Tag:Rutgers
Posted on: June 17, 2010 4:47 pm
  •  
 

How the Big East Survives

As a Big East fan, I hate this idea.  Unfortunately, I don't see any other way out for the BE other than merging with another league.  Beware Big East fans, this is not for the faint of heart.
By Selling It's Soul to Notre Dame
Posted on: May 25, 2010 11:05 pm
 

Big Ten Expansion: The Three Likely Winners

What the hell, time to stick your neck out.  No, I have no inside information other than what I read from readily available news sources.  And no, I have no connections with CBS so don't link to this and say "CBS reporting that  .  .  "  Just good old reading newspapers and reading between the lines.  With that the winners are:  <>

Nebraska, Missouri and Rutgers
http://www.associatedcontent.com/ar
ticle/5409936/the_most_likely_big_t
en_expansion_nebraska.html?cat=14
Posted on: April 19, 2010 10:36 pm
 

Big Ten Expansion: Rounding the Clubhouse Turn

Well that's what Teddy Greenstein of the Chicago Tribune thinks anyway.  With more Big Ten meetings this week, expansion will definitely be on a "front burner."  My picks for the expansion?  The Big Ten takes the big plunge and goes to 16.  Here are the teams:
RutgersMissouriSyracuseUConn
and at long last, Notre Dame finally climbs on board as #16.
Here's the reasoning:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/ar
ticle/2911398/big_ten_expansion_bet
_on_nd_rutgers.html?cat=14
Posted on: April 13, 2010 8:59 pm
 

Confused Fan's Guide to Big Ten Expansion

For some reason, I thought it would be worthwhile to summarize what's happened on the Big Ten expansion front since they opened this can of worms back in December.  Included are quotes from the Big Ten AD's and commissioners that people seem to forget with time.  
Guide to B10 Expansion
Posted on: April 8, 2010 2:18 pm
 

Big Ten Expansion Choices: 11, 12 or 16???

Yes according to Tony Barnhardt.  It still all revolves around Notre Dame.

Is the Big Ten Expansion Expanding?
Posted on: March 23, 2010 3:35 pm
 

Expansion-Pac 10 Wondering If It Needs It

CBS'  Dennis Dodd reported today that the commissioner of the Pac-10 has had conversations with the Big 10 and Big East about holding a championshp game with less than the NCAA-mandated twelve teams.
www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/s
tory/13102294/pac10-looking-at-titl
e-game-possibilities-without-expans
ion

The article notes that there's not a lot of value for the Pac-10 adding teams.  Unlike the Big Ten, it does not have a cable network that is driving the expansion issue.   (Although, there reportedly have been talks about the Pac-10 and/or Big 12 joining forces to form one.)
Dodd's article leaves the impression though that the Pac-10 might be interested in staying at ten teams but having a championship game.  What stands in the way are NCAA bylaws that require a conference to have 12 teams to hold a conference championship.

So I'm reading this article and I'm thinking, well good luck with that Pac-10.  If I remember correctly the ACC wanted to do the same thing but was told they needed twelve teams.  That set them on the path to expansion and the Big East raid.   So why is the Pac-10 commissioner bothering to talk to the Big East and Big Ten about this?  Well they're the only BCS conferences that don't have a conference championship.  Maybe he's trying to cobble together some support to get the twelve team rule overturned?

Here's another thought.  What if the Pac-10 decided to set up a championship game that involved not one but two or more conferences?   Suppose the Pac-10 approaches the Big East and says, "Hey let's soak up some of this post regular-season, pre bowl time TV time  and maximize our TV revenue by staging a Pac-10/Big East championship?"  Now I'd include the Big Ten in this idea because it, or at least Joe Paterno and Barry Alvarez are concerned about the Big Ten disappearing from the public eye after conclusion of the Big Ten season.  Expansion, however, makes more sense for the Big Ten because of the potential for further profits from their Big Ten Network cash cow.

The Big East and the Pac-10 don't have that option.  If Dodd reports that the Pac-10 is having trouble finding schools "valuable" enough to support expansion, how do you think the Big East feels?  The Pac-10 targets could be Utah, BYU, and Colorado.  The Big East gets to look at UCF, Memphis, and East Carolina.  Now don't get me wrong, I think any of these schools could become valuable members of the Big East, just as USF, Cincinnati, and Louisville did.  "Become" is the operative word though.  They're not going to come in and immediately increase the pie.

But a Pac-10/Big East championship would increase the TV revenues of both conferences.  Some hungry network would be happy to pick it up during the week of the other conference championships.  You don't have to expand to do it.   Finally, it gets you back in the public eye during conference championship week.  Alternate the site between the Pac 10/BE champ for the first few years so you don't have the embarrassment of an empty Gator Bowl like the ACC had.  If you get a really prime matchup like a highly ranked West Virginia and USC you can always move it to a larger pro stadium nearby if deamand warrants it.  In fact most of the teams in these conferences line up pretty well with nearby pro stadiums.  Just look at the BE:  WV and Pitt- Heinz Field in Pittsburgh,  Cincy and Louisville-Paul Brown Stadium, Rutgers, UConn, Syracuse-The new Meadowlands, USF- Raymond James Stadium.  The Pac 10 already has USC, UCLA, in the LA Coliseum and Rose Bowl, Cal's Memorial Stadium seats 75,000, Stanford can play at Candlestick, Husky Stadium holds 72,500,  (Sorry Oregon, Oregon State and Washington State, you get to schlep to Seattle), and Arizona State at Sun Devil Stadium and Arizona at University of Phoenix Stadium.

Now, I'm sure the bowl interests would fight this tooth and nail.  The Big Ten wouldn't like it.  But, hey, with the Big Ten's potential expansion, it' a bold new world in college football right?

Now, will this stave off expansion for both of these conferences forever?  No.  But not a bad interim step to make some money.



Posted on: March 20, 2010 4:24 pm
 

Big Ten Expansion Rumour Du Jour -ND, Rutgers, BC

Just when Big Ten expansion rumours were starting to quiet down, whistling in from the heartland of the nation comes this gem:
Radio host Steve Daece in Des Moines, Iowa quotes "sources in the Michigan athletic department" believing that Notre Dame, Rutgers, and Boston College are likely to be announced as winners of the Big Ten Beauty Pageant in 2-3 months.  Posters in Iowa have on the one hand alleged that Daece's source is the guy who drives the Little Debby Snacks truck to cafeteria  and on the other hand lauded Daece as an accurate prognosticator.  So anyone's guess on the validity of this one is, well, valid.

So let's look at this premise.  1.  Notre Dame.   Duh!  Yes the Big Ten will be happy to open its doors to the Golden Domers despite being spurned in the past.  Rumours from the Big Ten indicate that ND will have to do the courting this time.  This is like that hot chick that shot you down has to give you a sign that she's interested now.  So if ND looks coyly at the Big Ten and smiles, they're in. 

2.  Rutgers.  Yes I can hear the wailing and gnashing of elitist teeth already.  No Texas?  Uh, no.  But the Big Ten deserves better.  Yes and I deserve to retire right now to a life of playing golf, drinking good bourbon, and doing whatever the hell I feel like.  Ain't gonna happen.  Let me spell it out.  The Big Ten Network wants to make more money.  They want the NY/NJ television sets.  A lot of them.  Sorry Michigan, Penn State and whatever other Big Ten school that has at least one alumnus in NYC, you're just not getting it done.  Furthermore, the duo of Rutgers and Notre Dame on the BTN is a pretty good argument to get it on the basic tier.  And maybe, just maybe the BTN can get a bump in Philadelphia rates (4th largest DMA) with Rutgers in the fold as well. So despite many Big Ten fans' belief that Rutgers isn't worthy of the Big Ten, the fact remains that the Big Ten Network isn't worthy of getting on the basic tier in the NY/NJ area without them.  Deal with it.


3.  Boston College.  Now this one to me is a stretch.  Yes, you traditionophiles, BC has it, they have a rivalry with ND,  they've had success in football having made it to the ACC championship twice.  But if you talk to the ACC, you kinda get the impression that they're not that happy with new member Boston College.  Well at least their bowl partners anyway, that try to shun the Eagles every year because of their poor fan support.  The fact is, even the ACC Championship draws poorly when BC's in it.  BC wasn't in the original "5 team report" bandied about in the Chicago Tribune.  Add in that BC's 44,500 seat Alumi Stadium would be the smallest in the Big Ten and BC looks like a questionable choice.  How about Boston TV sets? Boston has the 6th largest DMA, better than any Big Ten home city with the exception of Chicago (Northwestern).  The TV argument is there along with adding another state to the Big Ten footprint.  Will BC really increase the pie of the Big Ten Network enough to justify its addition?  I don't have the answer but from what I read, BC has been somewhat of a disappointment in the ACC TV wise.  Could it change if they're playing Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State instead of Virginia Tech, Clemson, and Georgia Tech?  My guess would be yes.  

How about Notre Dame's coattails?  Suppose ND says we'll only join if we can bring BC with us.  Now why Notre Dame would do this other than that they're both private Catholic schools is beyond my comprehension.  In fact Notre Dame apparently got rather tired of being beaten by Boston College on the football field and has not renewed the series.   Notre Dame doesn't need to bring rivals to the Big Ten, it already has plenty.

If Notre Dame is campaigning for BC's admission, it would explain why the Eagles are being mentioned now while being omitted from the "Report of Five."  The idea of the Big Ten's two eastern outposts located in the DMA of over 10% of the nations total number of TV sets does have some allure to it.  You would think that the Fighting Irish would have a few fans in New York and Boston as well.   If the trend is toward superconferences, the Big Ten would pluck some prime real estate in the NYC, Philadelphia, and Boston areas if it does pull this off.  Who knows, maybe the ACC would be happy to swap out BC and swap in a West Virginia, that actually has rivalries with Maryland and Virginia Tech?  Well it passes the giggle test anyway. 
Posted on: March 14, 2010 12:21 pm
 

Expansion - Time for the ACC to Enter the Fray?

And the plot thickens even further.  So is the Big Ten plan to cherry pick one or more Big East teams if Notre Dame doesn't come around?  Well don't wait to long Jim Delany.  You may have competition soon.  It's called the Atlantic Coast Conference.  Hold it, the ACC already has 12 teams.  Expansion for the ACC has been a money-maker by some reports, but hasn't put the ACC in a position to challenge the SEC.  Miami is still trying to return to a dominant team.  Virginia Tech and Boston College have both made the ACC championship the past few years.  With embarrassing results attendance wise.  So you'd think the ACC would have had enough expansion for a while.

Well think again.  According to an article in Sports Business Journal, the ACC's television negotiations with ESPN aren't really going that well.  Seems the ACC thinks they should get a 60 to 70% increase.  ESPN apparently has told them, "Sorry, you're not the Big Ten or SEC."  The reason?  According to unnamed media executives, the "weakness of the ACC's football teams."
http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=acc+ourand+tepid&d=755400772582&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=974aae56,269d1ed0

Can't you just see the ACC honchos, scratching their heads and saying, "Hmmm, I wonder where we can get some good football teams that will make the TV networks give us more money?  Well we certainly don't want to geographically expand our footprint.  Going to Boston College is far enough already.  If we could only find some decent teams a little closer than Boston College.  We could revamp divisions, save some travel costs by going to geographical divisions with only a few out of division games.   We could come up with a rival for BC.  And of course, we could get some more money out of those TV devils.  If only there were some teams that could do that.  Are there any teams like that close to Boston College?  Or if not,  how about Maryland, who's the next farthest north.  Aren't there some schools around there that have strong football teams?"

Nah forget it.  The ACC wouldn't know how to go about getting teams from other conferences to join.  Just not something they'd do.  Never mind.

 
 
 
 
The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com