Will the Big 1G Look South?

[SpecialKHawk]

I agree with everything you wrote.
You clearly understand the dynamics at work.
I would add that I have some suspicions that Texas is quite complicit in each and every action that is happening right now. Meaning I wonder if they're working with the B1G.

Agree with your point also with Texas. It's possible they want to blow up the B12 without all blood on their hands and either go independent or join a super conference that gives them the best deal/autonomy. I don't think they want to join the B1G under the current revenue sharing format but they have to be careful also. They can and may have over-played their hand. I could see a reluctant move to the Pac 12. The only other power play is to add at least 2 prestige programs to what is left of the Big12. I really don't see that happening because those teams would have to come out of the B1G, Pac12 & SEC which are the three conferences sitting in the best positions.

ND was involved informally in last year's expansion talks because they also are leveraged by the super-conference formation. They will join the B1G if super conferences form and the number gets to 16.

I'm not certain anyone wants to be an independent early on if 4 super-confernces form. They could be shut-out of opportunities big time.

Expansion is a must in the B1G if the SEC or Pac 12 makes another move - don't be left behind or risk the fate of the B12/Big East

 

[DJL]

Never say never 83hawk. But I agree that ND and OK would be interesting. I don't like the idea of super conferences either but I also don't want the Big 1G caught with their pants down. If they stay the same while others evolve then the conference puts themselves at risk. Jim D understands this.

 

[SpecialKHawk]

1. Texas will never be in the Big 10. Never, ever, never.

2. Neither will Oklahoma. Oklahoma and Oklahoma State will likely be a package deal, and I doubt they would be invited to the Big 10.

3. The Big 10 doesn't need to expand. No matter if there are other "Super" conferences...the Big 10 will survive just fine as is.

4. *If* the Big 10 ever expands in the future, I don't think it would be any higher than 14 teams. Notre Dame may get one final chance...if they ask to join I can see them and either Pitt or Missouri. If no Notre Dame, then Missouri and Pitt.

5. Rutgers, UCONN, Syracuse, etc. bring NOTHING. There may be a few more TV sets, but nobody cares about those FB teams. Adding them would lower the power/prestige of the Big 10 and I don't see it happening. Not that Missouri and Pitt are all that great..but they are better than the aforementioned. And you can forget about any team from Virginia, the Carolinas, Maryland, etc.

I don't want the Big 10 to expand any futher....but if they did, the ideal would be Oklahoma (if they could be had without OSU) for the Legends Division, and Notre Dame for the Leaders. That would make the Big 10 head and shoulders above ANY other conference you could cobble together. It would be the PREMIER conference, and the TV contract would be dazzling.

You can jump and down all you want about not expanding but it is going to happen as soon as the next move is made. Count on it. By standing pat while other super conferences are being formed opens the B1G up to being poached down-the-line and lessons it's long-term financial leverage. The BIGGEST issue long-term with the B1G is it's membership exists in the 'Rust Belt' of the United States. There's a geographic reason why the SEC has continued to become stronger and stronger over time.

If you listened carefully to Delaney's comments last year he dropped several notes about (I'm paraphrasing) taking a look to more populated areas outside of the typical B1G footprint noting the population shift. I would bet money as forward-thinking as the B1G is that Delaney has targeted 4 areas; Texas, Upper East Coast(N/Y+NJ), Maryland/DC area & Atlanta (ie Georgia Tech). This is one of principle reasons why the division names are what they are and have no 'geographical' indicators. This is because B1G will be adding and the division names lend themselves to moving teams around. The names were mocked but are brilliant in hind-sight -> typical Delaney & B1G forward thinking.

Oklahoma would be a huge long-shot besides their football prestige. They are so poorly rated academically and their market size is not anything to brag about. They thrive in today's world due in large part to Texas. Oklahoma is in a tough-tough position if things fall apart. Their life is going to be much more difficult than it is now.

 

[H8IAST8]

SEC would love to get into texas, recruit and tv market, if they select A&M then I think they raid florida for FSU, Clemsen, and Virginia TEch, wow! talk about a super football conference, maybe Georgia Tech for the Atlanta TV area, wonder what Vandy fans are thinking?

Early reports say FSU is the other SEC school

 

[treychase]

You can jump and down all you want about not expanding but it is going to happen as soon as the next move is made. Count on it. By standing pat while other super conferences are being formed opens the B1G up to being poached down-the-line and lessons it's long-term financial leverage. The BIGGEST issue long-term with the B1G is it's membership exists in the 'Rust Belt' of the United States. There's a geographic reason why the SEC has continued to become stronger and stronger over time.

If you listened carefully to Delaney's comments last year he dropped several notes about (I'm paraphrasing) taking a look to more populated areas outside of the typical B1G footprint noting the population shift. I would bet money as forward-thinking as the B1G is that Delaney has targeted 4 areas; Texas, Upper East Coast(N/Y+NJ), Maryland/DC area & Atlanta (ie Georgia Tech). This is one of principle reasons why the division names are what they are and have no 'geographical' indicators. This is because B1G will be adding and the division names lend themselves to moving teams around. The names were mocked but are brilliant in hind-sight -> typical Delaney & B1G forward thinking.

Oklahoma would be a huge long-shot besides their football prestige. They are so poorly rated academically and their market size is not anything to brag about. They thrive in today's world due in large part to Texas. Oklahoma is in a tough-tough position if things fall apart. Their life is going to be much more difficult than it is now.

Its nice to have someone else that understands.

 

[SpecialKHawk]

Superconferences are coming folks weither i/we like it or not....

Eyeballs, inventory and prestige are the key players in this movement. Count our lucky stars we are in the B1G or we could be potentially left out of this movement. Also be greatful for what we have in Coach Ferentz & Co. I'd hate to be sitting where ISU is right now. Not saying they are done but they may find themselves on the outside looking in depending on how things go down.

The other factor with super-conferences no-one is talking about is the rising costs of playing the nobody's of D-1 in your non-con schedules. A larger conference might lend itself to even fewer non-con games as in-conference games in the future are the games fans/TV execs want. I could see a 10 game schedule with only 2 non cons down-the-line.

The selection of the next two teams for the B1G will be interesting moves on the chess board.....

 

[hawkeyescott]

Superconferences are coming folks weither i/we like it or not....

Eyeballs, inventory and prestige are the key players in this movement. Count our lucky stars we are in the B1G or we could be potentially left out of this movement. Also be greatful for what we have in Coach Ferentz & Co. I'd hate to be sitting where ISU is right now. Not saying they are done but they may find themselves on the outside looking in depending on how things go down.

The other factor with super-conferences no-one is talking about is the rising costs of playing the nobody's of D-1 in your non-con schedules. A larger conference might lend itself to even fewer non-con games as in-conference games in the future are the games fans/TV execs want. I could see a 10 game schedule with only 2 non cons down-the-line.

The selection of the next two teams for the B1G will be interesting moves on the chess board.....

I don't think there is any question that 10 game conference schedules are coming with 16 team conferences. It gives the conference better inventory which gets better tv deals and you wouldn't go more than 4 years without playing anyone, which we are at right now with 8 games schedules and 12 teams.

 

[SpecialKHawk]

I don't think there is any question that 10 game conference schedules are coming with 16 team conferences. It gives the conference better inventory which gets better tv deals and you wouldn't go more than 4 years without playing anyone, which we are at right now with 8 games schedules and 12 teams.

Agree... I'm fine with this and excited about it. I'd prefer to see a conference game any day over a non-game against Tennesee Tech, Louisiana Laf, Ball-State and even ISU anyday.....

 

[treychase]

Superconferences are coming folks weither i/we like it or not....

Eyeballs, inventory and prestige are the key players in this movement. Count our lucky stars we are in the B1G or we could be potentially left out of this movement. Also be greatful for what we have in Coach Ferentz & Co. I'd hate to be sitting where ISU is right now. Not saying they are done but they may find themselves on the outside looking in depending on how things go down.

The other factor with super-conferences no-one is talking about is the rising costs of playing the nobody's of D-1 in your non-con schedules. A larger conference might lend itself to even fewer non-con games as in-conference games in the future are the games fans/TV execs want. I could see a 10 game schedule with only 2 non cons down-the-line.

The selection of the next two teams for the B1G will be interesting moves on the chess board.....

No one talks about the inevitability of the "new" D1 of college athletics as well.
Nor do they talk about the REAL possibility that "new" D1 is not governed by the ncaa.

Both are important issues to consider in this.

True cost scholarships are going to price out the ISU's of the world, likely leaving us with 56-64 programs that will become the new D1.
The "new" D1 no longer being governed by the ncaa would likely afford those programs even higher revenues, as they control their own tourneys, bowls, tv, etc...
Effectively being run as a minor league system to the nfl.
Tax exempt status of college athletics will come into play.

All these issues are connected, I'm convinced of it.

 

[SpecialKHawk]

No one talks about the inevitability of the "new" D1 of college athletics as well.
Nor do they talk about the REAL possibility that "new" D1 is not governed by the ncaa.

Both are important issues to consider in this.

True cost scholarships are going to price out the ISU's of the world, likely leaving us with 56-64 programs that will become the new D1.
The "new" D1 no longer being governed by the ncaa would likely afford those programs even higher revenues, as they control their own tourneys, bowls, tv, etc...
Effectively being run as a minor league system to the nfl.
Tax exempt status of college athletics will come into play.

All these issues are connected, I'm convinced of it.

Yes, could not agree more.... the price poker will be going up for sure and some if not all of these changes will come into play.

In all honestly, I'm not certain that U of Iowa will fair all-that well either in this landscape or at least to being in the upper 10-15% on a regular basis.

I think if this scenario unfolds over time the State of Iowa would be best served by forcing a merger of Iowa, ISU and UNI athletics into a single body. I know this would be a widely unpopular(and confrontational position) but wasting precious resources/support between these schools does not make sense on a broader spectrum of competition, in fact it's foolish.

 

[bud2380]

Short of joining the NFL Texas CANNOT make more money than joining the B1G with ND and allowing the BTN to go national.

Nothing even comes close.

Do the math...
B1G is at ~$7M/yr each member from the BTN.
Now triple that for the increase in subscriber fees....$21M/yr
Now double that for the increase in households...$42M/yr

Those numbers are from the BTN ONLY

Texas would need 3 Longhorn Networks to touch that.

You are literally pulling numbers out of your *** and calling them facts. Texas will not join the Big Ten. Delaney has too much respect for the tradition in the Big Ten. I personally hope we never expand beyond 12 teams. If we go to 16 teams and stay opposite of Wisconsin in a realigned division, we would get them in Kinnick about once every 8-10 years. That's not a conference game anymore. 16 teams is more like 2 conferences who play each other for the right to 1 BCS game. Stupid idea.

 

[SpecialKHawk]

You are literally pulling numbers out of your *** and calling them facts. Texas will not join the Big Ten. Delaney has too much respect for the tradition in the Big Ten. I personally hope we never expand beyond 12 teams. If we go to 16 teams and stay opposite of Wisconsin in a realigned division, we would get them in Kinnick about once every 8-10 years. That's not a conference game anymore. 16 teams is more like 2 conferences who play each other for the right to 1 BCS game. Stupid idea.

It's not an idea but a future reality.... It's going to happen and Delaney has already provided several pre-cursors to it happening.

That's like denying Wal-Mart would have any impact on small-town grocery hardware/stores. By the way, where are most of those stores now?

There is no choice in the matter, only to proceed strategically and cautiously.

 

[treychase]

You are literally pulling numbers out of your *** and calling them facts. Texas will not join the Big Ten. Delaney has too much respect for the tradition in the Big Ten. I personally hope we never expand beyond 12 teams. If we go to 16 teams and stay opposite of Wisconsin in a realigned division, we would get them in Kinnick about once every 8-10 years. That's not a conference game anymore. 16 teams is more like 2 conferences who play each other for the right to 1 BCS game. Stupid idea.

not hardly

 

[bud2380]

not hardly

Provide me with some real data then, because everything I have seen is you just pulling numbers out of your ***.

 

[bud2380]

It's not an idea but a future reality.... It's going to happen and Delaney has already provided several pre-cursors to it happening.

That's like denying Wal-Mart would have any impact on small-town grocery hardware/stores. By the way, where are most of those stores now?

There is no choice in the matter, only to proceed strategically and cautiously.

I realize this is a very real possibility (hardly a reality at this point). I am just vehemently opposed to it. The tradition of the B1G and the teams in it are more important to me than adding a bunch of teams just to expand our market. The B1G has the largest and most loyal fan base in the nation. The B1G would easily survive and thrive as a 12 team conference even if the SEC expands to 16. Now I doubt Delaney will stand pat, but I wish he would. I could handle going to 14, but going to 16 is too many IMO.

 

[SpecialKHawk]

Yes, could not agree more.... the price poker will be going up for sure and some if not all of these changes will come into play.

In all honestly, I'm not certain that U of Iowa will fair all-that well either in this landscape or at least to being in the upper 10-15% on a regular basis.

I think if this scenario unfolds over time the State of Iowa would be best served by forcing a merger of Iowa, ISU and UNI athletics into a single body. I know this would be a widely unpopular(and confrontational position) but wasting precious resources/support between these schools does not make sense on a broader spectrum of competition, in fact it's foolish.

I realize this is a very real possibility (hardly a reality at this point). I am just vehemently opposed to it. The tradition of the B1G and the teams in it are more important to me than adding a bunch of teams just to expand our market. The B1G has the largest and most loyal fan base in the nation. The B1G would easily survive and thrive as a 12 team conference even if the SEC expands to 16. Now I doubt Delaney will stand pat, but I wish he would. I could handle going to 14, but going to 16 is too many IMO.

I understand the opposition but reality is it is what it is.... times are changing.

Now would you feel that way if the Pac 12 goes to 16, SEC to 16, ACC to 16 and the Big 12 to 16 and the B1G stays at 12. What do you think will happen long-term to our future TV contracts, bowl invites and overall competitiveness? Again, stay put and we will be left behind. Under that scenario what if an Ohio St or Michigan is poached in the process however hypothetical? Do you think the big dogs of our conference are going to be happy being in a less prestigious conference compared to the other super conferences? You see everyone basis things off the past but the future could be drastically different if the B1G is not on the forefront (like it always is... think of the addition of Penn St at the time which made an odd number of 11 -> why do that?)

 

[TecmoSuperHawk]

Trey you keep saying that the B1G needs to add a team to make the BTN go national. There is not a team in America that can make this happen. There's not 4 teams that could make this happen.

Cablevision in NYC does not carry the NFL Network and that's with the Giants and Jets the enormous clout the NFL carries. No way are they going to be bullied into paying $2 per sub even if the B1G adds Notre Dame, Texas or Rutgers (for those dumb enough to want that putrid program in the B1G).

Same goes for carriage in LA, the Southeast and Pacific NW and anywhere else where the BTN doesn't have a footprint.

 

[DwayneTwill]

1. Texas will never be in the Big 10. Never, ever, never.

2. Neither will Oklahoma. Oklahoma and Oklahoma State will likely be a package deal, and I doubt they would be invited to the Big 10.

3. The Big 10 doesn't need to expand. No matter if there are other "Super" conferences...the Big 10 will survive just fine as is.

4. *If* the Big 10 ever expands in the future, I don't think it would be any higher than 14 teams. Notre Dame may get one final chance...if they ask to join I can see them and either Pitt or Missouri. If no Notre Dame, then Missouri and Pitt.

5. Rutgers, UCONN, Syracuse, etc. bring NOTHING. There may be a few more TV sets, but nobody cares about those FB teams. Adding them would lower the power/prestige of the Big 10 and I don't see it happening. Not that Missouri and Pitt are all that great..but they are better than the aforementioned. And you can forget about any team from Virginia, the Carolinas, Maryland, etc.

I don't want the Big 10 to expand any futher....but if they did, the ideal would be Oklahoma (if they could be had without OSU) for the Legends Division, and Notre Dame for the Leaders. That would make the Big 10 head and shoulders above ANY other conference you could cobble together. It would be the PREMIER conference, and the TV contract would be dazzling.

Can you imagine the resumption of the annual Oklahoma-Nebraska game? Not to mention having Notre Dame back on Iowa's schedule on a regular basis? Can you imagine 6 of the top 10 or 12 most storied football franchises in NCAA history all in the Big 10?

All this. I agree 100%.

 

[TecmoSuperHawk]

I'm not convinced the B1G needs to go to 16 teams if other conferences do. I have not seen anything but conjecture to prove that 16 makes more sense than 12.

My guess is Delany (no E people!) will do it, but then again maybe not. He talked often about the intimacy of playing teams in your league and you don't get that by going to 16 teams. I think the B1G makes a move only when Notre Dame is ready to join.

 

[treychase]

Provide me with some real data then, because everything I have seen is you just pulling numbers out of your ***.

$7M is the current payout to each B1G member from the BTN, 2010 numbers.

If the BTN goes NATIONAL, same as ESPN, TNT, Food Network, whatever, they will up their carriage/subscriber fees, which currently average .36cents.
Historically those fees triple for networks.

So lets keep it at average .36cents times 3 = $1.08 per subscriber.

At $1.08 that $7M suddenly is $21M/school per yr.

Second part is the number of all tv subscribers...
which is currently sitting around 1/4 -1/3 of tv households.
A national network garners fees from ALL subscribers. We all pay for espn, tnt, tbs, etc..people just don't realize it.

Therefore, conservatively I'll double the number of subscribers and we have...

a tripling of subscriber fees and a doubling of subscribers...

so if we triple the current $7M we get $21M; then you double the subscribers to get $42M.

This is from Day 1, it will continue to grow.