AD Alvarez Comments on Future B10 Expansion

Submitted by psychomatt on

Barry Alvarez, speaking at a Little Caesar's Pizza Bowl fundraiser last night, reinforced the idea that the next move for the B10 will be east:

I’m not sure about continued expansion, but it would not surprise me. Our commissioner (Jim Delany) thinks outside the box and is always thinking how to be progressive and proactive. We will continue to study expansion throughout this year. It would not surprise me if we continue to expand. We’ve always talked about and had research done that we haven’t taken full advantage of Penn State being in the east and we need someone else in the league from the east to maximize Penn State. It wouldn’t surprise me if we went that way.

Barry Alvarez, July 30, 2010

Link to full story (warning, it is Freep):

http://www.freep.com/article/20100730/SPORTS08/100730001/1355/SPORTS/Al…

psychomatt

July 31st, 2010 at 6:19 PM ^

I'm not part of the pro v. against Freep battle on this board, but intentionally posting to the board something you know is not true just to mislead people is not cool. I suppose if you had the intelligence and skill to persuade people based on facts and logic, you would not feel the need to do this. At least you know your limitations.

OMG Shirtless

July 31st, 2010 at 7:13 PM ^

Have you seen any of the arguments regarding the merits of the Free Press boycott?  Those arguments are tired and pointless.  Neither side will ever budge.  I think the Free Press Boycott is useless.  It has been almost a year and the Free Press is still in business.  They just hired a new writer.  He obviously thinks it is a promotion to leave AA.com for the Freep, even if he might have to cover the Lions.  Obviously people around here are still reading the Free Press.  There are links to it every single day.  Then there is another pissing match about OMG FREEP LINK!!!!!1one!!! Then comes the 'Section One' 3000 word essay and the usual rebuttals. 

If the Free Press dies, it will be because print media, as a whole, is dying, not because a few thousand ubersensitive MGoBloggers, Rivals members, and Scout members decide that they want to go into a frenzy everytime someone posts a link to the Free Press.

With that said, I probably shouldn't have labeled it as Non-Freep link, but what can you do, I'm a jackass, I'm the guy who has previously stated he hopes the band catches a wicked case of oral herpes, gets caught hazing, and gets the Wisconsin marching band treatment for the year. 

Have a pleasant evening.

psychomatt

July 31st, 2010 at 7:32 PM ^

No, I haven't read any of the arguments because I do not care whether people like or dislike the Detroit Free Press. But they are irrelevant to what you did here. The only thing you wrote that is relevant (and can be relied upon as truthful) is this:

With that said, I probably shouldn't have labeled it as Non-Freep link, but what can you do, I'm a jackass ...

Thank you. I plan to have a very nice evening.

SwordDancer710

July 31st, 2010 at 7:41 PM ^

Going back on topic, if we go east, what would be the best first step? If the Pinstripe Bowl works out, I think Rutgers would be a great entrance into the NYC market.

MGoShoe

July 31st, 2010 at 7:56 PM ^

...again with the Freepiness.

Just click here and you'll get a summary of Birkett's (the quasi-Freeper) A2.com article in my post on the topic from a few days ago.

The four things Alvarez addressed:

  • The ADs have not been prebriefed on post-expansion scenarios
  • It's likely that the conference will follow the divisional alignment criteria established by Jim Delaney earlier this year
  • Conference championship game
  • Additional expansion, to the east?

psychomatt

July 31st, 2010 at 8:27 PM ^

Two different strategies, depending on if the B10 is going after ND or going after the Northeast markets without ND. I think the B10 still really wants (and thinks it can get) ND. The B10 has been working on this for 20 years and will be patient if necessary to get what it wants.

ND Strategy: Offer Pitt or BC and then go to ND and tell them you need another team to get to 14 and it likely will be another Big East or ACC team. Understand, every time you steal an ACC team it hurts the Big East the same as stealing a Big East team because the ACC is likely to go after a Big East team as a replacement. Also, while BC is not an AAU school, they would rank 3rd in the B10 in undergraduate universities about 10 spots behind UM. They are a good undergraduate school and the B10 can honestly argue they are not taking a subpar academic school just for the dollars. BC also is the only BCS school in their state, it has large media markets, it is somewhat of a former rival of PSU, it has been a very recent rival of ND and they have a solid athletic department with a full array of men's and women's sports. Note: if ND still does not bite, move to Non-ND Strategy (see below) to add one more team to reach 14. Then wait.

Non-ND Strategy: Take Pitt and BC. Like it or not, Rutgers alone does not get you the NYC market. Rutgers and Syracuse together also probably do not do it (primarily because Syracuse is so bad at football). Except for Rutgers football very, very recently, Rutgers athletics are unmarketable and when Schiano leaves (and he will) the football program easily could return to its historical status as irrelevant. Similary, except for bball and lacrosse, Syracuse offers little national appeal in athletics. The B10 needs to add schools that will draw eyeballs for football and, to a lesser degree, men's bball. BC and Pitt have good (and marketable) football programs and Pitt is very good in basketball. Between UM, PSU, BC, Pitt, OSU and NE (not to mention the B10 home football games against ND the conference would host and have media rights to each year), the B10 would have a powerful group of brands that would be attractive to many viewers in the major Northeast media markets (NY, NJ, Phila, Boston, DC, Balt). And then stay at 14 and wait.

M2NASA

July 31st, 2010 at 8:33 PM ^

"Syracuse offers little national appeal in athletics"

SU is the #27 school in national merchandising. (Pitt is #44, BC is #48, Rutgers isn't in the top-75)

"Syracuse is so bad at football"

Syracuse is top-20 all-time in wins, and shouldn't we as Michigan fans have more understanding for a program having a down period?  After all, it was caused by the gentleman that is now Michigan's defensive coordinator...  And SU football is already on the way back.

By the way, since 1987, SU was been to four of the four major bowls (1 Sugar, 2 Fiesta, 1 Orange), how many teams can say that?

psychomatt

July 31st, 2010 at 8:36 PM ^

I am looking at TV ratings. If you think Syracuse is on its way "back" and if you think its football team will outdraw Pitt or BC in TV ratings when it gets there, you can make the argument to pick Syracuse instead of one of the two teams I suggested. The same, frankly, is true of MD, but those are big "ifs". I would definitely put Syracuse and MD as the next two choices on my list, but I would still choose BC and PItt before either one of them because the risk is lower.

psychomatt

July 31st, 2010 at 9:10 PM ^

At best, this suggests that college football is unimportant in the Northeast and the B10 should not try to expand in that region. However, if the B10 has decided it wants to expand in the Northeast by adding one or more schools, using the attendance at this game would be a poor way to pick the school.

MGoKalamazoo

July 31st, 2010 at 8:36 PM ^

+1 for the NYC market insight. I can't see Rutgers or Syracuse bringing in the New York market. If the Yankees don't get ratings Rutgers stands no chance. I can't see New York ever becoming Big Ten country.

Seth9

August 1st, 2010 at 12:20 PM ^

But the way to do it would probably be to work to remove their favored status in the BCS. I assume that if Notre Dame needed to join a conference to get a the same shot as Michigan or Washington or any other BCS conference team at a bid, they'd do so.

MGoKalamazoo

August 1st, 2010 at 12:22 AM ^

New York is a tricky market. I don't see one team or even a set of teams that can move to the Big Ten that will rope the Big Apple. New York is a "what have you done for me lately"  city. If New York is watching college football they are watching USC, Texas, Alabama, ect., not Rutgers, Syracuse Pitt or ND. ND must be relevant and even then they probably won't draw New York.

psychomatt

August 1st, 2010 at 1:33 AM ^

But you said it yourself earlier, even the Yankees don't "own" the New York market. In NYC, in particular, there are too many other things going on for any one team or sport (or anything else) to be all consuming to everyone. Also, many of the people who live there did not grow up there, but have moved there temporarily or permanently for work reasons. Still, because of the size of the market, you do not need to own the market to be very profitable. Again, just look at the Yankees.

What the B10 needs is enough "national" names along with one or two regional/local ones such that it always has match-ups that a significant portion of New York viewers would like to see. And if the cable providers in NYC do not want to carry the BTN at first, the B10 will do what it did in the Midwest -- get DirecTV to carry it. Once cable subscribers start dropping their subscriptions and switching to DirecTV, the cable providers will realize there is enough of a following for games between UM, OSU, PSU, NE, BC, Pitt and ND that they will figure out a way to pick up BTN at an economically viable price.

DeathStar

July 31st, 2010 at 8:37 PM ^

I might be talking to myself, it feels good to say it.

The Nebraska addition should tell people all they need to know about "academics" Honestly, you stuffed shirts had your pocket protectors swiped when Nebraska came on board. And remember Penn State? Not exactly the "academic fit harrumph harrumph" you all would have thought, were they?

If BC is the best for the Big Ten, they're in--and I think of all the teams mentioned, BC IS the best (outside of Notre Dame). They would probably bring more eastern market share than Rutgers or Stinkacuse, they are a WAY better program than those two put together, and they bring a rival for both PSU and Notre Dame.

But this thing is FOOTBALL driven and FOOTBALL DRIVEN ONLY (caps intentional for emphasis). Forget the AAU, the CIC, or any other letters you can come up with to try and sound smart.

Steve in PA

July 31st, 2010 at 10:20 PM ^

I like the idea of Pitt and MD, but Pitt will not be in B10 as long as JoePA is at PSU.  Given, that's not many more years so there may be something to Pitt coming.  I also go with MD because there is a LARGE amount of PSU (and other I'm sure) alums in the greater DC/Baltimore area.  Visiting fans could fill the MD stadium.

 

As far as Rutgers, I still think Schiano lands at PSU.

psychomatt

August 1st, 2010 at 1:44 AM ^

1. Pitt to B10. When JoePa brought up expansion again (12+ months ago), he specifically named three schools he thought would be good additions to the conference -- Syracuse, Rutgers and PItt. So, although this idea has been going around for awhile that Paterno does not want PItt in the B10, that is not what he has said publicly.

2. Schiano to PSU. If you had asked me two years ago, I would have said it was a near 100% chance Schiano would replace JoePa. I think that was the main reason he passed on the Miami job when they axed Coker and the Michigan job when LC retired. But his performance has waned in the past couple of years while the current PSU assistant coaching staff has received much of the credit for PSU's most recent resurgence. I still think Schiano is the favorite, but I also could see PSU going with someone else or even taking a shot with one of PSU's coordinators.

3. Note on MD: The drawback to MD is it is still mostly a bball school. Bball matters on the margin when it comes to conference expansion, but the primay driver is football. I just don't see PSU v. MD or UM v. MD or Anyone v. MD being the must watch football game of the weekend anytime soon. Also, MD really fits better in the ACC culturally and geographically. They have longstanding rivals in the ACC and it seems like an odd fit to try to force them into the B10. BC and Pitt, on the other hand, were Big East teams going way back and would fit nicely with PSU. BC certainly fits as well or better in a B10 that includes PSU and Pitt (and potentially someday ND) than it ever has in the ACC.

Steve in PA

August 1st, 2010 at 12:04 PM ^

1.  That's the public statement.  There's too many reasons for Joe not to want Pitt.  If they wanted Pitt on the schedule that would have happened years ago.  There's a reson they don't schedule Pitt and that reason is JoePA.  Pitt used to be fertile PSU recruiting ground, now it's being carved up by Pitt and OSU.

2.  I'm actually leaning more to Schiano than I have for a few years.  PSU has always had a 5 year boom-but cycle and they are back on the decline.  Look at their recruit singings, I think last update on this site they had 3.  If the assistants are getting praise when they do well, imagine how brutal it will be when they are not doing well.

3.  Agree that MD fits in ACC, but there is a lot of B10 (PSU) alums from that region.  I would say that MD was #1 as far as out of state students when I attended.  I think it's about selling tickets and MD in B10 would sell more tix than MD in ACC.  Basketball would not really be that much of a stretch with the recent success of the B10 in basketball at schools not coached by a guy named Izzo.