Top 10 reasons MU/BE should relax and be left alone from more B10 expansion.

[HouWarrior]

Top 10 reasons MU/BE should relax and be left alone from more B10 expansion.

The Big 10 commish Delaney has told Big 12 commish and Mizzou, it lacks interest in any more big 12 teams, leading many to begin speculation it will turn now to the east, and to consider more expansion by poaching Big East teams, including ongoing interest in ND, and possibly Rutgers, Pitt, or Syracuse.

BIG TEN (12):

Here are the top ten reasons to leave the Big East alone, and let us on the MU board relax that BE football is untouched, remains at 8 teams and keeps its BCS auto qualifier status for at least 2 more years:

10. Nebraska gives you 12 teams and lets face it the "Big 12" name is also well known, and soon to be available; its time to be accurate and call yourself the BIG 12— allowing 11 high academic schools to end their 20 year embarrassment of not being able to count.

9. You have your championship game and the extra $ you sought; why split it up more?

8. An 8 game conf schedule in a 12 team league allows all 5 division games, and three cross division games (exactly half the other division), and a complete conference play through, biannually. Pure math symmetry and fans are thrilled to see all the teams play each other.

7. Pac 10 seeks 2 BCS spots mainly because its new Pac 16 is succeeding to two conferences; each of whom had automatic BCS spots. You are NOT going to get 2 BCS spots going to 16, ....especially as you already have all that money.

6. In Nebraska you got a top ten Forbes most valuable college team and (except for ND) none of these BE targets come close to top 40—heck, no target even has revenues/value exceeding Mizzou, whom you have already rejected. Don't go small when your goal is bigger time ball.

5. ND may give up its independent status/independent NBC contract and agree to join—but think twice—it will then be the ONLY private religious school in your league (ask the Big 12, or better still, Pac 10, about Baylor!)—and VERY Catholic. Do you really think catholic ND fans won't still consider themselves superior to those public state schools? Its really a pain to have to deal with that---just ask Badger fans—lol.

4. If you lose Izzo and let Syracuse join, Boeheim's teams will quickly show BE BB has been better than B10, all along. Joe Pa wants his Pitt rivalry, but its not worth splitting $22 million a year for him to get it--- just buy Joe Pa a really nice Gold watch and tell him to  retire...soon!.

3. Rutgers may have good academics—but how smart can they really be: they couldn't pick the simple name of University of New Jersey....and as NY Gov,
, Patterson, on SNL would say...its not NY...its Neeww Jeeerrsssseeyy.

2. If you really want ND because of revenues/value (and ND accepts), ...and you are then at 13, needing to even it out to 14....believe it or not, Kansas revenues and value are next largest (top 25) among available targets, and you need Kansas BB more than Rutgers...if you're going to 14 .

1. You'll never gain the academic prestige of "eastern" schools by chasing us—go raid the Ivy League!!

Please Big 10—leave our BE alone, go count your money and let us all get back to worrying just about MU and BE basketball—the best in USA!!!

[GGGG]

I don't think the Big Ten will expand further unless Notre Dame is in the mix, and then if they get ND, they'll take Rutgers.  They don't want Mizzou...never have, never will.

A lot rides on Texas' decision on Tuesday.  If they decide to stay in the Big 12, A&M stays, the Pac Ten adds Utah, the Big 12 adds BYU and TCU (or some such), and it's all over.  If they decide to bolt for the Pac 10, it's free for all time.  A&M goes to the SEC, meaning they need another team...potentially Oklahoma, Florida State, etc.  The possibilities are nearly endless.

But there is no doubt that Texas' decision is key.

[the eagle]

Because of Marquette's tradition, history, and pride in basketball, it is easy for MU fans to try to make fair adjustments and provide possible scenarios for conference realignment....the unfortunate part is realignment has nothing to do with basketball.  Basketball is the least of concerns....all changes being made are being made purely on football (like you said, money).  Nebraska was sought after because of their football prominence and history, as well as Nebraska football being cared about more then just in Lincoln (sorry i dont have a source for this, I found it on ESPN or SI earlier this week though).  While Rutgers has been a strong football team in a weaker conference, its easy to observe that competing in the B10 with football will be a struggle; however, being placed in the B10 would put the B10 market in the tri-state area.  AKA, $$$$$$$ for the B10.

Its disgusting to see how influential money can really be.

[marquette99]

Excellent top 10!  The only one I'd add is that they don't care abouþ college football in new york!  It's all j-e-t-s and giants.  Every time I'm up there they ask why any of us care about college football.  I never thought I'd thank ND and the Big 10 - for staying put and for taking nebraska over rutgers.  Shoot, may as well thank all our enemies and add alvarez too for speaking up pretty early on why they'd divide up the money with that many extra teams.

[ChicosBailBonds]

If the Big Ten stops at 12, it will be temporary.  They just said so themselves yesterday.  They'll hold off for about a year to 18 months and then do it again.   Yes, MU could get a short reprieve, but the music hasn't stopped and won't stop for quite some time in terms of realignment.


Hey Hou, I understand Mack has been all over the airwaves down there talking up conference realignment.  I'm hoping UH can improve their lot.  He's a fantastic AD and an even better person.

[HouWarrior]

If the Big Ten stops at 12, it will be temporary.  They just said so themselves yesterday.  They'll hold off for about a year to 18 months and then do it again.   Yes, MU could get a short reprieve, but the music hasn't stopped and won't stop for quite some time in terms of realignment.


Hey Hou, I understand Mack has been all over the airwaves down there talking up conference realignment.  I'm hoping UH can improve their lot.  He's a fantastic AD and an even better person.

Yes Mack has done such-- right now hope is either joinder with old SWC foes in joining and propping up a shrunken B12 needing maybe UH and TCU...or UH bringing Hou TV/recruiting markets along in a UH/B12 orphan group joining a 16 team MWC. Heck if BE wanted the Coogs we'd be happy to come, too

...eat'em up eat'em up Coogs...raw raw raw

[HouWarrior]

I don't think the Big Ten will expand further unless Notre Dame is in the mix, and then if they get ND, they'll take Rutgers.  They don't want Mizzou...never have, never will.

A lot rides on Texas' decision on Tuesday.  If they decide to stay in the Big 12, A&M stays, the Pac Ten adds Utah, the Big 12 adds BYU and TCU (or some such), and it's all over.  If they decide to bolt for the Pac 10, it's free for all time.  A&M goes to the SEC, meaning they need another team...potentially Oklahoma, Florida State, etc.  The possibilities are nearly endless.

But there is no doubt that Texas' decision is key.

Maybe because we are all BE'ers there seems an all too easy assumption Rutgers is Next most likely to an ND joinder. I can only agree that B10 taking Rutgers makes a "little" sense if :
1) one assumes or is swayed by its AD Pernetti (a former big time cable sports exec) that it will exponentially increase TV/market revenue( I'm dubious--believe it or not MWC tv ratings are better than BE FB, over the last 4 years);
or,
2)B10 wants to kill BE auto qualifer status by taking us below 8, and try to claim 2 spots for B10's 2 divisions....
otherwise if you compare Rutgers to Mizzou in last reporting periods (and assume Big 10 already found Mizzou deficient)
note:

Mizzou total athl. revenue was $63 mil. with no (0)govt/tax or student fees contributions required...vs
Rutgers $58 mil athl.revenue claimed, but which actually included/required $18 million (30%) in direct govt tax funding, and $9 million in direct student fees (13%)..this is 43% in artificial $ support for Rutgers athletics revenue claim--and it badly misleads as to the actual team value (Nebraska's "real" revenue is more than $50 million/per year better than Rutgers...and Kansas' "real" revenue is $30 million/per year better than Rutgers)
Rutgers is Mizz LITE LITE....to me it'd be a huge B10 stretch to take Rutgers, a second 50 program, which in real revenue/program value terms (excluding its prop ups--see above) should actually be valued at around 75-90, and merge it with a league of only top 20's...on some illusory or hoped for belief of tv value, which, on its own Rutgers cannot prove it even has/or will have.
You can check these figures at:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/ncaa-finances.htm
For a general review of Rutgers motley athl program viz revenue expenses see:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601079&sid=a80qQrrJ28Bg

[bilsu]

If the Big Ten stops at 12, it will be temporary.  They just said so themselves yesterday.  They'll hold off for about a year to 18 months and then do it again.   Yes, MU could get a short reprieve, but the music hasn't stopped and won't stop for quite some time in terms of realignment.


Hey Hou, I understand Mack has been all over the airwaves down there talking up conference realignment.  I'm hoping UH can improve their lot.  He's a fantastic AD and an even better person.

Survive this round and it gives time to start the Big East network. The future threat to the Big East would be a divorce of the football schools and the basketball schools.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Survive this round and it gives time to start the Big East network. The future threat to the Big East would be a divorce of the football schools and the basketball schools.

Bilsu, the Big East Network isn't going to do much (if anything)....there just isn't the market for it to the level people think.  Yes, they could start one but I'm not convinced they could get a $1 more than what they got from ESPN, and that's without the risk and startup costs and operational investment that they would have to make.  There's a reason why the SEC, Big 12 and Big East all stayed with ESPN, it made more financial sense.

Besides, what exactly would a Big East Network televise?  ESPN has the conference rights until the conclusion of the 2013 season.  The Big East can't even start it's own network for football for another few years.

[wyzgy]

serious question-can a school(notre dame) be in one conference for basketball and another for football??  i wouldn't think so, but that is why i ask-thanks

[GGGG]

serious question-can a school(notre dame) be in one conference for basketball and another for football??  i wouldn't think so, but that is why i ask-thanks

There are many examples of schools that compete in certain conferences for certain sports thoughout the NCAA.  The BE used to have football only members, such as Virginia Tech, that competed in another conference for other sports.  I don't know if the NCAA still allows this though.

[HouWarrior]

Temple owls play fb only in MAC, and BB in A 10. There are no such aberrations at the "major" conf level, now.

[Dawson Rental]

Yes Mack has done such-- right now hope is either joinder with old SWC foes in joining and propping up a shrunken B12 needing maybe UH and TCU...or UH bringing Hou TV/recruiting markets along in a UH/B12 orphan group joining a 16 team MWC. Heck if BE wanted the Coogs we'd be happy to come, too

...eat'em up eat'em up Coogs...raw raw raw

Houston is east Texas right?

[HouWarrior]

Houston is east Texas right?

lol== well the word is w/i southeast texas...we call the gulf coast...then again milwaukee in niether  Big, nor East...and the big 10 has been 11, for 20 years...
whats really in a name--anyway.

[ChicosBailBonds]

serious question-can a school(notre dame) be in one conference for basketball and another for football??  i wouldn't think so, but that is why i ask-thanks

Yes.  Temple did it...Big East for football and A-10 for basketball until they were finally kicked out of the Big East football part for being so bad.

If you recall, back in our CUSA days, Army was part of the football conference but not part of basketball.

So yes, it can be done.

[Dawson Rental]

Yes.  Temple did it...Big East for football and A-10 for basketball until they were finally kicked out of the Big East football part for being so bad.

If you recall, back in our CUSA days, Army was part of the football conference but not part of basketball.

So yes, it can be done.

There you go.  Another negative statement from comrade Chicos!

[Benny B]

Bilsu, the Big East Network isn't going to do much (if anything)....there just isn't the market for it to the level people think.  Yes, they could start one but I'm not convinced they could get a $1 more than what they got from ESPN, and that's without the risk and startup costs and operational investment that they would have to make.  There's a reason why the SEC, Big 12 and Big East all stayed with ESPN, it made more financial sense.

Besides, what exactly would a Big East Network televise?  ESPN has the conference rights until the conclusion of the 2013 season.  The Big East can't even start it's own network for football for another few years.

What if ESPN, the BE and the ACC teamed up to form a college basketball-centric network?  Sure, college football is what makes the BTN go round... in "football country."  You have - in my opinion - the top two basketball conferences in the nation (as far as tradition, fanbase, ratings, etc.) and the top sports distributor in the world.

1) College basketball amongst ACC/BE schools has to have a collective rating that is greater than the Big Ten has collectively for football (just based on # of games played throughout the season).  I understand that there are schedule overlap/conflicts that exist right now, but the conferences could easily adjust to accommodate for a prime-time basketball game (plus an under card) six nights a week for nearly five months straight.

2) Rupert owns 49% of the BTN, so I don't buy the "why would they [ESPN]" argument.  Once Rupert starts milking the cow that that is the BTN, my guess is that he'll want to buy another calf or two.

3) There's still going to be overlap, so ESPN, 2, and U will still get some love.

4) Between both conferences, you have nearly every major DMA east of the Mississippi... that's a pretty decent viewership base, possibly even larger than the Big Ten currently covers.

The primary downside is whether the split amongst 30 teams is a better deal than what's going today - so long as we don't have access to the books, any of us could argue both sides of this argument until we're blue in the face.  The other downside is that the demand for a BE/ACC network probably won't be as vocal as the BTN, hence, less leverage for the providers in negotiating with the cable companies.

Bottom line: ESPN/Disney is a behemoth, and they hold the key.  But I think the BE and ACC could put together one heck of an argument. 

Plus, I'm pretty sure Mickey is none to please with the existence of the BTN.  In any event, the mouse isn't going to sit idly by while Rupert continues to cut into his sports broadcasting share.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Benny, what do you do with all the hours that basketball is not on?  The BTN has enough trouble as it is filling content which is why you see so many coaches shows, fluff pieces on girls softball and volleyball, etc.  Most of the sports on the BTN that are broadcast are not football or basketball, but rather Olympic sports, because they need the content to fill the 24/7 network.

[Benny B]

You do the exact same thing that the BTN does with, as you said, Olympic sports.  Plus with more than twice the number of schools of the Big Ten, filling time slots isn't going to be very difficult.

Football makes the BTN possible.  Basketball helps.  I agree that everything else is fluff.

Basketball would have to make a BE/ACC Network possible.  Football might help.  But I'd wager that even lacrosse (esp. Duke and Syracuse) would generate better ratings on the East Coast than any Olympic sport currently generates market-wide on the BTN.

I'm not advocating beating the BTN, I'm advocating playing the same game with different players.

[ChicosBailBonds]

You do the exact same thing that the BTN does with, as you said, Olympic sports.  Plus with more than twice the number of schools of the Big Ten, filling time slots isn't going to be very difficult.

Football makes the BTN possible.  Basketball helps.  I agree that everything else is fluff.

Basketball would have to make a BE/ACC Network possible.  Football might help.  But I'd wager that even lacrosse (esp. Duke and Syracuse) would generate better ratings on the East Coast than any Olympic sport currently generates market-wide on the BTN.

I'm not advocating beating the BTN, I'm advocating playing the same game with different players.

It's a noble idea, but the problem is that you would never be able to cover your costs.  Football drives the BTN deal and allows for the Olympic sports to be broadcast.   In your scenario, I believe you are advocating that basketball is the driver....there just isn't enough revenue there to trickle down and allow for the other sports to be broadcast. 

As an example, the BTN right now broadcasts a ton of Big Ten football games.....every Saturday we have to open up multiple channels to allow for this.  Big dollars from advertisers, etc go to subsidize that.   With hoops, you just won't get that kind of $$ to allow you to bring in all the other content to make it a viable 24/7 network.   

I like your out of the box thinking, I really do, but it's hard for me to put pencil to paper and find a financial formula that makes that scenario work.

[Benny B]

As an example, the BTN right now broadcasts a ton of Big Ten football games.....every Saturday we have to open up multiple channels to allow for this.  Big dollars from advertisers, etc go to subsidize that.   With hoops, you just won't get that kind of $$ to allow you to bring in all the other content to make it a viable 24/7 network.   

I like your out of the box thinking, I really do, but it's hard for me to put pencil to paper and find a financial formula that makes that scenario work.

There are two sources of revenue to the BTN as I see it - the per subscriber fee paid by the carrier (cable or satellite provider) and on-screen advertising.

The Big Ten covers eight states.  The BE & ACC cover eighteen.  The population of the latter is about 80 million more than the former.

BTN currently reaches an average of 40 million households (although it claims to be available to 73 million).  It's only available on "basic cable" in the eight Big Ten states plus in St.L, Omaha, and Louisville.  If a BE/ACC network were available on basic cable in the BE/ACC states and was placed on the same package as the BTN by the satellite providers, it could charge a fraction of what the BTN does per subscriber to the carriers and still generate the same revenue as the BTN.

I don't know what the total reach of football and basketball on the BTN in any given season is, but something tells me that the total reach of football and basketball on a BE/ACC network combined is probably very close, if not greater simply based on the fact that you have over twice as many games being played in a given season.

So unless you're telling me that an advertiser would pay more money to advertise to 1,000 Big Ten football fans than they would 1,000 BE or ACC basketball fans or the marginal cost of airing more games on a BE/ACC network than the BTN does is crippling, I'm not seeing how the above is not plausible.