Adding Nebraska has been the Big Ten's worst mistake in its history

Donate To GopherHole
Bob_Loblaw said:
To the best of my knowledge, and I've lived all over the country, BTN is part of every just normal sports package. It doesn't matter where I live. I have an apartment in PA, and basic cable does not include BTN, but the sports package includes BTN. It's the EXACT same way in California. It's been that exact same way in every other place I've lived.

Also, more people probably watched last night's game (at least the first couple quarters) than all of the Rutgers games combined. Nebraska has generated more big games than Rutgers has and it's not even close.
Click to expand...

The BTN's negotiating rule has always been, to the best of my knowledge, that all cable systems in Big Ten states (states that have a Big Ten school) must carry the channel on the normal tier (same tier as ESPN), or else they can't carry the channel at all. For other states, it can be in a special "sports package" or other add-on tier.

Could have changed by now, or perhaps in the future, as traditional cable/sat will continue to hemorrhage subscribers.

But in the previous era (before cord cutting/streaming), that was how it was supposed to work, hence adding New Jersey and Maryland/DC was huge. Nebraska, not so much.


All of that is completely independent of ratings. Ratings are obviously good, and important, but when the BTN is carried on a system, it commands a per subscriber monthly fee/payment, regardless if that subscriber ever tunes in the channel or not.

Ratings mainly matter for advertising.
 

Swap out Rutgers for Syracuse and the expansion is fine.
 

Face The Facts said:
The OP is wrong.

Nebraska was a great add to further bolster the Big Ten's national brand.
It was necessary and has paid great dividends.

Nebraska fans are passionate, but more importantly, they are dispersed through several large markets including Chicago. In the building of the BTN, passionate fans like Nebraska were needed to get the larger, nationwide exposure.

Rutgers can be ripped on for many reasons, but getting on all the TV's in NJ and maybe more in NY has definitely paid off, as has MD in the DC area.

The Big Ten is the largest national brand of any college conference despite the football not being of the level of the SEC, or the basketball being equal to the ACC.
But adding Nebraska was needed greatly to provide more western and central / southern exposure.

Nebraska coming to the Big Ten got the entire Big 12 country watching Big Ten football because Nebraska was either loved or hated. Just like if OSU or Michigan changed conferences now, the rest of the Big Ten would watch to hope they sucked.
Click to expand...

This is a good and valid hypothesis. Would love to test if it really did work out the way you think it did, or if it currently does.

Regardless, you can't deny: with each and every season that clicks off, and Nebraska football doesn't matter ..... the cachet from the 90's/early 2000's tarnishes further and further.
 

GopherVotary said:
Swap out Rutgers for Syracuse and the expansion is fine.
Click to expand...

By that time though, I think the ACC was under lock and key.

If we were talking at the time Nebraska was added, in theory we could've approached any school in the ACC or the (old) Big East. Syracuse would've been an interesting one that probably was considered, but ultimately didn't get the top ranking. I bet Penn St would've liked to have an old "rival".
 

Face The Facts said:
The number of "Big Games" it provides is meaningless.

The battle BTN had up front was getting on the right number of cable sports packages as necessary to make BTN happen.

Does the West Coast care about the original Big 10 teams? Not enough to include on a sport package.
Add Penn St... okay, getting close.
Add Nebraska... okay, now we're getting phone calls that it needs to be an option. They had to get that percentage high enough in all of these non-Big Ten areas to make it a national brand, and adding Nebraska did that.
Click to expand...

Again, it's a valid hypothesis.

People on the west coast care about Nebraska? Why? Maybe in the late 90's/early 2000's, there are some people who think Nebraska is a great program.
 


As a fan of gopher football for 40 years, how the hell can I mock anyone being added?
 

Nebraska fans were just like Penn State fans..........they thought they would take over the Big 10

I've enjoyed the carnage myself.
 

GopherVotary said:
Swap out Rutgers for Syracuse and the expansion is fine.
Click to expand...

In football, Syracuse and Rutgers will both regress to roughly the same mean.
But Syracuse will still be located in Upstate New York, while Rutgers is an hour outside of Manhattan in one of the highest income areas in the Western Hemisphere.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
To the best of my knowledge, and I've lived all over the country, BTN is part of every just normal sports package. It doesn't matter where I live. I have an apartment in PA, and basic cable does not include BTN, but the sports package includes BTN. It's the EXACT same way in California. It's been that exact same way in every other place I've lived.
Click to expand...

Yes, and two (Playstation Vue and Youtube TV) of the three most popular TV streaming packages have BTN.
 



MnplsGopher said:
Again, it's a valid hypothesis.

People on the west coast care about Nebraska? Why? Maybe in the late 90's/early 2000's, there are some people who think Nebraska is a great program.
Click to expand...

Nebraska fans don't stay in Nebraska because they don't want jobs as agronomy managers.

They get degrees in other fields and end up moving to Denver, Mpls, Chicago. Some go further west and further south.
 


Face The Facts said:
Nebraska fans don't stay in Nebraska because they don't want jobs as agronomy managers.

They get degrees in other fields and end up moving to Denver, Mpls, Chicago. Some go further west and further south.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, that's the same with Minnesota and all the Big Ten West schools, along with people that state in-state.

I have some doubts there were enough people on the West Coast that saw Nebraska added to the Big Ten and called their cable/sat company to demand that BTN be put on the main tier, to make that happen. I could easily be wrong, but am really just curious to know how it really happened rather than guess.
 

mkAz said:
It doesn't always feel like they are getting the 2 best teams in the B1G Championship games.
Click to expand...

I would argue that's a good thing, actually. It gives an easier game for the higher ranked team. At that point in the season, the CFP selection committee isn't going to downgrade any team for winning their conf championship game.

See Clemson the last few years.
 



Nebraska is fine, I'd take Pitt and Missouri any day over Maryland and Rutgers.
 

Nebraska was a logical choice and they were willing. Rutgers adds nothing to the BIG as far as Im concerned and Maryland is a perfect ACC team. I am a firm believer in having teams have some sort of geographic tie to their conference which would have made Iowa St a nice fit.

In a perfect world I would arrange all the conferences across the country from North to South. I love the idea of all conferences having both extremes of south and north venues. The PAC 12 and ACC do the best job of this and the BIG and SEC do the worst.
 

MnplsGopher said:
For fun: at the time Nebraska was added, and assuming the Big Ten *had* to expand to 12 to keep pace, split into divisions, create a televised championship game, who would've been a better add??

Possible options would have been:
- Missouri (AAU, rivalry with Illinois)
- Kansas (AAU, major basketball program, wouldn't have been contiguous to Big Ten states at that time (if you believe that matters), but only barely)
- Iowa State (AAU, not great programs at the time, but have improved greatly, rivalry with Iowa)

Could've looked at Big East and ACC options as well. Pitt would've been a great option in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Instead of Nebraska and Rutgers I would have added Louisville and either Army or Navy. Louisville gives us a presence further south, and the Army/Navy linkage gives us the largest alumni base that exists (I'm not talking about actual graduates from the academy, but rather folks that enlisted for military service). Also, as an aside, for Big 10 hockey we need more members -- I'd add a Canadian school to the league...
 

Nebraska

WriterGoph said:
I don't think it's anywhere close to Rutgers. Nebraska has a great environment and fan base. Going to games there is very fun. Just because they don't live up to the hype, I don't think its been a huge mistake.
Click to expand...

They do make Big 10 volleyball more interesting.
 

Two things: MN had played Nebraska more times than any non-conference opponent and more times than some conference opponents, so it was a natural for us to play them every year; Frost is only in his second year and will probably get Nebraska up to Iowa and Wisconsin standards - Ohio State, maybe not, but they are now building a $150 million football complex which they consider will be the best in the U.S. Recruiting will kick up for them with that, Frost, and the fan base.
 

I think Nebraska was and will remain a reasonable choice for the Big Ten to pick up. Despite their recent struggles they still won a division title since they've been in the conference and still draw huge audiences. They'll keep investing in the football program and draw a lot of attention. That's a plus.

I have to say the Maryland/Rutgers additions have been very hit and miss for me. The only positive pick-up it seems have been the expanded TV markets and the Terps basketball program. If it were purely from geographical standpoint, I could see the conference adding Pitt, Missouri, Iowa St or maybe even Kansas before selecting those two schools. Also, I feel like Notre Dame has been a missed opportunity. If they want to stay independent in football, fine, but having them in every other sport like they are with the ACC would work well.
 

Livingat45north said:
Instead of Nebraska and Rutgers I would have added Louisville and either Army or Navy. Louisville gives us a presence further south, and the Army/Navy linkage gives us the largest alumni base that exists (I'm not talking about actual graduates from the academy, but rather folks that enlisted for military service). Also, as an aside, for Big 10 hockey we need more members -- I'd add a Canadian school to the league...
Click to expand...

Your BTN channel would get cancelled.
 

At the time the sexiest schools to add were:

1. Notre Dame - This would have been epic and could have put us everywhere.
2. Texas - Slightly less epic but they have a huge base.
3. Oklahoma - Monster school in all sports
4. Nebraska - Big name at the time. heck, still media darlings.
5. Mizzou - Would have been good.
6. Maryland - recent national champs in B-Ball and access to Baltimore-Washington recruiting fields.
7. Pittsburgh - would have given PSU a rivalry in conference.
8. Boston College - Would have been good solid pick-up

25. Rutgers - aside from academics and location, what did they offer?
 

I might be in minority but I feel like Nebraska fits in nicely in the B1G, I see them more of rivalries than I do with northwestern and Illinois. Maryland and Rutgers still do nothing for me, and I honestly don't care if they ever become successful, they just don't seem like B1G teams to me. Stick to the Midwest, I want to have the ability to drive to road games.
 

GuyFawkes said:
I might be in minority but I feel like Nebraska fits in nicely in the B1G, I see them more of rivalries than I do with northwestern and Illinois. Maryland and Rutgers still do nothing for me, and I honestly don't care if they ever become successful, they just don't seem like B1G teams to me. Stick to the Midwest, I want to have the ability to drive to road games.
Click to expand...

Couldn't have said it better. I'd argue that Nebraska is already our 3rd biggest rival in football behind Wisky and Iowa.
 

John Galt said:
Couldn't have said it better. I'd argue that Nebraska is already our 3rd biggest rival in football behind Wisky and Iowa.
Click to expand...

Notre Dame, Oklahoma and Texas are the only schools I would have taken over Nebraska. I seem to remember the problem with getting Oklahoma was their insistence on also Texas. And Texas (like ND) didn't want to let go of the Longhorn network funding stream.
 

Liked the Nebraska add. Would've enjoyed Missouri as well. Didn't hate Maryland, thought Rutgers was asinine . Would love to see how much financially they've brought back in. Pitt or Louisville would've been nice adds I think. Now just have to hope Rutgers would like to lose the money the B10 network gives them and move to a different conference.
 

Otis said:
Notre Dame, Oklahoma and Texas are the only schools I would have taken over Nebraska. I seem to remember the problem with getting Oklahoma was their insistence on also Texas. And Texas (like ND) didn't want to let go of the Longhorn network funding stream.
Click to expand...

Okla was tied to Okla St...that to me would have been a huge hurdle. Irish were always seen as the 11th Big team.

In the end, the moves made have been a huge financial success for B1G.
 

I liked the Nebraska add. At the time, I thought Mizzou and Iowa State or Pitt would have been a more natural fit (than Rutgers or Maryland) for subjective reasons. I didn't think the BG10 every had a realistic chance at Texas, Oklahoma or Notre Dame.

I wish we had access to BTN numbers. Adding Maryland probably helped the BTN subscription base, especially for basketball. But Rutgers? It probably added hard subscription numbers in NJ, but I'm guessing any game involving Rutgers in almost any sport has a low eyeball count. Advertisers love eyeballs and they pay the bills. For high ratings sports like football and basketball, and even lower tier revenue sports like volleyball, baseball and softball, I gotta believe the ratings would have been exponentially higher for games with Mizzou and Pitt or maybe Iowa State...instead of Rutgers.
 
Last edited:

Livingat45north said:
Instead of Nebraska and Rutgers I would have added Louisville and either Army or Navy. Louisville gives us a presence further south, and the Army/Navy linkage gives us the largest alumni base that exists (I'm not talking about actual graduates from the academy, but rather folks that enlisted for military service). Also, as an aside, for Big 10 hockey we need more members -- I'd add a Canadian school to the league...
Click to expand...
Canadian colleges currently aren't very good at hockey.

Sent from my phone using Tapatalk
 

I have always felt Missouri was a lost opportunity. Good school. Wanted "in" the B1G very badly. Lots of natural rivalries. As for Nebraska I do feel the culture of their fan base fits very well, although the academic stuff is not a great fit. Rutgers seems to have an athletic department that is doomed to be mediocre at best, regardless of how many recruits are available within easy driving distance. Maryland still seems like they should be in the ACC. During the B1G/ACC challenge I still do a double take when I see their matchups prior to reminding myself they are actually in the B1G.

After all is said and done it would have been great had it been Nebraska, Notre Dame, and Missouri.
 

Nebraska was an awesome addition. It's an easy drive from Minnesota, super fun road trip, great place to watch a game and party for the weekend.

Maryland...meh, I can live with them (although they do feel like an ACC school).

Rutgers was beyond stupid, they add nothing to the conference.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom