Expansion regret
- Thread starter FirstDownB
- Start date
I've got to go with Louisville as they have mainly brought a lot of negative attention with them around all the cheating in basketball.
I am trying to recall the other realistic options for the ACC at the time. Obviously the ACC has less appeal than Big 10 or SEC, which sets the bar lower.
Could've gone UCF, Houston, Cincinati.
Houston probably should've been the move to get a foothold in Texas.
I can’t answer this because I don’t know how much revenue each has added to the conference. All we know is on field performance, which is not at all the same thing.
for instance, Rutgers has been really bad in football. But Rutgers did their job, which was to bring in the NYC tv’s. Not that NYC people necessarily care about Rutgers, but they were close enough that the BTN could charge higher rates because it was now in market. This allowed the BT to build revenue so much that schools like USC were calling asking for admittance.
Likewise, Utah has been really good at football. But they don’t seem to have a National following and I would doubt they’re contributing a ton to conference revenue.
Nebraska, by the way, still profiles exactly as a school that the BT wants. It’s a Midwest state school, lots of history, great fan base, spends a ton and has good revenue. They just can’t make a good football hire, and it’s fun to make fun of them.
for instance, Rutgers has been really bad in football. But Rutgers did their job, which was to bring in the NYC tv’s. Not that NYC people necessarily care about Rutgers, but they were close enough that the BTN could charge higher rates because it was now in market. This allowed the BT to build revenue so much that schools like USC were calling asking for admittance.
Likewise, Utah has been really good at football. But they don’t seem to have a National following and I would doubt they’re contributing a ton to conference revenue.
Nebraska, by the way, still profiles exactly as a school that the BT wants. It’s a Midwest state school, lots of history, great fan base, spends a ton and has good revenue. They just can’t make a good football hire, and it’s fun to make fun of them.
Other than the revenue piece (and I’m not convinced Nebraska has enlarged the member revenue shares) according to whom does the Big Ten value these things?
Rutgers is a win if you’re most of the conference .. Purdue fans classically fail to realize that their priorities and the priorities of 10-11 big ten schools are the opposite of Ohio state. Ohio state wants teams that will lose to them but propel them to better playoff seeding. Purdue and 10 other teams should want teams they can beat.
I mean, sort of. With revenue shares, the days of the conference 'tomato cans' are practically over. Most programs have their ups and downs. There are very few elites and even fewer that are automatic wins. Even IU had a 9 win season. Out of the 9 schools in this poll, there isn't a single one I would be afraid of having on the schedule from a long-term competitive perspective.
We don't know the exact payoff, but Rutgers and Maryland did extend the Big Ten footprint into the populated east coast markets. The Big Ten was very clear about its intentions there. So, whether that was the 'right' move, those moves at least accomplished a stated goal.
Where does your school rank among richest and poorest Power 5 college football programs? New revenue figures for all 65
It took a little longer this year for the U.S. Department of Education's Equity in Athletics Data dump. But the latest numbers are out now. See where your favorite program ranks in the numbers that actually matter most -- on the business end of college football.
According to the link above, Nebraska was 10th in revenue in 2021. Hard to believe that brand doesn’t grow the pie.
The “spends a ton” and “great fans” correlates (or even contributes) heavily to revenue.
The “state school” and “lots of history” is more subjective, but given who the BT is comprised of, and the additions they’ve historically made, I think there’s a clear pattern.
You need to separate a school's revenue from the shared revenue it generates for the conference. The main shared revenues are media contracts and bowl payouts. Read the fine print: These figures do not include the massive annual payouts from conferences’ broadcast contractsWhere does your school rank among richest and poorest Power 5 college football programs? New revenue figures for all 65
It took a little longer this year for the U.S. Department of Education's Equity in Athletics Data dump. But the latest numbers are out now. See where your favorite program ranks in the numbers that actually matter most -- on the business end of college football.www.pennlive.com
According to the link above, Nebraska was 10th in revenue in 2021. Hard to believe that brand doesn’t grow the pie.
The “spends a ton” and “great fans” correlates (or even contributes) heavily to revenue.
The “state school” and “lots of history” is more subjective, but given who the BT is comprised of, and the additions they’ve historically made, I think there’s a clear pattern.
Purdue doesn't see a penny of the $95.8M Nebraska revenue stream cited in your article. That goes right into Nebraska's pocket. It is nice to see they are on solid financial standing, but it doesn't mean they are growing the pie for the rest of the conference.
"Spends a ton" and "great fans" you admit are simply counting revenue multiple times.
Being Midwestern has nothing to do with anything. In fact, it works against the aims of geographical expansion. The Big Ten is an a real life game of Risk with the SEC as its primary competitor.
AAU membership and academics/research $$ is much more of a factor than geography or history.
Good catch. I didn't bother to look it up. Point is, anyone can have a good season, everyone is building amazing facilities, etc. It's not 1988.
And your take on this is exactly why the top players want to go to the SEC. The relevance of the SEC has made every team in their conference a better football program. All you have to do is look at Ole Miss, Miss St, South Carolina, and Kentucky. They all recruit better than Purdue and half the other B1G teams. Beating nobodies and recruiting at a lower scale means nothing. You're entitled to your opinion. But your take is wrong...
Wish the Big Ten could have stuck with the 11 + Maryland is okay. Rutgers and Nebraska both aren’t in the Midwest, are the 2 worst schools in the conference, and are the worst schools at the sports that actually matter. Nebraska has literally never won a NCAA tournament game lol. Haven’t looked into any numbers but the whole Rutgers NYC thing never made sense to me when NYC is filled with people from across the country and they have “better things to do” than watch sports. At least that’s why USC and UCLA fans seem to say when USC brings in 50% less football viewership than Purdue despite being in the supposedly valuable LA market. Clearly market size doesn’t translate to viewership, and Rutgers fan base can’t possible exceed USC’s. Then UCLA fills about 15% of their stadium for a top 25 matchup last week and can never sell out Pauley Pavillion. At least the California schools are decently good at sports and are good schools.
I wasn’t suggesting that Purdue gets a piece of Nebraska’s revenue. I understand how my post could have been interpreted that way. But my point was that a brand that massive HAS to grow the pie.
also, I think you’re focusing too much on my inclusion of “Midwestern”. Obviously it’sa stretch to even consider Nebraska Midwestern.
My point is that if Nebraska was currently available, the BT would be flirting a lot with them. This is a long play. Even though there may be disappointment with their on field success, I highly doubt there’s any “regret”.
Last edited:
Actual viewership is far less important than the number of people paying into a BTN carrying platform. This is being challenged by cord cutting, which makes the new billion dollar media deal all that more impressive.
I don’t. I want to be in the biggest, best, most high profile conference with the most revenue.
It is good that their athletic department is secure. Beyond that, their large personal war chest does absolutely nothing for the other conference members. In fact, it can and will be used against them in battle. A regional brand in a state of less than 2 million consumers grows the pie but shrinks the slices.
What rank would you say their brand is in college football? Definitely top 15, right? Probably top 12.
In this age of cord cutting, a conference wants to accumulate as many top brands as possible. People are going to tune into matchups.
It's hard to say. Fans are more fluid now days due to the amount of choices available. Nebraska hasn't been nationally relevant for a long time. Due to realignment and competitive differences, they are an afterthought with their former rivals. And the brand of football that made them famous is totally incompatible with modern football. Nebraska is obviously hugely popular in their own state/region and have an extremely passionate fan base. I just don't believe as a whole their brand translates to the average fan sitting on the couch scrolling for a game to watch.
Brand is different than value. They are, by the numbers, top 15 in value. I would say maybe top 25 in brand if I am being generous, not substantially better than Iowa or Wisconsin.
I believe all of those choices were bad choices for being made and not being made! I had hoped the big 10 would have selected schools based on their values, educational standards, and geographic location . Rutgers , Maryland and Nebraska were added for the wrong reasons: $$$, $$$$ and more $$$$$$$$ and market share! The big 10 wanted to expand its Tv market. They added Nebraska because of their name. Looking at geography and academics, they should have added teams such as Iowa st and Missouri. Notre dame would have been a nice add. West Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee would have also been better choices.
and no I don’t want to see people saying but but but contractual commitments to other conferences were in place. You asked a hypothetical question, so I’m providing a hypothetical answer! Rather than their pursuit of $$$$$$$$$$$, the Big 10 should have pursued academic excellence and geographical proximity. Instead they went after teams to increase revenue and increase their Tv viewer package
and no I don’t want to see people saying but but but contractual commitments to other conferences were in place. You asked a hypothetical question, so I’m providing a hypothetical answer! Rather than their pursuit of $$$$$$$$$$$, the Big 10 should have pursued academic excellence and geographical proximity. Instead they went after teams to increase revenue and increase their Tv viewer package
No, they do that because they want to play the best competition and get noticed as NFL talent. Who the hell wants to go to Starkville, MS? Or Columbia, SC? I wouldn't want to do two a days in those locations during the summer. Indiana's bad enough.
In the current class and the last 3, for ole miss, I count 7 kids from north of Maryland.. NJ 2 times, no cal, Philly, CT and Ontario twice
The kids from Ontario were unrated, CT was 5.7, no cal was 5.5. So please
If you look at Miss St, you'll see numerous transfers from other states. Are they getting kids from the south? Gee, let me think. Yeah. Who woulda thought? Does that mean they'd get the talent they are if they weren't in the SEC? Probably not...
What percentage are highly rated kids from the north who turned down northern schools to go there?
Geography nerd take: you could even sell Houston as "Atlantic" as the Gulf of Mexico is an extension of the Atlantic Ocean.
When it comes to shared experiences Nebraska is more Midwestern than Maryland, Rutgers, or Penn State.
For someone who considers himself very erudite and knowledgeable, your posts belie you more often than not.
Iowa State - only dilutes BIG member payouts. Almost no viewership to speak of. Academically mediocre. Great choice.
Missouri - only dilutes BIG member payouts. Academically mediocre. They belong in the SEC more than the BIG.
West Virginia - only dilutes BIG member payouts. Almost no viewership to speak of. Academically mediocre. Great choice.
Kentucky - they are in the SEC - for years. WITH would they jump to the BIG? Their history is in the SEC. Academically mediocre. Cheaters.
Tennessee - they are in the SEC - for years. WITH would they jump to the BIG? Their history is in the SEC. Academically mediocre. Great choice.
These choices are about as clueless as could be. Bad fits for multiple reasons. Don’t quit your daytime job, wolegib. You don’t belong anywhere near making long-term strategic decisions regarding conference realignment.
How do so many people still not understand that Rutgers and Maryland are the reason our conference is the richest? Glad some of you aren’t in charge, or we’d have Oklahoma State because they’re “a football school,” Kansas for hoops and Iowa State because it’s close. 😂
I just don’t understand your posts.
Rutgers and Maryland are far better academically than any of the schools you mention, bar ND.
Also, Rutgers, MD, and Neb. are all touching states previously in the BT footprint, so I’m not sure why you think your schools are better geographically.
You forgot Pitt because… well I forget all the reasons people were advocating for them.
Your reasoning is about $$$$$$, not academics or values or ethics! At one point those were the three things this conference was forged together on and created! I knew there would be somebody here that would say my comments didn’t make any economic sense. They were not meant to please the greedy business people who only see $$$$$ as their reason for living and success! Hey, you obviously believe the only reason to add a school is to generate $$$$$$ Do you marry the rich girl and drive your bmw or Lexus and live in your $800,000 house in a suburb? And sit in your cushy job and become part of the JPC? Or do you marry the poor and ugly girl and become a teacher and spend your extra time on food drives?
I never said my plan was to make the BIG the richest and best conference in the world. My statement was what the conference should have done! And maintained their values and integrity. Rather than a college conference, what we now have is professional entertainment. Look at the BIG 10 and then look at the IVy League. Which league is a true college conference? And which is about making money? And ask yourself, where does that money go? It goes to making more money! What’s more important? Generating money? Or providing an education and ethics? Can you Have an outstanding athletic program at a school that places academics as their #1 priority? Check out a game at Wabash or Drake or a military academy or Princeton! The excitement is the same even if it’s not on national TV or before 60,000+ drunk fans. Is the best high school football game always the one with the best players? Is beating a team 64-0 the type of game you enjoy?
At one time the University of Chicago was a part of our conference. Admittedly a school such as ISU brings no market share or revenue or prestige! Ask yourself who is the most famous Purdue alumni. Drew Brees? Or Neil Armstrong? Why do students go to Purdue? For their football and basketball teams? Or to get an education and make a difference in the world? What should be Purdue’s priority? Cancer research? Or new renovations to our arena and stadium and a new fitness facility only available to athletes? I know it’s all about the $$$$$
Purdue now has a business school and offers an MBA! music and art and education schools are not profitable! I know what college sports is all about. I just have a differing viewpoint. It’s not about intelligence! It’s about life priorities! I believe college coaches should make the same amount as professors do. I believe athletes are already paid! But others believe we need to pay them more so we can be competitive against other schools! What would happen if we just said no?
I’m not a stupid person just because I believe academics should take a priority over athletics! And I don’t believe those people who believe athletics should take a priority over academics are less intelligent than myself. We just have different viewpoints on life! Purdue has over 40,000 students. What % of them are sports fans or even care about the Purdue football team? Ever go to the library on a Saturday afternoon? You’d be shocked to see all the students there. A win is nice, but is it more important than the calculus test on Monday?
I’m not a stupid person just because I believe academics should take a priority over athletics! And I don’t believe those people who believe athletics should take a priority over academics are less intelligent than myself. We just have different viewpoints on life! Purdue has over 40,000 students. What % of them are sports fans or even care about the Purdue football team? Ever go to the library on a Saturday afternoon? You’d be shocked to see all the students there. A win is nice, but is it more important than the calculus test on Monday?
Similar threads
