Looks like Maryland is on the way
An article placed at cbs sports an hour ago says Maryland will vote as early as tomorrow on their invitation to join the Big Ten. Says that university's biggest donor backs the move. Hard to imagine that this is not a twofer deal, with Rutgers right behind.
The article notes that the $50 million exit fee might be a stumbling block for Maryland. But from what I've read elsewhere the league may take all or part out of future revenue to the school.
Perhaps it's been noted elsewhere, but this gives the Big Ten access to 35% of the nation's viewers, bringing in the DC and NY areas, and extends the league across a fairly contiguous--that is, plausible--swath of the country, from Nebraska to the Atlantic coast. I realize that Rutgers and Maryland aren't the most appetizing draws in an immediate sense, but I like having the league entering NY and DC, taking in part of the South now, too. (And there's no reason why those schools cannot get better, including in football.) Obviously, the expanded TV revenue is the big draw for the league itself. Will be interesting to see if the league uses the pretext of expansion to reconfigure the divisions, which are pretty unpopular, at least here.
Link:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/blog/eye-on-college-football/2…
November 18th, 2012 at 8:11 PM ^
Big Ten East
- Rutgers
- Maryland
- Michigan
- Ohio State
- Penn State
- Indiana
- Michigan State
Big Ten West
- Iowa
- Nebraska
- Wisconsin
- Northwestern
- Illinois
- Minnesota
- Purdue
This split would create an imbalance methinks, with Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State in one division.
Alternatively,
Big Ten North
- Wisconsin
- Minnesota
- Michigan
- Michigan State
- Rutgers
- Penn State
- Northwestern
Big Ten South
- Maryland
- Ohio State
- Indiana
- Purdue
- Nebraska
- Iowa
- Illinois
Not sure if that's any more balanced or not, and does pose the (same current) problem of Michigan and OSU in separate divisions.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:13 PM ^
Central: Michigan, Ohio State, Michigan State, Illinois, Northwestern, Purdue, Indiana
Northwest/East: Nebraska, Penn State, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Maryland, Rutgers
- almost every major rivalry game is protected within division (except Little Brown Jug) and creates East Coast partner schools for PSU
- Eliminates need for the protected crossover thus enabling 2 rotating interdivisional games per year (one of the biggest problems with the SEC setup)
November 18th, 2012 at 8:15 PM ^
Mine were based strictly off of geography and sacrificed Northwestern/Illinois or Indiana/Purdue rivalries.
This one makes quite a bit of sense in everything else.
November 18th, 2012 at 10:17 PM ^
I like this setup. If we can get placed in the same division as OSU, I will definitely change my tune about expansion.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:18 PM ^
November 19th, 2012 at 4:23 AM ^
If UMD and Rutgers are added, I am convinced that the only reason was to cover up the division alignment SNAFU without admitting it sucked and changing them.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:08 PM ^
November 18th, 2012 at 8:08 PM ^
Thank you Delaney for turning us into the Big East.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:08 PM ^
November 18th, 2012 at 8:14 PM ^
November 18th, 2012 at 8:18 PM ^
November 18th, 2012 at 8:21 PM ^
November 18th, 2012 at 8:38 PM ^
November 18th, 2012 at 8:42 PM ^
The conference maybe not for profit, but the AD's are surely for profit.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:50 PM ^
In the long run, Rutgers and Maryland has much more potential for great football than Pitt. And we're not even going into the little to no revenue Pitt would generate.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:53 PM ^
November 18th, 2012 at 9:53 PM ^
Pitt will always, always be second fiddle to Penn State. They will always lose more than win to Penn State for recruits. Also their 'established' history is nothing special.
Rutgers on the other hand, is the dominant pubic school in a talent rich state. If they con retain only a small percentage of their recruits, they will always have better talent than Pitt.
November 18th, 2012 at 10:17 PM ^
Michigan State will always, always be second fiddle to Michigan. They will always lose more than win to Michigan for recruits. Also their 'established' history is nothing special.
Just having fun with that.
November 18th, 2012 at 10:45 PM ^
you're agreeing with the others in saying that Pitt doesn't add much, right?
November 18th, 2012 at 8:59 PM ^
November 18th, 2012 at 10:10 PM ^
Meh...
Not sure I buy the logic of a team always being crappy, just because their history isn't great.
Boise State was once a joke in the lower divisions and Princeton was once a powerhouse.
Rutgers has 7 winning seasons in the last 8 years AND they have pretty much only been playing Big Boy football for 30 years.
I will not be excited to get them, but even Miss Cleo would have a hard time prediciting who will win games 10 to 20 to 30 years down the road.
November 18th, 2012 at 10:11 PM ^
Wow! Winning seasons! My, what great expectations we have. "This team wins half of their games in an awful awful conference" Sign em up!
November 18th, 2012 at 9:55 PM ^
They've never had the resources of the B1G, and the old Big East poisoned any momentum they might have had, and the new Big East is a joke of a conference none of the blue chips would play for.
Put them in the B1G, and suddently the Jersey recruits have a home option. New York and New Jersey, are very, very decent recruiting grounds.
November 19th, 2012 at 9:44 AM ^
B1G schools, FWIW. And there's little doubt being in the conference draws more recruits. When they're kicking our a** one inevitable day down the road, then we'll REALLY regret the move.
EDIT: this is a football conversation; any move is far bigger than that. Let's hope Delaney et al are more broad-minded than mgobloggers. "shit-stained"? I mean, c'mon. Their coach snubbed us a few years ago, so there's that. . .
November 18th, 2012 at 8:58 PM ^
No, no, haven't you heard?
College athletics is now a huge game of Risk and whichever conference has dudez in the most states wins.
November 18th, 2012 at 9:00 PM ^
November 19th, 2012 at 9:45 AM ^
your posts being a little more thoughtful in the past; a certain hysterical quality of late--are you alright?
November 19th, 2012 at 9:47 AM ^
A joke about the game-board of Risk strikes you as "hysterical"?
November 18th, 2012 at 9:15 PM ^
is going to vot in a school like Pitt that would decrease their won piece of the pie. Mew footprints like MD and Rutgers make everyones piece bigger...that is why they are considered.
November 19th, 2012 at 9:54 AM ^
Also, Pitt ain't too shabby of a research university....
November 18th, 2012 at 9:03 PM ^
Pitt's got AAU membership, 2.4 billion endowment, decent football, a top notch BBall team etc.
I don't necessarily DISLIKE Maryland, but M is a bit more of a cultural leap. I like to pretend it's 100% about football too, but it actually isn't.
November 19th, 2012 at 9:27 AM ^
I don't understand the "cultural leap" thing with Maryland. It's a big, state-supported research institution with a solid academic reputation. Aside from geography, that to me pretty much is the definition of a B1G school (with apologies to Northwestern and Chicago).
To me it seems like a natural extension, if we're going to extend, much like Penn State was. Pitt and Syracuse would be natural fits as well, as would Virginia. Rutgers seems a bit lightweight on the academic side compared to the other schools--if any of these isn't an institutional fit, I think it's them.
November 19th, 2012 at 10:18 AM ^
They eat crabs there . . . I mean they really EAT them! It's disgusting and unamerican.
/steak&potaoed
November 18th, 2012 at 11:04 PM ^
November 18th, 2012 at 8:16 PM ^
I was thinking Pitt too. Better athletics historically, and closer to our geographic footprint. Maryland, I just don't get it.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:20 PM ^
Not a huge fan of expansion, but what does Pitt offer in terms of $? Seems like we already have the big fish in Pennsylvania. At least Maryland pushes us into a new area it seems like.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:08 PM ^
one day everyone will look back at this time of college sports and say WTF?????
November 18th, 2012 at 9:46 PM ^
November 18th, 2012 at 8:08 PM ^
Dammit, stop this nonsense.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:09 PM ^
It's like asking the girl to prom when your mom says, "She's a nice girl." Yeah, she's alright but she ain't anything special either.
Can't wait to see the tradition, spectacle, and wonderment of seeing Nebraska and Rutgers match up!
Thank God college football places a television network's ratings and subscribers first, otherwise the college football world wouldn't make sense.
November 18th, 2012 at 9:09 PM ^
What's wrong with her? She's beautiful. She's rich. She's got huge...tracts of land.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:09 PM ^
November 18th, 2012 at 8:10 PM ^
It's funny that this is the method people are using to try and displace ESPN from their spot as king of the hill in college football broadcasting.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:10 PM ^
Say hello (eventually) to the Big 16. They won't have to change the logo.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:26 PM ^
If we must get to 16 (which I don't want to); Maryland is a good fit. DC is a growing a prosperous area that will pay dividends to tap into.
I'd rather stay at 12.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:10 PM ^
I heard MD was going into the leaders division if they join - which sucks. I'd much rather that train wreck be in our division...at least to even out the Penn St. is gonna suck for a while.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:25 PM ^
Disagree. I think MD has peices to become a good program; they're in an area that has pretty decent talent and few other schools, and more importantly, they have a very rich alum who is the sports buisness willing to sponser their program like Nike did for Oregon. All it's going to take is the proper coach. And honestly, Edsall may actually turn out to be a decent choice. Too early to tell. Rutgers is overinflated right now because they play in the Big East (an even worse version than previous versions as every single good program bailed). Remember when Big East champions UConn got stomped by the freaking 2010 UM team. I'll take Rutgers in our division.
But I think the real issue is a complete divisional re-alignment. With PSU cratered from the better part of the next decade, the whole competative balance the conference was based on is thrown to hell.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:33 PM ^
No! They can't be in the Leaders division! The only way I can remember who is in our division is by remembering that it's all the teams that start with "M", "N", and Iowa. I'm not smart enough to remember that it's all teams that start with "M" - except for Maryland, "N", and Iowa. Damn it Delany! First you give them dumb names and now you make it more difficult to remember.
November 19th, 2012 at 3:57 AM ^
Sorry, I don't like it either, but my information is that Illinois would move to join Northwestern and both Maryland and Rutgers would be put in Leaders. The new crossover guaranteed game pairings would be Illinois-Indiana, Northwestern-Rutgers, and MSU-Maryland.