re: Interesting take on Big Ten expansion..prob. the best explanation.

quote:

---

What exactly do Illinois and Indiana contribute in the fall?

---

Its different between an existing member and adding an expansion member you ruhtard. The Big10 DOESN'T need to add a member - the only reason to do so will be to INCREASE its revenue PER TEAM, not to keep it the same or decrease it.

quote:

---

As for the second rule, that isn’t just fuzzy math for a conference with 11 members that still calls itself the Big Ten. The reason why the Big Ten has stood at 11 members for so long is that Penn State, which has been an unqualified success in bringing an enormous amount of resources to the conference, is now the baseline standard for any type of expansion candidate. That is, a new school must bring financial, academic and fan base value to the conference that is way above and beyond what an average school would bring to the table. The Big Ten DOESN’T need 11 + 1 = 12, where all that does is add another mouth to feed without materially changing the fortunes of the current conference members. At the same time, the Big Ten absolutely positively will not even consider 11 + 1 = 11.5, where the revenue split per school would actually go down by adding a 12th member. Instead, a viable expansion candidate has to show that by becoming the 12th school in the conference that it would be the equivalent of bringing value that is above and beyond simply adding a conference championship game – essentially, the Big Ten needs 1 marquee school that is worth 2 average schools. Hence, the proper math for the Big Ten is 11 + 1 = 13.

---

quote:

---

Ill brings the state of Ill in the fall fyi.

---

But their football teams are not traditional powers.

BSU has become a traditional power. How many BCS bowl victories do IL, IN, or Purdue have in their backgrounds?

quote:

---

No way in hell Texas would leave! That would be the end of the Big 12

---

Read the article. Texas makes more money by joining the big ten.

The logical thing would be for Texas, Texas A&M, and an eastern school like Pitt or Rutgers joins. Then Texas makes sense. Texas is the second biggest state in the country and is growing and would make the Big Ten more like the NFL in being a national conference.

If you read between the lines a 14 team big ten means two schools from Texas and one from the East.

I laughed at you and continue to laugh at you and anyone else associated with the big ten that is considering Texas. You are wasting your time.

quote:

---

What exactly do Illinois and Indiana contribute in the fall?

---

2 really good basketball programs

good women's teams

2 good academic institution

indianapolis and chicago markets

quote:

---

BSU has become a traditional power.

---

BSU is nowhere near a traditional power

and BSU is a horrible academic institution that sucks dick at every other sport

i agree, but $20M is a pretty big budget for a shitty football program in its own right

I think he is putting WAY too much emphasis on a new addition adding the Big Ten Network to local TV coverage.

The BTN is nationwide on Directv, Dish and is available regionally on most cable providers. He says Rutgers wouldnt add NYC but the BTN is already on CableVision in NYC

Hell it is already on TimeWarner in Austin, TX

quote:

---

but $20M is a pretty big budget for a shitty football program in its own right

---

$20M is just the TV rev, the actual budget is probably smaller since some of that will have to pay for all other programs at a place like NW

The Big 10 takes academic reputation very seriously. I think a lot of it is a crock, but they do value it, so they are going to add a team that brings in money AND has a good academic reputation. Texas would bring in revenue, but add too many expenses so its no longer worth it. I just don’t think it is viable.

It really has to be an Eastern/Midwest/Northern team. Otherwise, travel doesn’t work in the minor sports. Really, there aren’t a lot of viable options: you could swoop down to Nebraska, but there’s no TV market. You could look at Rutgers for NYC, but the school is pretty “eh”. They could make a play for Tennessee which isn’t that far from Ohio, just to play chicken with the SEC, but I don’t think they can offer anything. Honestly, why not Virginia, Virginia Tech, or Maryland? All feel sort of as outsiders in the ACC, they all have varying degrees of decent football tradition, and they can deliver DC/Baltimore, the 5th largest TV market in the country. Not to mention, all are pretty good schools. Honestly, I think VT is a really good fit.