How Maryland came to join the Big Ten

How Maryland came to join the Big Ten

Submitted by Leaders And Best on December 12th, 2012 at 9:56 AM

Washington Post has an article detailing the process and negotiations that brought Maryland to the Big Ten.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/maryland-to-big-ten-its-money-versus-tradition/2012/12/11/3c5da16c-3fd0-11e2-ae43-cf491b837f7b_story.html

A couple points I found interesting:

  • Jim Delany definitely discussed the new Big Ten division format with Maryland. In my opinion, the Big Ten office already has a plan for new divisions, and this new survey is just a front to make fans think our input is actually being considered.
  • Maryland is getting money front-loaded in the deal to address their debt crisis unlike Nebraska who had their share increase incrementally over several years to full share.
  • Once the story started breaking, the deal moved fast. Brandon left the last meeting with Delany not knowing a deal was imminent.

Nate Silver on B1G expansion

Nate Silver on B1G expansion

Submitted by dnak438 on November 20th, 2012 at 10:08 AM

The article is here on his NYT blog.

Some highlights:

 

Maryland and Rutgers are not necessarily poor choices compared with some of the other logical alternatives.

I count five other universities that are A.A.U. members, that play in a major college football conference, and that are either within a current Big Ten state or border one.

And the conclusion:

It is probably no coincidence that the two most popular college football conferences – the Southeastern and the Big Ten – have until now been the most conservative about expansion. The most recent additions to the Big Ten, Penn State and the University of Nebraska, ranked as the 3rd and 18th most popular football programs in the country. The newest additions to the Southeastern Conference, Texas A&M and Missouri, were ranked 6th and 23rd.

Rutgers and Maryland are outstanding public universities – but they are just not in the same league in terms of football.

The Big Ten may have expanded the size of its revenue pie, but it will be dividing it 14 ways rather than 12, and among family members that have less history of sitting down at the table with one another. In seeking to expand its footprint eastward, the conference may have taken a step in the wrong direction.

B1G Maryland Presser open thread

B1G Maryland Presser open thread

Submitted by bdsisme on November 19th, 2012 at 2:20 PM

 

BTN & BTN2Go will have live coverage at 2:30 PM ET of the Maryland press conference announcing it's joining the Big Ten.

 Retweeted by Big Ten Network
 
 

Guests joining BTN after 2:30 PM ET MD presser include Penn State's Dave Joyner and Michigan State's Mark Hollis

 Retweeted by Big Ten Network
 

Other confirmed guests following MD presser on BTN: Gary Williams, Mike DeCourcy, U-M AD Dave Brandon

 Retweeted by Big Ten Network
 
 
If you are on campus (or VPN into umich network): http://iptv.umnet.umich.edu/
 
Maryland will be airing the press conference starting at 3pm here: http://www.umterps.com/allaccess/?media=353681

Maryland prez leaks Conference divisions

Maryland prez leaks Conference divisions

Submitted by Leaders And Best on November 19th, 2012 at 1:47 PM

Not a fan of this at all.

Brett McMurphy @McMurphyESPN

Maryland prez tells regents MD, RU in Leaders Division w/OSU, PSU, Wisconsin, Purdue & Indiana. Illinois moves to Legends

 

Legends

  • Michigan
  • Nebraska
  • Michigan State
  • Iowa
  • Minnesota
  • Northwestern
  • Illinois

 

Leaders

  • Ohio State
  • Penn State
  • Wisconsin
  • Purdue
  • Indiana
  • Maryland
  • Rutgers

 

It probably guarantees the protected crossover game (can't wait to see who they matchup with Maryland & Rutgers) which means Michigan would play the other teams once every 6 years.

Huge competitive and recruiting disadvantage for Legends Division as well as the Ohio, Pennsylvania, DC/Baltimore, and Jersey markets are all in the other division.

 

If the B10 were to go to 14 teams, why not add the service academies?

If the B10 were to go to 14 teams, why not add the service academies?

Submitted by Communist Football on November 23rd, 2010 at 9:25 PM

According to MGoComrade SeniorBearcat, Dave Brandon said today that he could see the Big Ten expanding to 14 teams over the next few years:

DB sees the Big 10 at 14 teams in the next couple of years, with 16 teams being possible. Only big name teams that have a large market share / successful in sports and in academics. He did not name names, but mentioned only a few schools fit that profile.

If this is true, what could the teams be? Going by big market share in athletics and academics, and geographic contiguity, other than ND, who makes the cut?

With Nebraska in the fold, the geographically contiguous states are: Wyoming, South Dakota, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, and New York.

Here are the I-A (FBS) teams in each of these contiguous states (I am assuming that the Big Ten will not seek to add a team in an existing Big Ten state, because the idea is to expand the television footprint):

WY: Wyoming

SD: None

CO: Colorado, Colorado State, Air Force

KS: Kansas, Kansas State

MO: Missouri

KY: Kentucky, Western Kentucky, Louisville

WV: West Virginia, Marshall

MD: Maryland, Navy

DE: None

NJ: Rutgers

NY: Syracuse, Buffalo, Army

Of these schools, the remotely plausible candidates are Kansas, Missouri, Kentucky, West Virginia, Maryland, Rutgers, Syracuse, and the service academies.

Strong athletics (FB or BB): Kansas, Missouri, Kentucky, WVU

Strong academics: Army, Navy, Air Force

Decent TV markets: Missouri, Maryland, Rutgers, Syracuse, Army, Navy, Air Force

Now I know that they don't have the most powerful programs anymore, but how cool would it be to add Army and Navy to the Big Ten? Two old-time college football powers in major East Coast states. Awesome academics and premier research institutions. High-character institutions. Air Force could also fit this bill, but it's a smaller TV market than New York or the DC area.

What say you, Comrades?

Joining B10 costs Neb. $9.255M

Joining B10 costs Neb. $9.255M

Submitted by mgokev on September 21st, 2010 at 11:22 PM

For those out there interested in financial stuff regarding the expansion, here's an article regarding our new conference members, Nebraska.  Joining the conference is costing Nebraska over $9M this year from the Big 12.

 

We feel the long-term benefits of entering into the Big Ten, both academically and athletically, will make this a very good investment," athletic director Tom Osborne said.

 

Obviously, as last year the Big Ten distributed $22M to each of the member schools.

Link? Link:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5601182

RichRod Addresses Several Topical Issues

RichRod Addresses Several Topical Issues

Submitted by MGoShoe on June 18th, 2010 at 11:46 PM

RichRod and the rest of the football coaching staff attended the Sound Body Sound Mind camp in Detroit on Thursday and he made several statements to the media. 

Topics covered included Demar Dorsey, the 2010 recruiting class, interest or non-interest in USC players, Michigan's upcoming camps, conference expansion, Nebraska, and divisional alignment.

RichRod on Demar Dorsey and recruiting marginal qualifiers:

  • Recruiting marginal qualifiers:  “I think all coaches and not just us have to look at everything involved as far as recruiting, not only who can get in, but who can graduate and get out.  We have that in mind anyway. But you particularly have to (be) mindful of that in the future. I think all schools are doing that.  It’s hard to project some guys (more than) others.  There’s some guys that may have struggled to get in and they’re doing very well. Some guys that got in very easily are struggling. I don’t think there’s an exact science to it, but at the same time we’re moving forward with what we got and not looking back."
  • Michigan's non-admission of Dorsey:  “I don’t know if it’s important to get into all that right now.  I think what’s important is make sure that the guys that are here for summer school are doing the right things. I think there’s, if you look at it, there’s probably a lot of people that sign throughout the country and there’s not as much attention if they matriculate there or not. But this one’s got a lot more attention and I understand that.”
  • How he feels about the Dorsey decision:  “I worry about the guys that play for Michigan."

The article indicates that Antonio Kinard's status continues to be up in the air and that RichRod and his staff have not reached out to any USC seniors or juniors.

  • Interest in USC players and when his new class will fully report:  “You got to have scholarships first to give out, and there’s got to be mutual interest and all that.  So we’ve been concentrating on our guys. And guys that have been on campus and taking summer classes and the freshmen that we expect to come on the 26th, that’s had most of our attention.”

Regarding Michigan football camps, RichRod talked about the value of shorter, focused camps to attact prospects who are pressed for time to make it to multiple campuses. 

  • So far this year, Michigan has held a one day camp for top prospects and a kicking camp and is set to host its four-day summer camp June 19 - 22, a 7-on-7 camp June 24 - 25, and a youth football camp for middle schoolers June 26 - 28.
  • Michigan is expecting 700 athletes and 100 college coaches for this weekend's camp and 400 campers for the youth camp.
  • The importance of establishing relationships with recruits: "That’s a big reason why we’re here.  Not only from the evaluation standpoint of seeing the guys do football drills in camp, but also for them to evaluate us. Again, they get to know us as people and teachers. I think that’s absolutely critical when you can establish relationships.  Everybody talks in recruiting about relationships and it is true. You establish relationships and the easiest way to do that is to be around them. 
  • Outreach to younger players: We’re even reaching into the junior-high level and at least get them indoctrinated to Michigan, get a chance to see everything we’re about.  We started that last year and it was a big hit, and there’s going to be even more this year for that.”

RichRod also talked about several issues surrounding expansion.

  • Expansion and Nebraska: “I did think [the league would grow to 14 or 16 teams], but now maybe not.  But I also thought at the time, if the Big 12 imploded I think there would have been more of a domino effect. I think this probably just slowed everybody down.  [Nebraska is a] great program, a great tradition, and it’ll be exciting.
  • Conference championship game: “I know the players have [wanted one].  For the coaches, I think it’s pretty exciting if you’re going to have something at the end there to play for.  But I guess it’s going to happen sooner than anticipated, too. I think that probably is the most surprising part, that it’s going to happen so quick.”
  • The makeup of Big Ten divisions:  “But I think there’s a lot to think about geographically and there’s a lot to think about competitively.”
  • Does he have a preference for Michigan and Ohio State in the same division?:  “Either way, the way it works we’re going to play them every year, we’re going to play Michigan State every year.  I’m sure every school will have maybe two rivalries that they say we have to have those no matter how it works out. We have our two there.”

Take OU to get TX?

Take OU to get TX?

Submitted by ciszew on June 13th, 2010 at 5:45 PM

A Texas fan on the Northwestern board wrote a pretty great piece about the current U of Texas perspective in expansion:

http://northwestern.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?SID=901&fid=57&style=2&tid=1…

Anyway he basically states (and this is pure theory so take it with a grain of salt) that Texas would join the Big Ten if Oklahoma was in a package deal with them.
Some of the Northwestern peeps where saying no, b/c of OU's lack of academic credentials.  
I personally would say yes, bring in OU even if they are not up to par with some of the other institutions in our conference.  The benefits out weigh the risks.
What does the Mgoblog community think?