The point of the playoff is to maximize revenue. B1G furthers that goal.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(09-14-2014 02:40 PM)mikeinsec127 Wrote:  RU class of the B10 vs P5 OOC!

it's debatable whether or not Washington State should be considered a p5 win, but it still counts

(09-14-2014 06:17 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The point of the playoff is to maximize revenue. B1G furthers that goal.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I gave you a +3 for understanding the situation from the top down rather than from the usual bottom up fan perspective.

This is why you see ESPN folks ripping on the Big Ten so much in public. Yes they deserve it by their gameplay but ESPN is All about ripping them. They don't just let them soak in their pathetic play, no no, ESPN is stirring that up constantly. They do not want The Big Ten to just continue to slide while collecting their big checks and quite frankly this could affect negotiations that are happening and heating up.

That is also why any final major realignment will include something that helps The Big Ten. Too much money, too much viewership and too much potential to let those lazy ass sons of ******* at the top squander it away with ineptitude.

I wouldn't count them out of the playoff situation yet. Down the back stretch a lot could happen and the playoff will take a Big10 team if at all possible. It is all about money after all.

The OBC really insulted ECU saying we were better than only the bottom of the B1G.

The BIg is a G in P's clothing.

(09-14-2014 06:30 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-14-2014 06:17 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The point of the playoff is to maximize revenue. B1G furthers that goal.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I gave you a +3 for understanding the situation from the top down rather than from the usual bottom up fan perspective.

This is why you see ESPN folks ripping on the Big Ten so much in public. Yes they deserve it by their gameplay but ESPN is All about ripping them. They don't just let them soak in their pathetic play, no no, ESPN is stirring that up constantly. They do not want The Big Ten to just continue to slide while collecting their big checks and quite frankly this could affect negotiations that are happening and heating up.

That is also why any final major realignment will include something that helps The Big Ten. Too much money, too much viewership and too much potential to let those lazy ass sons of ******* at the top squander it away with ineptitude.

Play on the field means absolutely nothing in regards to the next contract negotiations. Viewership is the key and the BIG has a huge collective alumni base and brings in great numbers even with an inferior product. ESPN will pay out the nose to keep the BIG which makes the constant bashing, though deserved, rather odd. It was ESPN's arrogant attitude that created the BTN and the last thing the network would want is the Big ten heading to Fox.

Your point on realignment is interesting however, I don't think the highbrows that run the BIG, and its football into the ground, care much about what the networks want unlike the other conferences. As much as I would love the BIG to look at teams like Oklahoma, Florida State, and Virginia Tech, I don't see it happening. I see them hiding behind the AAU requirement even though Nebraska proved that is a farce.

(09-15-2014 07:49 AM)Psuhockey Wrote:  

(09-14-2014 06:30 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-14-2014 06:17 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The point of the playoff is to maximize revenue. B1G furthers that goal.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I gave you a +3 for understanding the situation from the top down rather than from the usual bottom up fan perspective.

This is why you see ESPN folks ripping on the Big Ten so much in public. Yes they deserve it by their gameplay but ESPN is All about ripping them. They don't just let them soak in their pathetic play, no no, ESPN is stirring that up constantly. They do not want The Big Ten to just continue to slide while collecting their big checks and quite frankly this could affect negotiations that are happening and heating up.

That is also why any final major realignment will include something that helps The Big Ten. Too much money, too much viewership and too much potential to let those lazy ass sons of ******* at the top squander it away with ineptitude.

Play on the field means absolutely nothing in regards to the next contract negotiations. Viewership is the key and the BIG has a huge collective alumni base and brings in great numbers even with an inferior product. ESPN will pay out the nose to keep the BIG which makes the constant bashing, though deserved, rather odd. It was ESPN's arrogant attitude that created the BTN and the last thing the network would want is the Big ten heading to Fox.

Your point on realignment is interesting however, I don't think the highbrows that run the BIG, and its football into the ground, care much about what the networks want unlike the other conferences. As much as I would love the BIG to look at teams like Oklahoma, Florida State, and Virginia Tech, I don't see it happening. I see them hiding behind the AAU requirement even though Nebraska proved that is a farce.

There are plenty of big money donors at these schools that don't like seeing their Alma Mater dragged through the mud and being **** talked by co workers, bosses and employees of theirs. Not even to mention the guys at their country clubs and what not that aren't Big Ten guys giving them ****. It is happening and that is the kind of pressure that would actually move folks in the Big Ten. It isn't that I think the ESPN propaganda pressure works directly on them. Most of them may not even see it. It is how it affects others and the actions of those others around the people that "matter", that is what I am talking about when it comes to affecting change there.


Also play on the field will absolutely matter to ESPN and I see no reason why they wouldn't use it as a negotiating point. If they end up airing less Big Ten games because of a perception of weakness and boring games then that could affect things. If they end up airing less Big Ten games due to rankings, then that applies as well.

We are in a time of College Football where play on the field is actually mattering more than it use to, by quite a bit.

(09-15-2014 08:36 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-15-2014 07:49 AM)Psuhockey Wrote:  

(09-14-2014 06:30 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-14-2014 06:17 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The point of the playoff is to maximize revenue. B1G furthers that goal.


Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

I gave you a +3 for understanding the situation from the top down rather than from the usual bottom up fan perspective.

This is why you see ESPN folks ripping on the Big Ten so much in public. Yes they deserve it by their gameplay but ESPN is All about ripping them. They don't just let them soak in their pathetic play, no no, ESPN is stirring that up constantly. They do not want The Big Ten to just continue to slide while collecting their big checks and quite frankly this could affect negotiations that are happening and heating up.

That is also why any final major realignment will include something that helps The Big Ten. Too much money, too much viewership and too much potential to let those lazy ass sons of ******* at the top squander it away with ineptitude.

Play on the field means absolutely nothing in regards to the next contract negotiations. Viewership is the key and the BIG has a huge collective alumni base and brings in great numbers even with an inferior product. ESPN will pay out the nose to keep the BIG which makes the constant bashing, though deserved, rather odd. It was ESPN's arrogant attitude that created the BTN and the last thing the network would want is the Big ten heading to Fox.

Your point on realignment is interesting however, I don't think the highbrows that run the BIG, and its football into the ground, care much about what the networks want unlike the other conferences. As much as I would love the BIG to look at teams like Oklahoma, Florida State, and Virginia Tech, I don't see it happening. I see them hiding behind the AAU requirement even though Nebraska proved that is a farce.

There are plenty of big money donors at these schools that don't like seeing their Alma Mater dragged through the mud and being **** talked by co workers, bosses and employees of theirs. Not even to mention the guys at their country clubs and what not that aren't Big Ten guys giving them ****. It is happening and that is the kind of pressure that would actually move folks in the Big Ten. It isn't that I think the ESPN propaganda pressure works directly on them. Most of them may not even see it. It is how it affects others and the actions of those others around the people that "matter", that is what I am talking about when it comes to affecting change there.


Also play on the field will absolutely matter to ESPN and I see no reason why they wouldn't use it as a negotiating point. If they end up airing less Big Ten games because of a perception of weakness and boring games then that could affect things. If they end up airing less Big Ten games due to rankings, then that applies as well.

We are in a time of College Football where play on the field is actually mattering more than it use to, by quite a bit.

Completely disagree with you. The Big Ten has been terrible lately and still manages the 2nd best conferences ratings by a large margin. That is not going to change. The SEC is number one because not only of their current success but they are the only game in town for a lot of these states. The Big Ten competes against prosports for t-shirt fans but pump out a crap ton of alumni year after year who's fandom is now set for life. Penn State has been irrelevant since the mid90's and still draws big numbers.

Espn still needs ratings to sell advertising. They are not going to start showing NC State games over Michigan games cause of rankings and try to convince their advertisers to except fewer eyeballs for their money. That's ridiculous. Why do you think the Dallas Cowboys are on TV all the time and are talked about constantly on ESPN when they too have been irrelevant since the 90's? It's all about eyeballs.

Penn St irrelevent since the mid 90's? They finished in the top 20 in the BCS era 6 times, 5 in the top 12. That's hardly irrelevent.

it'll be interesting to see how the ratings are for the Big Ten this year. This year is the worst Big Ten in ages. Last year they had 11 OOC losses all year long. This year already 13 OOC losses. 14 the year before. And 5 games this weekend where they play a P5 team- 3 on the road- then a game in Nov where Northwestern plays at Notre Dame. So it's possible they could be up near 20 OOC losses.

ESPN might not show NC State games, but they might show more FSU or Clemson games.

Like H1 said- play on the field is actually starting to matter more now than before. For example- the Big Ten in the BCS era got 2 teams every year but 1 in the 10 team era. That now isn't guaranteed to be the case at all- it's no longer the bowl's choice- it's the top teams getting in.

(09-15-2014 09:38 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Penn St irrelevent since the mid 90's? They finished in the top 20 in the BCS era 6 times, 5 in the top 12. That's hardly irrelevent.

it'll be interesting to see how the ratings are for the Big Ten this year. This year is the worst Big Ten in ages. Last year they had 11 OOC losses all year long. This year already 13 OOC losses. 14 the year before. And 5 games this weekend where they play a P5 team- 3 on the road- then a game in Nov where Northwestern plays at Notre Dame. So it's possible they could be up near 20 OOC losses.

ESPN might not show NC State games, but they might show more FSU or Clemson games.

Like H1 said- play on the field is actually starting to matter more now than before. For example- the Big Ten in the BCS era got 2 teams every year but 1 in the 10 team era. That now isn't guaranteed to be the case at all- it's no longer the bowl's choice- it's the top teams getting in.

Well we will have to wait for the ratings. However, last year when every Big Ten except Ohio State was a loser in nonconference play in the 1st 4 weeks of the season and ACC with two teams fighting for a BCS championship until midway thru the season, the BIG still averaged more than a million viewers in comparison.

Play on the field matters less this year than before since there will be now 4 teams in the playoffs. Before an early season nonconference loss all but eliminated you from the BCS title game. If a big name Big Ten team wins out with only one loss, I would wager they will get in simply because of the viewers. The reason there is a 4 team playoff is because the all SEC title game a few seasons back was a ratings disaster.

I keep on hearing that the committee is going to make all their decisions based on markets and who is best for TV. I just do not think that's going to be the case at all.

And what are you talking about last year? Ohio St, Michigan, Northwestern, and Minnesota all were undefeated OOC.

I think play on the field matters more now because more games are going to mean more. I mean, if this was last year- the Big Ten would have about a 0% chance of getting into the top 2. They would have to hope that there was only 1 champ with 0 or 1 loss. Now, they have at least some chance.

And the reason there is a 4 team playoff isn't just 2011. It's because there were a number of years where there were 3-4 teams that deserved a shot.

(09-15-2014 12:05 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I keep on hearing that the committee is going to make all their decisions based on markets and who is best for TV. I just do not think that's going to be the case at all.

And what are you talking about last year? Ohio St, Michigan, Northwestern, and Minnesota all were undefeated OOC.

I think play on the field matters more now because more games are going to mean more. I mean, if this was last year- the Big Ten would have about a 0% chance of getting into the top 2. They would have to hope that there was only 1 champ with 0 or 1 loss. Now, they have at least some chance.

And the reason there is a 4 team playoff isn't just 2011. It's because there were a number of years where there were 3-4 teams that deserved a shot.

My bad, thought Michigan played Alabama last year but Northwestern and Minnesota don't normally get great ratings, so I didn't think they really mattered. You proved my point inadvertently about play on the field mattering less. The Big had great ratings with only Ohio State eligible to the BCS after week 6. Now with 4 spots, ratings could go up with more games having playoff implications. So the original point that the BIG would be bypassed by espn to show other teams because of their losing is more than likely wrong because Big Ten ratings are too good to pass up.

The BCS was one of those grand transitional moments. I just don't think people really understood what happened or was happening.

The Orange, Sugar, and Fiesta were huge players and crafting a deal that would get the Rose on board was a hard thing. If Rose wasn't happy the Big 10 and Pac-10 weren't going to be happy.

The bowl people wanted to as much as possible preserve their historic ties while rotating around the title game and if they got to pick up an attractive champion they normally wouldn't have hosted in the non-title years, all the better.

As far as the bowl guys were concerned, the champs of ACC, Big 10, Big 12, Pac-10, and SEC needed to be taken care of. The bowl perspective was they'd gladly take a top flight Big East but didn't want to be locked in to taking them.

ABC was holding enough cash, that they forced the issue, Big East would be in the permanent rotation.

The playoff probably became inevitable with the double hosting model created to make life easier for busters and amp up the money. By creating a new "bowl game" that rotated location, we moved closer to the concept used in the new title game.

The bowl bigwigs have been an obstacle but TV money finally disrupted their power.

The folks at ESPN aren't worried if NIU plays UCLA in Dallas in an access bowl or if they played in Miami. They don't want the place empty or half full but their primary concern is the game be close enough that people don't change channels because it isn't worth watching.

The dirty secret of the big bowls is what is really going on.

While they may claim to be worried about attendance, those games are sold. The top bowl games have long ago sold out and having a waiting list. The only unsold tickets go to the schools and the schools are going to pay for those tickets whether they are sold or not. The big bowl games aren't worried about attendance that year.

They worry about the ability of their regular ticket buyers (locals who got in early and local sponsors) to get a good price on the secondary market. You could be the official gumbo of the Sugar Bowl pay the price, get your sponsor tickets and most years recover most of that sponsorship cost selling the tickets on the secondary market, in a good year, you could make a profit.

The big bowls don't want weaker supported P5 and don't want G5 schools because they tend to lead to a weak secondary market and if that happens consistently, people who have been buying four tickets a year and never using them except to make some extra cash will eventually drop out.

The economic model that drives the top bowls is vastly different from what is driving the CFP or before that the BCS. Most bowl committee members have long been able to pocket a nice profit just selling their tickets or have been able to curry favor with wealthy people by obtaining those hard to get tickets for them. Bowl committees tend to have an over-representation of lawyers, insurance people and CPAs because they saw access to those tickets as good for client relations.

(09-15-2014 01:07 PM)Psuhockey Wrote:  

(09-15-2014 12:05 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I keep on hearing that the committee is going to make all their decisions based on markets and who is best for TV. I just do not think that's going to be the case at all.

And what are you talking about last year? Ohio St, Michigan, Northwestern, and Minnesota all were undefeated OOC.

I think play on the field matters more now because more games are going to mean more. I mean, if this was last year- the Big Ten would have about a 0% chance of getting into the top 2. They would have to hope that there was only 1 champ with 0 or 1 loss. Now, they have at least some chance.

And the reason there is a 4 team playoff isn't just 2011. It's because there were a number of years where there were 3-4 teams that deserved a shot.

My bad, thought Michigan played Alabama last year but Northwestern and Minnesota don't normally get great ratings, so I didn't think they really mattered. You proved my point inadvertently about play on the field mattering less. The Big had great ratings with only Ohio State eligible to the BCS after week 6. Now with 4 spots, ratings could go up with more games having playoff implications. So the original point that the BIG would be bypassed by espn to show other teams because of their losing is more than likely wrong because Big Ten ratings are too good to pass up.

You should come over to the Big Ten board bro.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Is this a start of a blossoming bromance?

(09-14-2014 03:27 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(09-14-2014 11:49 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(09-13-2014 10:21 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  Why all the piling on of the BIG? This thread is unnecessary.

Give the B1G credit for one thing: They are sticking their neck out and playing more OOC games against P5 than anyone else.

The problem with sticking your neck out like that is that it can lead to decapitation. The ridicule and abuse stems from the conference that promotes itself as THE leader failing miserably. It's human nature, and the natural consequence of falling flat on your face.

As Woody Hayes of Ohio State would say, "kick them while they down"! Same goes for the Big 10!

(09-19-2014 02:11 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  As Woody Hayes of Ohio State would say, "kick them while they down"! Same goes for the Big 10!

Should have maybe kicked a little harder.

So far today the BigTen is 2-0 against ACC with Neb vs. Miami still to come. If Neb wins that game, you can make an argument that the BigTen at least is competitive against the ACC.

Indiana is hanging with Mizzou...

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App