Big Ten Alignment Tax

Donate To GopherHole
RodentRampage

RodentRampage

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
9,474
Reaction score
209
Points
63
The east-west split not only best preserves rivalries and competitive balance, but keeps travel distances at a minimum. I'm not primarily concerned about the impact to the teams, but the impact to the fans. The longer the trip to road games, the more time and expense it will take for fans to travel to road games. This will either force fans to bear an increased burden or to give up going to road games. This is the Big Ten putting a "tax" on the fans. I wonder if framing the idea in these terms could put pressure on the Big Ten officials. If fans make less road trips, this is would result in less tickets sold. Why should fans have to take hours more on the road and spend much more money just because Big Ten officials decided to make a Rube Goldberg style realignment?
 

I'm cool with everything except the "Tax" part. Its not a tax. Call it burden. But its not a tax. That's just misusing a word b/c of its connotations. But your underlying point gets a +1 bazillion from me. I don't make a lot of road games but would like to make more. That's not happening if the divisions have no geographical underpinnings.
 

I realize it's not a tax, just using a cheap rhetorical device. :) I should be ashamed of myself for lowering myself that far. And maybe I am, but just a little.
 

RodentRampage said:
I realize it's not a tax, just using a cheap rhetorical device. :) I should be ashamed of myself for lowering myself that far. And maybe I am, but just a little.
Click to expand...

It's not a true tax in the sense the word was designed...but the Big Delany...oops...the Big Ten is increasing the financial burden on fans to attend games (longer road trips) in order to increase their perceived takeout ("better games because of competitiveness"). I see your point.
 

RodentRampage said:
I realize it's not a tax, just using a cheap rhetorical device. :) I should be ashamed of myself for lowering myself that far. And maybe I am, but just a little.
Click to expand...

I know you get it. I just get particularly annoyed by the mis-use of that particular rhetorical device. :) Your underlying point still stands and is very valid. Which means of course the that the Big Ten will ignore it.
 


I prefer "financial @ss-reaming burden to the travelling fan" to tax.
 






You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom