Don't Panic: Nebraska Isn't Coming to the Big Ten
by Patrick Vint on Feb 15, 2010 1:30 PM CST
91 comments
Last year, when We Will Always Have Tempe discussed the possibility of Nebraska joining the Big Ten, I jumped into the comment section to shoot it down. There were questions of academics and traditional rivalries, but in the end the strike against Nebraska was the presence of athletic director Tom Osborne, former ruler of the Big 8 Conference. Surely the man who went toe-to-toe with Barry Switzer and won two* national championships for the Big Red wouldn't leave tradition behind to join the uppity Big Ten, right?
"We haven't entered into any formal talks with anybody right now," Osborne said. "We're focusing on the Big 12. But I don’t think that means if somebody wanted to pick up the phone and call us, that we'd hang up on them. You listen...."
"I would have to say the center of gravity has moved south. You’d have to say that trend to the south still continues to this day, which is a little concerning sometimes for people in the north part of the Big 12."
Rittenberg is correct: For Nebraska, it's all about the Benjamins. If EDSBS's math is correct (though you really shouldn't trust numbers from a man named Swindle), NU would triple its television revenue by moving from the Texas-centric Big XII contract to the Big Ten Network. The Big Ten would essentially be making Nebraska an offer it can't refuse. Given the current state of Nebraska-BXII relations, the timing has never been better.
Of course, that assumes the move makes sense for the conference and, if the Big Ten is only adding one additional team this time, it probably doesn't. Nebraska has been a member of the Association of American Universities for a century (a deal-breaker for the CIC if you aren't Notre Dame), but their graduate research programs would place them squarely at the bottom of the CIC. While the Huskers remain a national name in football, they are now more than a decade removed from their last national championship and haven't been to a BCS game since getting trounced by Miami in the 2002 Rose Bowl; over the last decade, NU's winning percentage is lower than Iowa's. They are the equivalent of Penn State in men's basketball. It opens up little recruiting territory that wasn't already available. And Jim Delaney doesn't stay up at night asking how he can break the Big Ten Network into the illustrious Omaha and Lincoln markets (where BTN is already available on the sports add-on from the local cable monopoly). Basically, the Big Ten would give Nebraska about $13M per year, for which Nebraska would give the Big Ten a championship game, bad basketball, Mike Nobler, and Runza sandwiches.
There are three constituencies at play in Big Ten expansion plans: The academics, the athletic departments, and the television arm of the conference. There are two rumored candidates who are palatable to all three: Texas and Notre Dame. As we know, Texas' geographic issues (and political situation) and Notre Dame's traditions (and hesitancy to share research goals with 11 secular institutions) make those unlikely. This is why I am more certain of a three-team expansion bonanza with each passing day. The academics of Pittsburgh, the national brand of Nebraska, and the new television markets of Missouri would make everyone happy and make more money for everyone involved. If the Big XIV is coming, Nebraska makes sense. But if expansion scenarios continue to focus on one new school, the dust will eventually settle, and Nebraska will still be handing wheelbarrows of cash to Texas.
* -- OK, two-and-a-half.
0 recs |
91 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
With you on this, as you already know.
There are very few (okay, two) institutions that make sense if we’re going to 12. Otherwise, we’re headed for 14, with the three additions made up of the second tier candidates like Nebraska, Missouri, etc.
Twitter: @scrappled
scrappled.com
"When it’s third-and-10, you can take the milk drinkers and I’ll take the whiskey drinkers every time" - Max McGee
by Run Up The Score on Feb 15, 2010 1:37 PM CST reply actions
Not so sure
Nebraska is a national name, and like Alabama, does big TV numbers across the country despite a small home state population. As I said in comment here, “as a former resident of Kansas City, I can confirm that it was not unusual for a Nebraska game to draw better local ratings than a Mizzou game.” And yes, I just quoted myself.
Yes, academics are an issue. Nebraska allowed Tommy Lee to enroll for that reality show. But has the world turned on Motley Crue that much to allow that to prohibit Nebraska’s inclusion?
http://www.rivalryesq.com/
"Bama Hawkeye, you know, the Iowa blogger who actually uses reason and analysis." - Hawkeye State
It's also worth mentioning (not really) that Larry the Cable Guy is a Husker
As is Houston Alexander. Both have proven to be one trick ponies and haven’t demonstrated much intelligence. Hell, Tommy Lee may be the best of the bunch.
by The Mexican't on Feb 15, 2010 3:00 PM CST up reply actions
Really?
I never saw the T.Lee show, but saw some ads with students in red. I just assumed he had enrolled at USC- – seems a much more logical fit.
I guess his herpes have already been enrolled at USC and UCLA for years, so maybe the show was going for a different market.
by Eyeheartfreedumb on Feb 16, 2010 11:18 AM CST up reply actions
14 Is Too Many
WIth 14 teams in football you play the other 6 on your side and only 2 on the other. So it takes you 3.5 years to play everybody on the other side. That’s just too long.
In basketball you play a home and away on your side and everybody on the other side once, that’s 19 games. How many non-conference do you lose? Not that that’s a horrible thing, but it would be taken into consideration.
12 is plenty. Add one and one only. Either Texas or Missouri. Maybe a Big East team. Missouri has all but begged to join anyway.
In 100 years, we'll all be dead.
Not necessarily
The Pac-10 plays 9 in football. It’s not out of the question (though you would lose a little revenue from the cupcake home game taken off the schedule every other year).
As for basketball, the BXI already plays 18 conference games. The difference is negligible.
Before you respond, let me remind you: Brian Cook called me smug, which makes me the Obama of smugness. I'm basically Smugbama.
by Patrick Vint on Feb 15, 2010 1:54 PM CST up reply actions
If we went to a 9-game conference schedule...
I would think it would be the end of the Arizona/Pitt-type games and not the UNI-type games. The AD will do everything in their power to have seven home games every year.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
Yeah, that's probably correct.
Sad but true.
Before you respond, let me remind you: Brian Cook called me smug, which makes me the Obama of smugness. I'm basically Smugbama.
by Patrick Vint on Feb 15, 2010 2:08 PM CST up reply actions
But by moving to 9 conference games
Aren’t we sort of negating the omission of the major OOC opponent? Obviously it’d be great to get both an additional conference game and a solid OOC schedule, but as long as we’re replacing the Arizona/Pitt with a Texas/Nebraska/Mizzou, it can’t be considered much of a loss.
by The Mexican't on Feb 15, 2010 3:03 PM CST up reply actions
It's a wash, yeah.
Similar (or better, on occasion) caliber opposition, although not quite as much variety.
But I think, from a competitive/entertainment standpoint, we’d all rather do away with the UNI-type games. But obviously those games are very very important for fiscal purposes.
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
That's actually a really good point.
Iowa’s stated scheduling philosophy includes home-and-home series with one BCS-level opponent every year. Essentially we would just be replacing that with a conference opponent on the same terms.
Someone like PSU or aOSU, on the other hand, might not be so happy.
Before you respond, let me remind you: Brian Cook called me smug, which makes me the Obama of smugness. I'm basically Smugbama.
by Patrick Vint on Feb 15, 2010 3:20 PM CST up reply actions
Ohio State makes gobs of money
But Penn State has to keep a much closer grip on their finances because the atlhetic department is self-sufficient (although we’re instituting a new quasi-seat licensing program next year, which will surely help). We’re never going to play less than seven home games, regardless of what craptacular Division III program we have to buy for slaughtering purposes. If we play 9 conference games, there’s no way that the years we play five away conference games is paired with three abject patsies.
Twitter: @scrappled
scrappled.com
"When it’s third-and-10, you can take the milk drinkers and I’ll take the whiskey drinkers every time" - Max McGee
by Run Up The Score on Feb 15, 2010 3:37 PM CST up reply actions
Bah. "isn't paired with..."
Twitter: @scrappled
scrappled.com
"When it’s third-and-10, you can take the milk drinkers and I’ll take the whiskey drinkers every time" - Max McGee
by Run Up The Score on Feb 15, 2010 3:37 PM CST up reply actions
didnt Iowa play 9 conf gms in 1983?
Non-conf gms vs. iowa st & Penn State…
this place smells like feet. i’ll bring a can of lysol next week.
by pfac51 on Feb 15, 2010 8:57 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
The Northern Implosion
The nightmare scenario for the Big XII (other than Texas leaving) would be Nebraska and Mizzou bolting for the Big Whatever and Colorado going to the Pac-12. How do you replace three teams? I can see Jerry Jones poaching Arkansas (as Orson speculated on the twitter today) and TCU and BYU coming over, I guess, but the Big 12 would essentially be the old SWC, only with Oklahomas, Kansases, and ISU.
Before you respond, let me remind you: Brian Cook called me smug, which makes me the Obama of smugness. I'm basically Smugbama.
That picture looks like Biff from Back To The Furture
by ChryslerKinnick on Feb 15, 2010 1:59 PM CST reply actions
Make like a tree..
and get out of here.
Excuse me for my bellicosity. And spelling. Bellicosity and spelling.
by Blackheartnopants on Feb 15, 2010 3:05 PM CST up reply actions
I’ll warn you now this is from an ACCer who knows very little about the Big Ten, Big XII or Midwestern values.
“I would have to say the center of gravity has moved south. You’d have to say that trend to the south still continues to this day, which is a little concerning sometimes for people in the north part of the Big 12.”
I’m reading into this, but maybe Osborne wants to put a scare into the Big XII. As Rittenberg said there hasn’t been a phone call and as Hawkeye State said, in all likely hood Nebraska shouldn’t expect a phone call. I think Osborne realizes there’s a good chance the Big Ten could poach Texas and, for a short while, leave the rest of the conference in shambles. I think the latter half of his quote is 1) pushing the North division’s agenda and 2) a subtle warning to the Big XII, “get your shit right, or else…”
Football is my anti-drug. CollegeGameBalls.com
by collegegameballs on Feb 15, 2010 2:01 PM CST reply actions
If Texas leaves
for whatever reason… (I’ve seem some saying they should go independant), I think it’s the end of the Big 12. Not right away but within a few years. Without them as a draw, their TV deal gets even crappier. After the PAC 10 expands, I think there will probably be a big shuffle of most teams west of the Mississippi. It should be exciting.
In 100 years, we'll all be dead.
Texas may leave
But they’d never go independent. The days of powerful, tradition-rich independents is long over, it died when Penn State joined the Big Ten and South Carolina joined the expanding SEC. Notre Dame is the lone hold out, and will probably be forced to join a conference when their current tv contract comes up (no way are they going to be renewed for anywhere near the $$ they’re getting now).
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
x100 on the Domers
I can’t see any network being dumb enough (like NBC) to offer them the kind of cash necessary for being an independent to be financially viable. If they continue to suck in football, if Notre Dame wants to remain independent, they might have to drop down to I-AA. Where I think they’d be a lot more competitive year in and year out.
My blog: http://www.gretainthebox.com
by Leftcoast Hawk on Feb 15, 2010 11:00 PM CST up reply actions
Never, ever underestimate the stupidity of NBC
If they still think tape-delaying the Olympics on the west coast (when the Olympics are taking place on the west coast, no less) is a good idea, there is no depth to which I would assume they are incapable of sinking.
I hope the Big Ten goes big or bust
meaning Texas, Notre Dame or nothing. But if the powers that be favor expansion for expansion’s sake, I would gladly take Nebraska over Pitt or Missouri.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
why? football alone?
Mizzou and Pittsburgh both have stronger academics and better all-around athletics. I understand that expansion is football-driven but lusting for a program with a ton of football history that COULD be a power again doesn’t make sense with their weaker academic anf market factors.
by PackerHawk on Feb 15, 2010 2:31 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
Incorrect.
Big 12 Conference titles by school
North Division
Nebraska – 66
Colorado – 27
Kansas – 20
Iowa State – 11
Kansas State – 7
Missouri – 6
South Division
Texas – 99
Texas A&M – 38
Baylor – 34
Oklahoma – 34
Oklahoma State – 33
Texas Tech – 11
Mizzou is a doormat in the Big 12. The only revenue sport championship they have is a men’s basketball tourney (they weren’t regular season champs that year).
and....
they have the most academic all-americans (271). But most of them still think the N on the helmet stands for Nowledge….thanks, thank you, take my wife, please, try the veal, best in the city, tip your waiter, thanks.
Dennis: Hi. I'm a recovering crack head. This is my retarded sister that I take care of. I'd like some welfare, please.
by RonnieHarmonsBookie on Feb 15, 2010 11:06 PM CST up reply actions
Notre Dame
I don’t think ND has a chance. They were invited in the 90’s and said no. They apparently tried to join in 03 and were rejected.
I think the feeling is that they had their chance, fuck ‘em. I’d rather see the conference expand it’s state footprint anyway.
In 100 years, we'll all be dead.
Make no mistake
The Big Whateverweare would take ND if they wanted in. The $$$ associated with the ND following would overwhelm any arguments against by a metric fuckton.
Having said that, I really don’t want ND in the conference.
I do
Wouldn’t You just love to beat up on those Irish bastards year after year
"You know, we always called each other good fellas. Like you said to, uh, somebody, :You're gonna like this guy. He's all right. He's a good fella. He's one of us.: You understand? We were good fellas. Wiseguys."
To the person that negotiated the Big 12 media deal
This is what happens when you don’t do your due diligence. You’ve set the conference up to become the next SWC.
A lot of the talk from the Big 12 teams about wanting to leave involves the amount of tv revenue (or lack thereof) the conference is taking in compared to the Big Ten & SEC. Add to that the fact that Texas gets the lion’s share (due to the ‘per appearance’ revenue sharing) and the Big 8+4 (the offices are now in Dallas) sentiment, and you’ve got a lot of unhappy North teams.
I don’t think the Big 10 adds someone that is below their academic, media and top-to-bottom athletic standards. They can wait— the championship game nets them $5-10mm a year, which isn’t too much in the scheme of things. Mizzou’s academics aren’t great, their sports teams aren’t that competitive (only 1 basketball tourney Big 12 championship to show for all their men’s sports) and they really aren’t that popular in the St. Louis and Kansas City markets (St. Louis is a pro-sports town, and KC is a Kansas town). Nebraska’s academics aren’t that great, they have pretty good top to bottom athletics (their b-ball is a doormat, though) and they have a good football following, but don’t deliver any markets.
If I’m the Big 10, I make a serious run at Texas and then table the whole expansion idea.
If they’re going to snag three schools from the Big 12, Texas, Texas A&M and Nebraska or Kansas would have to be the selections. Texas is a no-brainer, but A&M also has strong athletics, a large endowment and a historically strong football program. It’d also make the move easier for political reasons.
The question of Nebraska vs. Kansas comes down to which brand you like better: Nebraska has near elite football, Kansas has elite basketball. Kansas is a bit better academically, but neither are the sizes or quality of a Big 10 school. Kansas generates about $11mm a year more in revenue ($86mm— eleventh in the nation), but also has less punch in the non-revenue teams it fields.
Again, a lot of this smoke is coming from the north schools that hate the current media deal. Take it with a grain of salt.
by Gopher86 on Feb 15, 2010 2:35 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
+ 1! I want the Huskers in the Big XI because I want to see Pelini lose his shit live in Iowa City, actually see him pass out from rage, like we almost had when Coach Rod mentored his freshman demoralized a BitchMade concussed California boy on National TV.
Dennis: Hi. I'm a recovering crack head. This is my retarded sister that I take care of. I'd like some welfare, please.
by RonnieHarmonsBookie on Feb 15, 2010 11:14 PM CST up reply actions
I'm still not in love
with a 14 team league, but if it were to happen the UT/A&M package should be countered with an eastern team. Frankly, if Notre Dame were to see those to names on the ticket I have to believe they would find it all but impossible to not join this time around. However, if the Texas market were to come into play, the huge revenue that comes with would make me really want to see my sentimental favorite, Pitt (no following, no revenue but excellent academics and competitive athletics) get the call.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Feb 16, 2010 3:53 AM CST up reply actions
I'm betting that in two years Notre Dame is ready to sign-up for Big Ten status.
That is when they will have see the light that they are no longer a football powerhouse as an independent. That is when NBC is out of business, at least their old model and that leaves ND without a really big time TV deal. And that is when Congress mandates a playoff of some sort.
"I’m sick of following my dreams. I’m just going to ask them where they’re going and hook up with them later." M.H.
Ready, maybe...
But does the Big 10 then tell them to enjoy mediocrity in the Big East?
Excuse me for my bellicosity. And spelling. Bellicosity and spelling.
by Blackheartnopants on Feb 15, 2010 4:58 PM CST up reply actions
Not a chance.
It’d be nice to do the “right back atcha” thing, but Notre Dame is the most valuable property in college football.
PP-TPW.
The Only Colors
Most likely...
but never underestimate the ability of adults to act like children, especially where tens of millions of dollars are involved.
Excuse me for my bellicosity. And spelling. Bellicosity and spelling.
by Blackheartnopants on Feb 15, 2010 6:55 PM CST up reply actions
Texas
http://barkingcarnival.fantake.com/2010/02/15/being-bill-powers/
A Longhorn lays out the pros and cons, and how he sees power conferences in the near future. The comments at the end are quite interesting.
There's some food for thought in there...
In many ways, the Big Televen plus UT, A&M and Mizzou makes the most sense of all the proposals I have heard.
But — and there always is a but — this expansion will have more to do with politics than on-field issues. Conspiracy theory time: The president of OSU is Gordon Gee, the same Gordon Gee who was president of Vanderbilt from 2000-07. Vandy wants nothing to do with the SEC football arms race. What about joining a conference where you can enhance the academic standing of already fine university and increase — albeit slightly — your chance of sports success? And yes, I do believe Kennedy was killed by Castro, in conjunction with the CIA, Gambino Crime Family and the Illuminati.
Also, why screw one rival conference when it’s more fun to screw two?
Excuse me for my bellicosity. And spelling. Bellicosity and spelling.
by Blackheartnopants on Feb 15, 2010 5:19 PM CST up reply actions
No thanks.
We already have a Vanderbilt, and one is insufferable enough.
Although the possibility of an Armani-off between them is tempting… .
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
I don't know
Vandy girls are HOT, something that jNWU can’t compete with.
I ate the blue ones ... they taste like burning.
Krissy Cox begs to differ.
"Oh no, don't do that, don't do that. If you shoot him, you'll just make him mad." - The Waco Kid
Hey, I'll bet she tries harder
My blog: http://www.gretainthebox.com
by Leftcoast Hawk on Feb 15, 2010 11:05 PM CST up reply actions
My money is on Missouri.
Outside ND, they’re the best fit from a history and $$$ standpoint.
In 1894 their fans rushed the field and beat the Hawkeyes with canes.
Brunettes not fighter jets
The best fit remains Pitt
but if it didn’t fit you must acquit.
Anyway, Pitt has academics, tradition (in FB especially), location, and a decent TV audience (probably negated by variable fan support). But it’s the academics that would put it over the top compared to Mizzou or Nebraska.
Texas won’t do it: they will never want to be an equal fish in a big pond.
Mizzou would be fine by me—academics are reasonably decent—and in a practical sense, are the most likely to join. Nebraska just strikes me as too far north, too far away, and not sexy enough in their academics (they have a good medical school/hospital but it’s not located in Lincoln, so it hardly counts).
I’d prefer Pitt, but Mizzou has the edge. ND would be interesting from an athletic point of view, but basically the B10 is telling them to go fuck themselves since ND turned the B10 down years ago. Bitter much, B10? YOU BET.
"If you want to become a man--come to Iowa" All American IOWA LB PAT ANGERER, whose best friend is a dog.
Pitt
Won’t bring much in the way of television viewers/revenue – Penn State already rules the roost in that regard. Rutgers has been brought up in previous discussions, though, as a way to crack into the greater New York/New Jersey television market.
"Oh no, don't do that, don't do that. If you shoot him, you'll just make him mad." - The Waco Kid
Pitt isn't going to the Big Ten.
Nebraska, Texas, and Mizzou all strike me as Big Ten type schools. Like Penn State, they’re state schools and research schools. Pitt isn’t.
Lastly, Pitt WANTS to be a basketball school. Can’t underestimate that.
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 15, 2010 7:35 PM CST up reply actions
I dunno
Pitt’s academics are pretty solid, especially in the medical fields. If NEW television is the goal, then no, Pitt won’t add much. But adding them makes in-roads into prior Big East territory, at least. And B10 schools playing regularly in Pittsburgh would, I think, draw more fans to the games than currently go (especially natural rivals such as PSU and OSU).
Pitt’s FB tradition is pretty solid—Marino, Dorsett, Hugh Green, a NC in the past—and they’re good in BB, so athletically they’re fine by me.
The trouble with the others like Mizzou and Texas is the “poaching” of a team from a conference they’ve been in for decades. Would the B10 really do that? I dunno again. The B10 is a little funny in that the university presidents don’t always look at $$ as the #1 thing—they look at academics, prestige programs, and the like. Texas seems too far away to me, to ensconced in the whole Texas “thing” (which ain’t like the midwest under any terms). Mizzou would be a nice fit, but I just dunno if they’d actually leave their Big8/Big 12 history. Rutgers sounds nice for all the $$ reasons, but boy they’re a continent away. I just don’t see it.
To me, it’s Pitt or Mizzou. I’m not opposed to either.
I’d like to see Pitt, but I have no objections to Mizzou
"If you want to become a man--come to Iowa" All American IOWA LB PAT ANGERER, whose best friend is a dog.
by The Director on Feb 15, 2010 9:54 PM CST up reply actions
Pitt's football tradition is all in the past.
I’ll leave it at this: they tore down their football stadium and instead of building a new one, they shipped their FB team across the river and built a fancy new basketball arena there. Pitt knows they’ve got a good thing going with basketball over football.
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 15, 2010 11:00 PM CST up reply actions
Forgot this part:
Pitt being able to play in Madison Square Garden every year is really key to their basketball recruiting, exposure, etc.
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 15, 2010 11:02 PM CST up reply actions
I'm also not sure if it matters who they play RE: attendance
Pitt football fans are fairly bandwagon. Just in the fall, you’ve got the Penguins and above all else – the “Stillers”. Heinz Field has really only been filled when Pitt is good. When they played Penn State, IIRC, they relied on Penn State fans to fill their stadium (whether it was Pitt Stadium or Three Rivers). Maybe playing Big Ten teams would motivate them, but I’ve my doubts is all.
And this is why Pitt basketball is so successful: no NBA team in the burgh.
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 15, 2010 11:11 PM CST up reply actions
The Big 12 is, what, 15 years old?
It’s not exactly a bastion of tradition and storied history.
And Texas is a pretty elite public university — I think the Big 10 presidents would be happy to have a closer association with them. And I wouldn’t downplay the money issue too much — the economic downturn is driving home how perilous it can be for athletic departments to rely too much on state funding; adding Texas would increase the amount of money available to athletic departments by a tremendous amount (and reduce the amount of aid they needed from states).
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
Pitt is a public school
It has 26k+ at the main campus and another 7k+ at satellite campuses. They have solid professional and graduate programs and could still be a basketball school, MSU is whether or not they want to be. I know the big east is a bball conference, but Pittsburgh would make a ton of money leaving for the BigWhatever and I think their administration would welcome the chance to join the CIC
by PackerHawk on Feb 15, 2010 10:26 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
Mizzou is an awful choice
I know there is this sentiment that having a state name delivers the major cities in that state, but it couldn’t be further from the truth in Mizzou’s case.
Let’s start with St. Louis: can Mizzou fill up a stadium for an Illinois-Mizzou game once a year? Yes. Is St. Louis a Mizzou town? Hardly. It’s a pro-sports town— period. The other question you have to ask is how many alumni in St. Louis are from U of Illinois vs. Mizzou? Do you really capture anything by adding Mizzou?
What about Kansas City? Their pro-sports suck! True, but their college team of choice is definitely not Mizzou. They have an alumni presence, but they’re outnumbered by Jayhawks fans (Kansas’ campus is 35 miles away). You can’t swing a cat (or tiger) in that town without hitting a Jayhawks fan.
On paper it looks like a great play: a state population of 6 million and two major cities with no other BCS teams. If you start to look at their fan base, it breaks down. They’ve been skipped over three bowls in a row, because their fan bases don’t travel. The latest one involved a 6-6 Iowa State team being selected over their 8-4 team. IOWA STATE!
Let’s take a look at academics:
Mizzou is 8th in the Big 12 according to US News and World reports. http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-colleges/2009/03/03/athletic-conference-breakdown-big-12.html Their ranking would seat them dead last in the Big 10— by a 25 school margin.
A poster mentioned their research school status. What are Mizzou’s strongest programs? Journalism and Communications. Their Engineering and School of Business’ are light years behind most Big 10 schools. Hell, Kansas State is a better research institute.
Let’s take a look at endowment:
5. Texas – $15,613,672,000
10. Texas A&M – $6,590,300,000
57. Nebraska – $1,277,169,000
60. Kansas – $1,238,695,000
66. Oklahoma – $1,114,426,000
70. Missouri – $1,097,846,000
74. Baylor – $1,018,012,000 (Baylor Med was 56th w/ $1,278,011,000)
100. Colorado – $716,656,000
118. Texas Tech – $641,640,000
128. Iowa State – $592,368,000
148. Oklahoma State – $468,735,000
186. Kansas State – $346,360,000
Again, Mizzou is in the middle of the pack. Their endowment would tie them for dead last in the Big 10.
Let’s take a look at athletics:
Mizzou’s football team has been reasonably good over the last few years, but they haven’t accomplished much historically. They’ve never been to a BCS bowl game, they’ve never won a Big 12 title nor won the Big 12 North outright.
In 2007, when they got to the top of the rankings (only to be crushed by Oklahoma again), they were overlooked by the Orangebowl committee in favor of a team they’d beaten (the Jayhawks). Mizzou fans called foul play, but the committee’s selection turned out to be the first in a series of snubs, because their fan base doesn’t travel. In 2008, when they were supposed to compete for a national championship, they ended up a field goal away from losing to Northwestern in the Alamo Bowl. In 2009, the Insight Bowl snubbed them for Iowa State.
Let’s look at basketball: This team has never been to a Final Four. Ever. Ever Ever. One of a handful of teams to never get to a Final Four or a BCS game. They got their first Big 12 championship in a revenue sport when they beat a weak field in the tourney. They didn’t win the regular season that year. Their attendance numbers for their games are atrocious at times.
What about their non-revenue sports? Mizzou is dead last in the Big 12 in championships, but competes in the most sports. The law of averages would dictate that a blind squirrel would find a nut every once in a while:
Big 12 Conference titles by school
North Division
Nebraska – 66
Colorado – 27
Kansas – 20
Iowa State – 11
Kansas State – 7
Missouri – 6
South Division
Texas – 99
Texas A&M – 38
Baylor – 34
Oklahoma – 34
Oklahoma State – 33
Texas Tech – 11
You read that correctly, Iowa freaking State has nearly twice as many Big12 titles as Mizzou.
For all the reasons above, Mizzou is an awful choice.
I agree.
I’ve said this before: Grabbing Mizzou would be almost like grabbing another Purdue.
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 16, 2010 1:15 PM CST up reply actions
Purdue > Mizzou
It’d be like grabbing a team with Northwestern’s sports history and Alabama’s academic history.
Does OU not fit the Academic Requirements?
What a fit that would be
i don't wife em...i one night em
Not in any way
does OU meet Big Ten academic standards. Acie Earl could actually become their university president by defeating that current jobholder in a game of H.O.R.S.E.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Feb 16, 2010 4:28 AM CST up reply actions
Not by a long shot
They’re 108th in the nation on US News & World Reports. Good for 9th in the Big 12. 37 spots behind dead last in the Big 10.
I lot of the discussion focuses on football, but like you said the academics will kill this thing before it ever gets to the athletic benefit.
But doing this: “The academics of Pittsburgh, the national brand of Nebraska, and the new television markets of Missouri would make everyone happy and make more money for everyone involved.” doesn’t make any sense to me at all because now you’re splitting all this with three more schools, which seems very probably that you actually would lower everyone’s share when we’re adding just one marginal TV market and one decent brand, yet splitting it all into three more piles. (Pitt is a total financial anchor in every major category BTW).
As someone once said on an XM morning show my boss made me listen to over and over again: the beer he have now drink pretty good, don’t it?
I know about your diabolical plan.
Money
will be the deciding factor on how big the conference gets. Texas may be the only real choice where it’s win-win on the money side. Schools like Missouri might grow the pie enough to get everybody an extra million or two, or maybe they would lose a million or two.
All the talk of 14 teams or more ignores the question of "how are they going to generate at least $25 million in revenue to the conference coffers so they can pay for themselves. Adding one team gets a football championship game, that means 10-15, so the first team in gets to cheat a little. After that, any new team will need to add a LOT of new eyes to BTN. Who does that?
In 100 years, we'll all be dead.
Respectfully, and I mean really respectfully, I’m calling bullshit. Expansion that doesn’t include either UT or ND is dead on arrival. Adding any lesser Big XII school or Pitt dilutes the tv money. No way the conf adds another team if tv money gets reduced for existing televen. None of the potpourri of Pitt, NE, Mizzou will do it. Academics matter, but at least equally is the Tank’s 11+1 = 13 thesis. Osborne can say whatever he wants, but NE by itself does not a fucking thing.
"Expansion that doesn’t include either UT or ND is dead on arrival."
Respectfully, I’m calling bullshit on that.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
by Adam Jacobi on Feb 15, 2010 10:35 PM CST up reply actions
I'll agree
It doesn’t have to be UT or ND. Those two make a lot of sense, but it isn’t required.
What IS required, however, is that whoever gets added be additive to the conference. While Pitt makes sense in a lot of ways, they’d bring the revenue shares down across the board. That won’t fly. Missouri, to me, is one that might add more than their share. Kansas would be one for sure that would. However, I would wholeheartedly agree that if it was a three school expansion, it would absolutely have to include either UT, ND, or an equivalent school.
And respectfully
I disagree. Big Ten presidents are getting a glimpse at what they can aspire to. If they were to somehow be rebuked by either candidate, I think they would rather play the hand they already have and hope that it remains good enough than take an inferior school just to say the process was a “success.” .
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Feb 16, 2010 4:33 AM CST up reply actions
Agree, all this discussion is centered around the idea that the Big Ten will expand, when really all they’ve every said is that they will “seriously look at it.” I don’t see how you’ll get the all 11 schools to sign off on expansion for expansions sake, especially once you start getting pushback from salty academics and rivalry loyalists from OSU and UM.
All we’ve seen so far is Big XII schools leaking public threats, probably because they are upset about how Texas and OU are getting an unfair slice of the pie. And, from the Big Ten’s perspective, maybe this is all a big show for ND, trying to get them worried about ships sailing, ect.
I know about your diabolical plan.
What on earth would lead you to believe the OSU-UM rivalry would be in danger?
The Big Ten isn’t stupid. They’d never go one single football season without those two teams playing in November.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
by Adam Jacobi on Feb 16, 2010 10:24 AM CST up reply actions
It's not that HE thinks OMG THE GAME is in danger..
It’s that they think OMG THE GAME is in danger.
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 16, 2010 1:16 PM CST up reply actions
Do they?
I haven’t seen anything that suggests that.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
They equals the administrators.
I just think there’s a reason UM and OSU opposed our entrance and such stuff.
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 16, 2010 8:08 PM CST up reply actions
That's not actual evidence.
Sorry, but this doesn’t look like a valid line of criticism.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
If the Big XIV does happen,
I hope they change the name to the Big North. Keeps the “Big” in there, avoids having to change names whenever a team is added/drops, and would be a massive, civil war-esque “fuck you” to the SEC.
by Third Generation Hawk on Feb 15, 2010 11:24 PM CST reply actions
Then let's just go for
The Union. Powerful, evocative and a giant middle finger at the South (if you somehow need a reason to fell superior to them).
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Feb 16, 2010 4:30 AM CST up reply actions
Yes
Assuming, of course, that Texas is not part of the expansion. Something tells me they wouldn’t like being part of the “North”, let alone “Union”.
Hey Dolph, you look like I need a beer.
by Give Eddie a Beer on Feb 16, 2010 10:05 AM CST up reply actions
What Gopher said.
Also, Nebraska has had some good coaches there, but they’ve all sunk into the marshes of awful. Penn State has never had good coaches.
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 16, 2010 8:32 AM CST up reply actions
The way I read it,
While the Huskers remain a national name in football, they are now more than a decade removed from their last national championship and haven’t been to a BCS game since getting trounced by Miami in the 2002 Rose Bowl; over the last decade, NU’s winning percentage is lower than Iowa’s. They are the equivalent of Penn State in men’s basketball.
he meant Cornhusker football was the equivelant of PSU Mens’ B-ball
by Mr. Rosewater on Feb 16, 2010 12:48 PM CST up reply actions
I see.
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I agree with you in that case.
although Cornhusker B-Ball DOES have one conference win
by Mr. Rosewater on Feb 16, 2010 4:55 PM CST up reply actions
And the legendary Danny Nee
as coach emeritus/neck tie designer.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Feb 16, 2010 10:48 PM CST up reply actions
Here is your handy Guide to the Big 10 Rumor Mongering..
http://bull-run.blogspot.com/2010/02/ncaa-aq-theater-big-ten-expansion-rumor.html
Hello this is a public service announcement from the Big Ten
In recent weeks the landscape of college football has been shaken up by rumors that the Big ten is going to augment its numbers by adding one or more programs. While we did not intend to create such a fuss we are genuinely touched that so many schools are excited. This buzz has created an atmosphere of rumor mongering and we at the big ten do not feel that is productive.
So we at the Big ten have set up a few simple guidelines to help Big Ten and other College fans sort out things which might have some basis in truth from the more absurd rumors
Agnostic toward the whole thing...
But you are delusional to believe that Neb isn’t well within U of Iowa’s ballpark academically. Average ACT score, Neb 25, Iowa’s is 25.5. Nebraska actually has a larger endowment and in looking at the US News composite scores, Iowa is at 46 and Nebraska is at 41. Compare that to UT at 57, so it is reasonable to say that to any person who cherishes reason, Iowa is considerably closer to Neb. in academics vs. UT, which Iowa cannot even see.
Basically, both schools are full of dumb midwestern kids.
Respectfully, and I mean really respectfully, I’m calling bullshit. Expansion that doesn’t include either UT or ND is dead on arrival. Adding any lesser Big XII school or Pitt dilutes the tv money. No way the conf adds another team if tv money gets reduced for existing televen. None of the potpourri of Pitt, NE, Mizzou will do it. Academics matter, but at least equally is the Tank’s 11+1 = 13 thesis. Osborne can say whatever he wants, but NE by itself does not a fucking thing
Forbes magazine listed the 20 most valuable college football teams, Nebraska was number 4. Penn State is the only Big 10 school that ranks ahead (number 3, TU and ND are 1 and 2). So if it’s just for football I don’t think the Big 10 would have any problems sharing revenue with Nebraska and bringing NU into the conference. It’s the other factors where Nebraska starts looking like a bad choice (football is the only dominant Men’s sport, women’s sports vary from elite (VB) to mediocre (BB)) and the other things the Big 10 would be looking for.
by whateveritis12 on Feb 16, 2010 10:44 PM CST reply actions
What's "TU"?
"...there'll be some woman, maybe 45 or 50, she'll come up and give me a hug, and I'll give my wife a wink: See? I'm not that old." - Joe Paterno
by ReadingRambler on Feb 16, 2010 11:11 PM CST up reply actions
French
for “you”.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Feb 17, 2010 5:19 PM CST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
