Detnews: B10 hired consultant, expansion makes financial sense
http://www.detnews.com/article/20100302/SPORTS0203/3020424/Report--Inve…
Five schools mentioned (Rutgers, Pitt, Mizzou, Syracuse and ND) only one makes financial sense. To me, that's obviously ND.
Other schools are potential targets as well, but if they can't make some of these work, I don't see who else works (outside Texas, of course).
EDIT: Topic title. The story at the link is unclear. It either means 1 of 5 schools work, or expansion in general works, with five schools mentioned. Journalism fail.
I'm not sure you're reading that correctly. It says:
The firm's report concluded that it would be financially beneficial to expand with one of those five schools.I read that as "ANY one of those five schools would be financially beneficial," not "ONLY one of those five would be financially beneficial." I could be wrong, but the headline and the generally positive quote seem to imply that the study had good results for the Big Ten. If only Notre Dame was a moneymaker, that would definitely be a bad thing since they're not coming.
You could be right - but it can be read both ways. Shoddy, shoddy writing to say the least.
I don't think it's poor writing. Saying "one of those schools" makes it clear that we're only going for a 12th team, not a 12th, 13th and 14th team (as people have been throwing out there for some reason). Saying "any of those schools" is more ambiguous in that respect.
Well, the ESPN article on the same source sort of debunks that:
"The point was: We can all get richer if we bring in the right team or teams," a source told the Tribune.Of course, that one is even more poorly written:
An analysis prepared by a Chicago-based firm looked at whether the addition of five schools would generate enough revenue to make expansion worthwhile, according to the Chicago Tribune.Certainly makes it sound like they assessed the impact of all five at once, doesn't it? This is the real money quote, though:
"You just don't jump into the league and get a full share of what everyone else in this league has established over time," Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez told The Associated Press. "I think someone has to buy their way into the league."The Big Ten pretty obviously believes being turned down isn't going to be a problem here.
It's TV eyeballs. And Rutgers is the only major state university in New Jersey, which is the 11th most populous state with the 2nd highest median income. And it splits between the New York and Philadelphia media markets. I know...I know, who the fuck is Rutgers? They are the Carvin Johnson of Big Ten expansion possibilities.
No, more like the Justin Feagin of possibilities. They're really, really excited to be in the Big Ten, and the fans get even more overexcited about the possibilities, but it's all a big house of cards because once we see them in action, we realize why they were actually a two-star and after a year, it's time for them to begone, NOW.
Seth9* looks great as an expansion possibility, until you realize that Seth9 isn't competitive in football, basketball, or any other sport.
*This comparison isn't entirely valid, as Seth9 can only theoretically bring in the #56252 TV market, instead of the #1 market. However because Seth9 and Rutgers both suck at sports, nobody would bother watching either.
You moved up from #56256. Congratulations! Some people must have died in the other markets...
I'd love to know what assumptions were used by the firm. I get that NJ is a large market and Rutgers happens to be smack dab in the middle of said market but, if a tree falls in the forest any nobody watched it on tv, did it really happen?
Anytime I talk to an east coaster, they tell me that NYC/NJ just doesn't care that much about college football. They say it's a pro sport area.
Sooo, there's a lot of eyeballs in NJ, will any of them actually watch the Big Ten(12) network if it were to include Rutgers? I honestly don't know, but I'm extremely skeptical.
Rutgers is not going to make New York City "Big Ten Country".
It will only make New Brunswick "Big Ten Country".
Still worth it?
The city is a pro sports town, but if you look at the college infusion there, Syracuse has by far the largest fanbase and interest in that town. Look at MSG next week when the Big East Tournament is played. Hell, Syracuse fans this year out-numbered fans in Washington, DC against Georgetown, Providence, and most notably in this case, Rutgers, in their own gym, as they have for years. When SU knocked off UNC at MSG earlier this year, the Empire State Building was lit orange and blue.
Syracuse is the top academic school in the Big East, its a historical rival of Penn State, its recruiting territory doesn't step on the bounds of the rest of the Big Ten (northeast, mid-atlantic), it has the largest fanbase which not only expands into the NYC market but Boston and D.C. as well, and has a premier college basketball program that carries by far the best TV exposure, and plays in the college basketball equivalent of the Big House.
For those that are enamored with Rutgers due to their "football resurgence", take a look at the schedule that has given them second-tier bowl games, and the fact that they still have never finished higher than I believe third in the eight-team Big East.
Financially, if you're comparing to Rutgers or Pittsburgh for financial reasons, Syracuse is by far the best option.
I would take three. Rutgers, Pitt or Syracuse and Boston College. A BC candidacy would be delicious. They hate Notre Dame and would love to get the drop on them by joining the Big Ten. So then does ND, which considers BC a poor cousin, allow that to happen or make a play for the Big Ten themselves? Don't laugh. I think this could actually happen.
If we can't get ND or Texas, BC would be a great target because not only are they decent enough in football and basketball, they also help form Big Ten Hockey.
Like hell. It's probably more likely that another addition to the league would add a hockey program than BC would give up Hockey East.
Yes, that definitely should be clarified. Right now, "one of five" can mean two distinctly different things. DetNews needs more copy editors.
I don't think it's poor writing. Saying "one of those schools" makes it clear that we're only going for a 12th team, not a 12th, 13th and 14th team (as people have been throwing out there for some reason). Saying "any of those schools" is more ambiguous in that respect.That's actually one MORE way to read it that I hadn't considered. But that just adds to the ambiguity, IMO. I don't think it makes it clear at all that we're only going for a 12th team (although I do think that's the case) -- it could be read that way, but I still think it could mean that ANY of the five (and possibly more than one) would be beneficial. I'm curious to see another story regarding this report, just because I feel like it probably provided some interesting information and, as of right now, I don't know exactly what that is.
The Big Ten benchmark for expansion is Penn State. Penn State was the greatest expansion decision by any conference in recent memory. It expanded our footprint, it brought in a powerhouse in athletics and academics, and it made everyone richer.
What's that mean? It means we're not fucking bringing in Pitt or Missouri or something. Pitt WOULD fit. I'm sure they would. But TV footprints are a big part of the process right now, and the Big Ten already has Pennsylvania completely on lock down. Mizzou, Syracuse, and Rutgers are nowhere near the Penn State benchmark. You don't need a consulting firm to figure this out.
Notre Dame is the only school mentioned that works. Texas is the obvious no-brainer that may or may not be in talks with the conference. If I take off my OMGTEXAS goggles off, all I see happening is this - the Big Ten will NOT be expanding any time soon. Notre Dame's now-petty NBC contract will run out, they'll realize how foolish they are for missing out on our $22,000,000 paydays, and they will join our conference.
Penn State set the bar really high for expansion. They were a perfect fit. They were also smart enought to accept the invitation.
Notre Dame and Texas are the only two that really get me excited. But I think Notre Dame values its independence more than the money. And Texas would have to fight Texas politics.
My money is on status quo. At least for the next few years.
until the overwhelming financial and recruiting disadvantage of being left out of a major conference finally wears down Notre Dame.
Yea, they'd like to stay independent in Football. So what. Michigan would still like all the games to be played at 1:00 with the players in leather helmets and the fans in fedoras.
The world is moving on without them. When some of the old alumni that used to personnaly watch Rockne walk the sidelines die off, they'll catch up.
Astute observations. The third paragraph should read:
The firm's report concluded that it would be financially beneficial to expand with any one or any combination of those five schools.
also: water is wet.
If there's one lesson we continue to learn about shoddy internetz reporting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch#playnext=1&playnext_from=TL&videos=8fb52n1…
I don't want to do anything that benefits them other than beating them on TV.
I don't think it will be Rutgers for 2 reasons. #1 Yawn factor and #2 NJ is a big PSU recruiting ground.
I still think it's Mizzou and not Pitt.
The "Frank The Tank" site has a detailed analysis of the Big Ten study article:
http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/
That guy does a great job of looking at the issue from a lot of angles. I mean I may not agree with him 100% but he is really covering the issue. Thanks for the link.
then perhaps expansion is not such a good idea.