan and Ohio State.

They will never agree to any manner of expansion that compromises that tool measuring contest of theirs, and it’s going to take a minimum of eight (and probably nine) votes to expand. Rest assured that they’ll find the necessary sycophant[s] somewhere to block expansion if their needs aren’t met.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 2:21 PM EST up reply actions  

I don't see where it takes away from the game. I really do not

If anything it adds another level to it. You could see them play it twice a year instead of once.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 2:25 PM EST up reply actions  

You just play it at the end of October.

The SEC schedules their east-west games throughout the season. So Michigan and Ohio State move it back two to three weeks, no big deal.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 2:26 PM EST up reply actions  

Of course you don't see it that way.

You’re normal. We’re talking about Ohio State and Michigan fans here. They won’t see any problem playing two weeks in a row. In fact they’ll think it’s the coolest thing in the world. That’s the problem.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 2:26 PM EST up reply actions  

I’ve actually found most OSU fans kind of hate the idea of having to play twice. Part of that might be because they never lose the first one.

I know about your diabolical plan.

by Kevin HD on Feb 1, 2010 2:27 PM EST up reply actions  

You might be right

But there again, if the two teams have earned the conference championship I do not see anything wrong with them playing two weeks in a row. If it has national championship implications you could be talking HUGE exposure on the scale of ’06

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 2:29 PM EST up reply actions  

I have a huge problem with it.

Primarily because it allows those two schools to dictate to the balance of the confrence something that is objectively stupid to protect their own selfish interests.

It may not be the worst thing in the world, but it’s a dumb plan, that no right thinking confrence would adopt. The only reason it would even be discussed is because it’s Ohio State and Michigan.

I’d rather Penn State leave the Big Ten than play in a league that allowed this to happen.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 2:31 PM EST up reply actions  

What allows them to schedule a game at the begging of the year?

Then have them play out the season and see who makes the conference championship? IF they earn it they are in? It seems to me Jesse you are being overly stubborn in your objection to allowing Michigan and OSU to split up.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 2:33 PM EST up reply actions  

numerous spelling failures abound in this post sorry

What? Allow them to schedule a game at the beginning of the year?

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 2:34 PM EST up reply actions  

If they'll play in September,

or even October, I don’t have a problem with it. I’ve said as much on several occasions. What I think is preposterous is allowing them to play the last week of the season while being in seperate divisions.

In my mind they have to pick one or the other. Frankly, the compromise is allowing them to pick, rather than objectively forcing the proper decision on them.

They can either be in opposite divisions and play the first week of October, or they can be in the same division and play at the end of the year. Either is fine with me, but they can’t have their cake and eat it too. It’s not fair to everybody else.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 2:37 PM EST up reply actions  

How is not fair in any way?

If they play at the beginning or play at the end, they could still meet for the second time. The game counts the same in the standings. (assuming you have them in oppo divisions of course)

If you are willing to let them do it the one way, not the other?

Black Shoes. Basic Blues. No Name. All Game.

"Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."

by Roland86 on Feb 1, 2010 5:09 PM EST up reply actions  

Dude

Do you have any idea how lame it would be if they played in back to back weeks? The Big Ten would be the laughingstock of college football. The championship game would be a farse.

Why do you think Florida State and Miami play in September?

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 6:11 PM EST up reply actions  

Further,

look at it this way. Do you think Penn State and Michigan State would be permitted to continue to play the last week of the season if there was a feasible possibility that three times a decade we’d play in back-to-back weeks for the Big Ten Championship, and that one of those times we’d know going in we were playing again in 14 days no matter what?

Of course they’d move the game. They would be stupid not too, and anybody who thinks they wouldn’t is, simply put, wrong.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 6:16 PM EST up reply actions  

Absolutely, if UM and tOSU were in separate divisions, they’d have to move the game to a different time to avoid playing in back to back weeks; it would be silly not to.

That’s why tOSU and UM will have to be in the same division. Because the powers that be aren’t changing when that game is played. And I don’t really see that as unreasonable at all — why should two teams that have played that weekend for decades and have a huge rivalry just abandon that, it makes no sense.

Would it make sense to put PSU and Pitt in different divisions and have them play in October (if Pitt were actually invited)? Of course not.

Any reasonable division puts UM/tOSU in one division and PSU in the other. Ideally, we’d be adding another big power to accompany PSU (like a division with PSU and Notre Dame or PSU and Texas).

by Laaaaazzz on Feb 1, 2010 6:37 PM EST up reply actions  

okay take my list from above and add wisconsin to the A division and shift OSU to B

Does that jingle your bells?

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 7:21 PM EST up reply actions  

it isn't that Pitt wouldn't add anything

it is just that pretty much every other possible school would add as much or more. And if the current model of adding the Big 10 to the cable lineup for the state holds (which may not exactly be the case, but at least regionally it should), then adding a school in another state would bring in at least some more revenue, while adding Pitt adds zero revenue.

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 1, 2010 12:32 PM EST up reply actions  

except for academics

I agree with you, there’s very little tv benefit to adding Pitt.
But in terms of academic reputation and research money, Pitt is in the same group as Texas and Notre Dame. Pitt’s well ahead of Rutgers, Syracuse, and Mizzou on research money and even slightly ahead of Texas. I haven’t heard Notre Dame’s research budget, since they’re a private school.

I’m not saying it’s enough to overlook the TV problem, but thinking like a University President, you have to give Pitt a look.

by SlingStone on Feb 1, 2010 1:52 PM EST up reply actions  

Pitt doesn't make the rest of the Big Ten teams more money by being a part of the conference.

That’s all I’m saying. They are a decent fit, have history with PSU, ect…but when you add in the value they bring to the TV contract and bowl revenue, which is split evenly, and then divide that number by 12 instead of 11, I suspect it is less than the current ration among the 11 teams. Bottom line. Also: the value of a CCG has been greatly exaggerated in every single report I’ve ever read. In the whole pie, that game is peanuts.

Maybe basketball offsets this. I doubt it, but I know nothing about how bball revenue is shared so I can’t say it doesn’t.

I know about your diabolical plan.

by Kevin HD on Feb 1, 2010 12:43 PM EST up reply actions  

What team outside of Jesse's Texas theory does?

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 1:05 PM EST up reply actions  

Missou does not...Rutgers forget it...Syracuse blah...

Pitt works on every level except for the Big Ten Network. I think expansion on any level is going to cut into revenue. But if you can create a league that as a whole is more competitive and exciting then ratings will go up nationally. That is where the true money is at, not just “expanding your footprint” that does not guarantee ratings, or in turn money.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 1:08 PM EST up reply actions  

why is Syracuse "blah"

winning percentage the past:
10 years
Pitt: 60%
Cuse: 39%

20 years
Pitt: 47%
Cuse: 54%

30 years
Pitt: 54%
Cuse: 55%

Yes, Syracuse has been in the crapper the past decade (and mostly the latter half of the decade), and maybe won’t rebound, but it isn’t like Pitt is some powerhouse, and outside of the past decade Cuse is as good, or better, of a program.

Basically it seems like you are saying Pitt is >>>>>> Syracuse based on the past 5 years where Pitt became somewhat respectable while Syracuse slid a bit.

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 1, 2010 1:30 PM EST up reply actions  

no, no this isn't about football winning percentage

I agree that for football they’re close and each has had their high points and lows over the past decades.
But as a research institution, Pitt is way ahead of Syracuse.

At the same time, of course, Syracuse bring new TV access, while Pitt brings nothing.

by SlingStone on Feb 1, 2010 1:58 PM EST up reply actions  

Pitt doesn't bring "nothing"

I don’t think they bring “enough”, but there is a distinct difference there.

Pitt isn’t my first (second, third or fourth) choice for membership in the Big Ten, but Syracuse is far and away my last. I mean first, it’s Syracuse. It’s not New York State, and it’s not the University of New York City.

I think the “brings the New York City market” argument is 50% red herring and 50% pipedream. Take that out of the mix, and there is zero reason to take Syracuse over just about anybody.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 2:05 PM EST up reply actions  

How many big ten fans will travel to syracuse?

How many will travel to Pitt?

I think Pitt fits better not on 5 years, not on % but on overall value. I don’t see where Syracuse gets it done.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 2:21 PM EST up reply actions  

Iowa brought a fair number of people.

Michigan State did not, which is stupid because Michigan State is so much closer.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 2:28 PM EST up reply actions  

Imagine what PSU and OSU would bring?

Once a year they would guarantee a huge sell out.

If they continue the backyard brawl then you have two huge sell outs every two years. Even if the other games are mediocre that is better than many teams in the conference

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 2:30 PM EST up reply actions  

True

The only way adding Pitt works for the Big 10 is if they expand to 14 or 16 teams. I just don’t see that happening and if it does, my money would be on some combination of the Texas, Oklahoma, A & M, Nebraska, Missouri group over the Syracuse, Rutgers, Pitt, Maryland, UConn group.

by VVeRPennState on Feb 1, 2010 12:24 PM EST up reply actions  

Why doesn't it work?

Why does everyone on here automatically assume Pitt won’t work because of the Big Ten network?

The NHL was worried about opening new TV markets while ignoring traditional geography, and fan intereset. Now look where that got them. (I know labor unrests, and tv contract worked in, but wouldn’t they have a better TV deal if people in the new expansion areas actually were excited about the product?)

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 12:29 PM EST up reply actions  

but that was adding teams with no fanbases

I’m pretty sure Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Missouri, New Jersey, or New York (and probably in that order) already have established products with huge fanbases that would be excited about watching their team on TV every week. The Big 10 is already on TV in Pittsburgh, so they wouldn’t open up ANY market.

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 1, 2010 12:34 PM EST up reply actions  

But you assume that those teams want to join the Big Ten.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 1:10 PM EST up reply actions  

and you are assuming that Pitt wants to join the Big Ten

I’d say Rutgers and Syracuse (NJ and NY) would join the Big Ten about as likely as Pitt, and they are about equal academically and athletically, while also bringing in a new market.

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 1, 2010 1:31 PM EST up reply actions  

Pitt would jump at it the moment it was offered.

Twitter: @scrappled
scrappled.com

"When it’s third-and-10, you can take the milk drinkers and I’ll take the whiskey drinkers every time" - Max McGee

by Run Up The Score on Feb 1, 2010 1:52 PM EST up reply actions  

and so would Rutgers, and possibly Syracuse

Texas apparently “applied” for the Big Ten back in the 90s, and didn’t the Missouri president say something along the lines of wanting to join the Big 10?

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 1, 2010 2:00 PM EST up reply actions  

Again, I don't necessarily agree with this.

Penn State (or Texas) joins the Big Ten as a player. A big school, with a top tier football team and alumni base. They enter with gravitas, and a manner of influence.

Pitt joins the league as Purdue. Why bag on a place where your influential and important to become a mid level team? Pitt gains money in the Big Ten, but I think they lose prestige in the long run.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 2:11 PM EST up reply actions  

Jesse I love the texas angle

but i just do not see it happening. I will be proud to eat crow, that would be the best crow eating of my life, but I don’t see it.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 2:31 PM EST up reply actions  

I don't think the Texas angle is likley either.

My point was that it’s easier to make a move when you have a fair amount of confidence that your move will be successful from an athletic and academic standpoint. Penn State had that confidence, Texas would have it.

If Pitt is confident that they can compete across the board in the Big Ten they are deliusional.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 2:41 PM EST up reply actions  

oh, come on Jesse

Even if Pitt would join as “just another Purdue” in the Big Ten, I seem to remember Purdue beating your conference champion this past year. Tell me, which of us has beaten Iowa more recently?

Pitt would be above .500 in men’s & women’s basketball and football. To me, that pretty much ‘competing across the board.’

by SlingStone on Feb 1, 2010 2:47 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah...

Pitt has miles to go from a facilites stand-point to be in the Big Ten. Have you seen where Penn State plays baseball for Christ’s sake? Pitt’s facilites are, in many areas, far behind intramural facilities at Penn State.

A common misconception among Pitt fans is that this doesn’t matter. But it does, a lot. Where does Pitt play soccer, field hockey, volleyball, tennis? Compliance with Title IX, and indeed going well above and beyond “complaince” with Title IX is a big deal in the Big Ten.

Pitt is looking at investing billions in capital improvements over the next 10-15 years if they join the Big Ten. Not because Pitt sucks, but because that is what being competitive in the Big Ten requires. Penn State went through it too.

Pitt certainly has the endowment for it, but are they going to be able to find a five million dollar donor for a tennis facility? Be honest.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 2:56 PM EST up reply actions  

Facilites

Pitt’s brand new olympic sports complex

Sarni Tennis Center.

Medlar Field.

Jeffrey Field

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 3:07 PM EST up reply actions  

Facilities

I think it’s more of a space issue than a money issue. The new olympic sports center will be pretty nice and really maximizes the on-campus space we have to work with, but there’s no room for a soccer field or a substantial tennis facility.

Perhaps Pitt could invest in expanding/improving the public courts and fields in Schenley Park, split the cost with the City.

I’m not saying Pitt is the best choice for the Big Ten, but those extra millions from the Big Ten tv revenue would certainly prime the pump on any infrastructure improvements Pitt would need. The really costly facilities, football and basketball, are already in place.

by SlingStone on Feb 1, 2010 3:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Space/Money/Radioactive Monkeys, it's an issue.

I get what your saying, football and mens and womens basketball are at all an appropriate competitve standard. But “who cares about field hockey” doesn’t really cut it in the Big Ten.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 3:43 PM EST up reply actions  

PS: I went to Pitt, and lived in Oakland

I’m acutely aware of the areas many strengths and limitations.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 3:50 PM EST up reply actions  

And South Florida beat Marquette last year in basketball

(and just beat Pitt this year), and Penn State basketball is about comparable to South Florida basketball, therefore Penn State could be step into the Big East and compete.

Just because an upset happens doesn’t mean the team that pulled off the upset is any good.

Tell me, which one of us has beaten Iowa more recently?

Yawn. Which one of us beat Oregon State more recently? Which one of us lost to Bowling Green State more recently? Which one of us beat Michigan State more recently? And on and on and on. You can’t use one win (by 1 point) over one team as your rallying cry for legitimacy.

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 1, 2010 3:29 PM EST up reply actions  

what if PSU joining is the exception not the rule.

 The circumstance and sucess oif our joining maybe the holy grail It only comes along once in awhile. Look at the acc adds. Did miami and bc do the same as we did for for the bog 10 No….

"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. "
George S Patton

by psu in the w-b on Feb 1, 2010 10:33 PM EST up reply actions  

see slingstones comments about research money

Pitt is above those two.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 2:22 PM EST up reply actions  

The more I think about it...

I think Pitt works for the Big Ten network. Penn State football is popular in Pittsburgh, it is non-existant in basketball. No discussion, no television, no nothing. The only reason the games are on the radio is because it’s the only way you can broadcast the football games.

I could see a cable company that’s required to carry the BTN in Pennsylvania wanting something to televise during basketball season.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 12:39 PM EST up reply actions  

It's not that the Big Ten won't add Syracuse..

It’s that Jim Boeheim and ‘Cuse fans would hate giving up Big East basketball. Go to NunesMagician, read comments about the boring Big Ten and the excitement of playing Georgetown and UConn, and you’ll see what I mena.

by ReadingRambler on Feb 1, 2010 1:10 PM EST up reply actions  

Jim Boeheim might not like it, but Syracuse is not going to stay in the Big East just for the basketball team.

Financially speaking, there really wouldn’t be much of a choice. By joining the Big they would receive over $17 Million more per year in TV revenue alone. And that number is using the current revenue, before a championship game and any new markets are added to the equation. It would be almost irresponsible for a school to turn down that kind of money.

Plus its not like football, there is no shortage of non-conference games. If Syracuse wants to continue to play Georgetown and UConn every year, then they easily could.

by VVeRPennState on Feb 1, 2010 2:19 PM EST up reply actions  

Because with Pitt you get a comparable basketball team with a good football team

and better geographics, and thus more potential to bred a rivalry with OSU, MSU, or Michigan.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 1:11 PM EST up reply actions  

If Pitt basketball and Syracuse baskeball are "comparable", then so are Pitt football and Syracuse football.

The part of the equation that you seem to be missing is that while Pitt makes sense geographically and academically, those are near the bottom of the list in terms of priorities. Things like revenue, TV markets, and prestige are all higher priorities which doesn’t bode well for Pitt.

by VVeRPennState on Feb 1, 2010 2:31 PM EST up reply actions  

what prestige does syracuse have that Army doesn't

or how about Navy? I might be near sighted but Syracuse has not been a huge prestige school since the 60s

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 2:35 PM EST up reply actions  

If your memory on goes back to 2001, then you are correct.

Syracuse was undefeated (11-0-1) in ‘87 and was very successful during the 90’s when compared to Pitt. In fact, in the 90’s SU finished every season higher in the standings than Pitt. Since 1990, SU has finished the season ranked 8 different time, Pitt has done it only 3 times.

by VVeRPennState on Feb 1, 2010 3:00 PM EST up reply actions  

And how has this translated to prestige?

I don’t consider Syracuse to be a prestigous school. I am immersed in football 365. It is part of my paying job. I consider myself a historian of the game as well. Outside of the great backs in the early part of the 20th century Syracuse has lost a step or nine. Not as bad as Army, but almost as bad. Trot out winning percentages, and all of that nationally they have little prestige.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 7:28 PM EST up reply actions  

BTW what the F is prestige and how do you measure it?

It seems like a moving target, and PLEASE DON"T SAY STARS ON EA SPORTS.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 7:29 PM EST up reply actions  

You can't, its largely subjective and changes year to year.

I think there is a somewhat clear upper-tier of teams that have either been continually strong forever, or for at least a really long time. Prestige will always be largely based on the here and now though, I mean a school like ND can handle the downswing and a school like UF or LSU can jump up due to massive recent success.

I would guess, a lot of wins, AA’s, trophy winners, NFL production, iconic figures, etc etc play into it mostly.

I would say the top level would be somewhat like this(in no order):

tOSU, UM, ND, PSU, Texas, UF, USC, OU, Bama, LSU, FSU, Miami, Nebraska

Outside of that, I’d say it gets a little hairy. Schools like UGA, Tenn, etc are on the fringe.

Black Shoes. Basic Blues. No Name. All Game.

"Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."

by Roland86 on Feb 2, 2010 3:48 AM EST up reply actions  

Pitt
Things like revenue, TV markets, and prestige are all higher priorities which doesn’t bode well for Pitt.

I’m not so sure about prestige being a problem, but the money issue is for Pitt. As has already been said many times before on the internet, Pitt is a perfect fit for the Big Ten in basically every way… except they are in Pittsburgh. If Pitt were located where Rutgers was, they’d probably have already been invited to join. But given Pitt’s location in an already covered market and the nuances of how the BTN works, there is just no way for Pitt to generate enough revenue on their own to justify inviting them (at least, not unless they are part of a larger group being invited). It may not make financial sense for Rutgers or Syracuse to be invited either, but at least there’s an argument there due to expanding the “home markets” of the BTN and charging higher rates and having more widespread carriage.

by Laaaaazzz on Feb 1, 2010 5:33 PM EST up reply actions  

nah

It makes sense if you’re trying to make a super conference and go for 14 and even 16 teams. Pitt fits the mold of a Big 10 school athletically and academically. However, if the stated goal is more eyeballs for the BTN, they’re decidely low on the list. But if you plan on adding other schools, it certainly doesn’t hurt to add Pitt and set the Big East back even further as a football conference.

God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...

by fugimaster24 on Feb 1, 2010 11:25 AM EST up reply actions  

The obvious fault in all of this thing for me is

That a university would tell a bunch of student athletes a secret, then expect it to be kept secret. Does that sound like something any university would ever do in the midst of a historic move like this?

In my opinion the student athletes would find out about a conference switch the same way the rest of us would: from an official release by the university. If a coach quietly and secretly pulled his team into a room and told them ahead of time, yeah I could see that. But the university bringing all the student athletes into a big room and formally announcing it to them? I don’t think so.

Also, Pitt sucks.

"We hugged as grown men do. It was a great moment. Then, it was business as usual." -- LJ Sr.

by millzners on Feb 1, 2010 9:02 AM EST reply actions  

I agree,

I would expect if they told all the current players, Wanny (and Jamie, et. al.) would also have to tell his incoming recruits (and families), which further muddies the waters. Unless, as one account had it, the announcement will be on Groundhog Day and not Thursday or Friday as other accounts have written.

If some of you want to rent a good movie, watch “The Waking of Ned Devine”. It’s about trying to keep a secret (in this case a lie). But at every turn, you have to let somebody else in on the secret until, well, every body knows whats going on before it happens.

Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence.
Vince Lombardi

by PaJoe on Feb 1, 2010 9:17 AM EST up reply actions  

yeah, this is how you keep a secret, tell a bunch of kids
Pittsburgh athletic department officials held closed door meetings with all of the University’s student athletes last week about the potential move.

"Football"
Goldie Hawn, Wildcats

by letsgopsu on Feb 1, 2010 9:05 AM EST reply actions  

HUH ? 64

Oh yes, sPITT does suck !!!! and that is no twitter secret.

by DerryPharmer on Feb 1, 2010 9:07 AM EST reply actions  

AND

The obligatory “Yellow Out” is always good for a chuckle or 100…I believe it was taken at one of their homecoming games at “the greatest College FB venue” mankind has ever seen….my better half spits everytime she hears that ad…me, I just think it’s hilarious.

by DerryPharmer on Feb 1, 2010 9:18 AM EST up reply actions  

I saw that BR reference yesterday and cackled like a fool

…and led me to post this yesterday. Everyone is so eager to make a name for themselves but wild-ass guessing is the best they can do. The fact remains that not a single responsible or reputable news outlet, or any of their “insiders”, has said a peep about Pitt going to the Big Ten.

All of this completely ignores the fact that adding Pitt doesn’t really make any sense for the B10, unless it’s part of a three-team addition. Pitt by itself adds next to nothing.

Twitter: @scrappled
scrappled.com

"When it’s third-and-10, you can take the milk drinkers and I’ll take the whiskey drinkers every time" - Max McGee

by Run Up The Score on Feb 1, 2010 9:35 AM EST reply actions  

There is definitely a formula

Write a rumor based on some questionable information that cannot be confirmed or disproven. Then, after editorializing, drop a bomb in the middle like “it’s a done deal according to multiple outlets.” Always use “multiple”, it’s important even though it’s never true.

The sad thing is it works. This guy has been getting 200-500 views per story, and this one is up around 8,000. I liked the internet better before bleacher report existed.

I know about your diabolical plan.

by Kevin HD on Feb 1, 2010 9:46 AM EST up reply actions  

Pitt adding nothing

I keep hearing that, and I have to disagree. Pitt brings a lot to the table in basketball, and their football program should be competitive from day one. Their academics are very good and fit right in line with the Big Ten vision. Plus, just the fact of adding a 12th team that will allow for a Big Ten Championship game with added ticket sales and incredible ratings makes it an attractive deal.

by BSD on Feb 1, 2010 9:48 AM EST up reply actions  

Football Stadium.

What is the general though about them not having an on campus football stadium? Does it not matter since it is the NFL? Because they share the stadium, stadium expansion is highly unlikely and thus unless they raised ticket prices every year, they are maxed out with revenue.

Big Ten Titles for everyone.

by QBsneak12 on Feb 1, 2010 9:50 AM EST up reply actions  

So what?

Minnesota played in the Vikings stadium for decades.

by BSD on Feb 1, 2010 9:51 AM EST up reply actions  

The stadium holds 65,000 people

And while I can’t be certain, I don’t think they “share” it in the confiscatory way the University of Minnesota shared it with the Vikings.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 10:05 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

+1

For confiscatory.

"We just forgot our pants. Nothing against the team or anything like that." -- take a guess

by jtothep on Feb 1, 2010 10:29 AM EST up reply actions  

The stadium is own by the city

Officially owned by the “Sports & Exhibition Authority of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County”
This group also own PNC park, the mellon arena and eventually the new Penguins arena. It makes it easier to coordinate parking and vendors and such.

It’s my understanding that both the University and the Steelers organization signed 25 year leases to use Heinz Field when it opened for the 2001 season. I have no idea what the conditions for the lease were, but Pitt doesn’t have the funds or space to build their own stadium in Oakland, as many occasionally hope.

by SlingStone on Feb 1, 2010 2:13 PM EST up reply actions  

Right

But Minnesota had their own building for 75 years before Lou Holtz decided it was a good idea to blow up their own stadium and move into the Metrodome (I understand they remember him fondly for that decision).

Heinz Field was built specifically with the University of Pittsburgh in mind, the city insisted on that. The Metrodome was not. Pitt’s not going anywhere, but they also aren’t getting bent over a barrel every year they stay there, Minnesota was.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 2:24 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm talking $$$'s

Pitt doesn’t bring a large fanbase, doesn’t open up any new media markets, and doesn’t add any interest from outside a very, very small radius around Allegheny County. They have a great basketball program and a decent football program, which is nice for them. But this decision isn’t going to be made on those factors.

That’s why I can see them being part of a three-school addition, but not by themselves. I could envision a scenario where the Big Ten added Pitt, Rutgers, and Missouri, or Pitt, Syracuse, and Nebraska — some combination like that. But not Pitt by themselves. It’s silly.

Twitter: @scrappled
scrappled.com

"When it’s third-and-10, you can take the milk drinkers and I’ll take the whiskey drinkers every time" - Max McGee

by Run Up The Score on Feb 1, 2010 10:00 AM EST up reply actions  

I'll always rec Gene Parmesan.

Twitter: @scrappled
scrappled.com

"When it’s third-and-10, you can take the milk drinkers and I’ll take the whiskey drinkers every time" - Max McGee

by Run Up The Score on Feb 1, 2010 10:01 AM EST up reply actions  

Gene Parmesan?

That guys a hack. It’s time to lawyer up with Bob Loblaw.

by Frank O'Brien on Feb 1, 2010 12:04 PM EST up reply actions  

OH GENE! YOU GOT ME AGAIN!

Before you respond, let me remind you: Brian Cook called me smug, which makes me the Obama of smugness. I'm basically Smugbama.

by Patrick Vint on Feb 1, 2010 10:08 AM EST up reply actions  

Good hus

Tried to get there first, but you gots wheels.

"We just forgot our pants. Nothing against the team or anything like that." -- take a guess

by jtothep on Feb 1, 2010 10:29 AM EST up reply actions  

If it helps...

My previous “report” on Big Ten expansion was based upon telepathic communication with several dead University Presidents at the Universities of Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska. Can I be a full-fledged internet rumor now? Or so I still have to stay at “message board Crackpot”?

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 10:03 AM EST reply actions  

you have to use the words

“outlet” and “multiple”.

I know about your diabolical plan.

by Kevin HD on Feb 1, 2010 10:07 AM EST up reply actions  

also need to say that it is a done deal

and post an arbitrary day the announcement will be made (but unlike this fool, put it reasonably far into the future that the rumor mill has time to spin up). Also, randomly make edits to your original article adding or removing facts as you see fit (especially to push back to the so called announcement date.

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 1, 2010 11:05 AM EST up reply actions  

Wasn't the Delaney/big11 line from the beginning that

the Big Ten wouldn’t officially contact any schools until next year, and would only do so after getting permission from their conferences?

Does no one believe that or did this guy forget?

I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.

by spakajewia on Feb 1, 2010 10:10 AM EST reply actions  

Can't it be both?

But jokes aside, it’s going to be really difficult to keep something like this under wraps once the invites are extended.

Twitter: @scrappled
scrappled.com

"When it’s third-and-10, you can take the milk drinkers and I’ll take the whiskey drinkers every time" - Max McGee

by Run Up The Score on Feb 1, 2010 10:13 AM EST up reply actions  

AND

It’s not going to be an overnight sensation where Tuesday we know nothing and Wednesday it’s a done deal. I’m guessing this is going to be a long build up due to the enormous amount of money and the many many people invovled in the process. I don’t think Twitter is going to be the medium that breaks the story either.

"We hugged as grown men do. It was a great moment. Then, it was business as usual." -- LJ Sr.

by millzners on Feb 1, 2010 10:45 AM EST up reply actions  

There a hundred reasons why Pitt doesn't make sense

But I’d say that most, if not all, are based on one premise which is assumed but not necessarily true. The presumption is that whomever joins the league necessarily comes in as an equal financial partner. Penn State would have had the muscle to insist on it, it’s been a stumbling block with Notre Dame.

“Multiple outlets” have informed me that the cable television market is tough, and the just because the Big Ten is on basic cable now, doesn’t mean it will be in the future. Expanding the league, and improving the product especially during basketball season where Penn State adds nothing certainly couldn’t hurt.

Who is to say that they aren’t simeltaneously negotiating with Syracuse and Piit trying to cut the most profitable deal possible for the 11 other teams? Remember, they can have Rutgers or probably Missouri in a heartbeat. Maybe one of those two schools is willing to swallow their pride and take less that the other schools, while at the same time doubling their drop?

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 10:28 AM EST reply actions  

Maybe one of those two schools is willing to swallow their pride and take less that the other schools, while at the same time doubling their drop?

This is the only way it makes sense IMO to add anyone except Notre Dame, Nebraska or Texas. All three of those teams are as likely to join as any of the others.

I know about your diabolical plan.

by Kevin HD on Feb 1, 2010 10:33 AM EST up reply actions  

I can't believe

You’re not RSSing a bunch of pitt athletes.

"We just forgot our pants. Nothing against the team or anything like that." -- take a guess

by jtothep on Feb 1, 2010 10:28 AM EST reply actions  

The more you think about it, the less sense this story makes...

According to this guy, the Pitt executives a) want to poll every Pitt athlete before making their decision—this may or may not be something that Pitt executives would even do, but if they did it, they never b) poll the student athletes without making public the fact that they’re entertaining an offer from the big11.

Hey, we don’t want anyone to know that we’re considering joining the big11, so we’re just going to share the secret with a few hundred 18-22 year-olds and hope they keep their mouths shut. They’re cool like that.

Pitt very well end up joining the big11, but we’ve got a long time to wait until we learn that.

I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.

by spakajewia on Feb 1, 2010 10:36 AM EST reply actions  

Oh, and just to be cynical and put this out there

I’m sure Pitt would have nothing to gain by floating a rumor that they are joining the Big Ten the day after signing day. Nothing. Nothing at all.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 10:47 AM EST reply actions  

Ha! I like it.

Twitter: @scrappled
scrappled.com

"When it’s third-and-10, you can take the milk drinkers and I’ll take the whiskey drinkers every time" - Max McGee

by Run Up The Score on Feb 1, 2010 11:06 AM EST up reply actions  

yeah, that's the first thing that popped in my mind

since it shouldn’t really hurt their current commits, but could bring in a few guys who are on the edge.

It is kinda funny, since just yesterday I was thinking about the effect of the internet rumor, and if there was an “anonymous” source that cited that teams like say Texas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska were a “done deal” to join the Big 10, with an official announcement coming on the very vague day of “coming soon”.

You figure if you make it a big enough rumor, that eventually credible places will start reporting it, and even though it is still just a rumor, now it is a “credible” rumor. Then it gets big enough that the universities and conferences can’t help but think and/or comment about it, especially when various reporters start asking questions about it. And if you get enough people saying how much sense it would make for such a move to happen, then the universities would certainly look like fools if they rejected such an offer, so they might be compelled to accept just because of that, etc.

I almost wonder if this is how the Brian Kelly to Notre Dame thing happened. Was he really up there as their choice before all the “well Brian Kelly makes the most sense to go to Notre Dame” internet rumors started? Maybe, or maybe that’s the catalyst that got his hiring started in the first place.

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 1, 2010 11:12 AM EST up reply actions  

Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.

My $0.02: This is wild internet speculation, so we’re all just tossing around hypotheticals, but I like this idea. In my mind, it makes sense geographically, academically, and athletically. The only place where it doesn’t completely add up is financially. Pittsburgh is a smaller market that is already tuned into the B10 because Pitt is usually done with football for the week by Friday night. However, I don’t think this makes terrible sense financially. Pitt basketball is big news in this part of the state and would certainly increase our BBall viewership. Plus, as Mike said above, a B10 championship should be the end goal, with academics being second, and financial sense being later on the list. Again, that SHOULD be the priority, but I"m not an idiot. That being said, I don’t think the financial arguments against the addition make any more sense than the arguments for addition.

"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"

by PSUJunny05 on Feb 1, 2010 11:39 AM EST reply actions  

Financials make the most sense

why even bother doing a move that could very possibly lose money for the current conference members, even after the Big 10 Championship game is added in. Remember, everything would be split 12 ways, so you want to bring someone in who will at least be reasonably close to the current financial status of teams.

Pitt brings no more TV viewership contracts, and not really any football revenue. They bring basketball revenue, but that’s not much compared to football revenue.

I also don’t know if we would get another bowl tie in with Pitt, so that’s even more money down the drain (Pitt seems to go to a bowl game only about half of the time).

I’m not saying Pitt would be a terrible decision, but they’re sorta “last” on the viable teams list. I’d rather have Rutgers or Syracuse than Pitt, because they bring basically the same thing (though Rutgers bball sucks), while opening up the big ten footprint and media exposure.

As I see it, in no particular order, the “viable” candidates (not meaning they’d want to join, but that I could see the Big 10 wanting them to join) are:
Notre Dame
Missouri
Nebraska
Texas
Pitt
Rutgers
Syracuse
and maybe even some schools like Maryland, Oklahoma, and Texas A&M, though those last 2 I think wouldn’t make the cut for a 1 team addition.

I just don’t see Pitt bringing more to the table than any of those other schools on any level.

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 1, 2010 12:26 PM EST up reply actions  

why even bother doing a move that could very possibly lose money for the current conference members, even after the Big 10 Championship game is added in. Remember, everything would be split 12 ways, so you want to bring someone in who will at least be reasonably close to the current financial status of teams.

This. I think the point that people are missing is that Big Ten expansion isn’t a done deal and the conference will have no problem walking away from the idea if it doesn’t benefit the current members of the conference. The conference isn’t going to expand just for the sake of it — and surely isn’t going to expand if the move will end up costing the league money (by divvying up the pot an extra way without increasing revenues to compensate).

by Laaaaazzz on Feb 1, 2010 5:28 PM EST up reply actions  

BTW is there an actual Pitt SB nation site?

And if not why don’t we start one. We could offer some really great coverage from a PSU slant. I think a Colbert style reporting would be awesome.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 12:34 PM EST reply actions  

this is an awesome idea.

I know about your diabolical plan.

by Kevin HD on Feb 1, 2010 12:36 PM EST up reply actions  

I'll write it.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 12:40 PM EST up reply actions  

actually changed my mind

the yellow out should be the icon

but you should write it as JESSE! and his avatar should be the suck it dog

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 1, 2010 12:43 PM EST up reply actions  

why don't we call it the Yellow Pitt?

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 1:14 PM EST up reply actions  

this is a beautifuk thing or you could call i that yellow stain

"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. "
George S Patton

by psu in the w-b on Feb 1, 2010 10:38 PM EST up reply actions  

I've already named it...

It’s called “The Pitt”.

Or in the alternative, maybe it can be a “Rivalry, Esq.” for Penn State and Pitt fans.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 12:43 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm not working with those people.

Random historical note for the day: Robert E. Lee never called the Union the enemy. He called them “those people”.

by ReadingRambler on Feb 1, 2010 1:12 PM EST up reply actions  

Wait a minute.

Are you saying that you have reservations about writing for my non-existant Pitt Blog? I seem to recall you pretty forcefully declining overtures to write for another Penn State blog. But it looks to me like there is some room for some arm twisting there.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 1:33 PM EST up reply actions  

I dunno, jesse.

Writing as a fake Pitt fan would kinda ruin my position that Pitt is irrelevant and useless.

by ReadingRambler on Feb 1, 2010 1:38 PM EST up reply actions  

Well

I don’t think I’d be comfortable dictating content to you from an editorial prospective, you could write as whatever kind of fan you like.

You could be like the RUTS, to my Mike.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 1:44 PM EST up reply actions  

I'd be honored

To write for your Nonexistant Pitt Blog.

"We just forgot our pants. Nothing against the team or anything like that." -- take a guess

by jtothep on Feb 1, 2010 3:28 PM EST up reply actions  

Provided it remains non-existant I'm sure.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 3:44 PM EST up reply actions  

I'm writing for it right now in my head

My last post was a doozy.

"We just forgot our pants. Nothing against the team or anything like that." -- take a guess

by jtothep on Feb 1, 2010 4:08 PM EST up reply actions  

good one

lincoln never had the seats removed from congress for the seceded states

"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. "
George S Patton

by psu in the w-b on Feb 1, 2010 10:39 PM EST up reply actions  

How about...

“It’s Not a Rivalry, Esquire”

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 1:41 PM EST up reply actions  

what we really need

Is to come up with the name first. The rest of it will kind of write itself, but the name is the real cornerstone. Some kind of pun would be ideal, a really obvious one b/c we know Pitt fans aren’t known for their profound intellect.

"We hugged as grown men do. It was a great moment. Then, it was business as usual." -- LJ Sr.

by millzners on Feb 1, 2010 12:44 PM EST up reply actions  

you will be my here

"Football"
Goldie Hawn, Wildcats

by letsgopsu on Feb 1, 2010 12:45 PM EST up reply actions  

"hero"

"Football"
Goldie Hawn, Wildcats

by letsgopsu on Feb 1, 2010 12:45 PM EST up reply actions  

I think this idea could take wings

How about “Glory Days” with a nice shot of a Pitt PSU score board from back in the day.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 1:13 PM EST up reply actions  

I'd be real up front with them about who I am, and what I'd do.

I’d give them a fair blog. I’ve called out Penn State fans for being dumb towards Pitt before, I’d do it again.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 1:35 PM EST up reply actions  

the biggest drawback

would be the inevitable “every thread degenerates into pages of 12-0 and 48-14 posts”

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 1, 2010 1:38 PM EST up reply actions  

I think I'd write a rule about that at the outset.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 1, 2010 1:41 PM EST up reply actions  

I want in on this at the intellectual property level.

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 1, 2010 2:24 PM EST up reply actions  

That's not a drawback.

I would post “JOEPA ONLY LOST TO SPITT 6 TIMES” forever.

by ReadingRambler on Feb 1, 2010 1:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Maybe we should all head over to Bleacher Report and start commenting on the article.

I tried it and it sucked. All I got was my rug micturated upon.

"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"

by PSUJunny05 on Feb 1, 2010 12:55 PM EST up reply actions  

CONSPIRACY

I get an error when i try to open the page The pitt ad got to them too!!!!!!

"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. "
George S Patton

by psu in the w-b on Feb 1, 2010 10:42 PM EST up reply actions  

These are just rumors right now

but I hope it happens, with the possible exception of Notre Dame, Pitt is by far the best fit for the B11, Wanny even has them built more like a Big 10 team than some Big 10 teams are right now. Also, the Big 10 network isn’t on expanded basic cable in the Pittsburgh area, so in fact adding Pitt would likely increase viewership in the Pittsburgh area.

by Joe 96alum on Feb 1, 2010 1:07 PM EST reply actions  

UPDATE

Our friend Mike DeArmond has updated his post, the one that started this whole mess, and deleted the part about BR being a “credible source.”

Little victories.

I know about your diabolical plan.

by Kevin HD on Feb 1, 2010 3:01 PM EST reply actions  

And he's getting suitably roasted in the comments, too.

All it took was for anybody to search Google for roughly 5-10 minutes, figure out that the only people perpetrating this garbage were (1) message board posters, (2) blogs without sources, and (3) some suckhole in Milwaukee. None of them had anything credible. None. And they still don’t.

Twitter: @scrappled
scrappled.com

"When it’s third-and-10, you can take the milk drinkers and I’ll take the whiskey drinkers every time" - Max McGee

by Run Up The Score on Feb 1, 2010 3:34 PM EST up reply actions  

Empty Seats

To be fair, at the top of the page next to the picture of Heinz Field empty seats, why don’t you post a picture of the empty seats at the Bryce Jordan Center during a PSU men’s basketball game? Glass houses folks.

by EmptyBryceJordanCenter on Feb 2, 2010 11:30 AM EST reply actions  

Of course

You don’t find a lot of Penn State fans talking shit about how our basketball team is superior to Pitt’s, or anybody elses for that fact. Why would we, when all of the obective evidence points to a contrary conclusion.

In the alternative, many Pitt fans take the position that there football program is every bit as good as Penn State’s. It ain’t, and photo only provides a semblance of visual evidence.

Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.

by jesse. on Feb 2, 2010 11:53 AM EST up reply actions   1 recs

Pitt Football

I tried it and it sucked…All I saw was empty yellow seats

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 2, 2010 1:17 PM EST up reply actions  

I love when pitt fans sign up and post a trolling comment

I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.

BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.

by carolinaeasy on Feb 2, 2010 1:17 PM EST up reply actions  

that is an absolutely PHENOMENAL idea

I’ve been looking for an analogical comparison to Pitt football, and I think you hit the nail on the head with “Penn State basketball”. Kudos to you.

Come to Penn State: where our basketball team is as popular as Pitt’s football team!

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 2, 2010 1:19 PM EST up reply actions  

That's probably a par for the course shot

minus the “Nittany Nation” student section right behind the desk on the right side

by dawsonPSU10 on Feb 2, 2010 2:09 PM EST up reply actions  

who is playing in that game?

I know about your diabolical plan.

by Kevin HD on Feb 2, 2010 2:26 PM EST up reply actions  

lol, so I actually went back to find the picture

and went through the flickr account, and it is apparently the Harlem Globetrotters vs I’m not sure (it doesn’t look like the Washington Generals…their uniforms are green, aren’t they? This team almost looks like Minnesota)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8402464@N07/743513843/in/photostream/

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 2, 2010 3:19 PM EST up reply actions  

looks like their name is the "Nationals"

which is apparently one of the other names for the Generals used from 1995-2006

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 2, 2010 3:24 PM EST up reply actions  

Actually

I think we have more fans at our basketball game.

by BSD on Feb 2, 2010 2:37 PM EST up reply actions  

that one isn't too bad

most of the pictures I found were either of a packed arena, or too focused on an up close subject (player, student section members like this) and you couldn’t really see the stands behind them very well.

By the way, I like your efforts to help show that Pitt’s football team is as popular as Penn State’s basketball team ;-)

by The JuggerNitt on Feb 2, 2010 6:47 PM EST up reply actions  

No problem.

no point in an internet pissing match.

beside, there’s nothing more tame than a lion whose ego has been fed.

by SlingStone on Feb 2, 2010 7:01 PM EST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the Penn State Nittany Lions.
Start posting about the Nittany Lions »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Joepa_rival_small
Here Come The Expendables!
Jennings_small
Tailgate Thursday.
Large_moore_small
An open letter to the 2010 Penn State football team
Paterno_head_small
Sooo Ready for Opening Day

Recent FanPosts

At_the_foot_of_a_legend_small
What is the best football montage ever?
Donkey_small
Open thread Part 3... just because
1018081638_small
9/2 Open Thread Part II
1018081638_small
This Is Your Open Thread For Football, 9/2
Avatar2_small
Requesting Statistical Assistance
Small
Battle for the Felt Tipped Hat
Large_moore_small
New season of Big Ten's Greatest Games
Drj_small
Why Wisconsin Might Not Be Stuck in the East

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SPONSORS

SBNation.com Recent Stories

Virginia Tech quarterback Tyrod Taylor celebrates with the crowd in the final moments of the fourth quarter of an NCAA football game against Tennessee Sunday, Dec. 13, 2009 in Atlanta.  (AP Photo/John Bazemore)

Week 1 College Football Buffet: Previewing Every Game So You Know Which To Consume

Utah kicker Joe Phillips (39) kicks the winning field goal during overtime of an NCAA college football game against Pittsburgh on Thursday, Sept. 2, 2010 in Salt Lake City. Utah upset No. 15 Pittsburgh 27-24. (AP Photo/Steve C. Wilson)

Utah Upsets No. 15 Pittsburgh In Opening Night Overtime Thriller, 27-24

HONOLULU - SEPTEMBER 2:  Ronald Johnson #83 of the University of Southern California Trojans runs in for a touchdown against Corey Nielsen #8 of the University of Hawaii Warriors during first half action at Aloha Stadium September 2 2010 in Honolulu Hawaii. (Photo by Kent Nishimura/Getty Images) +2 updates

Lane Kiffin Is Victorious In Debut, No. 14 USC Wins In A Shootout At Hawaii, 49-36

More from SBNation.com >


Managers

Lioneye_edited_small BSD

Editors

1018081638_small fugimaster24

Authors

At_the_foot_of_a_legend_small carolinaeasy

Psu_logo_small IcersGuy

Small psuwresfan

Tb_small NGameday11