|
Post by Richard on Mar 13, 2010 20:55:37 GMT -6
Wow! So many great ideas and scenarios. I'm in the camp that believes that ND can be forced to make a move if the B10 adds two schools. That could be Rutgers and Syracuse, Rutgers and Mizzou or Rutgers and Nebraska. Any combination that cuts the number of open spots available for ND makes them think long and hard. I believe it will be Rutgers and Syracuse but it definitely isn't clear yet. I'd prefer the 2 to be Miami and FSU. Unlike the Texas schools, there could be synergies to play off of in terms of establishing the BTN on the East Coast. Taking a couple of ACC schools has the same effect as taking a couple BE schools, since the ACC would have to raid the BE.
|
|
|
Post by duffman on Mar 13, 2010 21:10:25 GMT -6
richard,
as i said in an earlier post.. they suck in football and still sell a 70,000+ seat stadium that they are getting ready to expand to 80,000 - 90,000. i was in driving by the music city bowl like 3 - 4 years ago.. it looked 80 - 90 blue and 20 - 10 orange (the opposing team color). it is why they can have worse record and get a better bowl bid.. if they were in say sugar, cotton, orange, they would sell well as last time they were in that position, was like the 50's.. they travel.. football and basketball.. it is surreal..
if you want to see a game, and you are getting tickets from scalpers - from my experience, they drive prices up.. as they fill venues..
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Mar 13, 2010 21:20:52 GMT -6
richard, as i said in an earlier post.. they suck in football and still sell a 70,000+ seat stadium that they are getting ready to expand to 80,000 - 90,000. i was in driving by the music city bowl like 3 - 4 years ago.. it looked 80 - 90 blue and 20 - 10 orange (the opposing team color). it is why they can have worse record and get a better bowl bid.. if they were in say sugar, cotton, orange, they would sell well as last time they were in that position, was like the 50's.. they travel.. football and basketball.. it is surreal.. if you want to see a game, and you are getting tickets from scalpers - from my experience, they drive prices up.. as they fill venues.. Seems that all the backcountry schools (WVA, VTech, Clemson, Kentucky, Tennessee) travel well. I wonder how Arkansas does? Surprising that Mizzou's traveling support is so poor. Maybe they have too many Northerners.
|
|
|
Post by joe4psu on Mar 13, 2010 21:37:22 GMT -6
I'd prefer the 2 to be Miami and FSU. Unlike the Texas schools, there could be synergies to play off of in terms of establishing the BTN on the East Coast. Taking a couple of ACC schools has the same effect as taking a couple BE schools, since the ACC would have to raid the BE. From the info available it seems as though the B10 wants to add the NYC market to it's so called footprint. This is why schools like Rutgers, Syracuse and ND are brought up so much. The addition of Miami and FSU would be great from a lot of perspectives but they don't help with NYC. The viewers that Rutgers or Syracuse would add from NJ and NY could probably generate enough money through the B10 Network to get either of them into the conference. The problem is neither will have much effect in the NYC market. Together they may have more influence and if the B10 adds them it puts pressure on ND to finally join the conference. If NYC is the target those are the 3 schools I think that the B10 will add.
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Mar 13, 2010 21:41:42 GMT -6
There are a decent amount of connections between NYC and S. Florida. I will admit that any positive effect the Florida schools have will be weak, but they'll do more for NYC than the Texas schools.
|
|
|
Post by joe4psu on Mar 13, 2010 21:54:08 GMT -6
There are a decent amount of connections between NYC and S. Florida. I will admit that any positive effect the Florida schools have will be weak, but they'll do more for NYC than the Texas schools. Yeah, if the conference goes after the Texas schools it's all about Texas itself. There a lot of viewers and money for the B10 Network as well as more leverage in negotiations with the other networks. Adding Miami and FSU to the conference would do the same thing in Florida. The question is what do the big shots want to do.
|
|
|
Post by duffman on Mar 13, 2010 22:35:04 GMT -6
richard,
clemson WAS the other team in the bowl game from above, as i said 80-90% UK and 20-10% clemson..
i watched the UT - UK today, and they said 90%+ was UK, even tho they were playing in Tenn
again, speaking from basketball experience.. it is UK,IU,UNC, and KU.. after those 4.. drops off quickly.. when i saw IU vs duke in Rupp.. it looked like a home game for IU! i saw unc vs stanford or ucla.. and it was mostly unc in the venue.. i think MSU sold well last year, as the FF was in their backyard, but i saw them play in texas awhile back.. did not travel so well..
|
|
|
Post by OT on Mar 13, 2010 22:47:42 GMT -6
Does anyone really think that USC will stick around the Pac-10 if the Big Ten were to lock up Rutgers, Texas, Texas A&M, and Notre Dame to get the 15 members?
(I don't see Notre Dame or Texas making the first move to be the 12th school in the Big Ten. That means the Big Ten will have to take Rutgers 1st, then the two Texas schools, before the Big Ten can bag Notre Dame.)
The Pac-10 has little chance to expand to 12 schools (because Utah does not bring enough cable TV households from the Salt Lake City market to justify admission; Colorado is at best a borderline candidate for the Pac-10.)
Furthermore, 3 of the Pacific Northwest schools (Oregon, Oregon State, and Washington State) all want to play USC in football every year, expansion or not, because they all need the USC game in order to pay their bills. Those 3 schools as a block can kill off any attempt by the Pac-10 to expand because they don't want to give up the USC game.
The Pac-10 is vulnerable to losing USC to the Big Ten, should the Big Ten offer USC to be the 16th member, because 1) USC football is the biggest football brand in the Pac-10 and is located in the biggest TV market on the west coast, and 2) Pac-10 basketball is slipping toward mid-major status (because blue chip recruits from Southern California would rather go east so that they can play on the ESPNs during east coast prime time.)
By joining the Big Ten, USC would add at least another $10 million in revenue and gain a recruiting advantage in basketball on the west coast, particularly Southern California, against the Pac-10 schools (because USC would play road games on the ESPNs or the Big Ten Network during east coast prime time.)
Furthermore, if the Big Ten were to add Rutgers, Texas, Texas A&M, and Notre Dame, it would lock up expanded basic cable TV households the #1, #3, #4, and #5 TV markets. USC would deliver the #2 market to the Big Ten.
|
|
|
Post by duffman on Mar 13, 2010 22:49:08 GMT -6
richard,
miami has the east coast connection....
fsu, more connected to florida, georgia, and alabama populations and culture....
ps.. ark travels ok.. (better when they were in the old swc), as they were closer to the old texas schools.. they have many facilities updates in past decade or so thanks to the Wal Mart folks ties to UA up in fayetteville. they have had good basketball going back to the 40's, but they see themselves as a football school.
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Mar 13, 2010 22:51:14 GMT -6
richard, clemson WAS the other team in the bowl game from above, as i said 80-90% UK and 20-10% clemson.. They were coming off of a bummer of a loss at a far-away ACC title game that many travelled to, though. When you were close to advancing to a BCS bowl, you may not care to attend the consolation prize.
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Mar 13, 2010 22:52:34 GMT -6
richard, miami has the east coast connection.... fsu, more connected to florida, georgia, and alabama populations and culture.... True, but I still like both if available.
|
|
|
Post by 84lion on Mar 14, 2010 8:23:21 GMT -6
I'm a Texas alum and the talk of bringing Texas Tech or a denial that Texas would join the Big 10 is for local politician and Big 12 consumption. No one really thinks Texas would care about Tech, only A&M. Texas will just pretend the care about everyone until they announce they are leaving the Big 12. Texas needs an excuse to leave and wants the appearance they don't want to leave. If Texas leaves the Big 12 they are basically taking a shotgun and blowing the Big 12's head off. Another thing about Texas. We have options. The PAC 10 would love to have us and Texas will use that to its advantage to extract extra benefits from the Big 10. And I believe we would get some. For instance: there is a penalty to leave the Big 12, would the Big 10 be interested is paying all or some of that - say a signing bonus? PAC 10 might be. Texas probably doesn't want many road games way up north in November, well take those in September when it is blistering hot in Austin. The Conference Championship game in Texas every... 3 years?, 4 years? Jerry's World in Dallas, Reliant Stadium in Houston. This point has been beaten to death, but here's the relative tv money: Big Ten: $242 million ($22 million per school) SEC: $205 million ($17.08 million per school) Big 12: $78 million ($6.5 million per school) ACC: $67 million ($5.58 million per school) Pac-10: $58 million ($5.8 million per school) Big East: $13 million for football/$20 million for basketball ($2.8 million per football school) I have no doubt that Texas would increase the tv money of the Pac-10 substantially (and that they would be welcomed into the conference), but to keep Texas at its current take would require about 1/5th of the current Pac-10 money. The "helping with the exit fee" is probably more reasonable. While I cannot see the Big Ten doing this for one of the Big East castaways, for Texas it could happen. From what I've seen the exit penalty is effectively one year of conference money (50% a year for two years). Everyone in the conference would recoup the "investment" the first year Texas plays. The CCG location I suppose could be negotiable on a rotating basis. The problem is this: suppose Texas and A&M join and agree to have the CCG at Jerry World once every 7 years. What happens if that year, its Wisconsin vs Penn State? If UT alums/fans believe that UT deserves special treatment or “concessions” or some other before even joining another conference… If this attitude permeates the UT admin (and my suspicion is that it does), Big Ten would be advised to steer clear. The Big Ten currently treats all members equally. I find it difficult to believe that Big Ten University presidents would approve the addition of a “more equal animal” UT (no matter how much money they might bring to the table); the bigger schools (e.g. – Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State) would see their influence diminished while smaller schools would see themselves marginalized even further. If I’m “thinking like a University president” do I really want this bull in my china shop? “Texas creates so much $$$ we practically carry the Big 12.” Even with the smilie that’s quite the attitude. Maybe Texas should go independent if they create “so much dollars.” The comment about the CCG makes a good point. A CCG in Texas between, say, Ohio State and Penn State (and it might well happen that these two rivals wind up in different divisions before all is said and done) makes about as much sense as the SEC holding their title game in Cincinnati because Kentucky is next door. Right now I think that none of the Big Ten schools would have an objection to a CCG in Chicago or Indianapolis as central locations. And I think that’s a big reason why any Big Ten expansion teams come from neighboring states as opposed to far-flung locations. Having a Big Ten CCG in Texas when there would only be one or two schools there makes no sense as it is not a "central" location for the Big Ten. And you’d have all the other Big Ten schools clamoring for the CCG rotating thru their state. The SEC has success with its championship in Atlanta, a central location.
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Mar 14, 2010 9:23:23 GMT -6
Plus, the Big10 has a lot of fans on the East Coast and in Florida. A championship game in NYC or DC would likely draw as well as a game in Detroit/Indy/Chicago unless both teams were from the Iowa/Minny/Wisconsin trio or Indiana. A championship game in Florida featuring 2 northern teams will likely be well-attended as well (though you run the danger of cannabalizing support for your Florida bowl games).
|
|