Expansion Reaction Roundup
Blogs of record from each Big Ten team and a bonus.
Crimson Quarry (Indiana):
For all the talk about footprint and media markets and academic standing, the Big Ten is an athletic conference. The Penn State and Nebraska additions made sense for athletics. These moves, if they happen, will best be understood as a cash grab. I'll certainly welcome these schools if it happens, but at first blush I'm not thrilled.
Bucky's Fifth Quarter (Wisconsin):
I've heard plenty of people say, "Get over it! This is the new age of college athletics." And yes, for better or worse we're moving into a new era.
With that being said, I'll firmly stand on the side saying that, yet again, money and greed are the evils that us into this "new era" of college athletics.
Hammer and Rails (Purdue):
I only see this as an absolutely shameless cash grab for the conference that is already printing money with its own TV network. At least the addition of Nebraska made sense. This really doesn't. We're shaking everything up to add a horrible basketball program and decent football program plus one with an awful football program and a basketball program that had a good run 10 years ago.
Land Grant Holy Land (OSU):
The Big Ten isn't quitting on their arbitrary, silly, and frankly pretentious divisional realignment and divisional names…. but instead we get more constant reminders about what Jim Delany thinks about basically all Big Ten sports fans, writers, and alums.
[AFTER THE JUMP: Penn State is okay with it. Everyone else?]
Black Shoe Diaries (PSU):
I can't imagine many around here will be happy with this move. But Jim Delany doesn't care what makes you happy. The Big Ten is--once again--jumping out in front of the expansion race. And whether you choose to believe it or not, establishing a bigger footprint in the New York City and Washington, DC metro regions is a very good get for the conference.
Sippin' on Purple (NW):
We know why this makes sense for Maryland - their school is broke - and we know how it makes sense for Rutgers - the Big East is a massive compilation of suck - but nobody can really figure out why the Big Ten is doing this. Does it REALLY make that much extra money? Isn't the league already flowing in cash? If so, does it offput the weirdness of a league that justified Nebraska to the conference on the school's geographical similarity, similar personality and football prowess adding Maryland and Rutgers, which have none of those three things?
Corn Nation (NU):
The University of Maryland and Rutgers University Are Joining the Big Ten. Shock, dismay follow.
Daily Gopher (Minnesota):
While the move makes a helluva lot of sense financially for Maryland, Rutgers, and potentially for the Big Ten, it makes zero sense from a perspective of the things fans care about: competition, geography, and culture. Unlike with the announcement of adding Nebraska, zero fans across the Big Ten were excited about this potential move.
The Champaign Room (Illinois):
It makes all the sense in the world monetarily, but in this week of rivalries I am left wondering what could have been. When Nebraska joined up, there were rumors and rumblings that the Cornhuskers may have been bringing fellow Big 8 founding member Missouri with them. It was ultimately decided that the St. Louis and Kansas City markets just were not appealing enough to make the addition worth it and our neighbors to the southwest moved to the SEC. And like any responsible adult, I'm left wondering what could have been.
Neither BHGP or Fight For Iowa bothered to say anything, probably because they care about nothing and just want football to end.
Maize and Brew (Michigan):
Since this whole conference expansion thing was originally Jim Delany's doing, its damn well appropriate that he is about to execute its swan song: a foolish, misguided attempt to better an athletic conference by considering everything but athletics.
Also the MZone:
JIM DELANY: I've had my eye on you forever.
SYRACUSE: You have?
JIM DELANY: 'Course. We should get together. Maybe go hang in the city. With all the people and their cable-ready households.
SYRACUSE: You mean like Buffalo?
JIM DELANY (LAUGHS): New York.
SYRACUSE: Uh... okay, but that's like four and a half hours away.
JIM DELANY: What?
SYRACUSE: I live in Upstate New York. Is that a problem?
JIM DELANY (MAKING HIS VOICE BREAK UP): What did you sa--? We ha-- a bad-- connectio--
CLICK! Delany slams down the phone.
MSU blogs didn't offer any opinions. Representative rec'd comment:
Booo!
I hate this move. Frankly Penn State was bad, Nebraska seemed like a good fit but Maryland? WTF are Delaney and Co. thinking? Maryland doesn’t fit geographically, regionally, ‘culturally’, and lets be honest: doesn’t bring much to the table athletically at this point either. Rutgers is just as bad if they end up coming along.
Terrible move for the B1G. I hate the shift towards super conferences they destroy everything that makes college sports special. I’ll always support MSU, but these moves just completely undermine regional and conference football identities.
For the record I graduated in ’02 even if the above makes it sound like I graduated in ’62.
By my count that's one yes from Penn State, two meh-leaning-nos from Illinois and Indiana, one inability to rouse yourself from overwhelming otter ennui at Iowa, and eight HELL NOs.
In other conferences, Best Rant Goes To From Old Virginia:
i hate college football
I guess there's no sense not addressing the elephant in the room. I can't not - Maryland has changed so many of my opinions about college sports in one day that I never thought could be changed.
More specifically, I no longer have opinions about things. I stopped caring. People don't like "conventional wisdom" because it's conventional. I like it because it's wisdom. Conventional wisdom dictated that we were finally settling into an equilibrium again. Now there is no conventional wisdom. Does the Big Ten sit around or find more markets to try and put the BTN into? Does the SEC look to the ACC for two more members themselves?
What happens to the Big East? Are we headed towards, not 4x16, but 5x16? Who knows? I don't give a damn any more.
It keeps going, and going. Enjoy it. Savor it.
November 21st, 2012 at 8:01 PM ^
Whether you like it or not, this is about what University presidents want, not what college football fans want. From that point of view, this makes perfect sense for the B1G. Increased CIC membership at a time when state/federal funding for "research" is at high risk makes a lot of sense, hence the emphasis on the academic component importance.
The Rust belt is crumbling. If the government hadn't bailed out GM and Chrysler, Michigan's economy would get even worse. Think Michigan couldn't end up in Maryland's shoes? Think again. You know what Mary Sue Coleman sees when she looks at empty seats in the student section? A serious drop off in alumni giving rates in about 10 years.
Virginia and UNC are next. Get used to it now.
November 21st, 2012 at 8:20 PM ^
that's the two best schools in the ACC, fit the B1G profile like a glove. And to my thinking, that would give the conference real geographic integrity. Look at a map--that's a nice row of states. In 20 years no one will care that it was once all about the midwest.
Plus, there's a political element. Those are two blue southern states. Missouri's legislators reportedly opted for the SEC for a reason.
November 21st, 2012 at 11:09 PM ^
November 21st, 2012 at 8:39 PM ^
to the economy. I know that we're just doing lots less leisure spending, even now that things are better for us. The hard times were a kind of discipline. Also, Rutgers is a commuter school; it will be very interesting to see whether participation in the B1G starts filling their stadium.
November 21st, 2012 at 9:45 PM ^
Since Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan, or other schools will visit NY every 2 years if not every 3~4 years, I have a feeling those games will sell out with local opponent fans no matter what.
November 23rd, 2012 at 11:40 AM ^
I know probably in the neighborhood of 100 Rutgers alumnae. I know one person who commutted.
November 21st, 2012 at 8:30 PM ^
Who knew therapeutically writing about my ex via conference realignment would lead to this?
November 22nd, 2012 at 7:54 PM ^
November 21st, 2012 at 8:38 PM ^
As a counterpoint, Indiana seems to have improved a fair amount in football once they got the money to hire a good coach and the ability to keep him. A couple years ago, Mizzou wanted to hire Matt Painter from Purdue, but Purdue gave him $1 million extra a year to stay. It's not like either of those two schools are powerhouses, but who knows what would have happened if their coaches left/they didn't have money.
November 21st, 2012 at 9:47 PM ^
Football takes a bit longer, but basketball can recover a lot faster. Look at Minnesota paying Tubby Smith almost 2 million.
November 21st, 2012 at 10:57 PM ^
Honestly, this sounds like a lot of infantile whining. It may have seemed advantageous to add more powerhouse programs (I guess, if you want fewer chances at a National Championship), but how many outside of the states of Florida and Texas really add a large population base?
November 22nd, 2012 at 1:10 AM ^
What is sounds like is a lot of incompetent reporting. If I'm the AD of a school that just cut 7 programs and a method comes along where I can restore those 7 programs, well, I think the decision is a no brainer.
But I haven't seen a single reporter express this as anything more than a money grab. I don't think so. The talking heads are taking the easy way out. Not one of them did any homework.
As a fan though, I think adding 2 schools that really don't give a shit about football sucks.
November 22nd, 2012 at 11:09 AM ^
Hi, just trying to understand some background on this deal.
1. We know already there are a multitude of UM, OSU and PSU fans in the NYC to Wash DC corridor.
2. It is already possible to view the BTN in that area on local cable providers.
I was curious how easy option 2 is for fans? I have Comcast and most of the most basic packages have BTN in their sports lineup. Is that the case for people in Virginia, Maryland, NJ, and NY State?
If it is, then the move isn't so much about getting the network onto cable packages as much as it is leveraging it into a more favorable position and promoting greater interest.
November 22nd, 2012 at 11:58 AM ^
November 22nd, 2012 at 11:47 AM ^
November 22nd, 2012 at 1:37 PM ^
I wonder if there is, understandably, a generational thing going on here.
To take two extremes, if you're 12 years old and you've always lived in Michigan it probably doesn't matter much who is or isn't in the conference. You've only seen a handful of games against each opponent and you probably don't know anyone that's a fan of a school other than Michigan or MSU, and except for Ohio and State nobody's left enough of an impression to generate any particular emotional response.
If you're 60, you've got dozens of games against each conference opponent under your belt, and for every school in the conference there's something memorable attached: the transcontinental against Minnesota, Wangler to Carter against Indiana after Corso played for the tie, the 70-point turnaround after it was about to be 28-0 down against Illinois, etc. And over time, especially if you've moved away from Michigan and even more if you've spent time in an urban center like Chicago, you've accumulated friends from each of those schools and the annual pre-game e-mail taunting or postgame congratulatory phone call from loser to winner has become a sort of marker of the friendship. And not having those games matters.
Comments