ohio state blogs will post literally anything
MUCH better add than either of the other two schools, for football, basketball, TV market, and especially academics.
Georgia Tech is much better for academics. Both schools (Maryland and Georgia Tech) receive very similar rankings from most college rating systems.(Like USNWR) Both are AAU acredited schools, but Georgia Tech just received this rating two years ago. Maryland has been an AAU school since the 60's (link). Both are large research institutions and very comparable, but there are plenty of things were one school out preforms the other academically.
As far as basketball goes Maryland has been a very good school for the past 10-20 years at least. They have a national championship to their name from 2002. I think many would argue that they have been the better program over the past decade or so.
Although I will sede that Georgia is a good TV market, I also think it is incredibly dominated by the SEC when it comes to college football. The College Park park area is ripe for a new college football TV market. The only succesful nearby teams are PSU and Virginia Tech; both many hours away. Plus there is not one consistantly decent football program in Maryland. This could begin to bring and entire sports crazy state (Ravens, Orioles, local lacrosse all have phenominal following) into the fold of the Big Ten.
Sorry but this entire discussion about expansion makes me want to puke. I like nothing about Maryland nor Rutgers. Sorry but these schools are losers. We don't need this. Why now? Market share?God help us.
not true at all. ccording to ARWU, which is waaaaaay more respected than US news, maryland is #38 university in the world, rutgers is #61, and GT is in the #101-150 range. U of M is #22. US news is junk, man.
No No No No No No No.
Yes. This would be a great add. Great academics. Great tradition. Geographically weird though.
but against further B1G expansion in general. See below.
Oh I'm with you. I kind of don't even like the b1g as is. Although Nebraska was about as good of an add (football wise) as you can get.
Georgia Tech would be a boon. Great academic school, expand the market into Atlanta, great football tradition.
I could get behind that.
I would be able to attend a Michigan game every two years!
Head asplode at the thought of defending the option nearly every year...
But I agree about academics, football, and expanding the footprint into the southeast region.
That said, as somebody who participated in a decidedly non-revenue varsity sport in college, it is going to create a travel nightmare and I would guess a strain on some of the ADs across the B1G.
GT is an excellent school, but I think they're just too far geographically.
As a new GaTech grad student certainly would be cool to see big ten teams down here. I bet Michigan fans could overwelm Tech's small little stadium. Tech would bring in more of a market in Atlanta than Rutgers would in new york or Maryland in DC. Still not good though. Tech will always lag way behind UGA in terms of marketshare.
It's not so much TV ratings as TV sets the Big Ten seems to care about. If Ga Tech gets the Big Ten Network on basic cable in Atlanta, that's a lot of money (as is DC for Maryland or NYC for Rutgers ... though I'm sceptical that the Rutgers fanbase is going to be able to force Jim Dolan's hand),
Perhaps there was something to CBS's Dodd's suggestion that the longeterm plan included UNC and gettting a footbprint in Georgia.
At this point, I am on the 'anything but Rutgers' train.
I'm not sure I understand the disrespect for Maryland's academics. By measures like board scores they'd be in the upper half of the B1G (only Michigan and Northwestern are clearly better) and, no doubt in part thanks to their proximity to DC, they're rolling in research money.
Of course I'd have no complaint about Georgia Tech on that score either. Both would be good adds academically IMO.
I'm not getting this vibe at all. Because Maryland and Rutgers are being referred to as a package deal and Rutgers is a steaming shitpile, they get lumped in together.
Maryland is a great school. The problems are that they're decent at basketball, but suck balls at the other major sports and don't do anything for the market. The east coast, especially DC and New York, are already full of Big Ten and SEC alumni and even those who aren't don't give a shit about Maryland or Rutgers sports.
Posted that in the wrong place--it was supposed to be a reply to the post that said Georgia Tech would be a "MUCH better add than either of the other schools fof...especially academics."
There have been a lot of posts since this story broke suggesting that Maryland added nothing academically. I'm glad some people know better--lumping Maryland with Rutgers as an academic institution is an insult.
If this is about academics, then Maryland and GT are fine grabs. But then why don't we get Boston College too? GREAT academics, and big market (Namely: Boston).
Now, I don't believe that's a good idea, and probably none of you do either. And any argument you can make agaionst Boston College, you can pretty much make against Maryland, and even Georgia Tech.
BC isn't a research institution. It's akin to ND. Good undergrad, spotty grad schools, particularly in the sciences.
I'd personally like NC, Duke, Virginia & VT.
Why the Northwestern hate?
Northwestern is a pretty good football school now...THey do have 8 wins and are on an upward trajectory
Nowadays, the distinction between public and private universities is becoming insignificant, especially for selective public schools. Going to U-M is about as expensive as going to a lot of private schools, if not even moreso (for out-of-state students).
They are the face of ACC basketball. I don't see them going anywhere. Virginia and VT would be good fits, although my preference would be VT because they actually have a decent football program these days.
I'm opposed to expansion... But if it happens I'd be okay with the UVA move. It won't happen, but I'd love to get some B1G football here. I'm not sure what the boys in bow ties and the girls in sun dresses would think of visiting B1G fans.
If we are definitely going to expand, geography matters less than improving the conference both athletically and academically. Ga Tech would do that far more than Maryland or Rutgers. I would add Rutgers to get the NYC and Philly markets, but don't see the upside to Maryland at all.
Ugh. I already hate how Micigan can go 3 years without playing a team in the conference. The addition of 2 more teams will just make that even worse. Hard to consider a team in your conference when you only play twice a decade. I feel like we play schools such Western and Eastern at least that often...
We already only play Wisconsin and Penn St. 2 out of every 5 years. Why should we give up more of these games for Maryland, GT, and Rutgers?
Essentially, this ends the B1G as a conference: it's two conferences with a common championship game.
If you institute a pod system that is constantly rotating you can play everyone multiple times in 4 years. Sure you aren't going to develop long term hate, but everyone will see one another.
They tried that in the WAC, and it crashed and burned. I don't know, maybe it could be done better, I'm not sure. But I think that "long term hate" was the relevant thing. Nobody felt like they were in the same conference.
Better than Rutgers. Who's next? Albion?
Chicago. The Maroons return to the B1G and rekindle the rivalry with Michigan. I can hear it now-
"You are looking LIVE from Stagg Field in Chicago, IL. Capacity crowd of 1,650."
It would be sweet if somehow Chicago came back. Rutgers can GTFO
This is a fan site. All the talk about expansion here eventually leads to a comment about where our television market will expand to. Let's make that irrelevant for the sake of being fans for a moment and talk about who actually we want to be in the Big Ten.
Personally GT sounds great to me. They are a bit far away, but apparently that isn't an issue anymore. Maryland and Rutgers do absolutely nothing for me. There is no record of sustained success in their football programs in recent history. It would be purely for TV which, as a fan, I will refuse to say is a good reason.
I agree, the tv market share is a non sequitur point of view. However kind sir, you are only using academics as your point of adding these three schools. They are find academic institutions, but athletically --to use a corporate term -- they are non-value added. They bring little to nothing of relevance and prestige. No ties to any school in the BiG sans Rutgers and PSU's FWB situation.
Nebraska is/was a football powerhouse, and decent academically. If we can't find someone or others damn similar, it's just a joke to change, and in my humble opinion hurts our brand rather than adding to it.
So I guess geography means absolutely nothing for conferences anymore. Sure, Boise State to the Big East probably sent that message loud and clear, but having teams in Nebraska, Pennsylvania, and Georgia all a part of the same conference seems ridiculous.
If Maryland and Rutgers end up in, and Georgia Tech comes as well, Virginia Tech makes the most sense for a move to 16.
No single school in that conversation is a fantastic addition for any one reason, but I suppose that does add depth and markets to make the B1G the strongest conference in many ways.
The fallout in terms of other conferences realigning to match scares me, though, because there are bigger fish and we will see conferences disappear.
It means something in that increasingly the goal maybe to cover as much geography as possible.
Have we covered that ND just spurned the B1G to join a conference that appears to be bailing en masse to join the B1G? Anyway GaTech>Rutgers. Pretty even with Maryland as far as I am concerned with athletics and academics. Living in DC, I know that Maryland football doesn't bring this market, and I'm pretty sure Rutgers doesn't bring the NYC market, but do any of us know that GaTech brings Atlanta?
To a degree, but Atlanta is at least as much a UGA town as a Georgia Tech town, even though Tech is in Atlanta.
It does not. The Falcons and UGA Bulldogs own that market, as much as any team does.
I'm not sure what "market" really means. I think that a lot of people focus on the how rabid the fans are in the area. However, in BTN terms, they're probably thinking about how many TV sets in are in the geographic area. This might allow BTN to become part of the "standard" package in the Atlanta area (and possibly all of Georgia). That's probably 5-8M new subscribers who are paying $0.50 - $1.00 in fees to BTN each month (depending on how it gets bundled. That's a lot of potential revenue for BTN.
My point is that it's not so important that the team is widely regarded in the area, it's about how many TV sets that will be picking up BTN. That's the entire driving force behind Rutgers.
IIRC, BTN is already available on basically the entire the East Coast...or at least New York metro and large surrounding area.
But if I'm wrong and this is the driving force behind Rutgers, then the people pushing for it can screw themselves. The boundless greed of media moguls makes me sick.
It's availablein NYC but not on the basic digital tier, which means only Big Ten fans willing to shell out extra get it (or switch to FIOS). The idea behind any of these schools is to be able to extract revenue from people who couldn't care less about the channel, in the manner of all the barely watched channels that come on basic cable.
I wouldn't say it's commonly available. Here in NYC I believe only Time Warner and a few other providers carry it. I have RCN and I can't get Big Ten Network, so have to stream or watch games at other peoples' places.
If they added some more East Coast schools, I'm assuming the other cable carriers will pick up BTN as well.
The counter to that is that you NEED a demand to make the BTN a standard part of the package. Otherwise, people aren't going to sit back and pony up for a station covering a team no one cares about.
It all comes back to the Big East argument: they like to brag about the big media markets they cover, which includes really a lot of major cities. But they can't get a good tv deal because those big cities don't care about the schools and their sports.
I know it's deifferent, as we have the glorious BTN, but again, there has to be demand to make the channel a part of automatic packages, and for any of these schools, that just doesn't exist.
But I think that GA Tech can generate enough interest, particularly in the HUGE Atlanta market to get BTN onto local cable packages.
Do you have actual data backing this up, or is this just pointless specuation?
Another question: do you find that expansion of a TV network is a good enough single motivator to expand an athletic conference?
"do you find that expansion of a TV network is a good enough single motivator to expand an athletic conference?"
Not the right question. Better: "Does Dave Brandon and do other athletic directors find that expansion of a TV network is a good enough single motivator to expand an athletic conference?"
I think we can all answer that.
I don't have actual data (although it's probably available somewhere). I just remember reading that BTN received something like $0.88 per subscriber. I'm not really sure how that works but it's pretty clear that's why they are exploring the markets that are involved.
I live in Raleigh and pay $5.95 per month for a "sports tier" package that includes BTN. I don't know how much BTN gets out of this but I think that it's the primary network (along with some regional channels).
Personally, I don't think that BTN market expansion is a good enough reason to grow the conference. I think that the B1G is fine the way that it is and I probably wouldn't expand unless it was to hit a "home run" (think Texas, ND....). Hell, I'd rather get Kansas (fits B1G geography, Top 5 basketball program...) than any of the schools that have been mentioned but that's not the way it works. It's all about generating revenue.
I was asking if you had data demonstrating that GT draws as much of the Atlanta market as you claim. I seriously doubt this; Georgia utterly dominates that state and there are pro sports concerns as well.
Thinking ND is regretting that deal right about now. Maryland and GT trying to leave and after hearing that FSU voted against raising the exit fee they have no intention of remaining in the ACC
But . . . but . . . but . . . the chance to play Notre Dame once every four years should be enough to keep the entire ACC embedded in place forever.
Michigan would at least get better at defending the triple option. That is if Paul Johnson still has a job there.
I am sooooo totally against this. Sorry but I totally disagree with all this adding more schools garbage. We have a great conference lineup, it needs to perform better.
GAtech isn't enough, and in no way helps the conference overall. Look at Texas. People don't even watch their network. Espn is engrained in college football, so expanding the BiG network share isn't all that is cracked up to be. People are looking for page clicks. Just stop please and thank yous!!!
All this crap talk about adding schools is change for the sake of change. Super conferences are not what's best, people will calm down and see that in the next few years, especially if the new playoff works better than the bcs. Which it still will be controversial, always will be!! MNC's are mythical, always have, always will be.
Rutgers and Maryland talk: As former nova resident, VAtech and UVA are way more relevant to that area. Maryland is an afterthought and frankly a laughing stock. Very fine schools, but if this is based on both academics and athletics, they are too small potatoes.
Seriously folks, Rutgers is a nobody, and I am sick of hearing their damn name associated with the BiG. If we take those two schools, we ought be be made fun of as a weakass conference. I would be uncontrollably pissed. Even more so if gatech is brought on, since they have no ties to the BiG at all. Who ever plays them? Rare matchup in bball. Do they even have the athletic department to compete with us? No hockey!! F me!
We have four flagship programs in our conference and Wisconsin is no slouch, especially recently in athletics. Stand pat!! I personally think all this realignment is a fools errand and makes everyone look bad. Acc is a joke, big east is a joke. We need to be leaders and make the legends. Not follow the leaders and destroy our legend. Geesh!! I am out and off my soap box.
How about we don't do something dumb, Jim Delaney?
Exactly, I get so bristly and fired up about this. We can be conservative here and wait. It's not an arms race if we already have a stocked armory.
So we're definitely poaching the ACC then. I don't know what to think. I guess our main priorities are TV markets and AAU membership.
So, add UCLA to the short list!
I hate this expansion crap
I would want regional divisions though. East and West.
Yes, I realize UM and MSU are further east than either Indiana school, but this format divides power more effectively.
Only way I would want it to happen is if it would put Michigan and Ohio is the same division so we won't run into the two weeks in a row possibility.
You do realize that with 8 team divisions having a protected cross-over game just isn't feasible, at least with an eight game conference schedule? So say good bye to Michigan-Ohio with those divisions you listed.
BC would be a nice grab in terms of hockey.
Which, as we all know, is what's really at issue here.
Kentucky would be a solid basketball pickup, but that's about it. Not a cultural fit in any aspect of the word, in my opinion.
Take the best schools from ths ACC just to stick it to Notre Dame
Take the best schools from ths ACC just to stick it to Notre Dame
Anyone but Rutgers!
Just as ND breaks off the rivalry with Michigan to play opponents from the ACC, the Big Ten starts to go after the ACC schools. If a few dominos fall maybe the whole conference will fall (doubtful but "To Hell with Notre Dame" it's hopeful). Perhaps by then FSU will venture over to the Big 12, the Big Ten has raided any decent teams left and ND has several games with the bottom feeders and any other mid-major additions the ACC can get to keep a conference in tact.
Heck, why not steal FSU? They got criminal justice!
Ga Tech would be a decent pickup. Great school, and the football program has its moments. Not even remotely a geographic fit, but since when does that seem to matter these days?
Still, it'd give the conference some good inroads into Georgia recruiting.
This All Needs to Stop!
Let's just add everybody.
That's exactly what I was thinking. We could be the B1120G and put 60 teams east of the Mississippi in one division. I think we should call that division the "Leaders" division. We could the other 60 teams west of the Mississippi in another division. I think that division should be called the "Legends" division.
And we still won't be put in the same fucking division as Ohio State.
Delany will mandate they cannot run that frickin triple option.
GT is a hell of lot more preferable than Rutgers. The latter is an embarrassment. GT is a good school with pretty good sports.
I love this one. What about Syracuse, they would be a good fit better than Rutgers.
I know that they are in the SEC and may not be likely to jump but I would look at a Vanderbilt in addition to Georgia tech. Could be interesting as both could potentially be good programs. I would also look at Virginia, Virginia tech and make another run at ND - if they have any foresight they will realize that the acc is not going to be a great place to be when the conferences realign. All of these would be much better options than Maryland or Rutgers.
I would take Georgia Tech over Maryland any day
...the most academically overrated school out there.
I've dealt with multiple recent GT EE grads with > 3.5 GPAs and I'm not impressed at all with their problem solving ability or critical thinking skills.
The engineering grads from UM, PSU, and several other lesser known schools I could name have all impressed me far more than GT grads.
Dennis Dodd did an interesting piece on Big Ten expansion and his thoughts on the motives of Jim Delany and it was posted last evening - (LINK)
About two-thirds into this pieces, there is this:
"Clearly, this isn't about football. It seldom is in conference realignment. The Big Ten has enough perception problems in football. Maryland and Rutgers aren't going to improve its image. It's about new viewers for the Big Ten Network. I talked to a Big Ten AD less than two years who told me the league presidents were impressed with Georgia Tech and Maryland before settling on Nebraska. Both are AAU schools. Neither play particularly great football. But each would add a new Big Ten footprint. Sub in New Jersey for Georgia and you see the strategy hasn't changed."
I guess my first question - as there are likely people more in the know than I am on this subject - revolves around Big Ten bylaws. I had thought there was a bylaw that restriced expansion to states contiguous to the Big Ten footprint, which Georgia is not. If that is the case, it would mean changing the rules, but I assume that if they really were looking to expand revenues, that's easy enough.
That being said, if there is any traction to this at all, I would definitely take Georgia Tech over Rutgers like others, particularly if we're talking about bringing a decent football program in addition to competitive basketball. Still, is there a reason the conference would do this other than the potential money? I have to believe that, if Maryland and Rutgers want to come to the Big Ten at all, then dollars are part of the driver for the schools as well.
I'm not a big fan of the big ten expanding but the landscape of college athletics is heading in that direction..I feel like if we don't pull the trigger on expanding we will be behind the eight ball in a couple of years looking to add schools that are less attractive.. As aprehensive as i am about it, i still think the big ten needs to do this.
I would like to kill all expansion with fire.
GT makes no sense whatsoever from an athletic standpoint. It would make more sense to add Syracuse and Pitt to Rutgers and Maryland; at least there would be some semblance of geographical logic, in addition to the fact that they would bring in pre-existing athletic rivalries.
But fuck it all, it's just about the $$ so those numbskulls will do whatever they want.
And then you have the most reasonable geography. Then maybe Rutgers with Notre Dame, but, you know...
I've lived in Atlanta my whole life, and I just got off the phone with my borther-in-law who lives in north Jersey. He said that in terms of TV networks, Rutgers would hardly do anything. But from experience, GA Tech turns the Atlanta attention pretty well. UGA is still the biggest market there, but Tech has a brand spanking new basketball arena, and a nice football standium. Small (by B1G terms), but well represented. Personally, I would rather add teams like Iowa State, Kentucky, Kansas, or Kansas State. But Tech would fun to see in the big ten. Better option than Rutgers/Maryland! The only problem is you risk getting mugged walking across the campus.
You're all forgetting about the burgeoning Big 10 hockey scene. Ga Tech, Maryland, and Rutgers hockey...DO WANT!
Although I would love having Big Ten games 20 minutes from where I live I have to wonder why the Big Ten would want Rutgers when their athletic department lost $ 26.8 million last year. Nobody goes to their sporting events.
Here in Central NJ we have two choices for cable TV. Comcast has the Big Ten network as a extra fee option while Verizon Fios has it part of their basic package.
Vote on Maryland to come tomorrow. If they approve it Rutgers will follow on Tuesday per ESPN
Am I the only one who thinks Nebraska and Penn State were both good, well thought-out additions to the Big 10 but that most (if not all) further expansion suggestions just seem half-baked and unsuited in at least one or major ways?
Rutgers? No thank you.
Maryland? meh. no thanks.
Georgia Tech? getting warmer, but no.
In terms of football, academics, and overall national/international reputation none of these schools suit the Big Ten and the Big Ten does not suit them. Maybe it would be an upgrade from the ACC, but the doesn't make it "the right move". I actually can't think of a school that I'd be excited about the Big 10 grabbing up right now unless I completely disregard geography and/or reality.
:-/ Can't we just be happy with 12 teams in the Big 10 and 10 teams in the Big 12? :P
Is Notre Dame also still in the mix? Cause, I mean, NC game and all. They just seem like a B1G caliber program.
Cut the big ten to 10 teams and leave it alone. I already hate that we dont play everyone in the conference. Expansion is gonna kill traditions.
Maryland. Might as well UVA and BC that way you can have a LAX and Hockey Conference. Even though Im against the expansion and the teams in it.
Atlananta supposedly has the 2nd most CFB fans of any city -- considering that bigger cities like Chicago have more NFL fans.
Nebraska was an excellent add in almost every way. Why make it weird with all of the kinda-sorta fits?
Rutgers is just no
Maryland is pretty much just no
Georgia Tech fits with the B1G geographically about as well as WVU is to the Big 12, aka not at all.
Money is ruining college sports
If expansion is going to happen, you can do alot worse than GT. But as long as we're thinking Georgia, how great would UGA be? I know, never going to happen. But from an academic and athletic viewpoint, they'd be a perfect B1G member school. UGA is pretty much the UofM of the South.
Yay Triple Option!