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

here's some military research for ya, GPS, not like no one uses that in the civilian world

As a graduate institution, ND has ramped up its aspirations over two decades or so and have really accelerated them in the Jenkins era. They've made a lot of new hires, have made new positions (in some fields where other schools are eliminating positions), and have increased their research budget substantially. Meanwhile, they've done a few things to create more space between their school and the church's political arm, making their university a bit more hospitable to faculty who happen to not fall in line with the mandates of the church. They're not an AAU member, and membership is probably a little ways off, but it's not fair to treat ND as if its graduate research is a joke. If you go by the ARWU rankings, which basically only look at research metrics, Notre Dame is not an elite research school in the US, and doesn't compare to any B10 schools,  but it does compare favorably, at this point, to some AAU member schools (like Kansas and SUNY-Buffalo) (source). But it's not a joke, per se. 

Simply because the value they would bring to the conference outweighs any research shortcomings.  The same can't be said for the service academies.

Sorry, but I don't believe it would work that way. There is a difference between market size, penetration, and demand. Market size, which you use for your values, is indeed huge in New York state, as well as New Jersey.

While they have incredible numbers of households that pay for cable television, the Big Ten Network would need to give the cable companies a reason to pay 88 cents per month, namely a team that drives interest and passion among those cable customers. The reason the BTN can charge 88 cents in the BTN footprint is because the fanbases in the footprint absolutely LOVE their college football and/or basketball teams.

A perfect example is Nebraska. While having a dramatically lower population than, say, New Jersey, Cornhusker fans are gaga over their football team. Many of the current shell out $35-$70 just to watch a game via pay-per-view. I have no idea what the particulars are, but I wouldn't be surprised if the cable providers in Nebraska are paying north of $1 per household for the BTN because of that rabid passion. If they didn't offer the BTN, you can assume the large number of rabid Cornhusker fans would take their dollars and get Dish Network or a competing cable provider that has the BTN.

New York and New Jersey, on the other hand, are a combination of the following factors: 1.) They don't have a large, rabid, college football fanbase with a local winner, 2.) Have a wealth of professional alternatives within a 50-mile radius (2 NFL, 2 MLB, 2 NBA, 3 NHL) and 3.) Are made up of a hodge-podge of transplants from across New England, Big Ten, ACC and small private school footprints. That's why, IMHO, I still believe that if the Big Ten goes after NYC/NJ, it will be based on an aggregate interest in the Big Ten. By using a team like Rutgers, combined with schools like Michigan, Penn State, OSU, Nebraska, and Syracuse, you can sell big time college football to New Yorkers. It is also why I think ND has to be on-board before Rutgers gets any serious thought from the Big Ten.

Even at that point, I don't see our subscriber fees jumping anywhere near the levels for the current BTN footprint. The YES (Yankees) Network, covering the most popular pro sports franchise in the region, with live game content roughly 5 out of 7 days a week during the season, still had a helluva time getting rates they found acceptable. I think the population numbers are great, and combined that with a discounted subscriber fee, can still financially warrant expansion, but it's not a slam dunk where we can just multiply average fees by households. Apologies for the lengthy post.

sum real pretty lips you got there.