Clemson 247 twittering that Georgia Tech has been approved into the B1G.
...says Denzel Valentine of Big Ten Tourney favorite MSU, which is 5-7 in its last 12 games. Cumong, man.
Then let the "harumphs" begin.
This is the interwebz. By Saturday, "unnamed sources" will be saying that Delaney screwed up the deal and GaTech will remain in the ACC.
A big part of the Rutgers/Maryland move was to secure the New England market, and the B1G is geographically set up to have no overlap with other major conferences. This is a stab into a market that is definitely SEC country and is a 2nd tier program in it's state. Annexing Big East or northern ACC (non-SEC overlap) makes sense. GT makes none.
Which means of course the B1G will do it. #Leaders #Legends #Inthecommunity
Said as someone who's never been to GA.
/from GA and grew up a Tech fan
Tech is second fiddle to the Bulldogs in GA, isn't it?
But that doesn't really matter with the reasoning here. The goal is to introduce BTN to as many major markets as possible. It doesn't matter that GT plays second fiddle to UGA, they still have enough fans to get on TV, and that is really all anyone cares about.
Personally, I see the SEC snatching up VaTech and NCState now, and Big12 pulling in FlaState and Clemson. (I would have added Miami(FL) but their present issues may put a merger off. Only if it is mandated by FSU addition.)
ACC could asphlode!
South Florida also has a lot of cable tv subscribers. Next up, Miami (YTM).
Depends on how you classify. UGA is the big state school but Tech is way harder to get into.
The other thing to consider about GA is no one shows their support for teams unless they're winning. For example, before Saban came to Alabamastand, you'd see an "A" on cars.. maybe a couple of times a week. Now you see almost as many as UGA's. Alabama is like Georgia's elite community college, they ship a lot of students there.
Tech hasn't been good in football since '90 but back then, you'd see about 55%-45% in favor of UGA. Still not bad. Also Tech have a bigger bball and baseball following than UGA.
I'd say most non-alumni support UGA for football (because they're better) but cheer for Tech's bball and baseball teams.
Kind of a stretch to say the GT is way harder to get into than UGA. The Hope Scholarship is a huge incentive to keep the best hs school students in Georgia in the state and UGA's enrollment has imporved because of it. You pretty much have to be top 10% of your class to get into UGA. This wasn't true 10 years ago.
I think GT is the obvious choice for the next addition to the B1G. Big TV market in what is arguably the center of the college football universe. UGA, Bama, Auburn, Florida, Clemson, FSU, Tennessee, and South Carolina are all five hours or less driving distance. Also a big advantage for current B1G schools to get into the talent laden south on the recruiting trail too. by adding GT to the conference. Good tradition in hoops, although not so much success lately, and a good baseball team are also nice adds.
If the B1G makes this move I think Texas or Florida State would be the next obvious choice for the 16th memeber. But Texas probably won't happen because of $$ and FSU's academics will probably keep them out.
UGA fans think of GT as their annoying little brother who has fans that come out of the woodwork once per decade or so when they do something good (sound familiar?)
The difference is that GT is a better school. UGA fans are generally annoyed by those "GT nerds".
Oh, and GT is in downtown Atlanta, so not a bad place to be.
...and I'm not knocking Tech, but my (one) trip to Atlanta (and GA generally) made me think that UGA football is easily king.
GT grad/Atlanta resident here. Your perception is not wrong. I'd even say that Auburn and Clemson have a fan presence as large or larger than GT. That said, there are a ton of B1G transplants in this area as well.
They also have the more recent national championship
and a final 4 in the last 10 years.
that combination alone is something only OSU can top.
Maryland, NJ, and NY were not part of New England, so not sure how Rutgers or Maryland would help there.
People don't really understand the geography of the US unless they've been to the states in question. In the minds of most midwesterners, anyone who lives east of PA wears a big buckle on his hat and hunts with a muzzle-loader while simultaneoulsy dumping tea in the harbor.
The post was meant to say that the Rutgers add secured NY/NJ DMA and that the Maryland add secured Baltimore/DC DMA. A GT ad could get the Atlanta DMA, which is the 9th largest TV DMA in the country. Check out this LINK. Do I agree with this add? No. Would it increase the TV viewing area to a scary level? Yes.
None? Don’t be too sure. Access to a major and growing media center like Atlanta makes total sense with what Delaney is doing. I believe he covets that sort of media exposure in the south. My contention if it is true is UVa is next. Only bad part is we will fill before we get into NC. This is not about head-head competition with the SEC. SEC would never take GT. Major conferences will now only add one team/state to open new cable markets = more subscribers = more money.
Didn't the Virginia legislature essentially make Virginia and Virginia Tech a package deal a few years ago when VT joined the ACC?
Enough said regarding motivation. That and it has strong academics
Michigan State is second-tier in its state, and we let them in the B1G.
But not really. We just get to face the option attack every other year instead.
We won't get the Atlanta market. It's SEC country like woah.
Only until we move the Big Ten Championship game to the Georgia Dome.
I don't think it's really viewers the Big Ten is concerned with; as long as they can get B1G on basic cable in that market, they get paid. A lot.
The conference does not care about actual exposure or winning the hearts and minds of fans. They just want money, and there are enough GT fans that they'll probably get it.
So, the moves earlier this month added:
1. NY DMA - 7.4MM Households
8. DC - 2.4MM
27. Baltimore - 1.1MM
We already had:
3. Chicago: 3.5MM
4. Philadelphia: 2.9MM
11. Detroit: 1.8MM
15. Minneapolis: 1.7MM
26. Indianapolis: 1.1MM
32. Columbus: 930K
34. Milwaukee: 900K
39. Grand Rapids: 720K
43. Harrisburg: 715K
54. Wilkes Barre/Scranton: 581K
67. Flint/Saginaw: 446K
69: Green Bay: 442K
72: Des Moines: 430K
75: Omaha: 414K
This add would give the B1G the 9th market in the country at about 2.3MM viewers. This would be the 5th largest market in B1G Network coverage. This is the equivalent of Indianapolis and Columbus combined. For Delaney's purposes, this makes perfect sense.
DMA driven additions:
Texas: #5 Dallas 2.58M, #10 Houston 2.21M, #36 San Antonio 881k, #45 Austin 705k
Florida State: #14 Tampa-St Pete 1.8M, #16 Miami-FL 1.62M, #18 Orlando-Daytona #1.45M #38 West Palm 794k
UNC: #25 Charlotte 1.13M, #37 Greevil-Spart 846k, #44 Norfolk-Portsmouth 709k, #46 Greensboro-W Salem 695k
Texas and UNC fit academically. Texas seems highly unlikely right now, but I guess things can change quickly. FSU gets us on almost most as many TV's (maybe more if you include the markets in the panhandle which I didn't include here), but they probably don't fit the academic pedigree of the rest of the conference.
Approx Viewers in Major Markets: Texas 6.3M, FSU 5.6M, Carolinas 3M.
I think the somewhat undiscussed elephant in the room is whether or not folks in DC and NY will actually watch the BTN. I say...nope. The east coast and mid-atlantic region just don't care about college football. On top of that, NYC doesn't care about Rutgers (thus sharing the sentiment of the country at large).
Based on population stats alone, I can understand the moves making sense (though I kidna prefer tradition and whatnot), but stats don't tell the whole story here.
It doesn't matter if they watch it, it only matters if it gets included in their basic cable package.
Exactly. The ratings are cool, but as long as people have to pay for it in new areas, B1G teams make money.
This is going to put a whole new meaning to rambling wreck.
If you are going to 16 teams in the league (whole different debate) it makes sense to add Georgia Tech. I think adding Maryland and Rutgers was to get into areas where adding that 15th and 16th team would make more sense to the East coast georgraphy. Who will 16 be?? I'm going to say Virginia.
is all a play for ND.
To hell with Notre Dame.
Virginia and Virginia Tech are attached and you have the VA State Government backing that arrangement. The Virginia and North Carolina schools will mostly likely stick together just because state governments won't want them split up.
Actually that is not correct. The VA politicians just wanted UVa to use it’s influence to get them in a more secure conference (ACC) when it looked like the BigEast was crashing. (Correct me if I misunderstood, Wahoo.) They don’t have the leverage now. With both in the ACC they may have to fend for themselves; as I doubt one of the stronger conferences will take on both. IMO UVa will go to the B1G and SEC (which has already said it wants into VA) will take VaTech.
Please stop repeating this myth. UVA and VT have been together for less than ten years. As long has VT doesn't remain in a dumpster-fire of a conference, than the legislature is not going to obstruct things. There are certain circumstances present in the instance where the legislature got involved.
If we're going for big TV markets, then let's get Boston, plus we'd get their hockey. And hopefully it'd piss off Notre Dame more.
I thought it should have been Maryland and BC instead of Rutgers. That makes more sense to me.
BC isn't an AAU member. They're akin to ND, strong undergrad, some grad programs but almost none in the STEM fields (science, technology, engineering, math) or academic medicine (and really no room to expand those fields within a glutted Boston academic market).
But they don't bring the athletic cache of ND, which meant the Big 10 was willing to overlook their research profile.
I know they aren't AAU, but USNews ranks them #31 in the US (Michigan is #29) so it all depends what metric you rank academics on. And let's be honest, the B1G is just going after TV markets now.
If it's only about viewers, Delaney should go for BC. It wouldn't be any worse than Rutgers or Maryland and it would add 2.4MM viewers to the fold. That would then give the B1G network viewership in:
8. Washington DC
That is pretty dominant in terms of viewership. The only non-contiguous markets in the Top 11 would be:
6. San Francisco
Only point I would contend is they may feel Boston has never really supported college sports, especially any specific one. The market tends to be segmented fairly equally between BC, BU, Harvard, Holy Cross, MIT(some degree), and UMass. So you take what market you did have and essentially watered it down even more, support-wise.
I know a similar contention could be made about NYC, but it’s also the overwhelming size/prestige of the market and Rutgers is still the major collegiate sports presence there and you also get NJ in the bargain. (If you call it a bargain. /kidding)
Is this a joke or serious?
If serious, they might as well stop calling the conference the BIG 10, and just give it a new name. There is virtually no resemblance to the Big Ten conference - only 2/3 of the teams are originally from that conference (less than 2/3 once an inevitable 16th team joins to make it even). And, the geographic footprint is no longer the midwest, as the real Big Ten was. This is stupid!
/no promise to end rant - I suspect that it will continue for much of the day in the upcoming 20 expansion threads - apologies in advance.
Might as well just go to 20 teams and have a Big Ten division and an ACC division.
This is pretty much the only desirable option at this point. Then at least we get our Big 10 back.
I dunno what the ramifications for 20 are but gut call, it sounds right.
Old Ten vs. New Ten? West vs. East? Champs of the West sounds about right.