Big Ten Expansion Looking At Texas?
by BSD on Feb 11, 2010 2:29 PM EST
in B1G / BigTen
Email
Print
After the Pitt fiasco a few weeks ago I promised myself we weren't going to chase any more Big Ten expansion rumors until something definitive was reported. So while hints and quotes from anonymous sources may not be a bastion of credibility, at least this is coming from a legitimate news source not named "twitter" or "Bleacher Report".
A source with ties to the Big Ten said that while most people’s attention has been trained on the conference stealing Missouri, the Big Ten has engaged in “preliminary exchanges” with a much bigger fish from the Big 12.
“There have been preliminary exchanges between the Big Ten and Texas,” the source told the Journal-World on Wednesday. “People will deny that, but it’s accurate.”
So what to make of this? Maybe something, maybe nothing. I'm sure the Big Ten is going to reach out to a lot of schools over the next year to gauge their interest in joining the conference. We will probably hear rumors leak out from discussions with Pitt and Missouri as well. Jim Delany will want to know who is interested before he goes to the league presidents with suggestions, and he's not going to tender an offer to a school without feeling them out first. So let's not get too excited or outraged over this.
But since it's a slow news day in the early stages of a boring offseason, let's discuss the merits of this idea. Would I like to see Texas in the Big Ten? As a Penn State fan living 90 miles from Austin, you betcha. Y'all are welcome to come tailgate in the grotto with me if that happens. But I'm not getting my hopes up.
Opening up the state of Texas to the Big Ten Network would generate millions in revenue for the conference. While the attraction of epic battles between Texas and the members of the Big Ten sure do look appealing, let's peel back the dollar signs for a minute. How practical would this be for other sports? Getting from Austin to places like Happy Valley and Ann Arbor isn't easy. You're talking a four hour plane ride each way. Jumping in for a weeknight basketball or volleyball game is going to create some hardships for the student athletes. I also think the Big Ten university presidents may have some heartburn over Texas, who doesn't exactly light up the scoreboard in graduation rates when compared to Penn State and other Big Ten Schools.
Ultimately, I would love to see it happen, but I doubt it will. I think geography is going to be a stumbling block for the university presidents who actually worry about things like student athlete well being and graduation rates.
105 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
In my opinion,
If the Big Ten can’t lure an elite school football school, it shouldn’t expand. Its Texas, Nebraska, Notre Dame, or no one.
Agree
But texas is actually in a similar situation as ND. Unlike the Big Ten, the BXII has a split based on what you bring to the table. So Texas’ conference might not make anywhere near as much at the BX, but they get
What I can’t see happening is the BX letting Texas in without making them agree to share equally like we all have with the NWs. I’m sure it’s simple math for the people who actually have access to the numbers, but I wonder if 1/12 of the Big Ten pie is worth it when they are in talks to create their own frickin’ TV network that they get 100% of the funds from.
I know about your diabolical plan.
Two other huge hurdles based on the football program are
historic rivalries and graduate rate 9as mentioned above).
Would Texas be able to negotiate a schedule where they continue to play Oklahoma and A&M? Second, their football graduation rate is really a joke.
I was going to bring up rivalries as well.
A Texas schedule that would include PSU, OSU, and Michigan in conference, and Oklahoma and TAMU OOC would be killer.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Feb 11, 2010 2:45 PM EST up reply actions
Although there’s a good chance they will never actually have to play PSU, OSU and Um in the same season, especially if they design it that way with the divisions. Not sure that helps, but it might. I see OU staying on the schedule and maybe a rotation of the other Texas schools if they really feel the pressure. Don’t they always just kill those schools anyway?
I know about your diabolical plan.
Well you'vegot three games against the other 6 teams in the league
What are the odds that one year it is both OSU and Mich? I mean, I guess they could organize it so that never happens, but I don’t have that kind of mind to figure it out.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Feb 11, 2010 2:49 PM EST up reply actions
Me neither, but teams in the BT already very often don’t play PSU, UM and OSU together, and sometimes they’re only playing one. With 12 teams you could probably get some engineer to design the divisional rotation so it stays a little light.
I know about your diabolical plan.
it really wouldn't be hard
especially since you’d only play 3 teams from the other 6 (or 2 teams from the other 7, if we go to 14 teams).
We’d likely rotate through the other division, so just put the “big 4” teams on opposite sides of the rotation.
for example (assuming 12 team conf, and arbitrary division just so I could make up 6 team names as they come to me)
year team1(home) team2(away)
1 OSU Northwestern
2 MSU OSU
3 Purdue MSU
4 Michigan Purdue
5 Indiana Michigan
6 Northwestern Indiana
7 OSU Northwestern
8 MSU OSU
etc etc etc
by The JuggerNitt on Feb 11, 2010 3:07 PM EST up reply actions
I have to reply about rivalries..
The UT vs OU/TAMU games are big money makers for UT, yeah i know PSU, OSU, and Mich could bring some revenue, but you would be losing two rivalries that date over 100 yrs. For the alums of the schools those two games are the most important, for fans of the three they are some of the most memorable. I think unless UT is able to keep OU and TAMU in the yearly rotation and keeping the Thanxgiving game against TAMU, (another old tradition) UT doesn’t leave big XII
Granted Penn State has been in the Big 10 as long as I have followed them,
so my view of the old rivalries might be jaded, but I don’t here that many people complaining that we don’t play Pitt, Syracuse, West Virgina, etc any more. Rivalries might be important today, but 20 years from know, Texas would have new rivals and could care less about playing Oklahoma.
by VVeRPennState on Feb 12, 2010 12:09 AM EST up reply actions
Meanwhile, OU
Will throw hissy fits because texas won’t play them unless its a 2-for-1.
"Every player we have, someone-maybe a parent, a grandparent, someone-poured their soul into that young man. They are handing that young man off to us. They are giving us their treasure, and it's our job to make sure we give them back that young man intact and ready to face the world."
-J.V.Pa.
And Burnt Orange Nation wins a best Oklahoma blog contest just to spite them.
by VVeRPennState on Feb 12, 2010 9:05 AM EST up reply actions
LOL.
"Every player we have, someone-maybe a parent, a grandparent, someone-poured their soul into that young man. They are handing that young man off to us. They are giving us their treasure, and it's our job to make sure we give them back that young man intact and ready to face the world."
-J.V.Pa.
I see
Well then why don’t we kick out Northwestern, Indiana, Purdue, and Illinois. I mean, they aren’t elite football schools. We could replace them with the schools you suggest.
I think it depends on how bad they want that 12th member so they can have a championship game. Schools like Pitt and Missouri may not bring a ton of alumni and dollars on their own, but in the bigger picture the conference gets a championship game along with the ticket sales and television contract rights that go with it. It’s tough to judge if those benefits can outweigh bringing in just anybody.
But I agree, I would like to see them make a big splash. Maybe this leaked rumor about talking with Texas is actually a ploy to light a fire under Missouri. You don’t like the Big XII now? See how you like it after we pluck your flagship school.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
I remain convinced that adding Pitt and Missu make no sense from a dollars perspective.
I know about your diabolical plan.
I don't really agree with that
I question Mizzou, but I think Pitt would be very attractive. Maybe they don’t sell out their stadium, but then fans from Cincinnati, Syracuse, Rutgers, and UConn don’t exactly travel well. And really, what Pitt cares about those games anyway? When they get Penn State, Michigan, Ohio State, Iowa, and Wisconsin coming to town, they’ll fill that stadium. There will be more interest on the Pitt end, and Big Ten schools travel well. It’s a geographic fit and would present opposing fans an opportunity to see their team.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
Agree for the most part
But as a local friend and I were just discussing, Pitt will fill the stadium when PSU comes to town because it will be mostly PSU fans. And I’m ok with that.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Feb 11, 2010 2:51 PM EST up reply actions
I understand people don’t agree, which is fine, because I have no definitive way of knowing. I do think that people over-value the $ you actually earn from a CCG, though. It’s like two or three million (ticket and TV) split 12 ways.
I know about your diabolical plan.
Big Ten conference championship
The projections I have seen are for a Big Ten championship to bring in something like $13-15 million to the conference. Problem is that that is still sort of the $21-22 million or so that each school gets right now in shared revenues, so unless the added school adds revenue beyond the championship game, they won’t be invited (the current Big Ten schools are going to willingly decrease their revenues by dividing the pot more ways).
Point being, I don’t see Pitt bringing much of any additional revenue to the conference and so I don’t see them being invited as a 12th team (not on their own, maybe as part of a larger expansion).
Very hard to believe.
In 2005 the ACC and ESPN signed a new agreement: entire TV deal and CCG were sold for about $35M per year, and the Big Ten will get almost half of that from one game?
I know about your diabolical plan.
A conference championship makes money beyond just the TV deal.
You are forgetting about gate receipts, parking, concession, etc. Just selling 100k tickets at $100 a piece is already $10 million.
by VVeRPennState on Feb 11, 2010 4:39 PM EST up reply actions
The stadium won't be 100k.
Lucas Oil Stadium is the probably destination IMO, that’s only 63k. And you figure students are probably getting a big chunk of those tickets, which will be lower. OU pre-sold CCG student tickets for $75 FWIW.
This is assuming the game is always a sellout, which it might not be if you get a Minn or NW in there.
I know about your diabolical plan.
The numbers were just for the sake of an example.
If the game is at an NFL stadium like Lucas Oil, the average ticket price will definitely go up. You don’t think the Big 10 will leave all those nice corporate suites empty, do you?
As a side note, does anyone know how the SEC/Big 12/ACC award conference championship tickets. I just don’t imagine anything more than 20k tickets going to students.
Either way, the original post was just to point out that $13 million is certainly doable if the game is done right, I wasn’t trying to estimate the actual revenue.
by VVeRPennState on Feb 11, 2010 5:19 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah I jumped on kind of quick didn't I?
But let’s settle on $5M for ticket (a LOT are going to be given away for free, remember), say $1-2M in concessions then maybe another $2-3M for TV. I’ll even stretch it up to $12 for the sake of math. Say we take a team that is otherwise mostly a wash, an equal with MSU or Iowa (as just about everyone is besides ND, TX and Nebraska). Is it really worth all the trouble for and extra $1M? When you could wait a couple 5-10 years and actually land ND?
I know about your diabolical plan.
There’s also sponsorship and Dr. Pepper pays a heck of a lot more as title sponsor of the Big 12 championship than the ACC one.
I don’t think $13M or so is all that difficult to get to, really. Think about how much top bowl games pay out (and the organizers get a huge cut, while the Big Ten in this case would be the organizer) and this game would basically be like a top bowl game.
The best way to get tickets to the ACC Title game
is to attend a local elementary school, where the 25,000 unsold tickets are distributed.
Pitt currently has both a better football and basketball team than Michigan.
by jesse. on Feb 11, 2010 7:25 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
does the conference share revenue from the home games and concessions, though?
I thought the only way we shared in that revenue was that we give them 5000 tickets to sell when they play here, and they give us 5000 tickets to sell when we go there, and we are “guaranteed” home & home deals (because otherwise, would we really schedule a home & home win Indiana?).
In that regards, Pitt wouldn’t do anything for us whether they fill their stadium, or it is completely empty. Meanwhile they likely won’t bring much bowl money (they go to a bowl, on average, a little less than every other year), especially if the Big 10 doesn’t add another bowl, since we already pretty much max out on the teams we send to our bowls. Maybe in the years where we send 2 BCS teams, and don’t have someone to pick up the Motor Bowl du jour (not really sure what the last bowl pick is off hand), a team like Pitt might be able to get that spot.
So other than that, it is TV revenue. Pitt again won’t add anything, as their market is already a part of the BTN footprint.
by The JuggerNitt on Feb 11, 2010 3:13 PM EST up reply actions
Here is how I understand it
Each team pays a “Fee” for each home game which is a portion of the ticket sales. So, let’s say for a PSU home game, they have to pay a fee of $500,000. They get to keep everything they make over that. If for some reason they only make $300k, they have to make up the difference. A team like Indiana may only have to pay a $100,000 fee per home game. It is weighted by fanbase and traditional ticket sales. A progressive tax if you will.
So I would think a team like Pitt playing in a (relatively) big city like Pittsburgh would have a pretty hefty fee. But I don’t think they would have to resort to shenanigans like they did in the past where if you want to buy a ticket to the PSU game you also have to buy a ticket to the games against Buffalo and Akron. Fans from PSU, Ohio State, and Michigan would fill up that stadium easily. Not great for Pitt, but at least it gives them the revenue they need to be competitive. Build a winning program in a few years and you can sell out the stadium with your own fans.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
so again, the Big Ten would make the same amount of money from this fee
whether Pitt sells out their stadium or it is empty (and would theoretically have a similar fee from any other major program), so Pitt adds nothing that any other school would add in ticket revenue (sold out or not), and would still not bring TV or bowl revenue* that a school outside of the Big Ten footprint would.
.* Bowl revenue will be the same no matter what, since there are set bowls that the Big Ten has. I’m going under the assumption that we could probably get the Cotton Bowl or something similar if we bring a team like Texas in, whereas Pitt doesn’t make the Big Ten more desirable to the bowls.
by The JuggerNitt on Feb 11, 2010 3:54 PM EST up reply actions
Build a winning program in a few years and you can sell out the stadium with your own fans.
Boom. Roasted. I’m going to use this line next time I get into it with a Pitt fan. Thanks, Mike.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Feb 11, 2010 3:54 PM EST up reply actions
The Gohpers are still waiting for ths...
Build a winning program in a few years and you can sell out the stadium with your own fans.
there’s a reason they called it Kinnick North.
This was the same arguement I gave two weeks ago and was basically called a lunatic for it.
I am glad to see I share some thought with the grottosan after all.
I am Laura Nichols and I like Bacon.
BSD is an addiction, and this is the first step.
by carolinaeasy on Feb 11, 2010 7:18 PM EST up reply actions
all this argument does
is show how joining the Big 10 would benefit Pitt, not how Pitt joining the Big 10 benefits the Big 10
by The JuggerNitt on Feb 11, 2010 7:36 PM EST up reply actions
That is a rather big leap you made.
I am suggesting nothing close to kicking teams out of the conference. In fact I am being much more conservative in my assessment of the Big Ten. I just don’t see how adding a team just for the sake of adding a team is a big advantage. The only reason any changes should be made is if we can convince a school with a great football program to join the Big Ten.
by VVeRPennState on Feb 11, 2010 2:54 PM EST up reply actions
I think it is along the lines of
adding a team like Pitt would be about a wash $ wise, but might bring a little bit more exposure to the conference. Adding a team like Texas would bring a lot more $ and exposure. Therefore, adding a team like Pitt now would be a loss of opportunity of adding a team like Texas (now or in the future), and so would actually be a negative investment (assuming we could get a big team).
by The JuggerNitt on Feb 11, 2010 3:16 PM EST up reply actions
Mizzou
But I agree, I would like to see them make a big splash. Maybe this leaked rumor about talking with Texas is actually a ploy to light a fire under Missouri. You don’t like the Big XII now? See how you like it after we pluck your flagship school.
Light a fire under Mizzou? Missouri (both school and state government) is already practically begging to join the Big Ten. They don’t need any convincing.
In terms of Mizzou, the big question IMHO is whether the Big Ten would even want them. I think their (relatively) weak academics will rule them out and, in fact, I think the Big Ten stays at 11 before seriously considering Mizzou for team #12. The conference doesn’t need to expand, they’ll do it if it enhances the product.
The geography thing is what immediately comes to mind
I don’t how reliable this mileage calculator is, but here are a couple of distances that exist between schools that are currently in the same conference (State College to Austin is about 1325 miles):
Boston (BC) to Miami: 1262.7 miles
Milwaukee (Marquette) to Tampa (South Florida): 1085.4 miles
And the difference there is that you’re going from major city to major city. This just seems like a logistics nightmare for the athletics department. But, if adding Texas means lots of money, it may be worth it.
Yeah
And B.C. hates being in the ACC from what I’ve read. I think if they could go back and do it again they would have stayed in the Big East. But at the time it looked like it was either get in the life raft or go down with the ship.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
I don't think distance matters.
Financially, sure its more expensive to travel to a school like Texas. But the extra revenue generated from the football teams will surely make up for it. Otherwise it really isn’t a big deal for anyone else besides Texas’s sports teams. For the other schools its only 4 extra hours round trip on a plane once a year.
by VVeRPennState on Feb 11, 2010 2:47 PM EST up reply actions
For the football team, but there are other sports.
That being said, off the top of my head I can name at least 5 times this year that the men’s volleyball team will be in the Pacific time zone, so distance isn’t that big of a factor.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Feb 11, 2010 2:52 PM EST up reply actions
What sports make more than one away trip to the same school per season?
Honest question, I just can’t think of any sport were it happens outside of post season play.
by VVeRPennState on Feb 11, 2010 2:58 PM EST up reply actions
None that I can think of, but getting to the other B10 schools is hard enough for, say, the fencing team, or the track and field team.
Now you’re adding a trip to Texas as well?
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Feb 11, 2010 3:02 PM EST up reply actions
Imagine if they get the BTN on digital cable in every Texas home.
Which isn’t out of the question if they join, you’d pay for any extra travel costs 500x over.
I know about your diabolical plan.
Not a big deal for us
What about Texas? Their teams are going to need a three or four hour plane ride for every road game.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
Which may cause Texas...
to negotiate that TAMU and Mizzou (or some other combo) also be asked to join the conference? Also, won’t there be significant political pressure on Texas not to leave the other Texas schools (TAMU, Baylor, Tech) out to dry?
Never mistake effort for achievement.
by Esteban d' Amur on Feb 11, 2010 3:03 PM EST up reply actions
eh
I’m not buying this expand to 14 teams talk. I don’t think Michigan and Ohio State will go for that. It’s big step just getting them to see the need for a championship game. Bringing in more alpha dogs will diminish their role in the conference even more. It sucks, but Michigan and Ohio State still call the shots in the Big Ten more than any other two schools.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
You realize that Michigan’s AD and football coach at the time were adamantly opposed to adding PSU, right? And yet here we sit as a member of the conference.
The reported power and influence of UM and tOSU is completely overstated.
Michigan hates everything.
I’m glad we’re in the BT if only to spite them. I hope they keep RIchRod forever so we can win too.
I know about your diabolical plan.
Michigan is just angry because their time is long past.
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 11, 2010 5:02 PM EST up reply actions
How would Mizzou help — they aren’t appreciatively closer to Texas than most of the Big Ten schools. It would still be a flight for teams to get there.
Your point might make sense if Texas demanded to bring in, say, A&M and Oklahoma, but why would they care about Missouri — a school they have a limited history with and isn’t particularly close.
Don't they already get on a plane a lot?
Texas has to fly a lot of places within the B12 already. It will mean a bit longer flight time, but thats not really that big of a hurdle as a good chunk of travel time is not actually in the air.
Louisiana Tech
If they can survive for years in the WAC, then Texas could easily survive in the Big Ten.
For me, I’m still convinced the best choice is the public research university that is a longstanding member of the American Association of Universities (of which all Big Ten schools are a member), that is a top 30 institution in every national and international ranking of Universities, that has $1.7 billion in annual endowments, has a good athletic infrastructure in the city, has a long tradition of college football in a dynamic TV market that is close enough to Big Ten country, but not so close that it overlaps existing media markets, and is within 315 miles of four Big Ten schools. University of Toronto.
by Cairo on Feb 11, 2010 3:12 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
is Louisiana Tech really an example of success, though?
Maybe one of the reasons they are struggling is because they are so crippled by their travel budget
by The JuggerNitt on Feb 11, 2010 3:18 PM EST up reply actions
I'm gonna go ahead and say they suck because they're Louisiana Tech.
And hey, they’re right there with Iowa, Michigan, and Notre Dame in pissing off Mike Valenti:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDbokLl9ejQ
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 11, 2010 3:25 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDbokLl9ejQ
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 11, 2010 3:25 PM EST up reply actions
I wasn't talking you to you though.
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 11, 2010 5:03 PM EST up reply actions
Bogus Travel Argument
Other than TAMU and Baylor, it’s not like the other Big XII schools are close by to Austin. Lubbock requires a flight or a six hour drive. Stillwater is in the middle of nowhere. Lawrence and Manhattan aren’t exactly easy to get to. What’s the difference between Ames and Iowa City? How do you think UT teams are getting to Boulder, Lincoln, or Columbia when they have to travel there? Is Columbia easier to get to than Champaign from Austin?
Minneapolis is about 1000mi from State College…that hasn’t placed too onerous on obstacle on either school’s swim team.
The biggest obstacle to this isn’t travel distances, it’s the fear of pissing off the Texas legislature…which basically forced UT to bring TAMU, Baylor, and TT with them when they joined the Big XII.
Dynamite drop in Monty
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Feb 11, 2010 3:16 PM EST up reply actions
yeah, that's how I look at the travel argument as well
a flight from PA to Texas isn’t really that different than a flight from PA to Chicago. I’m not really sure how chartered flights are, though.
One big pain, though, is that flying (commercially) into a place like State College is a lot more expensive than flying into Philly or Pitt (or even Harrisburg), and so for people coming in, it is expensive AND a pain to get to
by The JuggerNitt on Feb 11, 2010 3:21 PM EST up reply actions
well right
same with pretty much all the Big 10 teams, but most “away” fans to games usually come from the area, which the rest being a fairly consistent core of fans that are driving to the various games (at least that’s been my experience with the away games I’ve gone to). I just wonder how that’ll be after a few years with Texas in the conference.
by The JuggerNitt on Feb 11, 2010 10:52 PM EST up reply actions
Bad sport to choose
We (the swim team) never traveled to
Minnesota for a dual meet and vice versa.
by speedomike on Feb 11, 2010 4:24 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Although
I guess what would happen would that some teams just wouldn’t make that Texas trip. Which isn’t really a big deal with sports like swimming, track, etc. where the only thing that ultimately matters is the conference championship. Not competing against some teams during the regular season doesn’t matter a whole lot so it’s not a big deal if you don’t make those trips.
Meh
Not gonna happen.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
Just stopped by Burnt Orange Nation real quick
Some of their guys think this might be some kind of publicity ploy to make the Pac10 jealous, or to make the B12 do things for Texas (I’m not exactly sure what more Texas can ask for with a lucrative contract already in place).
At the end of the day, though, I don’t see this happening. If the B10 considers going to 14 teams, Texas will be in the discussion. But I do not see Texas being the 12th B10 team.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
This is fun to talk about. UT thinks about this this because each big XI school makes more from football than does UT, even with it’s disproportionate share of XII TV money. If you haven’t seen this already, go here:
http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/
I found it fascinating anyway.
Honestly, the bugaboo in this will be the TX legislature, which is comprised of the biggest dopes you’ll find anywhere outside of Wash, DC.
Thanks for linking that - I was just about to.
Make sure to read the updates too. I can actually see this happening – the politics isn’t nearly as ugly as it was 15 years ago.
Texas? I’d love to have them.
'People are about as happy as they decide they want to be'
by Pete the Streak on Feb 11, 2010 5:27 PM EST up reply actions
I wouldn’t be surprised if the Big Ten would have to take Texas A&M to get Texas, but that would be reasonable anyway and leave Texas as less of an “outlier” (and given them actual competition in baseball) and it would potentially placate the Texas legislature. And then the Big Ten would just have to get a 14th school — Notre Dame? Mizzou? Pitt/Syracuse/Rutgers/Maryland? Nebraska?
The 14th member
If Texas and A&M join, look at the options for the 14th member:
Academic benefit: Notre Dame and Pitt
TV coverage benefit: Rutgers, Nebraska, Notre Dame (in different ways)
Willingness to join: The any Big East school in a heartbeat
I actually like Syracuse the best (failing Notre Dame) but that’s just me. I’d take them in a heartbeat over Rutgers and at least they add great hoops which really enhances the BTN (given the number of basketball games). Plus Cuse is actually in NY state, which given the state based model of carriage for the BTN gives us more an argument for basic coverage in NYC than Rutgers does.
I get what you're saying, but
Does Syracuse have that much pull over the State as a whole? They are still a private school, after all. Does Northwestern have that much pull over the Illinois outside of Chicago?
I only say this because Rutgers goes out of it’s way to promote itself as The State University of New Jersey and both the athletic and academic flagship institution for the state.
Honestly, I think the amount of pull is not as relevant as the general concept of “school from that state” = “wide distribution on the BTN”. The way that carriage agreements have been structured has put an emphasis on more widely distributed tiers within “Big Ten states”. I don’t think that the proximity of Rutgers to NYC helps due to this past negotiating tactic by the Big Ten/BTN.
That said, I do firmly believe that Syracuse (due to hoops) has more of a presence in NYC than Rutgers. Rutgers only got some attention when they were doing kinda well in football. But I don’t think there’s really any lasting following in NYC (only bandwagoners) unlike college hoops and Syracuse which is somewhat popular in NYC. Also, Cuse actually does dominate college sports throughout upstate NY, which isn’t exactly devoid of people.
Wait - this is the original story/analysis link:
It’s actually weeks old, and a fascinating read. Dude did his homework.
Comments are also informative.
'People are about as happy as they decide they want to be'
by Pete the Streak on Feb 11, 2010 5:32 PM EST reply actions
Reply FAIL above to txhawkeye. Sheesh.
'People are about as happy as they decide they want to be'
by Pete the Streak on Feb 11, 2010 5:49 PM EST up reply actions
I'd like to make a reservation for 2 at the Grotto please.
Black shoes, basic blues, no names, all game.
I'm 90 minutes away from Columbia, Missouri
I have a rooting interest for them to be in the Big Ten. The Lovin’ Den here always has room.
Kinda OT but scuttlebutt out here says Utah to the Pac 10 is a done deal
Fwiw. Some are still talking Texas but no one takes that seriously. Talk about geography problems, try Austin to Seattle!
Some people are born mediocre, some achieve mediocrity, and some people have mediocrity thrust upon them. - Joseph Heller
Just one last point on the travel thing
I’m looking over all the different teams’ schedules, and there are a number of sports who already don’t compete against all the other Big Ten teams during the season. I looked at them pretty quickly but I think this is right (this is from the schedules on gopsusports):
Men’s
Swimming
Cross Country
Baseball (and they go down to Texas for tournaments anyway)
Fencing (they’re all over the country)
Golf (they’re in Georgia, Florida, Tennesse, to name a few)
Gymnastics (they have meets in California and Vegas)
Lacrosse (they don’t compete in the Big Ten anyway)
Soccer
Tennis (they play most of the other teams but also go down to Alabama and Florida)
Track (they were in Seattle and Oregon)
Volleyballl (like Junny mentioned they’re in California twice and were in Hawaii too)
Wrestling
Women’s
Swimming
Cross Country
Fencing
Field Hockey
Etc.
I think you get the point
So basically the only teams that would be making this trip on a regular basis are the football team every other year and the basketball teams. Aka the teams who bring in the most money and have the most convenient means of travel. So, this travel thing is looking more and more like and non-issue. I take back what I said earlier.
plus, you know, we have aero planes these days
give the kids an extra day to travel if two extra hours of plane time screws with their system
by Mr. Rosewater on Feb 11, 2010 7:35 PM EST up reply actions
no, it's the cat's pajamas
NO, it’s the dog’s bollocks!
by Mr. Rosewater on Feb 11, 2010 7:40 PM EST up reply actions
Roosevelt's plan is to let the generals take care fo the Krauts while he stupidly thinks he can make Stalin into a good guy.
Gah.
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 11, 2010 7:46 PM EST up reply actions
is that your opinion?
is that HL Mencken’s?
by Mr. Rosewater on Feb 11, 2010 7:53 PM EST up reply actions
It's my opinion, but it was also the opinion of others at that time.
Say, like Winston Churchill.
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 11, 2010 7:57 PM EST up reply actions
uncle joe could be trusted
just like he could leave poland alone
Never insult seven men when all you have is a six shooter --COL Sherman T Potter
by psu in the w-b on Feb 11, 2010 9:28 PM EST up reply actions
Yinz people need to put away the crack
before the crack puts you away. Texas and Nebraska aren’t joining the Big Ten.
That is all. Have a nice afternoon.
Care to offer a reason beyond just being dismissive?
I think the odds of Texas joining are not great, but there’s enough reasons for both sides (both the conference and Texas) to recognize that it could very well happen. Especially if the Big Ten is willing to go to more than 12 teams.
It's absurd on its face.
It makes no sense geographically, historically, or logistically. IIRC the Big 10 has said the expansion team will make sense geographically. One might then say, Nebraska, but they have a gold-paved autobahn to the Big XII championship game every year. Of all the candidates ever mentioned, Pitt and ND make the most sense (and are the most feasible) for the Big 10 by a country mile. Better logistics, geographically coherent, and better branding for the conference.
Quick question
Regardless if texas becomes #12 or not, where would the CCG be held do you think? Would it be some sort of record tie-breaker deal for home field adv.? Or would we try to find a neutral site?
That would be cool if they had it at a neutral site, it would be like getting two bowl games in one season!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Black Shoe Diaries
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE BLACK SHOE DIARIES STORE
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
