MUScoop

B1G didn't take too kindly to Notre Dame's move.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/source-maryland-big-ten-pretty-185500708--nfl.html
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8644587/maryland-terrapins-rutgers-scarlet-knights-talks-join-big-ten-conference-sources-say
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/stewart_mandel/11/17/big-ten-maryland-rutgers-realignment/

Dumb. Though it's nice to see the ACC get poached.

More trouble for the Big East if the Big Ten decides to take Rutgers.

Quote from: TrueBlueAndGold on November 17, 2012, 02:34:48 PM
More trouble for the Big East if the Big Ten decides to take Rutgers.

More trouble for the Big East if the Big 10 gets Maryland.

If true, you have to believe the ACC would move on UConn, Louisville, or both. At that point, its no longer worth it for the basketball schools to stay in the Big East. Almost all the basketball powers would be non-football schools, and it's not worth being dragged down by Southern Methodists and Central Floridas just to play Cincinnati and Memphis every year.

The Big East would look like:

Non-football schools
Marquette
DePaul
Georgetown
Villanova
Seton Hall
St. John's
Providence

Football schools who play basketball
Cincinnati
Southern Methodist
Memphis
Temple
Houston
USF
UCF

Football-only schools
Boise State
San Diego State
Navy

Quote from: Buzz Williams' Spillproof Chiclets Cup on November 17, 2012, 03:06:50 PM
If true, you have to believe the ACC would move on UConn, Louisville, or both. At that point, its no longer worth it for the basketball schools to stay in the Big East. Almost all the basketball powers would be non-football schools, and it's not worth being dragged down by Southern Methodists and Central Floridas just to play Cincinnati and Memphis every year.

Big Ten takes Maryland and Rutgers.  ACC takes UConn.  No way The ACC takes Louisville.  For Louisville it's Big 12 or bust (i.e. stay in the Big East).

But what does Maryland and Rutgers really bring to the Big Ten? I hope Maryland enjoys paying the $50 payout to leave.

Quote from: INDYWarrior on November 17, 2012, 04:43:46 PM
But what does Maryland and Rutgers really bring to the Big Ten? I hope Maryland enjoys paying the $50 payout to leave.

One of Maryland's biggest boosters is Under Armour's CEO Kevin Plank. On Tuesday it was reported that he is cashing out of $65 million in stock. Doesn't seem like a coincidence to me.

http://m.bizjournals.com/baltimore/news/2012/11/13/under-armour-ceo-kevin-plank-selling.html?r=full

Quote from: INDYWarrior on November 17, 2012, 04:43:46 PM
But what does Maryland and Rutgers really bring to the Big Ten? I hope Maryland enjoys paying the $50 payout to leave.

Supposedly eyeballs to the television.  Increased revenue though the BTN.

I think this would be a mistake for the B1G. Don't you think they could do better than Maryland and Rutgers?

Quote from: MARQ_13 on November 17, 2012, 05:08:36 PM
I think this would be a mistake for the B1G. Don't you think they could do better than Maryland and Rutgers?

What is your metric?  By quality of athletic programs?  Probably.  By quality of television markets?  Probably not.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 17, 2012, 05:31:01 PM

What is your metric?  By quality of athletic programs?  Probably.  By quality of television markets?  Probably not.

TV markets is the biggest (only) metric in this equation.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 17, 2012, 05:31:01 PM

What is your metric?  By quality of athletic programs?  Probably.  By quality of television markets?  Probably not.

UMD's mens and women's basketball have won the National Title in the past ten years.  The mens' soccer team won, as has the woman's field hockey and I believe soccer. Until a few years ago, the football team had a good 8 year run with Ralph Friedgen and prior to that Bobby Ross. To say the athletic programs are a substandard of quality is not true.

UMD covers the entire Maryland region, Northern Virginia and DC for the ACC.  The media market is huge since the only other ACC school close is Virginia to the south.

I have been a long time Maryland resident and I cannot fathom UMD leaving, as they were a charter member and going to cost them a 50 million buyout.

Rutgers is not even close in athletics, but probably would have a larger TV market based upon New York City and Newark markets, mainly in population.  

I for one would be shocked if this happens, but who knows these days.

Quote from: LittleMurs on November 17, 2012, 03:12:05 PM
Big Ten takes Maryland and Rutgers.  ACC takes UConn.  No way The ACC takes Louisville.  For Louisville it's Big 12 or bust (i.e. stay in the Big East).

ACC will have to give Boston College a load of money to drop its aversion to UConn.

Quote from: ecompt on November 17, 2012, 06:13:45 PM
ACC will have to give Boston College a load of money to drop its aversion to UConn.

Well...the ACC would be $50 million richer.

Quote from: PTM on November 17, 2012, 05:48:16 PM
TV markets is the biggest (only) metric in this equation.

But if you are watering down your product in the process, is that a good thing?  I mean, are people going to watch a Maryland v. Illinois Big Ten tilt?

On the other hand, they don't really have many options IF they want to expand.  Texas and Oklahoma aren't moving.  Kansas or Iowa State don't bring anything.

For what it is worth.  Darren Rovell, ESPNs business guy, wrote that Maryland and Rutgers would have to add at least 17% to revenues for current B1G schools to earn the same amount of money.  He questions if that would be possible, at the moment; uncertain about the long-run effect as well.

Spent some time browsing the Maryland scout site and some comments in local papers.  Very very Maryland fans had positive comments.  Feel that they aren't really a cultural fit for the conference. 

Rutgers delivering the NYC TV market is comical...if you're aiming for the armpit of America, then you're spot on with Rutgers.

Quote from: DCWarriors04 on November 17, 2012, 07:47:04 PM
Rutgers delivering the NYC TV market is comical...if you're aiming for the armpit of America, then you're spot on with Rutgers.

Rutgers is in North Dakota?

Just thought I'd post up the list of viable B1G members. People may not want to admit it, but AAU membership is a must. It just is. I'm not including SEC or Pac-12 schools as they don't seem to have any interest in those conferences. If I did, it would include Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Missouri, Oregon, Stanford, USC, Vanderbilt, and Washington. Color-coding, green seem more likely (to me), yellow not as much, red no chance.

• Duke: Deliver worthwhile markets, but private status doesn't help. Maybe as package with UNC.
  
• Georgia Tech: Atlanta is a top-10 market and would give southern presence. Makes more sense than many realize.
  
• Iowa State: No way Iowa allows it, and doesn't expand into a new market
  
• Kansas: If they wanted Kansas, they'd have moved on them earlier, but they're a future option.
  
• Maryland: Washington DC is the #9 market, Baltimore is #26, and it finally gives PSU a geographic rival.
  
• Rutgers: I'm not convinced Rutgers delivers NYC. If the B1G has heard from cable execs that RU would get them access to NYC eyeballs, it makes more sense.
  
• North Carolina: If the B1G ever came calling, I think they'd be hard pressed to say no, and they deliver 4 top-50 markets.
  
• Pittsburgh: If not for PSU, I think they'd be high on the list.
  
• Texas: No because of the Longhorn Network they are unwilling to give up.
  
• Virginia: Surprised they haven't been mentioned, 8 million in-state eyes and the DC market?

Both North Carolina and Virginia have issues with other public universities being "left behind."  Furthermore, I really doubt North Carolina would be interested.

BTW, an attorney friend of mine sent me a message.  He says that there will be no way Maryland pays a $50M exit fee.  Since they voted against it, and no window was given before the fee was implemented, they have set themselves up that they have been coerced to enter a legal agreement for which they didn't approve.  Not sure how accurate that is, but needless to say that it could be negotiated downward.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 18, 2012, 07:07:03 AM
Both North Carolina and Virginia have issues with other public universities being "left behind."  Furthermore, I really doubt North Carolina would be interested.

Of course they do. Just like Syracuse and Pitt feel betrayed that BC went to the ACC. It's easy to rail on about being left behind right up until Jim Delany shows up on your doorstep with bags of cash. Both meet the significant B1G criteria and provide significant television markets. If the league does decide to expand, those two certainly make more sense than ISU, Kansas, or Duke.

Believe it or not there are other factors to be weighed in any school additions and conference movement. The Big Ten also has academic and institutional requirements that need to be met before accepting a new member. It's just not only TV exposure, recruiting and such. Penn State had to fix/ address some of those before their entry and so did Nebraska.
Paying their current conference exit fee and changing the logo on their basketball floor isn't all that needs to be done. The Big Ten are high level academic institutions and their presidents will have to be sold on the applicants total abilities to belong in the conference.

Quote from: brewcity77 on November 18, 2012, 08:21:23 AM
Of course they do. Just like Syracuse and Pitt feel betrayed that BC went to the ACC. It's easy to rail on about being left behind right up until Jim Delany shows up on your doorstep with bags of cash. Both meet the significant B1G criteria and provide significant television markets. If the league does decide to expand, those two certainly make more sense than ISU, Kansas, or Duke.

I don't think you understand what I am saying.  It's not a betrayal issue...its an issue where there is a state governing board for higher education, similar to the UW Board of Regents, and/or state legislators would make life very difficult for UNC or UVA to leave.  That's the reason Oklahoma State is tethered to Oklahoma...why Texas Tech is with Texas...

A&M got to the SEC because pretty much anyone who was in a position of power at the time was an A&M alum.

Quote from: Warriors10 on November 17, 2012, 06:57:02 PM
For what it is worth.  Darren Rovell, ESPNs business guy, wrote that Maryland and Rutgers would have to add at least 17% to revenues for current B1G schools to earn the same amount of money.  He questions if that would be possible, at the moment; uncertain about the long-run effect as well.

But they will, first off, because they just bring MORE games. More products to sell. And who watches Maryland v Illinois? People in Maryland and Illinois! These are two huge state schools that are the singular dominant collegiate force in their respective states. I don't get how this is bad for TV.

Quote from: Aughnanure on November 18, 2012, 10:05:54 AM
But they will, first off, because they just bring MORE games. More products to sell. And who watches Maryland v Illinois? People in Maryland and Illinois! These are two huge state schools that are the singular dominant collegiate force in their respective states. I don't get how this is bad for TV.

Which by default also means people in DC and Chicago, two top-10 media markets. Maryland certainly makes more sense than some of the schools that have been mentioned in the past couple years. For me the question is more who joins them if they come, because I can't see the B1G going for just one school. Rutgers seems the hot name, though personally I think Georgia Tech might make more sense.

Quote from: brewcity77 on November 18, 2012, 10:17:56 AM
Which by default also means people in DC and Chicago, two top-10 media markets. Maryland certainly makes more sense than some of the schools that have been mentioned in the past couple years. For me the question is more who joins them if they come, because I can't see the B1G going for just one school. Rutgers seems the hot name, though personally I think Georgia Tech might make more sense.

Still 2 more spots to 16.

Quote from: Aughnanure on November 18, 2012, 10:28:45 AM
Still 2 more spots to 16.

True, but they can go two-by-two (hands of blue?). Add Maryland and Rutgers or Ga Tech now, then two more when they settle on the others they want. Would allow for two seven-team football divisions, though it would definitely mean some rivals rarely see each other (unless they go to a 10-game league schedule).

I still just don't see Rutgers. Do they really deliver NYC? Because Jersey is the armpit of the country, need more than just the state to justify it, I'd think.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 18, 2012, 07:07:03 AM
Both North Carolina and Virginia have issues with other public universities being "left behind."  Furthermore, I really doubt North Carolina would be interested.

I agree.  If North Carolina had any inclination (and the ability) to leave, I really think that they'd be in the SEC right now, instead of Missouri.  Virginia is the reason that Virginia Tech got into the ACC when they did.

Quote from: brewcity77 on November 18, 2012, 10:56:29 AM
True, but they can go two-by-two (hands of blue?). Add Maryland and Rutgers or Ga Tech now, then two more when they settle on the others they want. Would allow for two seven-team football divisions, though it would definitely mean some rivals rarely see each other (unless they go to a 10-game league schedule).

I still just don't see Rutgers. Do they really deliver NYC? Because Jersey is the armpit of the country, need more than just the state to justify it, I'd think.

Andy Katz tweeted earlier that during Rutgers football games, only 1.7% of NYC TV market has the game on.  It is obviously worse for basketball, etc.  Judge that number how you want, but that isn't really "delivering" NYC to the B1G

I think the only thing we can hope for is that  also Clemson and Florida St. jump to Big 12.

Quote from: bilsu on November 18, 2012, 05:39:53 PM
I think the only thing we can hope for is that  alos Clemson and Florida St. jump to Big 12.

Would that sequence of events put the Big East in better shape than the ACC? Would Clemson and Florida State to the Big 12 and Maryland and let's say Georgia Tech (instead of Rutgers) to the B1G be a good thing for the Big East? Or would the Big East still get poached?

Quote from: MARQ_13 on November 18, 2012, 05:56:42 PM
Would that sequence of events put the Big East in better shape than the ACC? Would Clemson and Florida State to the Big 12 and Maryland and let's say Georgia Tech (instead of Rutgers) to the B1G be a good thing for the Big East? Or would the Big East still get poached?

Probably not, but it would give me some satisfaction.

Quote from: brewcity77 on November 18, 2012, 05:52:19 AM
Just thought I'd post up the list of viable B1G members. People may not want to admit it, but AAU membership is a must. It just is.

It HAS been important.

With every dollar that comes in, it becomes less and less important.

IF the Big10 wants to maximize revenue (they do), they are eventually going to add a non-aau school.

It might not be today, or tomorrow, but it's going to happen.

I know there are a ton of politics involved, but there is one thing that ends all of the debates. $.

Quote from: Warriors10 on November 18, 2012, 04:42:10 PM
Andy Katz tweeted earlier that during Rutgers football games, only 1.7% of NYC TV market has the game on.  It is obviously worse for basketball, etc.  Judge that number how you want, but that isn't really "delivering" NYC to the B1G

True but all of NYC would tune in to watch Rutgers if they were playing the likes of Minnesota, Purdue and Iowa!

That was obviously said sarcastically but there are actual B10 people who believe that.

Quote from: Warriors10 on November 18, 2012, 04:42:10 PM
Andy Katz tweeted earlier that during Rutgers football games, only 1.7% of NYC TV market has the game on.  It is obviously worse for basketball, etc.  Judge that number how you want, but that isn't really "delivering" NYC to the B1G

Fair point, then again look at the competition.  One wonders if playing Ohio State, Michigan, Wisconsin, Penn State or the other powers on the football side would raise those ratings. More than likely....yes.  Playing Cincinnati, Louisville, South Florida, Houston, etc, is ever going to get those ratings going.  That will be a different scenario against the blue bloods of football in the Big Ten.  Also note that the Big Ten has a ton of alumni in the New York area that are not watching Rutgers vs Cincinnati for good reasons.  You can bet those Michigan alum are going to watch Michigan vs Rutgers.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 19, 2012, 09:00:37 AM
Fair point, then again look at the competition.  One wonders if playing Ohio State, Michigan, Wisconsin, Penn State or the other powers on the football side would raise those ratings. More than likely....yes.  Playing Cincinnati, Louisville, South Florida, Houston, etc, is ever going to get those ratings going.  That will be a different scenario against the blue bloods of football in the Big Ten.  Also note that the Big Ten has a ton of alumni in the New York area that are not watching Rutgers vs Cincinnati for good reasons.  You can bet those Michigan alum are going to watch Michigan vs Rutgers.

Those Michigan alums are watching Michigan no matter who they play.  They won't be watching Rutgers vs Indiana though.

This is the kind of stuff that happens consistently at research institutions that are not captured in a stadium of 80,000 but impact our lives all the times.  Athletics will always get the coverage and the publicity, but there are some amazing things happening daily that we all take for granted.

I plucked this one out of today's news but there are literally stories like this on a daily basis in the world of medicine, technology, design, engineering, etc.

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/507481/fabrication-trick-offers-fivefold-leap-in-hard-disk-capacity/

Missouri and Notre Dame were the perfect fits for the Big 10.  Even Syracuse.  Rutgers and Maryland, really?

Quote from: WarhawkWarrior on November 19, 2012, 09:50:44 AM
Missouri and Notre Dame were the perfect fits for the Big 10.  Even Syracuse.  Rutgers and Maryland, really?

Why do people not get Maryland and Rutgers? They're perfect. Penn St has always kind of been the awkward outlier, now you give them a real potential rival in Rutgers (Penn St is HUGE in South Jersey). Maryland is solid all-around (except their finances) and is literally the ONLY college football team in the DMV area.

State College, PA is closer to both Rutgers and Maryland than it is to any Big Ten school.  The Big Ten clearly wants Notre Dame, but not sure what is that much different between Maryland and Missouri.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 19, 2012, 09:42:42 AM
This is the kind of stuff that happens consistently at research institutions that are not captured in a stadium of 80,000 but impact our lives all the times.  Athletics will always get the coverage and the publicity, but there are some amazing things happening daily that we all take for granted.

I plucked this one out of today's news but there are literally stories like this on a daily basis in the world of medicine, technology, design, engineering, etc.

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/507481/fabrication-trick-offers-fivefold-leap-in-hard-disk-capacity/

+1

Quote from: Guns n Ammo on November 19, 2012, 08:32:43 AM
It HAS been important.

With every dollar that comes in, it becomes less and less important.

IF the Big10 wants to maximize revenue (they do), they are eventually going to add a non-aau school.

It might not be today, or tomorrow, but it's going to happen.

I know there are a ton of politics involved, but there is one thing that ends all of the debates. $.

Quote from: axaguy on November 18, 2012, 08:22:13 AM
Believe it or not there are other factors to be weighed in any school additions and conference movement. The Big Ten also has academic and institutional requirements that need to be met before accepting a new member. It's just not only TV exposure, recruiting and such. Penn State had to fix/ address some of those before their entry and so did Nebraska.
Paying their current conference exit fee and changing the logo on their basketball floor isn't all that needs to be done. The Big Ten are high level academic institutions and their presidents will have to be sold on the applicants total abilities to belong in the conference.

Can we PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE stop this bullish*t that academics will play any role in these moves? Just stop it. I'm begging. This is about dollars. Period. End of story.

And by the way, those two Big 10 schools currently on probation...are they Leaders or Legends?  ::)

Quote from: Groin_pull on November 19, 2012, 11:08:12 AM

Can we PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE stop this bullish*t that academics will play any role in these moves? Just stop it. I'm begging. This is about dollars. Period. End of story.

And by the way, those two Big 10 schools currently on probation...are they Leaders or Legends?  ::)

No. Because it's not BS. I think people underestimate the arrogance of the B1G. They are convinced they are the best conference in the country. They turn up their noses at non-AAU members. Adding Maryland and Rutgers gets them to 14. They can still add Kansas and Georgia Tech, both of whom would likely jump at the invitation and are both AAU members.

You can pout and whine that it doesn't matter all you like, but then why are 13/14 B1G schools AAU members and why have they not admitted any non-AAU members? And I know everyone will point at ND...but let's be honest, if they had joined the B1G, they'd have been rushed through the AAU acceptance process faster than you can say Touchdown Jesus.

It matters to one conference because they in their arrogance think they can have it all. Thus far, they have been able to do just that. Why do you think they would change their core values midstream when they haven't had to so far?

Quote from: brewcity77 on November 19, 2012, 11:34:51 AM
You can pout and whine that it doesn't matter all you like, but then why are 13/14 B1G schools AAU members and why have they not admitted any non-AAU members?

Why didn't the Big10 go to 16 teams years ago?

$.

I know the AAU thing is important, but let's not pretend like it's the ultimate deal-breaker.

Conferences are evolving quickly in ways we never imagined. Why? Yep. $

Quote from: brewcity77 on November 19, 2012, 11:34:51 AM
No. Because it's not BS. I think people underestimate the arrogance of the B1G. They are convinced they are the best conference in the country. They turn up their noses at non-AAU members. Adding Maryland and Rutgers gets them to 14. They can still add Kansas and Georgia Tech, both of whom would likely jump at the invitation and are both AAU members.

You can pout and whine that it doesn't matter all you like, but then why are 13/14 B1G schools AAU members and why have they not admitted any non-AAU members? And I know everyone will point at ND...but let's be honest, if they had joined the B1G, they'd have been rushed through the AAU acceptance process faster than you can say Touchdown Jesus.

It matters to one conference because they in their arrogance think they can have it all. Thus far, they have been able to do just that. Why do you think they would change their core values midstream when they haven't had to so far?

I think we're in general agreement on this. I definitely DON'T underestimate the arrogance of the Big 10. (That's why I love watching them get their collective as*es kicked every bowl season)

However....core values???? Are you kidding? What makes you think they have any values at all? How many Legends and Leaders have been on probation over the years? Puh-leze, they're no different than any other BCS conference. Their pious b.s. is disgusting.

Quote from: Groin_pull on November 19, 2012, 11:08:12 AM

Can we PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE stop this bullish*t that academics will play any role in these moves? Just stop it. I'm begging. This is about dollars. Period. End of story.

And by the way, those two Big 10 schools currently on probation...are they Leaders or Legends?  ::)

You are ignoring reality if you don't think the Big Ten puts an ENORMOUS value on the type of schools they are adding....they want markets, alumni base, ratings, and yes...academics.  All of the above.  If not, they would go in and grab a Louisville, or Cincinnati, or UCONN....they haven't and they won't despite those schools delivering everything but the academics.  It's key for them.  You can point to probations or whatever all you want, those schools go above and beyond just athletics...that is one piece, but not the sole piece.  It is why 13 of their 14 schools are AAU members and that will not change moving forward.

Quote from: brewcity77 on November 18, 2012, 10:56:29 AM
True, but they can go two-by-two (hands of blue?). Add Maryland and Rutgers or Ga Tech now, then two more when they settle on the others they want. Would allow for two seven-team football divisions, though it would definitely mean some rivals rarely see each other (unless they go to a 10-game league schedule).

I still just don't see Rutgers. Do they really deliver NYC? Because Jersey is the armpit of the country, need more than just the state to justify it, I'd think.

Whatever the reason it worked. NJ is a big market in its own right.  By the way NJ is not the armpit of the country (as someone who has lived there...and Wisconsin).

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 19, 2012, 10:47:28 AM
State College, PA is closer to both Rutgers and Maryland than it is to any Big Ten school.  The Big Ten clearly wants Notre Dame, but not sure what is that much different between Maryland and Missouri.

In my mind, the demise of the Big East started years ago when Penn State was not taken as a member.  That was the beginning of the end.  It would have likely allowed Syracuse to remain a powerful foil and program.  People forget that Syracuse was a solid football school, but they have literally fallen off the planet the last 10 to 15 years.  It's unfortunate where things are and MU not having football is certainly a killer.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 19, 2012, 12:52:39 PM
In my mind, the demise of the Big East started years ago when Penn State was not taken as a member.  That was the beginning of the end.  It would have likely allowed Syracuse to remain a powerful foil and program.  People forget that Syracuse was a solid football school, but they have literally fallen off the planet the last 10 to 15 years.  It's unfortunate where things are and MU not having football is certainly a killer.

Wait, Syracuse University is no longer a part of planet Earth?!? Is there just a big crater in upstate NY now?

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 19, 2012, 12:52:39 PM
In my mind, the demise of the Big East started years ago when Penn State was not taken as a member.  That was the beginning of the end.  It would have likely allowed Syracuse to remain a powerful foil and program.  People forget that Syracuse was a solid football school, but they have literally fallen off the planet the last 10 to 15 years.  It's unfortunate where things are and MU not having football is certainly a killer.

That's a rough fall. Syracuse to Conference Milky Way?

This move, liked or not does a lot of things
-Kills any chance that PSU was going to be booted from the B1G, if that was even a possibility in the first place.
-Maintains the B1G's academic dominance, poo poo it all you want but it is part of B1G's brand identity.  Based on their athletic performances to date it's one of the things that differentiates them from say the Big 12
-The 1.7% stat is great for reporting, but if you put Rutgers up against Penn State, Ohio State, or Michigan and I guarantee that number is much bigger just based on the number of alumni in NYC and New Jersey alone.
-Raids the ACC forcing them to add a member of less quality, potentially weakening them, leading to hope that ND will join the B1G
-Moves the B1G into television markets where the demographics are growing instead of shrinking like it is in the midwest
-Opens up the DC market for both basketball and football

The quality of the teams is debatable but then again everyone said TAMU would get killed in the SEC and look how that turned out this year.

I don't think this move on its own weakens the ACC.  It's one school out of 14.  They actually don't *have* to add anyone.  Its what this move opens doors to that may weaken the ACC.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 19, 2012, 01:15:56 PM
I don't think this move on its own weakens the ACC.  It's one school out of 14.  They actually don't *have* to add anyone.  Its what this move opens doors to that may weaken the ACC.

Agreed. Its the first step in the chain of causation.  At the end of the day for various reasons the SEC and B1G are the only two conferences that are nearly untouchable.  So both conferences want to avoid fights with each other and keep the rest of the "kids" distracted by fighting over the scrapes.

Replacement for Maryland, all are Big East schools.  No surprise.   ACC talking to USF, Cincinnati, Louisville, UCONN for replacement of Maryland.

Let's go USF!!

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 19, 2012, 01:15:56 PM
I don't think this move on its own weakens the ACC.  It's one school out of 14.  They actually don't *have* to add anyone.  Its what this move opens doors to that may weaken the ACC.

Like Florida State trying to leave to go to the SEC.

Looks like the ACC is starting to worry and this won't end well for them I don't think. I bet they wish they would have taken West Virginia when they had the chance.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 19, 2012, 12:52:39 PM
In my mind, the demise of the Big East started years ago when Penn State was not taken as a member.  That was the beginning of the end.  It would have likely allowed Syracuse to remain a powerful foil and program.  People forget that Syracuse was a solid football school, but they have literally fallen off the planet the last 10 to 15 years.  It's unfortunate where things are and MU not having football is certainly a killer.

The fact that the BE didnt vote Ped State into the conference was NOT the downfall of the BE. For starters, Ped State wanted equal revenue sharing in basketball and a sweatheart deal in football. That is why they were not accepted. Also, the admins from that era have stated publicly (years later) that they always wanted to be part of the Big 10. Had they moved to the BE, it would have only been a temporary home anyways. They just took Maryland and will soon take Rutgers. If Ped State was a BE school, they would have been long gone before those two.

And the thing that sucks about losing Syracuse, aside from the fact that their fans buy more tickets than any fanbase for the BE tournament, is that their new head coach is turning their football program around. A strong Syracuse football program most definitely would have helped the BE. Unfortunately, they had a horrible coach that they didnt fire soon enough and he drove it into the ground. Now that they are on the upswing, they are proprty of whatever will be left of the ACC.

I'll throw in another for you.  The new members, Houston, Boise State, etc...in their contracts it calls for a minimum revenue number from the television contract.  They can leave the conference WITHOUT PENALTY if those numbers are not achieved.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 19, 2012, 02:10:02 PM
I'll throw in another for you.  The new members, Houston, Boise State, etc...in their contracts it calls for a minimum revenue number from the television contract.  They can leave the conference WITHOUT PENALTY if those numbers are not achieved.

So what? Where are they going to go? MWC? The BE will still likely have a much more lucrative contract that that conference. What is their break even point to offset travel costs and bowl tie-ins? They are guaranteed at least several million dollars, they should stick with the BE. This is all about money, after all.

Another note....

Who would have thought that a conference called the Big East would not field an all-sports member from the states of New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts?  ?-(  Yet...field football teams from Texas, Idaho and California....

Ugh.

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 01:56:28 PM
The fact that the BE didnt vote Ped State into the conference was NOT the downfall of the BE. For starters, Ped State wanted equal revenue sharing in basketball and a sweatheart deal in football. That is why they were not accepted. Also, the admins from that era have stated publicly (years later) that they always wanted to be part of the Big 10. Had they moved to the BE, it would have only been a temporary home anyways. They just took Maryland and will soon take Rutgers. If Ped State was a BE school, they would have been long gone before those two.

And the thing that sucks about losing Syracuse, aside from the fact that their fans buy more tickets than any fanbase for the BE tournament, is that their new head coach is turning their football program around. A strong Syracuse football program most definitely would have helped the BE. Unfortunately, they had a horrible coach that they didnt fire soon enough and he drove it into the ground. Now that they are on the upswing, they are proprty of whatever will be left of the ACC.

Just my opinion, but the BE had a dominant program right in their midst and didn't take them in because they were stuck in basketball mode still.  Yes, it would have cost money and probably an unequal share, but the solidification of the Big East along with Miami, Va. Tech, Pittsburgh, Boston College, Syracuse and WVU is a very nice football conference. 

I think some people at Penn State have some memory problems (strike that, we know they do based on their issues with the sexual issues).  In the early 80's Penn State applied to be a member and the Big East said no.  PSU may have wanted to be in the Big Ten, but they actually applied as a member of the Big East.

Paterno wanted to create the EASTERN CONFERENCE and the issue was that the Big East schools, mostly basketball only, didn't want to go for it because the league had just started as a basketball conference.  Of course later, the Big East added Miami, Va Tech, etc to create the football portion of the conference, but the original EASTERN CONF that Paterno proposed was going to be quite a conference on it's own with roots in the east.  Instead, the Big East schools said no and offered only a basketball membership which PSU declined.

In 2009, Mike Tranghese admitted the biggest mistake the Big East conference made was not asking Penn State to join.   

Former Big East commissioner Mike Tranghese told the New York Times in a 2009 interview that not inviting Penn State was the Big East's "one major mistake." In fact, Tranghese recalled to the Times a post-vote meeting with founding commissioner Dave Gavitt, who died Saturday. "We will rue the day over this decision," Tranghese said he told Gavitt.

"You look back on it, and the whole of college athletics would be changed now," Tranghese told the Times.

What made the Big East's decision shortsided, both Tranghese and Crouthamel realized, was its basis on basketball instead of football. "A lot of the directors felt it was a basketball league," Tranghese told the Times, and Penn State's underdeveloped basketball program didn't pass muster.

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 02:20:13 PM
So what? Where are they going to go? MWC? The BE will still likely have a much more lucrative contract that that conference. What is their break even point to offset travel costs and bowl tie-ins? They are guaranteed at least several million dollars, they should stick with the BE. This is all about money, after all.

You would be surprised at their options right now, and without the penalty it makes those options every bit as attractive. 

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 19, 2012, 03:19:52 PM
Just my opinion, but the BE had a dominant program right in their midst and didn't take them in because they were stuck in basketball mode still.  Yes, it would have cost money and probably an unequal share, but the solidification of the Big East along with Miami, Va. Tech, Pittsburgh, Boston College, Syracuse and WVU is a very nice football conference.  

I think some people at Penn State have some memory problems (strike that, we know they do based on their issues with the sexual issues).  In the early 80's Penn State applied to be a member and the Big East said no.  PSU may have wanted to be in the Big Ten, but they actually applied as a member of the Big East.

Paterno wanted to create the EASTERN CONFERENCE and the issue was that the Big East schools, mostly basketball only, didn't want to go for it because the league had just started as a basketball conference.  Of course later, the Big East added Miami, Va Tech, etc to create the football portion of the conference, but the original EASTERN CONF that Paterno proposed was going to be quite a conference on it's own with roots in the east.  Instead, the Big East schools said no and offered only a basketball membership which PSU declined.

In 2009, Mike Tranghese admitted the biggest mistake the Big East conference made was not asking Penn State to join.    

Former Big East commissioner Mike Tranghese told the New York Times in a 2009 interview that not inviting Penn State was the Big East's "one major mistake." In fact, Tranghese recalled to the Times a post-vote meeting with founding commissioner Dave Gavitt, who died Saturday. "We will rue the day over this decision," Tranghese said he told Gavitt.

"You look back on it, and the whole of college athletics would be changed now," Tranghese told the Times.

What made the Big East's decision shortsided, both Tranghese and Crouthamel realized, was its basis on basketball instead of football. "A lot of the directors felt it was a basketball league," Tranghese told the Times, and Penn State's underdeveloped basketball program didn't pass muster.

Yes, I am aware of all that you wrote. So you are telling me the BE would have been a formidable football conference had they accepted Ped State with a sweatheart deal? Of course. Ped State, Miami, VTech and Syracuse would have been a great conference. But why do you think that they would have stayed in the BE to this day? Look at their game day atmosphere....which one is unlike the others? Which university ( a state flagship) is unlike the others? You damn well know Ped State would have ended up in the B10 regardless of whether or not they joined the BE. And yes, there are academic administrators (not athletic department personnel) that said their goal all along was to get to the B10. Again, one university's mission would have been unlike all the others....

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 03:29:45 PM
Yes, I am aware of all that you wrote. So you are telling me the BE would have been a formidable football conference had they accepted Ped State with a sweatheart deal? Of course. Ped State, Miami, VTech and Syracuse would have been a great conference. But why do you think that they would have stayed in the BE to this day? Look at their game day atmosphere....which one is unlike the others? Which university ( a state flagship) is unlike the others? You damn well know Ped State would have ended up in the B10 regardless of whether or not they joined the BE. And yes, there are academic administrators (not athletic department personnel) that said their goal all along was to get to the B10. Again, one university's mission would have been unlike all the others....

Tranghese said it best "we will rue this day".

I think the conjecture is that if the conference got it going early on and established themselves as a top conference, then it becomes the poacher in times like this and not the poachee.  Football is king, but the conference has gone with a basketball mentality.  So, I don't know that PSU would have ended up in the Big Ten.  If that conference that was proposed became a juggernaut and PSU was regularly winning it and playing in major bowl games we don't know what would have happened.  Considering it was Paterno's idea, I have a tough time thinking Paterno would leave for another conference and abandon his own idea. 

Quote from: Knight Commission on November 19, 2012, 12:45:10 PM
Whatever the reason it worked. NJ is a big market in its own right.  By the way NJ is not the armpit of the country (as someone who has lived there...and Wisconsin).

Jersey's what you drive through on your way from NYC to the Midwest. Its pretty bad. Rutgers? I just wasn't made for these times.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 19, 2012, 06:18:04 PM
Tranghese said it best "we will rue this day".

I think the conjecture is that if the conference got it going early on and established themselves as a top conference, then it becomes the poacher in times like this and not the poachee.  Football is king, but the conference has gone with a basketball mentality.  So, I don't know that PSU would have ended up in the Big Ten.  If that conference that was proposed became a juggernaut and PSU was regularly winning it and playing in major bowl games we don't know what would have happened.  Considering it was Paterno's idea, I have a tough time thinking Paterno would leave for another conference and abandon his own idea. 

I don't think there is a chance that PSU goes to the B10 if they were in the BE.  PSU is a traditional eastern school even now.  It is an outlier in the B10 conference in a number of ways.  BC, Syracuse, Rutgers, BC, Miami, Virginia Tech, Pitt...and possibly Maryland, is a formidable eastern conference.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 19, 2012, 06:18:04 PM
Tranghese said it best "we will rue this day".

I think the conjecture is that if the conference got it going early on and established themselves as a top conference, then it becomes the poacher in times like this and not the poachee.  Football is king, but the conference has gone with a basketball mentality.  So, I don't know that PSU would have ended up in the Big Ten.  If that conference that was proposed became a juggernaut and PSU was regularly winning it and playing in major bowl games we don't know what would have happened.  Considering it was Paterno's idea, I have a tough time thinking Paterno would leave for another conference and abandon his own idea. 

Miami was very successful in the BE and still left for the ACC. VTech left the BE immediately after the Mike Vick era. Why do you think accomplishment on the field would trump money? Mizzou didnt join the SEC because it thought it could win championships. Rutgers doesnt have a chance in hell of ever winning anything. Even if Ped State were still part of the BE, the markets the conference would hypothetically represent (Miami, Philly(?), NYC and Boston still wouldnt care. Those markets have never cared for college football and never will in the future. But you are telling me that if Ped State was part of an eastern football conference that the demographics would massively change? Oh really? Just because Joe Fucking Paterno wanted an eastern football conference doesnt mean jack. Besides, at the very least, he always wanted the B10 to expand eastward. Well, they just did that and added Maryland and Rutgers. Ped State can now have eastern rivalries.

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 07:26:37 PM
Miami was very successful in the BE and still left for the ACC. VTech left the BE immediately after the Mike Vick era.

You realize that with PSU in the mix, that the BE is entirely a different conference right?  The money is a lot more, and I really do wonder if Miami leaves in that case.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 19, 2012, 07:25:20 PM

I don't think there is a chance that PSU goes to the B10 if they were in the BE.  PSU is a traditional eastern school even now.  It is an outlier in the B10 conference in a number of ways.  BC, Syracuse, Rutgers, BC, Miami, Virginia Tech, Pitt...and possibly Maryland, is a formidable eastern conference.

So....does the state of New Jersey and Western Pennsylvania offer enough high school talent on a regular basis to feed all of those programs? NO! I know Don Bosco has a ton of D1 players every year, but the NE sucks when it comes to cultivating D1 talent.

Why do you think Miami can have no fanbase yet still bring in great classes? Could it be that there are over 150 D1 caliber football players within a 2 hour driving radius of the campus? Do you know that Texas high schools complete the equivalent of 5 football seasons compared to all schools in the states that comprise the NE (as well as many other parts of the country)?

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 07:36:16 PM
So....does the state of New Jersey and Western Pennsylvania offer enough high school talent on a regular basis to feed all of those programs? NO!

Calm down dude.  If PSU, Miami and Va Tech are in a conference, that is three of the top 20 programs over the past decade. 

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 19, 2012, 07:28:44 PM

You realize that with PSU in the mix, that the BE is entirely a different conference right?  The money is a lot more, and I really do wonder if Miami leaves in that case.

Yeah, I realize the money would be a lot more. Would it be more than the B10 minus Ped State? Doubt it. Nebraska left a lot of money behind and the potential to represent the conference in some years to be one of several programs with the potential to win the B10.

And both you and Chicos COMPLETELY ignore the fact that university administrators have said on record that they always desired the B10 due to the academic and cultural fit. So your entire argument that they could still be in the BE (which is laughable based on your argument) is moot.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 19, 2012, 07:38:44 PM

Calm down dude.  If PSU, Miami and Va Tech are in a conference, that is three of the top 20 programs over the past decade. 

What does that mean? Since when does on-field performance from a historical standpoint mean more money? Its all about markets, no? Sooooo......western Penn, a piece of Virginia....and a piece of Miami....a city that doesnt really support college or pro teams unless they are BIG winners.

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 07:43:21 PM
Yeah, I realize the money would be a lot more. Would it be more than the B10 minus Ped State? Doubt it. Nebraska left a lot of money behind and the potential to represent the conference in some years to be one of several programs with the potential to win the B10.

And both you and Chicos COMPLETELY ignore the fact that university administrators have said on record that they always desired the B10 due to the academic and cultural fit. So your entire argument that they could still be in the BE (which is laughable based on your argument) is moot.

Well, if you want to get technical about it, PSU in the Big East might have made it attractive enough to retain Miami, V. Tech, BC. Pretty good football schools.

If those schools stay, the whole conference realignment ball might never have started rolling, or at least rolling at this speed.

Quote from: Guns n Ammo on November 19, 2012, 07:48:14 PM
Well, if you want to get technical about it, PSU in the Big East might have made it attractive enough to retain Miami, V. Tech, BC. Pretty good football schools.

If those schools stay, the whole conference realignment ball might never have started rolling, or at least rolling at this speed.

LOL. So you, Chicos and Sultan want to continue to ignore the fact that Ped State always wanted to align itself with the B10. Your argument is dead in the water with that fact....which is why you ignore it.

And btw...that may be a pretty good conference....but those are incredibly chitty markets.

So, if you're the SEC, do you look at this as a chance to cripple your largest regional competitor?

If the SEC goes after say, North Carolina and Virginia Tech...

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 07:52:15 PM
LOL. So you, Chicos and Sultan want to continue to ignore the fact that Ped State always wanted to align itself with the B10. Your argument is dead in the water with that fact....which is why you ignore it.

And btw...that may be a pretty good conference....but those are incredibly chitty markets.

Well, there is no way to know for sure (in my mind), but I don't think PSU becoming a B10 member was inevitable as you imply.

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 07:52:15 PM
LOL. So you, Chicos and Sultan want to continue to ignore the fact that Ped State always wanted to align itself with the B10.

That simply isn't the case.  PSU always viewed itself as an eastern school with most of its students coming from eastern PA.

Quote from: Guns n Ammo on November 19, 2012, 08:14:10 PM
Well, there is no way to know for sure (in my mind), but I don't think PSU becoming a B10 member was inevitable as you imply.

Up to you...

BC is a small, private school in a terrible college sports market...
Miami is a small, private school in a terrible college AND professional sports market...
Syracuse is a private school in a small market...
VTech is a public that shares its space with UVA in a small market...
Pitt is the second fiddle in the state of Penn...

And then there is Ped State. The largest university of the 5 I mentioned. Their stadium and gameday atmosphere are unlike the other 5. The university itself is unlike the other 5. Their fanbase is unlike the other 5. All of those characteristics are VERY SIMILAR to B10 schools, though.

And where is the money in a tv deal? As I mentioned, those 5 markets are terrible. But I guess had Ped State joined the BE they would still be in the conference....because it would be easier to win....? Then why did Miami, VTech, BC, SU, Pitt, Mizzou, Utah, Colorado, A&M, Rutgers and Maryland ALL leave conferences that provided them better opportunities to win for conferences that will be (in many cases) nearly impossible to win? Money, perhaps? ...Driven by markets?  Nah...must be somethin' else. And the cherry on top is Boise State. Why are they joining a conference that is domiciled all the way across the country despite the fact that have been better than all of the aforementioned schools? Perhaps because Boise doesnt register as a legit tv market?

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 19, 2012, 08:23:46 PM

That simply isn't the case.  PSU always viewed itself as an eastern school with most of its students coming from eastern PA.

So multiple administrators were lying?

Sure.

Nah...Ped State isnt interested in graduate research.... Damn that Joe Paterno who wanted to steer the university in his own direction. I guess that was ONE battle he ALWAYS lost, no?

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 08:30:08 PM
Up to you...

BC is a small, private school in a terrible college sports market...
Miami is a small, private school in a terrible college AND professional sports market...
Syracuse is a private school in a small market...
VTech is a public that shares its space with UVA in a small market...
Pitt is the second fiddle in the state of Penn...

And then there is Ped State. The largest university of the 5 I mentioned. Their stadium and gameday atmosphere are unlike the other 5. The university itself is unlike the other 5. Their fanbase is unlike the other 5. All of those characteristics are VERY SIMILAR to B10 schools, though.

And where is the money in a tv deal? As I mentioned, those 5 markets are terrible. But I guess had Ped State joined the BE they would still be in the conference....because it would be easier to win....? Then why did Miami, VTech, BC, SU, Pitt, Mizzou, Utah, Colorado, A&M, Rutgers and Maryland ALL leave conferences that provided them better opportunities to win for conferences that will be (in many cases) nearly impossible to win? Money, perhaps? ...Driven by markets?  Nah...must be somethin' else. And the cherry on top is Boise State. Why are they joining a conference that is domiciled all the way across the country despite the fact that have been better than all of the aforementioned schools? Perhaps because Boise doesnt register as a legit tv market?

You make it sound like PSU was destined for the Big10. Was Maryland always destined for the B10 as well? How about Rutgers?

PSU may or may not have ended up in the Big10 eventually. But, the college football and conference landscape in the past 20 years would have been significantly different if the Big East grabbed PSU in 1990.

That's all I'm getting at.

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 08:33:15 PM
So multiple administrators were lying?

Sure.

Nah...Ped State isnt interested in graduate research.... Damn that Joe Paterno who wanted to steer the university in his own direction. I guess that was ONE battle he ALWAYS lost, no?

They WANTED to join the Big East.  They were REJECTED.  It was only after that they joined the B10 and paid all the lip service you are taking at face value.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 19, 2012, 08:38:14 PM

They WANTED to join the Big East.  They were REJECTED.  It was only after that they joined the B10 and paid all the lip service you are taking at face value.

Wow. More than one chancellor (because the strategy was implemented over a long period of time) has said that the goal of the university was to gain acceptance into the B10. I think one of the chancellors said it was the goal since the early 80's. If they wanted to join the BE so badly, why didnt they back off on their demands? Can you answer that?

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 08:45:02 PM
Wow. More than one chancellor (because the strategy was implemented over a long period of time) has said that the goal of the university was to gain acceptance into the B10. I think one of the chancellors said it was the goal since the early 80's. If they wanted to join the BE so badly, why didnt they back off on their demands? Can you answer that?

Why are you so violently defending this purely speculative point?

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 02:20:13 PM
So what? Where are they going to go? MWC? The BE will still likely have a much more lucrative contract that that conference. What is their break even point to offset travel costs and bowl tie-ins? They are guaranteed at least several million dollars, they should stick with the BE. This is all about money, after all.

To answer your question...yes, the MWC.  Boise State and others now look to be balking and I don't blame the.  With the AQ now gone and the GROUP of FIVE established, there is no need to join the Big East if they can't get a solid contract.

See the article attached.   http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8653727/boise-state-broncos-sdsu-aztecs-byu-cougars-talk-mwc-return-sources-say

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 19, 2012, 08:47:40 PM
To answer your question...yes, the MWC.  Boise State and others now look to be balking and I don't blame the.  With the AQ now gone and the GROUP of FIVE established, there is no need to join the Big East if they can't get a solid contract.

See the article attached.   http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8653727/boise-state-broncos-sdsu-aztecs-byu-cougars-talk-mwc-return-sources-say

Might I also take from this that negotiations on the next television contract isn't going as well as hoped??

Quote from: PTM on November 19, 2012, 08:46:12 PM
Why are you so violently defending this purely speculative point?

As opposed to the speculative viewpoint that Ped State would still be in the BE to this day had they not been denied acceptance?   ;)

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 08:49:25 PM
As opposed to the speculative viewpoint that Ped State would still be in the BE to this day had they not been denied acceptance?   ;)

Yeah, but you got some passion going here. It's all good.

Quote from: PTM on November 19, 2012, 08:50:30 PM
Yeah, but you got some passion going here. It's all good.

Because everything I have ever read about Ped State joining the BE was strictly an athletics decision. Everything I have ever read about Ped State joining the B10 was a strategic decision that transcended the athletics department.

Its just shocking to me that some people think Ped State could still potentially be in the BE to this very day had they been accepted decades ago. I mean....the B10 just took Rutgers and Maryland.... LOL.

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 07:43:21 PM
Yeah, I realize the money would be a lot more. Would it be more than the B10 minus Ped State? Doubt it. Nebraska left a lot of money behind and the potential to represent the conference in some years to be one of several programs with the potential to win the B10.

And both you and Chicos COMPLETELY ignore the fact that university administrators have said on record that they always desired the B10 due to the academic and cultural fit. So your entire argument that they could still be in the BE (which is laughable based on your argument) is moot.

Aren't you ignoring the fact the Eastern Conference was the brainchild of one Joseph Paterno and Penn State University?  They wanted the Eastern Conference first, before the Big Ten.

Of course there are no guarantees, but I think the chances of BC, Pitt, Syracuse, PSU, and others all in one conference would be a lot better if that league had formed when first comtemplated by Paterno back in 1981, but Pitt and others voted it down.  You needed 6 votes, PSU only got 5 with 3 against.

http://thetimes-tribune.com/sports/joe-paterno-wanted-a-conference-of-east-coast-schools-back-in-1981-1.1206664

http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/66059-why-pitt-still-irks-paterno

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 07:52:15 PM
LOL. So you, Chicos and Sultan want to continue to ignore the fact that Ped State always wanted to align itself with the B10. Your argument is dead in the water with that fact....which is why you ignore it.

And btw...that may be a pretty good conference....but those are incredibly chitty markets.

First, can we stop with the childish PED State?

Second, why are you ignoring what the proposed FOUNDER of the conference, Joe Paterno says about the situation?

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 08:33:15 PM
So multiple administrators were lying?

That sure hasn't happened of recent vintage from Penn State administrators

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 19, 2012, 09:00:39 PM
First, can we stop with the childish PED State?

Second, why are you ignoring what the proposed FOUNDER of the conference, Joe Paterno says about the situation?

Do you mean Joe Pedterno of Ped State University?

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 19, 2012, 09:01:50 PM
That sure hasn't happened of recent vintage from Penn State administrators

Right. So lets belive what Pedterno says instead...   ::)

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 19, 2012, 08:48:43 PM

Might I also take from this that negotiations on the next television contract isn't going as well as hoped??

I don't know, but I suspect Aresco's hand of cards keeps coming up 4's and 5's without a face card to be had.  I haven't talked to him in about a month.  I have spoken to several AD's I know of the schools that are coming into the conference, but that was before the news of the last week. 

We'll see what happens, but Mike has a very tough situation on his hands right now since the schools that are coming in no longer have to.  He's just lost one school in his biggest market and may lose another in the next 48 hours.  He's lost Notre Dame since he took the reigns only 2 weeks on the job.  If he pulls this off they should erect a statue for him.

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 09:04:21 PM
Right. So lets belive what Pedterno says instead...   ::)

I've provided links to articles referencing quotes from 20 to 30 years ago on the subject.  Tranghese has said effectively the same thing as Paterno.  I haven't seen any of your links, but I have provided many to support the clear position that PSU not only wanted to be in the Big East, they authored their own league called the Eastern Conference because they were an eastern school. 

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 19, 2012, 09:08:40 PM
I've provided links to articles referencing quotes from 20 to 30 years ago on the subject.  Tranghese has said effectively the same thing as Paterno.  I haven't seen any of your links, but I have provided many to support the clear position that PSU not only wanted to be in the Big East, they authored their own league called the Eastern Conference because they were an eastern school. 

I realized I was google searching Ped State instead of Penn State so my results were a bit off. But dont worry....I promise I will provide direct quotes from administrators eventually. Google searching anything regarding the B10 is messy right now.

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 09:11:51 PM
I realized I was google searching Ped State instead of Penn State so my results were a bit off. But dont worry....I promise I will provide direct quotes from administrators eventually. Google searching anything regarding the B10 is messy right now.

I'll answer for you:

After PSU joined the Big10, I bet they said it was their plan all along, and they were thrilled to be there.

What else could they say? "We really wanted to start a big conf. out east, but couldn't get it done, so we decided to go with the Big10."

I think it's naive to think that if Penn State were in the Big East since 1990, that things would still be exactly the same.

My google searching is moving in the right direction. Not completely there yet. Found this nice tidbit:

QUESTION: What really happened back in 1985 when Penn State applied for membership in the Big East Conference? According to Big East archives, the Nittany Lions, needing the approval of only six schools, were rejected by a vote of 5-3. Why was Penn State's membership rejected? Specifically, where did you stand in all of that? -- Mark Kelly; Syracuse, N.Y.

JAKE CROUTHAMEL: "Penn State wanted to start a new league of its own, composed mostly of schools that played football. And the deal was: No football revenues would be shared, but all basketball-generated revenues would be shared -- including gate receipts from home games. For me, it was a no-brainer, meaning that was a bad deal for Syracuse.

"Those were early years, but we were doing quite well in basketball in the Carrier Dome. So, mostly as a defense, some of us encouraged Penn State to join the Big East, which I definitely favored. As a parochial conference, however, I think you can pretty much see where the opposition came from. The deciding vote came from one of those schools, whose name I will not mention. But you are right, Mark. It was a one-vote miss.

"I voted for Penn State. Yes, I did. Absolutely. As a matter of fact, I may have been the one who first suggested that we invite Penn State into the Big East, but that original group was not even talking about football. The Big East was formed as a parochial conference and as a basketball conference. And Penn State was not parochial and it was not basketball. It was football. To the original Big East group, if you went to Penn State, you couldn't get any further away from the original purpose of the league."

http://www.syracuse.com/poliquin/index.ssf/2012/08/the_morning_orange_jake_crouth.html

Thanks Honkytonk.  Don't your own quotes you provided say what we've been saying, however?  First and foremost, they wanted to start their own deal, not go to the Big Ten. 


"Penn State wanted to start a new league of its own, composed mostly of schools that played football. And the deal was: No football revenues would be shared, but all basketball-generated revenues would be shared -- including gate receipts from home games. For me, it was a no-brainer, meaning that was a bad deal for Syracuse.


Your quotes go on to confirm what I said earlier....as a conference we were thinking only about basketball and not big picture.  We weren't visionary to include football and now we are seeing the results of that thinking.  Tranghese was right, "we will rue the day" of that decision.

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 19, 2012, 09:22:59 PM
Thanks Honkytonk.  Don't your own quotes you provided say what we've been saying, however?  First and foremost, they wanted to start their own deal, not go to the Big Ten. 


"Penn State wanted to start a new league of its own, composed mostly of schools that played football. And the deal was: No football revenues would be shared, but all basketball-generated revenues would be shared -- including gate receipts from home games. For me, it was a no-brainer, meaning that was a bad deal for Syracuse.


Your quotes go on to confirm what I said earlier....as a conference we were thinking only about basketball and not big picture.  We weren't visionary to include football and now we are seeing the results of that thinking.  Tranghese was right, "we will rue the day" of that decision.

But Ped State needed (I think) both Syracuse and BC to leave the BE. That wasnt going to happen under the deal Penn State proposed. When Paterno's conference idea fell through, they were invited to join the BE. Yeah, so? As I said much earlier in this thread, there is nothing there I didnt know. What you are glossing over is the fact that Penn State went so far as to try to create its own conference AFTER the BE was formed. If they thought the BE was so GREAT, why did they try to create a new conference? Hmmmmm.....

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1989-12-15/news/8903180229_1_penn-state-commissioner-james-delany-12th-team

Former Penn State President John Oswald first approached the Big 10 with the idea after the 1980 Fiesta Bowl, which paired the Nittany Lions and Ohio State. Conversations have continued intermittently over the years.

Shortly before retiring this spring, Big 10 Commissioner Wayne Duke was contacted by Penn State Athletic Director Jim Tarman.

``He asked if it (Penn State joining the conference) was still viable,``

Duke said. ``I told him I was leaving, but that in my view, he should pursue it.``

In the interest of full disclosure:

One reason Penn State has pursued it is the school`s modest basketball revenues. Though financially strong in football, the Nittany Lions basketball program suffers from competion provided by teams in the powerful Big East Conference.

When that league was formed in 1979, Penn State had the option of joining. A source in the Big East commissioner`s office said former athletic director and current football coach Joe Paterno wanted to ``move over when we reached a certain level of success.``

The Big East reached success quickly. Paterno, though, tried to destroy it in the early 1980s by proposing the formation of an all-sports conference. With that he hoped to draw Syracuse and Boston College from the Big East, but the conference effectively ended his campaign by inviting Pittsburgh to join the league.

The move left Penn State out in the cold as basketball revenues skyrocketed during the 1980s. The Nittany Lions hope to cash in on those revenues by aligning themselves with the powerful Big 10 in the 1990s.

--I will eventually find the direct quotes from the administrators.

Duke first remembers talking to Paterno and then-Penn State President John Oswald about the merger at the 1980 Fiesta Bowl, when Penn State met Ohio State.

"Joe and I had been friends a long time," Duke said. "I stopped at the Fiesta Bowl on my way to the Rose Bowl and (John) Oswald and Joe approached me about Penn State perhaps joining the Big 10.

"At the time, I thought it was a good mix and I still do."

Duke said that Paterno's efforts to form a comprehensive Eastern football conference put a halt to talks then but he added, "I think the emergence of the Big East in basketball, and some other things, academic things, got Penn State to contact the Big 10 again."

"Those talks are related to more than just athletics," Tarman added. "In fact, athletics are kind of secondary. They're related to where this university wants to be in the future. Penn State has a lot in common with most of the Big 10 schools. We're a large, land-grant, research institution like most of the Big 10 schools."

http://articles.philly.com/1989-12-16/sports/26158459_1_jim-tarman-penn-state-nittany-lions/2

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 09:51:38 PM
When that league was formed in 1979, Penn State had the option of joining. A source in the Big East commissioner`s office said former athletic director and current football coach Joe Paterno wanted to ``move over when we reached a certain level of success.``

The Big East reached success quickly. Paterno, though, tried to destroy it in the early 1980s by proposing the formation of an all-sports conference. With that he hoped to draw Syracuse and Boston College from the Big East, but the conference effectively ended his campaign by inviting Pittsburgh to join the league.

Quote from: honkytonk on November 19, 2012, 10:05:43 PM
Duke said that Paterno's efforts to form a comprehensive Eastern football conference put a halt to talks then but he added, "I think the emergence of the Big East in basketball, and some other things, academic things, got Penn State to contact the Big 10 again."

You just provided two quotes that proved exactly what Chicos and I have been saying.  Paterno was trying to form an eastern all sports conference, which failed, and lead PSU to the Big Ten.

Thank for the work on our behalf.  The check isn't in the mail.

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 19, 2012, 07:25:20 PM

I don't think there is a chance that PSU goes to the B10 if they were in the BE.  PSU is a traditional eastern school even now.  It is an outlier in the B10 conference in a number of ways.  BC, Syracuse, Rutgers, BC, Miami, Virginia Tech, Pitt...and possibly Maryland, is a formidable eastern conference.

Sultan, this was your original argument. If you want to change it to fit your last post, that's fine.

I stand by the fact that PSU never really wanted to be in the BE (Crouthamel quote states they ecouraged PSU to apply as a defensive move). Heck, the BE didnt even sponsor football until 1990. PSU started talking with the B10 in 1980. Paterno tried to start a new conference after by poaching two Big East members [why would he do that if he thought the BE could be such a nice home?]. BC and Cuse said no. The BE then invited PSU to join. They were not voted in. Gee, I wonder why. They threatened the very existence of the conference by trying to start a football-centric conference and it failed. Then the parochial schools voted against PSU joining. Shocking. Another Crouthamel qoute, "And Penn State was not parochial and it was not basketball. It was football. To the original Big East group, if you went to Penn State, you couldn't get any further away from the original purpose of the league."

Being asked to apply to a conference after jeopardizing iis existence (and asking them to apply because its a sound defensive defensive measure) is not exactly the same as Paterno lobbying for inclusion into a conference that wasnt a good fit and didnt even sponsor football at the time...and even had several members that didnt even have a football team. I think Crouthamel summed it all up nicely.

Quote from: honkytonk on November 20, 2012, 10:23:31 AM
Sultan, this was your original argument. If you want to change it to fit your last post, that's fine.

I stand by the fact that PSU never really wanted to be in the BE (Crouthamel quote states they ecouraged PSU to apply as a defensive move). Heck, the BE didnt even sponsor football until 1990. PSU started talking with the B10 in 1980. Paterno tried to start a new conference after by poaching two Big East members [why would he do that if he thought the BE could be such a nice home?]. BC and Cuse said no. The BE then invited PSU to join. They were not voted in. Gee, I wonder why. They threatened the very existence of the conference by trying to start a football-centric conference and it failed. Then the parochial schools voted against PSU joining. Shocking. Another Crouthamel qoute, "And Penn State was not parochial and it was not basketball. It was football. To the original Big East group, if you went to Penn State, you couldn't get any further away from the original purpose of the league."

Being asked to apply to a conference after jeopardizing iis existence (and asking them to apply because its a sound defensive defensive measure) is not exactly the same as Paterno lobbying for inclusion into a conference that wasnt a good fit and didnt even sponsor football at the time...and even had several members that didnt even have a football team. I think Crouthamel summed it all up nicely.

I've avoided jumping in on this but you are reading the tea leaves wrong.  Penn State always wanted an eastern conference, attempt one was build it from scratch, attempt two was folding in with the Big East.  When one and two failed, option three was the B10.  The Big 10 has never been a great fit for PSU and it's fans.  There is an academic appeal but that's it.  There was never a grand admin plan to move to B1G, that came about in the early 90s when they saw independence as a losing game and had no alternatives.  Keep in mind Syracuse was a bigger football rival with PSU then Pitt at the time.  Nobody at PSU wanted to join the B1G, in fact the BoT tried to scuttle the whole thing in 1992.

Teddy Greenstein
ON COLLEGES
8:42 p.m. CST, November 19, 2012

The Big Ten knew what it was getting by adding Penn State — a dominant football program. Same with Nebraska.

Now expansion is all about demographics, population shift, TV sets, inventory and subscriber fees.

Which are all fancy ways of saying money.

Asked about Maryland football, which is 6-17 since the 2011 season, Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delany said the league can't limit itself to adding pigskin powers like Penn State and Nebraska.

"If that's the litmus test," he said, "then there wouldn't be a lot of expansion around the country."

Here are more questions to examine ...

Will the league stop at 14 after adding Rutgers?

At this point, the Big Ten might not stop before world domination. "In order to be relevant, competitive and to move forward in the 21st century," Delany said, "you need a 21st-century paradigm ... It's not your father's Big Ten."

So who could be next? How about North Carolina, Delany's alma mater? What about Florida State? It's so-so academically and not a member of the Association of American Universities, as preferred by Big Ten honchos. Well, Nebraska lost its AAU status and Notre Dame, a previous Big Ten target, is not a member of the club.

As Michigan athletic director Dave Brandon put it: "10 was a good number; 12 was a good number; 14 will be a good number."

And if the fit is right, "maybe 16 would be the right number."

What's the problem with getting so large?

Rivalries die. Teams start playing each other infrequently. Schedules become inherently unfair.

Delany used to say Big Ten teams want to "play each other more, not less."

Now? "It's not the world you necessarily want," he said, "it's the world you live in."

Actually it's the world he is creating. Delany has pushed for a nine-game conference schedule in football, but athletic directors and coaches have pushed back.

How will adding Maryland and Rutgers make Big Ten schools richer?

More teams means more games, aka inventory. That helps BTN, which will try to land on expanded basic in the beefy New York/New Jersey (7.4 million TV households) and Washington D.C./Baltimore (3.4 million) markets. Philadelphia (3.0) also would be a nice add.

But outside of D.C./Baltimore, it will be an uphill fight. The Big Ten sparred with Comcast before the cable operator agreed to carry BTN. And that was in the football-mad Midwest.

Last week News Corp., the parent company of BTN partner Fox, purchased a minority stake in the YES Network, a New York-based sports channel that broadcasts Yankees and Nets games. So ...

Delany called it a "pure, unadulterated coincidence" with the pending addition of Rutgers, which craves attention from New Yorkers.

The bottom line is that News Corp. could try to bundle BTN with YES to get BTN distributed in New York. BTN already contributes about $6 million a year to each Big Ten school, and analysts estimate that with Maryland and Rutgers, the Big Ten could see a $100 million-plus per year boost in subscriber fees.

The Big Ten's deal with ABC/ESPN, worth $100 million a year, goes through 2016-17.

Delany is more than a little excited to hit the negotiating table.

Speaking of money ...

Yes, that is why Maryland said yes to leaving the ACC. Even if it has to cough up that $50 million exit fee, university President Wallace Loh said, "we have assured the (financial) future of Maryland athletics for decades to come."

What about Legends and Leaders?

Delany said that nothing has been determined. But ESPN reported that Loh told the school's board of regents that Maryland and Rutgers will be Leaders, pushing Illinois to the Legends Division.

Or maybe Big Ten officials will use this opportunity to call a mulligan and go with the revolutionary "East" and "West" for its divisions.

Some of the comments from today SBD:

Rutgers AD Tim Pernetti said it is a "transformative day" for the school after it officially signed on to join the Big Ten Conference. Pernetti stressed the conference is "where Rutgers belongs – not just a good fit for us athletically, it's a good fit for us academically." He said, "The Big Ten Conference is the ultimate academic neighborhood to live in and we're now in that neighborhood. ... This is not just about collaboration on the fields of play. This is about collaboration at every level." The school's start date in the Big Ten is uncertain.

Big Ten Network's Dave Revsine said Rutgers joining the Big Ten "is a different situation then what we saw" with Maryland joining the conference. Revsine said Maryland was a "charter member of a league that has flourished through the years," and there was some "ambivalence there by people who felt very strongly about staying." Revsine: "I don't think there's going to be a whole lot of ambivalence here." He noted the Big East is a "sinking ship," and for Rutgers, "this is a chance to start anew in a much stronger league and a much better situation" (Big Ten Network, 11/20).

Rutgers plans to join the Big Ten along with Maryland in '14, though the Big East "requires 27 months' notification for departing members." The school will "have to negotiate a deal with the Big East to leave early" (ESPN.com, 11/20).

So with two teams recently out (ND and Rutgers), what kind of clause do we add into the TV contract since we're two big market teams down?  Or does everyone think the Big East will dissolve before then?

Nate Silver says the Big 10 is stupid.
And that guy is never wrong.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/expanding-eastward-could-dilute-big-ten-brand/

"The Big Ten may have expanded the size of its revenue pie, but it will be dividing it 14 ways rather than 12, and among family members that have less history of sitting down at the table with one another. In seeking to expand its footprint eastward, the conference may have taken a step in the wrong direction."

Quote from: LAZER on November 19, 2012, 09:03:32 AM
Those Michigan alums are watching Michigan no matter who they play.  They won't be watching Rutgers vs Indiana though.

Remember that those Michigan alums in New York may not be able to watch Michigan, or may have to subscribe to a higher tier from their television provider at less dollars for the league in order to watch those games.  Instead of giving the Big Ten Network $0.85 per customer, they may only be getting $0.10.  Now they add New York market and suddenly those Michigan alums are paying higher rates to see their team.  They may also go down to Rutgers to attend the game.

"The top two cities for Michigan alumni are, not surprisingly, Detroit and Chicago. The third and fourth? New York and Washington, D.C.. The top regions for Ohio State alumni outside the Buckeye State are Washington, D.C./northern Virginia and New York. It's the same for much of the Big Ten."