Looks like Maryland is on the way

Submitted by MGlobules on November 18th, 2012 at 8:05 PM

An article placed at cbs sports an hour ago says Maryland will vote as early as tomorrow on their invitation to join the Big Ten. Says that university's biggest donor backs the move. Hard to imagine that this is not a twofer deal, with Rutgers right behind. 

The article notes that the $50 million exit fee might be a stumbling block for Maryland. But from what I've read elsewhere the league may take all or part out of future revenue to the school.

Perhaps it's been noted elsewhere, but this gives the Big Ten access to 35% of the nation's viewers, bringing in the DC and NY areas, and extends the league across a fairly contiguous--that is, plausible--swath of the country, from Nebraska to the Atlantic coast. I realize that Rutgers and Maryland aren't the most appetizing draws in an immediate sense, but I like having the league entering NY and DC, taking in part of the South now, too. (And there's no reason why those schools cannot get better, including in football.) Obviously, the expanded TV revenue is the big draw for the league itself. Will be interesting to see if the league uses the pretext of expansion to reconfigure the divisions, which are pretty unpopular, at least here.




Hardware Sushi

November 18th, 2012 at 8:32 PM ^

I don't really understand the negative reaction. There are a lot of positives:

  • Maryland and New Jersey have tons of talent, both basketball and football
  • Maryland has a good basketball program
  • Maryland has a rich booster that loves their football team and is trying to be their Phil Knight
  • Rutgers has performed better than half of the Big Ten teams in the last 10 years
  • Fox, which owns 49% of BTN, is buying YES, and can leverage that to get BTN in NYC area basic packages at good rates (similar to what ESPN does with ESPN2) meaning monayyyyyyyy
  • I will go to Michigan football, basketball, and lacrosse games at Maryland living in DC
  • Hopefully this leads to a 9 game Big Ten schedule, which means we'll be playing opposite division teams basically the same amount as now anyway.


November 18th, 2012 at 8:37 PM ^

Is not about the school, it is about the number.

12 is a good number, 14-16 is too many teams to be called a "conference" in my opinion.  When we get to 16 schools, because, well, we why stop at 14? ... we won't be a conference, we will be two conferences with a loose affiliation in that each individual conference champion plays the other at the end of the season.  There wil be what?  1 cross-over game?  Unless we revert entirely to a conference schedule, such that all 12 games are conference games.


November 18th, 2012 at 8:37 PM ^

It may end up being 5 superconferences.  FSU, by voting against upping the exit fee, made it pretty clear they don't intend to be in the ACC long term.  After that as far as football goes they basically have Clemson and Miami.


November 18th, 2012 at 8:58 PM ^

It isn't easy to view this positively. Try this, though: Recent actions could help persuade Clemson and Florida State to join the SEC (which fits them culturally pretty well). That would leave the ACC with nine teams. (I suppose they could UConn, but that's an all-round HA!)

If that Dodd article is even close to reality (large leap of faith required) and the Big Ten winds up getting UNC, great. Throwing geography, tradition, etc. completely out the window, they'd be near the top of my wish list with UVa, Duke, and Vanderbilt.

Oh, and Notre Dame would get screwed. Good outcome.


November 18th, 2012 at 9:03 PM ^

Re. the conference "entering NY"...  Can we please at least get basic geography right?

Rutgers is in New Jersey.

The addition of Rutgers means the conference is entering New Jersey, NOT entering New York.  

Two different worlds, man.

Rutgers = this guy:


Not this guy:


November 18th, 2012 at 9:41 PM ^

Pete Thamel had an interesting piece with some admittedly optimistic figures regarding the potential bump in revenue for the Big Ten (via the BTN, of course) - (LINK)

Obviously, this wouldn't necessarily be about Maryland football because...well...anyway, the move, per the article, opens up the BTN - potentially - to 15 million homes if it were able to get onto cable packages in all those local markets currently without it. The theory is that it opens the  door to about $200 in additional revenue if Maryland and Rutgers came on board. It likely will not be that high since not all the providers will likely buy in, but at a subscription fee that could be in upwards of $1 or so and a TV contract coming up for renegotiation in 2017 that is much nicer than the ACC's, I understand the move on a financial level. If the conference is driving it, then obviously this  has evolved to a point where the risk in falling short of revenue expectations is worth it to them. 

Still, there is the matter of that exit fee for the ACC - would Maryland eat it, or as some have suggested on a few sites, do they turn around and sue the ACC regarding their authority to collect? Kevin Plank, the CEO of Under Armor and a Maryland alum, is apparently supportive of the jump  and has substantial influence among the regents in College Park. 

eamus_caeruli (not verified)

November 18th, 2012 at 9:34 PM ^

I have been blowing up about this all night. Lets stop, and just think for a minute. Delaney, and most other BiG ath directors and prezis are pretty clever people.

Axons razor: expansion is eminent with lackluster members or this is a ploy to gather reaction and gage how this will be received by BIG fan bases?

Two weeks, this is an after thought. Go Blue, beat Ohio!


November 18th, 2012 at 9:39 PM ^

This is a terrible idea.  These schools do not fit geographically or academically.  This ruins the whole point of traditional conferences.  The Big Ten is succumbing to allow college football become another part of the entertainment industry.  If things like this continues, college football will be done in twenty years.

Professor Prepuces

November 18th, 2012 at 10:02 PM ^

If we add Maryland and Rutgers can we rebrand the conference the Big 14 to compensate for almost one score of inumeracy?  We can call the subdivisions whatever you like.  We could even devolve into "heroes" and "victors" with Michigan of course being in the heroes division.  But please let us change the conference name.  Please?

Avant's Hands

November 18th, 2012 at 10:12 PM ^

If we are going to add, I think Maryland is pretty good choice. 

I don't understand how people argue against Maryland and put forth options like Pitt, Vandy, Virginia, UNC, and Duke. Those are all good to great basketball schools (and the latter two at least, have good sports in general) with mediocre to bad football programs and great academics. Pretty much the same as Maryland. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing UNC come as well, but I don't want Duke. I'm not against Pitt, Virginia, or Mizzou either, but I fail to see how Maryland is worse than these schools. 


November 19th, 2012 at 1:16 AM ^

One, Maryland is a money pit.  Moving to the B1G won't change the fact that they horribly mismanaged their athletic department into running a massive deficit and will probably do so again.

Two, at least a mediocre football program can be expected to fill bowl allotments.  Maryland's program is now dependent on a skeevy OC to bring in talent and crossing their fingers he doesn't get caught skeeving, because their head coach pissed off most of the HS coaches in a 50-mile radius.

Three, you'll find out why any of those schools are better when you make your first road trip to College Park.

The FannMan

November 18th, 2012 at 10:24 PM ^

I finally got used to which teams were in the Legends and Leaders.  Wait - which one are we in again?

At this point, whatever.  We'll play teams we used to see every year twice a decade.  


November 18th, 2012 at 11:33 PM ^

What I find odd is that I am seeing a lot of Maryland fans not very happy about the move. Okay Maryland, we are going to give you more money, a more pretigious conference, more opportunities to be televised, and even help pay your exit fee.  Maryland fans..."no thanks, we want Wake Forest."



November 18th, 2012 at 11:42 PM ^

I am greatly opposed to this. Maryland and Rutgers may touch Pennsylvania, but are nowhere in the vicinity of the Big Ten Conference. Additionally, these teams produce pitiful attendance at football games and have lackluster universities in academic reference. Already Michigan only plays teams in the Leaders Division (not Ohio State) only twice every five years. More teams and Michigan will play these teams even less frequently. This is a terrible idea driven by money. I urge everyone to email all of the people listed below and tell them not to allow this. All of these people are regents or presidents for all of the Big Ten schools as well as Rutgers and Maryland.

They are not organized by school, rather one long list so a person can easily copy and paste.

[email protected]

[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; "anthony evers" <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; "tracyhribar regent" <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; "vasquez josef" <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; "ruth harkin" <[email protected]>; [email protected]; "miles david w" <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]; [email protected];

"william cast md" <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; "william strong" <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

"gordon gee" <[email protected]>

"brian hicks" <[email protected]>; "horn 5" <[email protected]>

"paul silvis" <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; "marianne alexander" <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; "ken frazier" <[email protected]>; "karen peetz" <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

STW P. Brabbs

November 19th, 2012 at 10:29 AM ^

I don't give a shit about fucking market shares.  If I did, I wouldn't give a shit about the shitty market shares on the goddamn Atlantic coast, where no ones gives a shit.  Want to know why no one gives a shit?  Because the football teams out there are shit.  

Let's further water down our conference with more mediocre bullshit, and make it so it's not even a fucking conference any more - just two little 7-team conferences that play each other at the end of the year.  

This is shit.  Fuck Maryland, and fuck Rutgers. 

EDIT:  For the sake of honesty I'm not going to revise the text from the original post.  (Note: it was fueled by sheer irritation, without even an ounce of alcohol.  Not sure if that's better or not ...)

Anyway, I will walk back a bit of the trashing of Maryland and Rutgers.  They are perfectly fine, middle-of-the-road football programs, and completely decent universities that slot in with the mid-level B1G universities.  But as such, I don't understand why they're good additions.  I feel like we're adding Saturn and Saab to what's already a somewhat unwieldy lineup.  If, when the dust settles, UM and OSU are in the same division, I might even be happy about this.  But I'm very, very skeptical that's what will go down.

If anyone is going to write an email to Brandon or the regents, my suggestion would be to make a (respectful) case for putting Michigan and OSU back in the same division/conference - The Game will really determine the division winner, and it will end the competetive disadvantage both teams have by virtue of always playing each other across divisions, etc.  


November 19th, 2012 at 12:23 AM ^

OK, so I have no clue if this Maryland and Rutgers thing is real and it seems pretty crazy, but if both were to join the B1G it is a big deal for Michigan Men's Lacrosse.  Yes we are part of the ECAC for Men's Lacrosse but with the addition of Rutgers and Maryland, The B1G would be at 5 schools playing lacrosse.  One more and the B1G would have its own Auto Qualifier for the National Tournament.  Still one away but if the confrence is really out shopping who know what other team might jump in. 



November 19th, 2012 at 12:57 AM ^

Adding Maryland or Rutgers would be awful for the Big Ten. We gain prestige by adding strong football programs. We dilute our strength by adding garbage football programs. We dont need to add any team, we're big enough. But if we do add anyone, we should only consider traditional powerhouse teams.

I also dislike the idea of dropping our regular big ten teams from the schedule to add these teams we have so little competitive history with.

This is such a terrible idea.