my God! anyone been following some of the B10 expansion talk on any Big East boards?

Donate To GopherHole
T

The Ghost of Bierman

Banned
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
205
Reaction score
0
Points
16
it is to the point where some of them are almost tearing each others throats out and "eating their young."

understandably, you have rutgers fans who are of course "tickled to death" in their feeling that they may have an "inside edge" on gaining big ten conference membership per the chicago tribune articles below which came out early last week.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/ct-spt-0302-big-ten-foot--20100301,0,2940944.column

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/college/chi-big-ten-expansion-side-mar02,0,4339535.story

some rutgers fans are reveling in the apparent misery of some of their conference brethren - most notably pitt, syracuse.

meanwhile, you have fans on the pitt, syracuse, etc. message boards who are either completely pissed at rutgers (most likely due to jealousy) or are now showing their total disdain for the big east conference and its future direction and searching for ways to get out of the big east quickly.

anyways, just thought i would mention this bit of big ten conference "related" news. to be honest, it is almost kind of "sad" in a weird way what the process of possible big ten expansion is doing "mentally" to some of these big east fans. has to be a tough spot for the schools who will be left behind and what it will likely mean for the big east conference (especially football) as a whole. :(
 

Bierman... What we need to realize is that the "elite" Big East still thinks we are so uncivilized that we still fight Indians behind every tree. :banghead:
 


The articles I've read make a good case for Rutgers, none of which base their argument on their football tradition, but on the realities of tv revenue, potential corporate sponsorships, and the fact that Rutgers academically fits well with the big ten. What amazed me was the 8.1 share the Louisville-Rutgers game pulled in 2006. Imagine if Rutgers consistently puts a good product on the field. A game between Rutgers and Penn State could draw huge numbers. The only hesitation I have is Rutgers truly doesn't have a great football tradition or even a modest football tradition. However, the potential is there and they would add more to the big ten's bottom line than Pitt of Syracuse. Missouri would lock up the St Louis market and get us into KC, and Denver would come with Colorado. Still the potential of the New York market is massive for the Big Ten Network. Does anyone remember when Reusse derided the BTN and said it would be a failure? I guess know more about baseball than he does the business of broadcasting.
 

So you created a thread about Big East boards, but did not provide a link?

Instead you linked a couple Chicago articles. Well, okay. Still hope Rutgers is not in, unless we bring in 3 teams.
 


Links would have been nice, but just Google "Big East football boards" and browse away. It ain't tough.
 

gophmeister said:
The articles I've read make a good case for Rutgers, none of which base their argument on their football tradition, but on the realities of tv revenue, potential corporate sponsorships...Still the potential of the New York market is massive for the Big Ten Network.
Click to expand...


The flaw in this argument is that the NY market is primarily a pro-sports market. It's always been that way and the addition of a Big Ten school isn't going to change that reality. If the Big Ten can't get Texas they should forget expansion and focus on changing the rule prohibiting conferences under 12 teams from having conference title games. That rule was made to apply for lower division 1 schools and the Big Ten/Pac Ten should be able to push to have that rule changed.
 

magpie said:
So you created a thread about Big East boards, but did not provide a link?

Instead you linked a couple Chicago articles. Well, okay. Still hope Rutgers is not in, unless we bring in 3 teams.
Click to expand...

:cry:

sheesh. me so sorry that i did not do all of the heavy lifting for you, sir. let me know if your fingers start to cramp up (i will pay your doctor's bill) while typing complex search phrases into google such as: "rutgers message boards", "pitt message boards", "syracuse message boards"........

:rolleyes:
 

AhliBobwa said:
The flaw in this argument is that the NY market is primarily a pro-sports market. It's always been that way and the addition of a Big Ten school isn't going to change that reality. If the Big Ten can't get Texas they should forget expansion and focus on changing the rule prohibiting conferences under 12 teams from having conference title games. That rule was made to apply for lower division 1 schools and the Big Ten/Pac Ten should be able to push to have that rule changed.
Click to expand...

With all due respect, I think that argument is overplayed. I'm not suggesting the Big Ten will dominate the market, but by virtue of having it in the footprint will be enough justify the addition of Rutgers if it comes to that. Is Chicago really a college football market or Minneapolis for that matter? I don't think so. Also, this isn't just about the money a championship game would bring. Just imagine if the BTN as first tier cable package in the New York area. That would be huge money that would far overshadow anything earned from a championship game. Remember the stink Comcast made about adding the BTN to yours and my cable package? They argued that not enough of their subscribers were interested in Big Ten sports to warrant the price of adding it. Well lo and behold they added it. Huh? If Notre Dame or Texas don't bite, be prepared for the occasional trip to East Rutherford.
 



I think many of you are forgetting that Rutgers is in New JERSEY. NYC doesn't care about Rutgers. The only college teams that have a small following are Notre Dame and Syracuse. Syracuse even has the slogan "New York's College Team". Watch the Big East tourneyment this week from NYC and notice that there will be almost no Rutgers fans there. Yes it is mostly due to their basketball team always sucking but no one in NYC would care if Rutgers joined the B11 and the cable companies refused to pay big $ for the B10 network.

Get Texas, Mizzu or Nebraska or forget about expansion.
 

at the bar said:
I think many of you are forgetting that Rutgers is in New JERSEY.
Click to expand...

I have yet to see anywhere on this board where anyone has indicated their inability to grasp this fundamental concept. Brilliant use of hyperbole, though.

at the bar said:
NYC doesn't care about Rutgers.
Click to expand...

The TV ratings during the time when Rutgers was recently successful would tend to disagree vehemently with you. Not to mention the fact that the Empire State building was lit in scarlet to celebrate the victory.

at the bar said:
The only college teams that have a small following are Notre Dame and Syracuse.
Click to expand...

I have never set foot in or anywhere near New York City, and even I know this is horribly misinformed, and laughably incorrect.

at the bar said:
Syracuse even has the slogan "New York's College Team".
Click to expand...

Um, you do know that New York is a state as well as a city, correct?

at the bar said:
Get Texas, Mizzu or Nebraska or forget about expansion.
Click to expand...

Texas makes absolutely no sense geographically or historically, and for a litany of reasons that have been posted here ad nauseam, it will never happen.

Missouri and Nebraska at least make sense from a geographic and competitive standpoint, but the overriding concerns for any new member are 1)bringing new eyeballs to the Big Ten footprint; and 2) academics. Both schools fall woefully short in both areas.

Rutgers has already been cited by numerous experts who know more than you or me as the best choice for expansion. Hell, even Maryland, Boston College, Syracuse, or Pittsburgh would be better than Missouri or Nebraska.

How 'bout another beer?
 

I've lived in NYC and have many friends there so I think I'm better qualified than you since you have never been there. Rutgers is a laughing stock in sports. The Rutgers football game that got a good rating was on the Thursday night if my memory is correct so there were no other football games to watch. NYC has 10 times more Syracuse signs and advertisements in NYC than Rutgers. The Empire State building has also been lit up orange after a Syracuse win so just because it was red once means nothing. The Big East fans would be devistated if Syracuse or Pitt left but they hope Rutgers leaves. Shouldn't that tell us something??
 

at the bar said:
The Big East fans would be devistated if Syracuse or Pitt left but they hope Rutgers leaves. Shouldn't that tell us something??
Click to expand...

Yes, it tells us that Big East fans know where their bread is buttered, and that they suck in football. They don't care if Rutgers leaves because their basketball team is nondescript, and they are probably salivating at the prospect of Rutgers leaving so they can get a better basketball team (Temple?) in their place.

And, I should add, even bringing "what fans care about" into the discussion is irrelevant, because the Big Ten has made it increasingly obvious with their recent actions that what the fan wants is way down on their list. A nebulous concept like "actually having good sports teams" is, at best, tertiary to "ka-ching" and "academics". I'm not saying I agree with it, I'm just stating that that's the way it is.
 



Pitt & Syracuse have a much better football history than Rutgers.
 


Yes. I'd take the Pitt or Syracuse football programs over Rutgers. Their records may not be as good recently but based on their histories and name recognition, I trust them more. If Rutgers joined the B11, they would battle for 10-12 place nearly every year in basketball and football. They bring nothing.
 


at the bar said:
Yes. I'd take the Pitt or Syracuse football programs over Rutgers. Their records may not be as good recently but based on their histories and name recognition, I trust them more. If Rutgers joined the B11, they would battle for 10-12 place nearly every year in basketball and football. They bring nothing.
Click to expand...

Apparently, you did not read my post, so I'll state it more eloquently for you:

THE PEOPLE MAKING THIS DECISION CARE VERY LITTLE ABOUT THE COMPETITIVENESS OF THE INSTITUTION'S ATHLETIC PROGRAMS.
 

Given the recent decision to allow Canadian Universities into the NCAA, I think the University of Manitoba is the natural choice as the 12th member of the Big Ten.

Certainly the tall foreheads at the U of Minnesota would appreciate the inclusiveness of calling the athletic department "Bison Sports and Active Living."

http://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/kinrec/bsal/
 

NYC is a fair-weather market for Slutgers, just as the Twin Cities is for the Gophers. RU was the talk of the town during the 2006 season capped with the UL win on Thursday night. But once they stopped being ranked in the top 10 the interest died quicker than a frat party busted by the cops.

That being said - simply getting the BTN and BT awareness and following (to what degree is debatable) out in the NYC market is better than not having it at all. Plus the academics of the school is a good fit, and increasing the recruiting base of the conference is never a bad thing.
 

It would be fun to announce that the Bison have been invited to join the Big Ten, only to have it be our neighbors to the North, rather than to the West. :D

Adding the University of Manitoba would give us the polar bear and caribou demographics.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Apparently, you did not read my post, so I'll state it more eloquently for you:

THE PEOPLE MAKING THIS DECISION CARE VERY LITTLE ABOUT THE COMPETITIVENESS OF THE INSTITUTION'S ATHLETIC PROGRAMS.
Click to expand...

I think you are absolutely right about this, what they do care about are financial considerations and a more competitive program brings more to the table in terms of money.
 

dpodoll68 said:
THE PEOPLE MAKING THIS DECISION CARE VERY LITTLE ABOUT THE COMPETITIVENESS OF THE INSTITUTION'S ATHLETIC PROGRAMS.
Click to expand...
Unless it affects the ability to get on basic cable in the markets they want. You’re totally right that the strength of a school’s athletic program isn’t the deciding factor and that dollar signs and academics are more important considerations. But your evidence supporting Rutgers boils down to the Louisville game/Empire State Building and location. I’m not sure what “experts” you’re referring to in an earlier post but he “expert” opinions I’ve seen are from sportswriters who end up using the same evidence you do.

And on the face of it its not bad evidence. The 8.1 rating for the game against Louisville was impressive and there is no doubt Rutgers has the proximity thing going for it. However, it is important to keep the following factors in mind when looking at that game:
1) Rutgers was facing an undefeated and highly ranked opponent
2) The Big East was very relevant and having a big year for visibility
3) The game was in primetime on a Thursday night without competing college football games to draw eyeballs.

These are great conditions for good TV ratings. Rutgers hasn’t done anything since to draw attention in NYC. In fact, this past season they averaged a 1.51 rating across their 6 national TV appearances. That would seem to indicate that NYC fans don’t really care about Rutgers but are happy to jump on the bandwagon if the attention is there.

I’m not saying you’re wrong for sure and that it will never happen. Maybe the weight of the Big Ten and matchups against teams like Penn State, Ohio State, and Michigan is enough to push them into the big city limelight (and more importantly, basic cable throughout the NYC market). Or maybe adding Rutgers gets the Big Ten enough extra money via the Sports Tier subscribers (where it currently resides) so that it doesn’t matter. I have my doubts. But that’s why the conference hired a company to research this stuff over 18 months.

All I’m saying is that location and one game seem like thin evidence to me to automatically trump the unknown of whether a traditionally poor athletic school with no traditional following in the big city can force NYC cable providers to put the Big Ten on a basic tier.
 

Having spent some time Syracuse and with a good friend teaching at Rutgers........they are both crap holes. That is a technical term for "dumps".
 

dpodoll68 said:
Yes, it tells us that Big East fans know where their bread is buttered, and that they suck in football. They don't care if Rutgers leaves because their basketball team is nondescript, and they are probably salivating at the prospect of Rutgers leaving so they can get a better basketball team (Temple?) in their place.

And, I should add, even bringing "what fans care about" into the discussion is irrelevant, because the Big Ten has made it increasingly obvious with their recent actions that what the fan wants is way down on their list. A nebulous concept like "actually having good sports teams" is, at best, tertiary to "ka-ching" and "academics". I'm not saying I agree with it, I'm just stating that that's the way it is.
Click to expand...

Spot on. The arguments that fans are bringing forth make a lot of sense and even sportswriters are joining the speculation. The one obvious flaw in their thinking is that to quote "The Common Man"; is that they assume the decision is nothing other than SPORTS, SPORTS, SPORTS! The bottom line is money and academics and I think the latter may be a larger consideration. The amount of money to be gained off of academics in areas of research grants, patents, etc... is enormous. Don't think the faculties at each school won't have a say either. On the TV side, Rutgers ratings in 2006 showed that if successful, they can be a draw. Add to that games against teams that have NYC cache like PSU and Michigan and you might have a ratings boost on your hands. At the least, if Rutgers gets you on Cablevision in NYC, the BTN gets dollars regardless of whether they draw huge ratings. The name of the game in cable is number of households, and I think the BTN people think that all they need is a foot in the door of the NYC market, then they can build their own brand and thus build ratings. At the end of the day, the Presidents who make the decisions will make the call based on money and academics, not total bowl appearances and Heisman winners. The real question on Rutgers is can they deliver on the academic side AND deliver a contract with Cablevision in NYC. The Big Ten will not issue an invite to them unless its a done deal ahead of time IMO. If they do, it will be a very happy day indeed for each school financially. For the record, I think Notre Dame and Texas would bring more dollars, but they don't appear overly realistic at this moment, although things can change pretty fast.
 

The Ghost of Bierman said:
:cry:

sheesh. me so sorry that i did not do all of the heavy lifting for you, sir. let me know if your fingers start to cramp up (i will pay your doctor's bill) while typing complex search phrases into google such as: "rutgers message boards", "pitt message boards", "syracuse message boards"........

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Finding any given message board on the subject is one thing. For you to cite a source and not link it is another.
 

Winnipegopher said:
Given the recent decision to allow Canadian Universities into the NCAA....

http://www.umanitoba.ca/faculties/kinrec/bsal/
Click to expand...

Really? Athletics aside, if our country wasn't in such a tailspin, one might wonder just how long it may be before Canada joins the US in some sort of N Amer Union. We are tied so closely in so many ways, and (I know it's only college sports) -- but to have students join a national organization of an internationally linked country. Well. Let's just say some people have the right idea.
 

magpie said:
Really? Athletics aside, if our country wasn't in such a tailspin, one might wonder just how long it may be before Canada joins the US in some sort of N Amer Union. We are tied so closely in so many ways, and (I know it's only college sports) -- but to have students join a national organization of an internationally linked country. Well. Let's just say some people have the right idea.
Click to expand...

Would they join the WCHA as well?
 

Well I was joking about Manitoba but both University of Alberta and University of British Columbia desire to join the NCAA. Their plan is to play D-2 in sports except for a single d-1 sport. The desire is to offer full athletic scholarships- presently Canadian athletes only get partials covering tuition and books.

I'll let you guess which sport they desire to play D-1 in.
 

Winnipegopher said:
Well I was joking about Manitoba but both University of Alberta and University of British Columbia desire to join the NCAA. Their plan is to play D-2 in sports except for a single d-1 sport. The desire is to offer full athletic scholarships- presently Canadian athletes only get partials covering tuition and books.

I'll let you guess which sport they desire to play D-1 in.
Click to expand...

Curling?

I imagine they will want to play D-I hockey, but if they chose D-II, that could revive D-II hockey.

If they do join the NCAA, I wonder what they will do about football? I suppose they could switch over to American Football, but I think it most likely that they would play Canadian Football. In that case, would the NCAA take over administration of Canadian college football, or would they have a seperate membership in a canadian organization?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom