Big Ten offers invites to Missouri, Nebraska, Notre Dame and Rutgers

Submitted by A tree on May 10th, 2010 at 2:55 PM

I'm surprised no one has posted this.

 

http://host.madison.com/sports/college/article_3f48eefa-5c60-11df-9a57-…

[mod edit: ESPN reports, per WHB Radio, that the Big Ten has extended offers to Notre Dame, Missouri, Nebraska and Rutgers - information linked. Since these reports came out, Nebraska has stated it has no such offer and Missouri will not respond to speculation.] 

Comments

Blazefire

May 10th, 2010 at 2:59 PM ^

because various radio stations and blogs have been saying this stuff and retracting it for weeks now.

 

NO DECISIONS WILL BE MADE THIS YEAR. AT ALL.

spacemanspiff231

May 10th, 2010 at 3:45 PM ^

I'd love to be able to see the future, which, by your post, I can tell you so clearly can.  If you can't, please refrain from making overgeneralized, sweeping statements like "no decisions will be made this year."  It's early  May.  You have NO IDEA what will happen this year.  While you're probably right, that doesn't mean that you definitely are.  Furthermore, an invite is not a decision.  An invite to join the Big Ten does not equate to actually joining the Big Ten.

With that said.  I do have to say that I question the source of this article, therefore its validity.

MGoShoe

May 10th, 2010 at 3:01 PM ^

...I like the approach.  Shore up the Midwest with Mizzou and the Huskers, give ND one...last...chance and raid the Big East if they don't bite.

joeyb

May 10th, 2010 at 5:23 PM ^

It's not about people actually watching. It's about Cablevision paying the Big10 $.70/subscriber/month. That alone is enough to pay for their entry into the Big10, let alone ticket sales, advertisements, extra games, etc.

psychomatt

May 11th, 2010 at 1:49 AM ^

It's about BOTH and this is something that constantly is misrepresented or at least misunderstood on this boad and in the MSM.

Currently, 60% of BTN's revenues come from advertising and 40% come from subscriber fees and advertising are probably growing faster than subscriber fees.  Advertising rates are tied to ratings.  This is one of the reasons that ND makes so much sense even though they are in the middle of the B10's existing geographic footprint.

If you want to really understand the economics, check out Frank the Tank (he has a number of posts on the topic that are excellent):

http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/the-value-of-expansion-can…

joeyb

May 11th, 2010 at 10:06 AM ^

I understand your point. My point is that people say that Rutgers won't get the NYC market because no one cares about Rutgers. That doesn't matter as long as we get Cablevision because we get put in 3 million homes which gets us subscriptions (around $25 million, which is about what other schools in the B10 take in) and the additional B10 alumni in that area will increase our ratings and get us more advertising revenue.

I wasn't trying to leave all of that out, I was just pointing out that Rutgers itself doesn't bring us money and people don't have to care about it. We just need Cablevision and we will be set.

spacemanspiff231

May 10th, 2010 at 8:34 PM ^

Maybe they don't care about college football b/c there is no real college football team to root for.  Clearly they care about football, evidenced by the Giants and Jets.  If in joining the Big Ten, Rutgers or Syracuse became a much stronger program, I doubt you have any idea how the New York market would react. 

jmblue

May 10th, 2010 at 8:57 PM ^

Not to mention that most Big East schools aren't big draws.  No school in that league has anywhere remotely near the draw of Michigan, OSU or PSU.  Bring schools like that to RU every other year and college football becomes a bigger deal.

Shalom Lansky

May 10th, 2010 at 3:14 PM ^

I'm going to wait and see if they camp with us this summer.  I've heard bad things about Nebraska's work ethic and I'm not sure if Missouri has the test scores but if they impress the coaches at camp this summer I'm willing to extend an offer.  Do we have enough scholarships available? 

Shalom Lansky

May 10th, 2010 at 3:21 PM ^

but it gives us an "in" to the New York market!  Have you ever been in Manhattan on Saturday afternoon in the Fall?  Everyone huddles around their television sets or flocks to a local drinking establishment to watch the Scarlet Knights do battle on the gridiron.  If I could say one things about Manhattan, or New York as a state, it is that they LOOOOVE Rutgers football.  Since no Michigan alums live in New York (which makes sense b/c nobody from NY goes to Michigan) it is unlikely that B10 football would be available there without adding a powerhouse football program from the region,  like Rutgers.

SARCASM: If you didn't catch it, you must be dead or immune.

DamnYankee

May 10th, 2010 at 3:56 PM ^

we constantly hear that while the NE is not necessary a great football market, it is a HUGE basketball market.  In fact, you hear b-ball coaches down here talk about how nice it is to establish a coveted recruiting presence in the City and the rest of the NE.  Again, I am not familiar with the NE and NY market (and Rutgers, for that matter), but do you think the b-ball angle is the one the BTN is trying to exploit?  I would be curious to hear your thoughts as someone who lives in that area.

jblaze

May 10th, 2010 at 4:00 PM ^

Rutgers has 53,000 students. Many of those students are in-state (NJ) or relatively regional (NY, CT, PA) and therefore in the NY media market. Additionally, Rutgers has 335,000 alumni, again largely in the NY Metro area.

While they may not be rabid fans, 2 things will happen.

1) the local cable networks (Time Warner, RCN, Cablevision, maybe Comcast, but I can't remember) will have to carry the BTN on the standard tier and

2) all games will be sellouts, with higher ticket prices. This is because other B10 alumni will go to the games even if RU alumni don't care at all (or more likely RU sucks). If you don't believe me, just watch what happens when RU plays at the new Giants stadium.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rutgers_University

UMFootballCrazy

May 10th, 2010 at 4:05 PM ^

Its not the Rutgers alumni they are after in the NY/NJ area.  Rutgers is the "in" that gets the B10 Network into the region to reach the current Big 10 alumni living and working in the area.  Rutgers is not the goal but rather and means to an end.  That their alumni might in turn watch the B10 network is an added bonus, but not the goal.

crum

May 10th, 2010 at 3:22 PM ^

I found another site saying that too.

http://www.810whb.com/article/3527

from the article

"The Big Ten Conference has extended initial offers to join the league to four universities including Missouri and Nebraska from the Big 12, according to multiple sources close to the negotiations. 

While nothing can be approved until the Big Ten presidents and chancellors meet the first week of June in Chicago, the league has informed the two Big 12 schools, Notre Dame and Rutgers that it would like to have them join. It is not yet clear whether the Big Ten will expand to 14 or 16 teams but sources indicated Missouri and Nebraska are invited in either scenario.  Notre Dame has repeatedly declined the opportunity to join the Big Ten."

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

May 10th, 2010 at 3:25 PM ^

You know, this brings up an interesting dynamic.  The Big Ten already has people interested, if not outright begging, to join.  If they can successfully add four schools, that'll make 15 and they'll have decimated the Big 12 and Big East in the process.  The line to be the 16th would be around the block.  Might be a way to get Texas in without bothering with A&M, hm?

BraveWolverine730

May 10th, 2010 at 3:36 PM ^

I'm not quite sure how this gets us Texas actually. We really wouldn't have obliterated either conference in this scenario.  If there is one school the Big East could afford to lose its Rutgers, they could offer Memphis or someone of that ilk and stay alive.  The Big 12 would have no problem inviting TCU and or BYU/Utah to replace Mizzou and Nebraska.

I am convinced that Texas will join the SEC before the Big 10 in any scenario.

BraveWolverine730

May 10th, 2010 at 4:31 PM ^

I think that you are limiting yourself to football when discussing "bottom feeders" there.  While Rutgers certainly applies, MSU and Indiana both have better programs than A&M in bball and MSU has done about as much in football recently.  Uconn has been better in football AND basketball as has Missouri.  Would I mind Texas A&M if it got us Texas? Heck no. Are the worth an offer by themselves? Equally heck no

 

EDIT: I reread the post and now can see that you possibly are referring to academics, where Texas A&M would be vastly superior to all your mentioned schools..

WolvinLA2

May 10th, 2010 at 5:49 PM ^

Actually, A&M would not be vastly superior to the schools he mentioned.  According to US News' rankings of public schools http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/national-top-public A&M is tied with Minny (and Purdue) at 22nd nationally.  MSU and Indiana (and Iowa) are tied at 29, not that far behind.  29 is pretty respectable for our "bottom feeders." 

For discussion sake, Rutgers is 26 (within our range), Nebraska is 43 and Missouri is 48.  Texas would be tied for 5th with Penn State as the 5th best school in the Big Ten.  For people curious how the conference stacks up academically, here it is:

1 NW, 2 Michigan, 3 (tie) Illinois and Wisconsin, 5 Penn State, 6 Ohio State, 7 (tie) Minnesota and Purdue, 9 (tie) Michigan State, Indiana and Iowa.

NOLA Blue

May 10th, 2010 at 4:23 PM ^

I agree with MaizeAndBlueWahoo that Texas may still be a possibility.  If the Big Ten were to first add Nebraska and Mizzou, quickly reel in Notre Dame with the Big East bluff, and offer Texas and Tex A&M to follow, it would mean the Texas schools would both be at a point of 3 options:

1 - stay in Big 12 while it considers adding TCU, Utah, etc.

2 - flee to the SEC, whose research standing is nowhere near the Big 10's

3 - join the Big 10 with it's A-list of national football schools (Michigan, Penn St, Ohio St, Nebraska, Notre Dame) and research powerhouses.  We can all keep talking the "millions" of athletics, or look to the "billions" of research that a state like Texas understands extremely well.

I disagree that we wouldn't "bother" with A&M.  I don't think it should be that difficult to swallow accepting another AAU member institute in order to secure a state with 24 million people, 99% of whom are raving-mad football fans (compared to the misdirected obsession with New York state's 18 million people, probably less than a third of whom are football fanatics to the level of a Texan,) or to get a collegial foothold of synergy in one of the largest research complexes in the world that is the Texas university system.  This should really be a no-brainer: think about where U of M's real money comes from.

But, in the end, football!  Texas, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Mizzou and Texas A&M.  If we are going to expand, that's one hell of a lineup that would certainly not dilute the quality of opponents.

jaggs

May 10th, 2010 at 3:34 PM ^

Why not go for the Boston market and grab UConn or BC, either of which provides better BB, football and hockey as a bonus?

Blueisgood

May 10th, 2010 at 3:38 PM ^

I'm not going to believe anything until its official announced. However, I also believe that were theres smoke, theres fire. Some of these teams have been mentioned in almost every article/story. If this does eventually happen, I'd bet on Mizzou and Rutgers to be in. ND and Nebraska I'm not sure yet.

Also how do you know that no decisions will be made at all this year? Are you Jim Delaney? It wouldn't surpise me to see something announced next monday. It also wouldn't surprise me to see something announced January 1st. Truth is no one knows any facts except for Delaney and the higher ups at each university.

psychomatt

May 10th, 2010 at 7:01 PM ^

The B10 has had discussions with all of the schools mentioned during which it has outlined the general terms of the deal and told its leading candidates to submit applications by a certain date if they are interested.  Delaney & Co. will review all the applications that come in and make a presentation and recommendation to the presidents at the upcoming meeting (first week of June, in Chicago).  At the meeting, the presidents will approve (or not) some course of action and give Delaney the authority to hammer out the final details.  It is much like an M&A deal where you use an investment bank to sell a company.

Tater

May 10th, 2010 at 3:48 PM ^

Rutgers would be OK for basketball because it would open up the East Coast for recruiting; it would also be great for BTN.  And they would be another "game but overmatched" team on the football field.  For providing this, they would get more money than they could dream of in the Big Least.  Sounds like a win/win to me.

Dark Blue

May 10th, 2010 at 3:48 PM ^

please let this be true, please let this be true, please let this be true, please let this be true, please let this be true,.........(crosses fingers)

Sandler For 3

May 10th, 2010 at 3:50 PM ^

Not that ESPN is ever wrong but they just reported it on College Gameday Live so I'm assuming it has more credibility than dandy don posting it on his blog. 

Sac Fly

May 10th, 2010 at 3:58 PM ^

...have to also look at their other sports, rutgers and notre lacrosse just joined the big east, if they left they would have to go independent

Alton

May 10th, 2010 at 5:02 PM ^

If Rutgers were to receive an actual invitation to join the Big Ten, they will spend less time worrying about their lacrosse team than you will spend reading this sentence.

Anyway, Rutgers and Notre Dame lacrosse could join Ohio State in the ECAC--a conference that (unlike the Big East) has an Automatic Bid to the NCAA Tournament for the conference champion.