The Un-intended Negative Consequence Syndrome....

[duanewade]

Any time someone tinkers with the common order there is always a negative un-intended consequence. 

For example if Obama raises the capital gains tax with the intention to raise more revenue to pay the budding federal deficit the following unintended negative consequences could happen:
More taxes means less trading which could lead to less overall revenue for the gov't than before if trading volume lowers.  In addition less day- traders and trades in general would lead to less liquidity which would lead to higher bid/ask spreads and the final overall unintended consequence of hurting both the gov't and the consumer.

Jim Delaney might have thought adding a 12th team by stealing someone else' critical conference member(s) would be good for the Big 10 and lead to more revenue.  However the chain effect of all these conferences cannibalizing each other for power and money could lead to such intense animosity from those fans programs directly receiving a short straw and such an overall turn-off to non-college attending fans that overall revenue could drop instead of increase.   College sports has never reached a higher hypocrisy level than they have this week when they've always called them "student-athletes" who shouldn't be paid but universities obviously have a "do as I say and not as I do" policy that is more transparent than ever.

For example I know if the cards fall such that Marquette gets stuck in a basketball only / catholic conference I'm going to change my cable/satellite provider to anyone who doesn't carry the Big 10 Network.  In addition I would cancel my subscription to the Chicago Tribune who has been a cheerleader to this effort and mocked the dismantling of the Big 12 today.  In addition I would watch less college football and basketball because of this animosity and would most certainly turn-off any Big 10 game faster than a knife through butter.  Finally I might be even more reluctant to hire any Big Ten alumni now or in the future due to this and the fact that Wisconsin and other Big 10 alumni tend to only network and hire each other any ways.

Let's hope Marquette lands in a 20 member Big East....but regardless of what happens all of this makes me pretty ill.   

[martyconlonontherun]

I think you are in the minority. Most will say they will watch less, but when the games come on the majority of fans will act like nothing has happened. Nothing drastic happened after the last shake-up.

[NCMUFan]

Since we will be victim this time around, I guess it is perceived as negative.  However, without Boston College, Virginia Tech, Miami leaving the Big East we would not of been invited.

[bilsu]

I think the unintended consequense will be congress deciding they are a business and takes away the non-profit status.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I think the unintended consequense will be congress deciding they are a business and takes away the non-profit status.

Actually, it would be very interesting if congress gets involved. Non-profit status, anti-trust laws, etc. These Universities could be causing a huge headache for themselves.

[NersEllenson]

 College sports has never reached a higher hypocrisy level than they have this week when they've always called them "student-athletes" who shouldn't be paid but universities obviously have a "do as I say and not as I do" policy that is more transparent than ever.

Amen - the money grab all of these schools are after is unreal.  Maybe the NCAA needs to reverse it's Title IX rules as far as how many teams a university must sponsor to retain D-1 status..if it is getting so hard for schools to run a balanced budget in athletics?  The reality is, is that it is an arms race as others have said..and the increased revenue that does come in gets used to build bigger and better training facilities, private jets for recruiting, more money for asst coaches, etc..Something strikes me as wrong that men's football and basketball are required to subsidize all other college sports - that don't bring in revenue but simply bleed cash.  Yes it may be sad if a kid can no longer play tennis, volleyball, or run cross country after high school..but ultimately those sports for both men and women drain cash..while not bringing in any cash.  If this type of dynamic exists in the real world..the cash bleeding entity is dissolved.

And yes, college basketball and football players should get paid something more than the limited stipend they currently get - it is so ridiculous to hear of the amounts of money TV contracts for the NCAA men's basketball tournament brings in..yet the players get nothing..same with football..and to me..a scholarship isn't exactly a hard cost to a university.

[bilsu]

They are paid something. What does an MU education cost with room & board?
Non-scholarship students are graduating with hugh debt. A lot of athletes would not even get a college education if they were not good in sports, let alone one for no cost.

[GGGG]

I am actually seeing very little downside at all for student athletes in the mega conferences.  They are going to be on television more and will have more resources at their disposal.

[ListerineSting]

For example if Obama raises the capital gains tax with the intention to raise more revenue to pay the budding federal deficit

Gentlemen, the Federal deficit is not budding. It is in full flower. While it might seem convenient to blame Pres Obama for this situation the fact of the matter is that the federal deficit took root and spread like kudzu in my beloved Georgia during the presidency of Ronald Reagan.

[VegasWarrior77]

Gentlemen, the Federal deficit is not budding. It is in full flower. While it might seem convenient to blame Pres Obama for this situation the fact of the matter is that the federal deficit took root and spread like kudzu in my beloved Georgia during the presidency of Ronald Reagan.

And I'm sure Reagan spent $4trillion on his buddies!  Are you better off now than you were $4 trillion dollars ago!

[Tugg Speedman]

Somewhat related ....

Arguably Michigan/Ohio State is the most important rivalry in all of sports, certainly in college football.

If they are in the same division, this important rivalry is reduced to another divisional game within a conference schedule. In other words, the game's importance is greatly reduced. 

If this happens, does it diminish the value of the rivalry?  Remember until now the Big 10 had no conference championship and with Michigan/Ohio State coming at the end of the season, it often was the defacto conference championship game.

If Michigan and Ohio State are split into separate divisions, they will not play every year. But when they do, it will be a big deal (conference championship). Does reducing the frequency diminish the value of the rivalry? 

My instinct is to bet against a bunch of academics trying to remake the Big 10 to get more money.  So let me say this ... this realignment will backfire.  Years from now they will find their revenues are going down as the Big 10 has either diminished their rivalries (by making them merely divisional games) or they don't play that frequently to keep up the intensity (if they are in opposite divisions).  Rivalries are what the Big 10 is about.  They are playing with fire.

[chapman]

If Michigan and Ohio State are split into separate divisions, they will not play every year. But when they do, it will be a big deal (conference championship). Does reducing the frequency diminish the value of the rivalry? 

For now it takes care of itself if they're in the same division because Michigan is awful.  I guess the solution is to just keep it as the last reglar season game since the winner will be in the championship game.  Pretty lame when it used to be a huge deal that the championship was decided in the last week, and it was scheduled as such.  Heck, Michigan even sat their starters in a game at Wisconsin in '07 to rest to try to beat Ohio State and take the title.  It'll never be like in '06 again, where both teams were undefeated and everyone tuned in fully knowing the winner was going to the championship (it almost ended up being both), and students even left an MU game early in the second half to get home to watch.  They could just unbalance the schedule, putting them in separate divisions and still playing every year.  Both teams could go two seasons in a row not playing a conference team to make that happen.  It would also diminish the value of the game greatly: they either play earlier in the season, drawing much less interest, or if they play on the last regular season game and both still end up in the championship game a re-match comes 1-2 weeks later.

Also got to wonder about the Pac 16.  16 teams with two divisions means you play 7 games in division.  It could be 8 years before some of the old Pac 10 members make their first trip to Austin to play Texas, and some players will play a conference opponent just once in a four year career.

[GGGG]

Somewhat related ....

Arguably Michigan/Ohio State is the most important rivalry in all of sports, certainly in college football.

If they are in the same division, this important rivalry is reduced to another divisional game within a conference schedule. In other words, the game's importance is greatly reduced. 

If this happens, does it diminish the value of the rivalry?  Remember until now the Big 10 had no conference championship and with Michigan/Ohio State coming at the end of the season, it often was the defacto conference championship game.

If Michigan and Ohio State are split into separate divisions, they will not play every year. But when they do, it will be a big deal (conference championship). Does reducing the frequency diminish the value of the rivalry? 

My instinct is to bet against a bunch of academics trying to remake the Big 10 to get more money.  So let me say this ... this realignment will backfire.  Years from now they will find their revenues are going down as the Big 10 has either diminished their rivalries (by making them merely divisional games) or they don't play that frequently to keep up the intensity (if they are in opposite divisions).  Rivalries are what the Big 10 is about.  They are playing with fire.

The SEC protects cross-division rivalries.  The Big Ten can too.

[Tugg Speedman]

The SEC protects cross-division rivalries.  The Big Ten can too.

The Michigan/Ohio State rivalry is one of the defining features of Big 10 football and possibly of all college football.  It is not another rivalry that needs to be protected like IL/NU, Purdue/IU or Wisc/Minn.  The entire Big 10 should be structured around this game, it is that important.  This game was naturally protected by not having divisions and by being the last conference game for both teams.  This meant that the winner often decided the Big 10 champion and who goes to the Rose Bowl (and now a BCS bid).  In other words, the most important rivalry in college football had a spot and meaning on the schedule that was appropriate to the importance of this game.

By reducing it to a "non-divisional conference game" tears the soul out of this game.  They might as well play each other in the kick-off classic in late August so it can be forgotten by Halloween.

In a few of the articles I read about the demise of the Big 12, they specifically mentioned the loss of the annual Nebraska/Oklahoma game on Thanksgiving Day.  Before the Big 12 started divisional play in 1997 (and became the Big 12 from the Big 8), this game often determined the winner of the conference.  The 1971 version of this game is considered one of the greatest college football game ever played.

I'm old enough to remember that this game was almost as big as the Michigan/Ohio State game.  I have some friends that are avid NU fans and they state flat out that NU football was diminished with the loss of this annual game at the end of the season of importance.

Let me state again, what we are watching here is the end of the Big 10.  Years from now they are going to wish they never did this.

[Litehouse]

The split seems easy in the Big Ten. 
WEST - Nebraska, Iowa, Minny, UW, Illinois and Northwestern
EAST - Indiana, Purdue, MSU, Mich, OSU, PSU

I think a team like UW is going to lose out for basketball in this situation, giving up additional games against Purdue, MSU, Mich, OSU and Indiana, for 2 games against Nebraska.  I can't imagine fans or potential recruits would get excited about that.

[GGGG]

AnotherMU84...

I'm sorry but your point are off base.  Nebraska and OU's rivalry declined in importance *because* they didn't protect it every year.  They could have easilly maintained the rivalry, but instead they decided to emphasize OU/UT and NU and Colorado.  There are plenty of examples where conferences split into divisions and rivalries havn't been diminished.  Alabama v. Auburn and Texas v. Oklahoma are two examples.

And finally, in the 70s and early 80s the entire conference was built around Ohio State and Michigan, because the rest of the conference really sucked.  That one game was deemphasized later when Penn State joined, and schools like Iowa and Wisconsin started winning.  Any conference is bigger than simply one game...the Big Ten is set up to have a number of them now.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Somewhat related ....

Arguably Michigan/Ohio State is the most important rivalry in all of sports, certainly in college football.

If they are in the same division, this important rivalry is reduced to another divisional game within a conference schedule. In other words, the game's importance is greatly reduced. 

Wait, you lost me.  This was always a game on the schedule in the Big Ten...it was always just a conference game (sure, important from a rivalry perspective, but still just one of the 8 conference games you had to play). 

The problem comes up when these games aren't played.  Yes, you could argue the game has slightly less meaning because it's for the division title and not the conference title....which were often the ramifications of the game in years past (same with UCLA and USC out here for many years).  But the bigger problem would be them not playing at all.  This is where the Big 12 screwed up so badly with OU and Nebraska.

[bilsu]

The game is already meaningless, because Michigan is no longer great in football.

[GGGG]

The game is already meaningless, because Michigan is no longer great in football.

Talk about "what have you done for me lately" mentality....

[ChicosBailBonds]

The game is already meaningless, because Michigan is no longer great in football.

Yes, but that's only a matter of time.  They'll come back at some point.