Take it for what it is.
The Detroit News: Big 10 Headed To 16-Team Super-Conference
Take it for what it is...baseless speculation.
Henning is a good guy and decent sportswriter. If he says he has "sources that are in a position to know" then I believe him.
What are his trusted sources? If you don't cite them, they don't exist.
would disagree with you, along with reporters for the biggest and most important stories (not saying this is one of course) of all time. And oh, BTW, Brian has sited unnamed sources as well. Come on.
You wanna know about the Big Ten expansion? Leave a red flag in your flowerpot so I know you wanna talk. Then let's meet in an empty parking structure....I'll be in a dark corner puffing my cig.
are you there??? ATPM. Love that movie....
Henning's sources also say that today's winning lotto numbers are: 4 8 15 16 23 42
Someone is going to have terrible luck for the rest of their life.
OR great luck in alternate reality.
Tonight's episode will probably be the best one yet. I want to leave work early and just stare at the t.v. until it comes on.
Best of the season anyway. Jacob/Flocke episode = plot driver, and it's about damn time. Finally after the horrible start to this season, the characters are moving around, doing something.
Your numbers certainly can't do any worse than mine have.
in his article = 16. One of his lucky lotto numbers = 16. Coincidence? I think not. Either that, or maybe we are going to 23 teams...????
Hence, no reason to take it seriously.
I disagree. Multiple times he cites his "unnamed sources" who are "in the know." This is all just unverified bullshit.
Notre Dame already is looking at a bigger payday in the Big Ten. The Irish get about $15 million a year in TV revenue compared with $22 million per school in the Big Ten.Obviously Lynn Henning did not read the front page of MGoBlog today. Tsk tsk.
True, but ND likely can gain financially by joining the Big Ten. For one, the bowls (or lack there of) that the Irish have been to lately are below what the average Big Ten team goes to, especially since we go to 2 BCS games every year and we get the Cap 1 bowl, so the bowl revenue sharing would be better than what they're getting on their own. But moreso than that, ND joining the Big Ten would greatly increase the revenue that the BTN brings in, so that 20 million from Brian's post today would go up significantly if ND joined the league.
Yeah, I was just talking about the supposed 22 million from TV that everyone is throwing around. ND will definitely be making more if they join the Big Ten, no argument there.
Yeah, it looks like that number is a little whacky.
It just seems that from a financial standpoint, both ND and the Big Ten win from them joining.
If ND joins the Big Ten, we become the big time conference in the country, right away. Not only that, we become the wealthiest conference in the country by a long shot, ensuring we stay on top.
While we don't know if there is a basis to this or not, when it keeps being reported, I'm increasingly thinking that there's something to it.
I hope not, though. A 16-team Big Ten would be utterly unrecognizeable. Twelve teams would be enough.
to college football say goodbye :( so we will play Penn St. what every half decade, all these assholes do is ruin sports that is all they are good for
Seeing as we didn't play Penn State basically at all until the 90s, I fail to see the issue.
We never played them before 1993, but PSU has become one of the most important games on the schedule IMO, right behind OSU/ND/MSU.
Incidentally, our ND series basically only dates to 1978 (we played them two times in the previous 60+ years), but I consider it a traditional matchup all the same.
Your e-pinion doesn't equal the life or death of college football as a whole.
Jeez, you realize jmblue wasn't the one who said that, right?
It's so unfortunate we might play PSU, Indiana, Iowa, Illinois, and/or Northwestern less in order to have games against Nebraska, Missouri, Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers, UCONN, ND or some set of those teams. What a shame.
I understand completely. Michigan wouldn't want a repeat of 1998 vs. Syracuse again...
One of the greatest things to ever happen to Michigan and the big ten was inviting Penn St. Now Michigan might have to take a 4, 5, 6 year break that's terrible I don't care how you see it
We don't play a lot of teams on a routine basis. Is that a big deal? As long as MSU, OSU and maybe ND are on the table every year, most people will live with whatever happens.
If we were to play 3 in our division and rotate 2 in the other divisions every two years, I don't think that would be an issue.
One conference to bind them all and in the darkness rule them.
He basically just regurgitated the baseless rumor yesterday.
Congrats Lynn Henning, nice journalism.
He commented on it and then claimed his own sources gave him the info he wrote.
Freep hasn't put it's crack team of Rosenberg and Sharp on this? Oh wait, they can't blame RichRod for any of this.....never mind
they can't blame RichRod for any of this
I hope they're not reading this, they'll probably take that as a challenge and set out to prove you wrong
Freep: Rodriguez is the Force Behind Big Ten Adding Rutgers, Montana, and Alaska-Anchorage
Rich Rodriguez, head coach of the Michigan football team and the sole cause of the Black Plague which swept through Europe during the 14th Century, is the nefarious attempt to ruin the Big Ten via expansion. Multiple anonymous sources claim that Rodriguez has forced every Big Ten University president to vote for his expansion plan involving Rutgers, and FCS school, and a school that doesn't even have a football program by making them practice football for 4 hours and 7 minutes last Sunday. After surviving such a torturous experience, every university president capitulated immediately and voted to add the teams. Rodriguez feigned ignorance upon hearing of these charges.
If the Big Ten goes to sixteen and the only NYC-area team taken is Rutgers, the ACC will likely only go to 14 and take Syracuse and UConn. Louisville and Cincinnati give them nothing. The only reason the Big East took them was to have eight teams to maintain a football conference.
How likely is it that the Big Ten would leave open NYC to the ACC taking the two largest alumni and fanbases of the three schools?
Since when is USF the bottom feeder of the Big East? They have finished in the top half of the Big East standings all but one year since they joined and have won 8 or 9 games in each of the past four seasons. During this stretch they have beaten Florida State, Auburn, West Virginia several times compiled a winning record in bowl games. That is hardly a bottom feeder.
or the 'Big Hex' for short.
69 20 6c 69 6b 65 20 74 68 69 73
This article looks like Henning has read a lot of blogs to get his info. His work over the years definitely seems to have shown much more passion for baseball than it ever has for college football. This isn't a slam on his writing at all, but more an appreciation of his baseball columns. That being said, I like the article anyway for selfish reasons.
Last year at this time, and for a few years prior to that, any articles about the Big Ten usually started with, "What's wrong with." In one year, the Big Ten has gone from national whipping-boy to "conference most likely to change the face of college sports as we know it."
That is a great accomplishment in my book, and I much prefer what we are seeing now over what we have seen the last few years.
That is a good point that I hadn't thought of before. Even if nothing comes out of all this expansion talk, it has definitely been a PR boost for the conference.
From a college football fan's standpoint, a 16-team conference is going to be a disaster.
From a financial standpoint, it's a massive windfall for the new members, but that's probably not the case for the old members. You know that $220 Mil per year that the Big Ten splits 11 ways? Now the pot gets split 16 ways. If you do the math, those five new teams have to generate $100 Million/yr for the Big Ten for the old teams just to break even. Those teams generate nothing in that neighborhood right now. The entire Big Least doesn't generate that much. Even if the old schools like Michigan and Ohio State make an extra $1 or $2 Million per year, it's a small portion of an athletic budget that's in the $100MM range. That's not even half the take from one football home game. Is it worth destroying the conference for that?
From a college football fan's standpoint, a 16-team conference is going to be a disaster.
Playing teams less frequently, and mixing in teams with less tradition. Playing other teams 1/8 of the time is a stupid recipe for a conference that wants to maintain even minor rivalry/emnity between its members (think Michigan-Wisconsin, etc). Why should I root for the conference if it's Syracuse playing some team I don't care about?
If we added ND/Texas/Nebraska to make it a 14 team conference, I'd be okay with that (and that won't ever happen). Anything less, and I'd miss the teams we currently play, even if they are a bit worse than their replacements. Minnesota may be a pretty bad team a lot of the time, but there's history there; replacing it with money is a shitty substitute.
Because people don't like change.
it makes no sense to expand the conference without expanding the pot, i.e. expanding the footprint of the conference. It does make sense to add schools in television markets where the sport fans are going to want BTN added to their basic package.
That's why Pitt, Cincy and Iowa State are not too likely to be the first three additions.
Adding Penn State in '93 was a very shrewd move; Phila (#4) and Pittsburgh (#22) of top 50 TV, plus PSU has fans all over, especially in the Northeast. Maryland adds DC(#8) and Baltimore(#24); Missouri adds St. Louis(#21) and KC(#31)
Will it destroy the conference? Well, it will change it. But change is coming anyway, that Conference Championship weekend has essentially become a play-in game for the NC game (barring undefeated MCS conference teams). The logic behind 16 appears to be: "Why not be the first super conference, rather than a late addition to the 12-team conference list?"
The lucrative TV markets that you speak of are already accounted for in the TV packages for the Big East and the Big 12. These are known commodities. And compared to the current Big Ten, they suck -- big time. You have to double or even triple the TV revenue that these programs generate for the current Big Ten members just to break even. Exactly how is this supposed to happen? Whatever ABC and CBS pays for these programs' games isn't going to increase, which means that all of the value added has to come from the Big Ten Network. In other words, the Missouri Valley State vs Missouri, Rutgers vs UConn, and Rutgers vs Temple matchups that generate currently generate no revenue have to suddenly generate millions of revenue on the BTN. Good luck getting cable companies in Missouri and the Northeast to get those subscriber fees out of their customers.
it not just the revenue of existing contracts which is re-distributed; BTN broadcasts a lot more baseball, softball, wrestling and gymnastics (at least that's what I've watched). Clearly they don't generate as much as football and basketball, but now they're on and growing an audience. Revenue for shows like "Big Ten Tonight" also grows with a larger audience, and after Maryland and Missouri play a Big Ten conference schedule, those fans will have much more interest in the Big Ten Championships in all sports.
Regarding matchups, just considering football, Illinois vs Missouri has been huge the last couple of seasons, and Penn St vs Maryland goes back a long way. Michigan lies in the center of the existing Big Ten, most of the nearby schools of similar size and stature are in the Big Ten. Personally, I don't believe ND will join until they have no other choice; too many ND fans believe independence is what makes ND great.
expanding to 16 teams not only expands the footprint but it greatly expands the programming. Adding 5 teams greatly expands the number of football and basketball matchups every week and it's live programming that sells advertising revenue. Right now there's too much dead time in the programming which attracts almost no audience. Watch, almost all the commercials on the network come during live games.
I'm sick of seeing all these rumors and speculation on what will happen. I will believe all of this expansion talk when I hear it from the Big Ten and the schools. Until then, I don't care about these "sources."
do you also eschew speculation about where high school football players will play college football? Where college players might be drafted by the NFL? Who the most significant free agent pickups in the upcoming signing period might be?
Its the off-season, speculation is the main course.
I do like that he addressed one issue that is hardly ever brought up, the idea that new members wouldn't get a full share of BTN profits immediately, or even as was suggested by one Big 10 official (I can't remember who) that any new members would have to purchase equity in the BTN. Now, for my question, each school faces a "loyalty penalty" whereby the school would have to give up a significant portion of their share of league revenues while they wait to jump conferences. All this at a time when big state universities are hurting for funds. Is it possible that the short term cost would be prohibitive for these universities to make the jump even with the obvious long term gains that would be probable (I say probable, because lets face facts, bigger isn't necessarily better. If we jump to 16 teams and it's Nebraska, Missouri, Rutgers, Pitt and Syracuse, one could argue that this leads to a watered down league).
As for the rest, "inside sources" are worthless if you can't get a single quote on the record, or at least name an organization the source is connected to.
If this is the case I say we ignore the Big East save for maybe Pitt and go headlong for the Big 12.
... but Big Ten expansion talk is anything but "baseless."
I spent two 13 hour days last week driving to the East Coast and back. This was all over satellite sports radio, and it boils down to who gets the best TV markets. The Big Ten Network is the jewel of sports cable right now; even the much-heralded SEC has a crappy cable presence compared to the Big Ten Network due to some of the schools (Ole Miss, anyone?).
Next to Notre Dame, Texas is the real crown jewel, market-wise. They are potentially SEC-bound but it's likely that the Big 12 ceases to exist if the Big 10 poaches Missouri and Nebraska. A mad scramble ensues...
For all ND says about wanting to remain as Switzerland, they are actually concerned that the rush to superconferences happens and they are left playing football musical chairs without a seat, or in the ACC, which may be worse.
So say what you want about Henning or DetNews. But (a) the Big 10 is expanding and (b) some or most of the schools he mentioned will be involved.
And as much as it pains me to say it, it would be best if ND is a part of it....
is Henning's mention of four 16 team superconferences. If true it clears up the national championship issue with semis and conference title games leading to two playoff bowls, and then an NC game. (A long season and post season road for the eventual championship game teams.)
the 100th post on Big Ten Expansion - someone verify.
....and many more to come!
Some easy to use titles on the next Big Ten Expansion Post:
1) Notre Dame to Join Big Ten - Source
2) Big Ten to Expand like Oil Slick - Killing all other Conferences
3) ___________ to Join Big Ten - No Kidding! For Real!
4) Big Ten Conference Official Discusses Expansion after Conference Meeting Steak Dinner
Can't seem to go one day without more speculation.
This article is a bunch of shite