OP should have titled this thread "Throw Some Shade UCONN's Way"....

(01-20-2016 05:25 PM)connecticutguy Wrote:  The rumor mill is filled with speculation the B12 may ask UConn to join. Should the Big10 or ACC act now to prevent the B12 from getting UConn and -- by so doing -- getting an entrance into the metro NYC TV market?

Yes, though I suspect Kaplony, XLance, Rabbit in Red, and H1 the man with ALL the stroke would disagree.

(01-20-2016 08:43 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  OP should have titled this thread "Throw Some Shade UCONN's Way"....

If there was a way for UConn to monetize all the conspiracy theory involving it, or at least mentioning it in conference realignment forums, UConn would be its own power conference.

You guys are pretty much the Notre Dame of getting mentioned in threads.

(01-20-2016 08:52 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 08:43 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  OP should have titled this thread "Throw Some Shade UCONN's Way"....

If there was a way for UConn to monetize all the conspiracy theory involving it, or at least mentioning it in conference realignment forums, UConn would be its own power conference.

You guys are pretty much the Notre Dame of getting mentioned in threads.

Very true. Granted it doesn't help when one of our (supposedly) own starts one...

(01-20-2016 08:04 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:58 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:47 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:24 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 05:44 PM)penguino Wrote:  no, B1G is waiting for the ACC to implode. then will take two from either NC, Virginia, GA Tech, Duke.

Unless Texas and ND want to join first. I don' really think Oklahoma has a chance at B1G. Academically they just aren't there.

If the BIG wanted UCONN they would have already been taken. If anything, the BIG has shown that it is patient and a long term strategic thinker. They aren't going to jump the gun for UCONN. They will wait out the grant of rights and cherry pick (along with the SEC) whoever they want.

Penguino: If JrSec's idea of content of brands takes shape...Rutgers could be dropped in a NY minute from the B1G. Rutgers isn't a big brand in any sport. Delaney will be retired in 5-7 years...priorities could shift as TV/content pipelines change.

BTW, I don't believe in Jr's Machiavellian SEC World View though...as colleges are more socialist than capitalist. He has some good points...but moving teams is hard to do...If it is easy...they will join together and form an NFL type model of $$$ distribution.

IMHO, JR is predicting the past, the present, and the future. TV markets never mattered. The two things that matter are fans' willingness to watch teams, and their willingness to pay for access to those teams. That has always been the case, and it will continue being the case.

RU and UMD were added for PSU, so unless PSU leaves the B1G, decides that they don't want easy wins in front of alums and recruits, and/or becomes less important in the conference, then neither RU nor UMD will ever get dropped.

And an NFL type model will take a LONG time because there are many, many vested interests, but FWIW, I do think that all massive conferences will break apart in the future, albeit not the immediate future.

Good points...I just don't see a super league of the top 16-24 brands forming.

It won't. IMHO, that's part of why I think that the B1G will have to rethink itself soon. PSU won't tolerate finishing 4th in its division ever year with a guaranteed 3 losses. When PSU is staring down the barrel of continued 7-6 seasons (3 losses to OSU, MSU, and Michigan, a WTF loss, and a crossover/bowl/OOC loss) things will get old quick. Since the Nittany Lions have very real and very legitimate options (i.e. jumping to the ACC), the B1G will have to meet their demands. My guess is that divisions will be reshuffled. PSU's MASSIVE football infrastructure will quickly shift from being an asset to a liability if they keep losing. They literally can't afford to take risks.

Penn State could go to the ACC (or almost anywhere else for that matter) but they'd be stupid to. Likewise, it would be stupid for the Big Ten to cater to Penn State's demands if they didn't plan on doing it anyway. Maryland and Rutgers weren't for Penn State. They were to roll out money printing machines and get the conference paid from carriage in Maryland, New Jersey, New York City, etc. They fit the criteria of a Big Ten school already (big enrollment, research driven, etc.). If Penn State said, "Add Buffalo or we walk," then the Big Ten says, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out."

(01-20-2016 10:23 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 08:04 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:58 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:47 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:24 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Penguino: If JrSec's idea of content of brands takes shape...Rutgers could be dropped in a NY minute from the B1G. Rutgers isn't a big brand in any sport. Delaney will be retired in 5-7 years...priorities could shift as TV/content pipelines change.

BTW, I don't believe in Jr's Machiavellian SEC World View though...as colleges are more socialist than capitalist. He has some good points...but moving teams is hard to do...If it is easy...they will join together and form an NFL type model of $$$ distribution.

IMHO, JR is predicting the past, the present, and the future. TV markets never mattered. The two things that matter are fans' willingness to watch teams, and their willingness to pay for access to those teams. That has always been the case, and it will continue being the case.

RU and UMD were added for PSU, so unless PSU leaves the B1G, decides that they don't want easy wins in front of alums and recruits, and/or becomes less important in the conference, then neither RU nor UMD will ever get dropped.

And an NFL type model will take a LONG time because there are many, many vested interests, but FWIW, I do think that all massive conferences will break apart in the future, albeit not the immediate future.

Good points...I just don't see a super league of the top 16-24 brands forming.

It won't. IMHO, that's part of why I think that the B1G will have to rethink itself soon. PSU won't tolerate finishing 4th in its division ever year with a guaranteed 3 losses. When PSU is staring down the barrel of continued 7-6 seasons (3 losses to OSU, MSU, and Michigan, a WTF loss, and a crossover/bowl/OOC loss) things will get old quick. Since the Nittany Lions have very real and very legitimate options (i.e. jumping to the ACC), the B1G will have to meet their demands. My guess is that divisions will be reshuffled. PSU's MASSIVE football infrastructure will quickly shift from being an asset to a liability if they keep losing. They literally can't afford to take risks.

Penn State could go to the ACC (or almost anywhere else for that matter) but they'd be stupid to. Likewise, it would be stupid for the Big Ten to cater to Penn State's demands if they didn't plan on doing it anyway. Maryland and Rutgers weren't for Penn State. They were to roll out money printing machines and get the conference paid from carriage in Maryland, New Jersey, New York City, etc. They fit the criteria of a Big Ten school already (big enrollment, research driven, etc.). If Penn State said, "Add Buffalo or we walk," then the Big Ten says, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out."

^this. Penn St ain't leaving the B1G, no matter how hard ACC or SEC folks wish to think so - I think there is just as much a chance of Alabama leaving the SEC for the ACC or BXII as their is for Penn St to leave.

It took the B1G along time to add penn st. Then along time to expand again. The expansion was suppose to be RU (which was in the works for > 10 years), then nebraska landed in their laps. And even though Mizzou was begging to be invited, they waited to pry Maryland away from the ACC to add RU to get back to an even number.

They are thinking long term. Unless Texas and ND land in their laps, they will wait and cherry pick who they want, when they want - from the ACC. Unfortunately for UCONN, I don't think they are in the plans, and just because they can't get who they want today, doesn't mean they are going to jump the gun and add somebody just for the sake of adding somebody.

(01-20-2016 05:25 PM)connecticutguy Wrote:  The rumor mill is filled with speculation the B12 may ask UConn to join. Should the Big10 or ACC act now to prevent the B12 from getting UConn and -- by so doing -- getting an entrance into the metro NYC TV market?

(01-20-2016 10:23 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 08:04 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:58 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:47 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:24 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Penguino: If JrSec's idea of content of brands takes shape...Rutgers could be dropped in a NY minute from the B1G. Rutgers isn't a big brand in any sport. Delaney will be retired in 5-7 years...priorities could shift as TV/content pipelines change.

BTW, I don't believe in Jr's Machiavellian SEC World View though...as colleges are more socialist than capitalist. He has some good points...but moving teams is hard to do...If it is easy...they will join together and form an NFL type model of $$$ distribution.

IMHO, JR is predicting the past, the present, and the future. TV markets never mattered. The two things that matter are fans' willingness to watch teams, and their willingness to pay for access to those teams. That has always been the case, and it will continue being the case.

RU and UMD were added for PSU, so unless PSU leaves the B1G, decides that they don't want easy wins in front of alums and recruits, and/or becomes less important in the conference, then neither RU nor UMD will ever get dropped.

And an NFL type model will take a LONG time because there are many, many vested interests, but FWIW, I do think that all massive conferences will break apart in the future, albeit not the immediate future.

Good points...I just don't see a super league of the top 16-24 brands forming.

It won't. IMHO, that's part of why I think that the B1G will have to rethink itself soon. PSU won't tolerate finishing 4th in its division ever year with a guaranteed 3 losses. When PSU is staring down the barrel of continued 7-6 seasons (3 losses to OSU, MSU, and Michigan, a WTF loss, and a crossover/bowl/OOC loss) things will get old quick. Since the Nittany Lions have very real and very legitimate options (i.e. jumping to the ACC), the B1G will have to meet their demands. My guess is that divisions will be reshuffled. PSU's MASSIVE football infrastructure will quickly shift from being an asset to a liability if they keep losing. They literally can't afford to take risks.

Penn State could go to the ACC (or almost anywhere else for that matter) but they'd be stupid to. Likewise, it would be stupid for the Big Ten to cater to Penn State's demands if they didn't plan on doing it anyway. Maryland and Rutgers weren't for Penn State. They were to roll out money printing machines and get the conference paid from carriage in Maryland, New Jersey, New York City, etc. They fit the criteria of a Big Ten school already (big enrollment, research driven, etc.). If Penn State said, "Add Buffalo or we walk," then the Big Ten says, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out."

1. How do RU and UMD add money to the B1G? Why would a cable company arbitrarily pay the conference more per school because of their addition? It would be one thing if they had legions of fans who would be willing to absorb an increase in carriage rates for the content and/or legions of fans to watch the content and by the stuff advertised during the games, but those schools, particularly Rutgers, don't.
2. PSU would only be stupid to bolt if the B1G caved to their demands. Everything is context. Is the Big XII better than the SEC/B1G? No. Is it better for Texas? Yes. Context matters.
3. If losing PSU cost the B1G more than adding SUNY Buffalo, then the B1G would add SUNY Buffalo and call it a move to "further solidify a hold in upstate, NY and strengthen the CIC by adding another AAU member."

(01-20-2016 08:48 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 05:25 PM)connecticutguy Wrote:  The rumor mill is filled with speculation the B12 may ask UConn to join. Should the Big10 or ACC act now to prevent the B12 from getting UConn and -- by so doing -- getting an entrance into the metro NYC TV market?

Yes, though I suspect Kaplony, XLance, Rabbit in Red, and H1 the man with ALL the stroke would disagree.

You don't pay attention. Ask some of those folks that you listed where I project UConn landing.

(01-20-2016 10:37 PM)penguino Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 10:23 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 08:04 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:58 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:47 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  IMHO, JR is predicting the past, the present, and the future. TV markets never mattered. The two things that matter are fans' willingness to watch teams, and their willingness to pay for access to those teams. That has always been the case, and it will continue being the case.

RU and UMD were added for PSU, so unless PSU leaves the B1G, decides that they don't want easy wins in front of alums and recruits, and/or becomes less important in the conference, then neither RU nor UMD will ever get dropped.

And an NFL type model will take a LONG time because there are many, many vested interests, but FWIW, I do think that all massive conferences will break apart in the future, albeit not the immediate future.

Good points...I just don't see a super league of the top 16-24 brands forming.

It won't. IMHO, that's part of why I think that the B1G will have to rethink itself soon. PSU won't tolerate finishing 4th in its division ever year with a guaranteed 3 losses. When PSU is staring down the barrel of continued 7-6 seasons (3 losses to OSU, MSU, and Michigan, a WTF loss, and a crossover/bowl/OOC loss) things will get old quick. Since the Nittany Lions have very real and very legitimate options (i.e. jumping to the ACC), the B1G will have to meet their demands. My guess is that divisions will be reshuffled. PSU's MASSIVE football infrastructure will quickly shift from being an asset to a liability if they keep losing. They literally can't afford to take risks.

Penn State could go to the ACC (or almost anywhere else for that matter) but they'd be stupid to. Likewise, it would be stupid for the Big Ten to cater to Penn State's demands if they didn't plan on doing it anyway. Maryland and Rutgers weren't for Penn State. They were to roll out money printing machines and get the conference paid from carriage in Maryland, New Jersey, New York City, etc. They fit the criteria of a Big Ten school already (big enrollment, research driven, etc.). If Penn State said, "Add Buffalo or we walk," then the Big Ten says, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out."

^this. Penn St ain't leaving the B1G, no matter how hard ACC or SEC folks wish to think so - I think there is just as much a chance of Alabama leaving the SEC for the ACC or BXII as their is for Penn St to leave.

It took the B1G along time to add penn st. Then along time to expand again. The expansion was suppose to be RU (which was in the works for > 10 years), then nebraska landed in their laps. And even though Mizzou was begging to be invited, they waited to pry Maryland away from the ACC to add RU to get back to an even number.

They are thinking long term. Unless Texas and ND land in their laps, they will wait and cherry pick who they want, when they want - from the ACC. Unfortunately for UCONN, I don't think they are in the plans, and just because they can't get who they want today, doesn't mean they are going to jump the gun and add somebody just for the sake of adding somebody.

The B1G is thinking long term so they added RU and UMD? Listen to yourself.

Thinking long term is waiting for Texas and/or OU. Thinking long term was waiting for Nebraska. Thinking long term was adding PSU in the first place.

Adding Rutgers was not thinking long term. It was a defensive move. RU wasn't even ready for the jump, and neither was UMD. Go back and read the old articles. I remember one in particular where Delaney actually voiced dissatisfaction with RU's progress and I remember a bunch where UMD fans and alumni were actually upset.

(01-20-2016 10:45 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 10:23 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 08:04 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:58 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:47 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  IMHO, JR is predicting the past, the present, and the future. TV markets never mattered. The two things that matter are fans' willingness to watch teams, and their willingness to pay for access to those teams. That has always been the case, and it will continue being the case.

RU and UMD were added for PSU, so unless PSU leaves the B1G, decides that they don't want easy wins in front of alums and recruits, and/or becomes less important in the conference, then neither RU nor UMD will ever get dropped.

And an NFL type model will take a LONG time because there are many, many vested interests, but FWIW, I do think that all massive conferences will break apart in the future, albeit not the immediate future.

Good points...I just don't see a super league of the top 16-24 brands forming.

It won't. IMHO, that's part of why I think that the B1G will have to rethink itself soon. PSU won't tolerate finishing 4th in its division ever year with a guaranteed 3 losses. When PSU is staring down the barrel of continued 7-6 seasons (3 losses to OSU, MSU, and Michigan, a WTF loss, and a crossover/bowl/OOC loss) things will get old quick. Since the Nittany Lions have very real and very legitimate options (i.e. jumping to the ACC), the B1G will have to meet their demands. My guess is that divisions will be reshuffled. PSU's MASSIVE football infrastructure will quickly shift from being an asset to a liability if they keep losing. They literally can't afford to take risks.

Penn State could go to the ACC (or almost anywhere else for that matter) but they'd be stupid to. Likewise, it would be stupid for the Big Ten to cater to Penn State's demands if they didn't plan on doing it anyway. Maryland and Rutgers weren't for Penn State. They were to roll out money printing machines and get the conference paid from carriage in Maryland, New Jersey, New York City, etc. They fit the criteria of a Big Ten school already (big enrollment, research driven, etc.). If Penn State said, "Add Buffalo or we walk," then the Big Ten says, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out."

1. How do RU and UMD add money to the B1G? Why would a cable company arbitrarily pay the conference more per school because of their addition? It would be one thing if they had legions of fans who would be willing to absorb an increase in carriage rates for the content and/or legions of fans to watch the content and by the stuff advertised during the games, but those schools, particularly Rutgers, don't.
2. PSU would only be stupid to bolt if the B1G caved to their demands. Everything is context. Is the Big XII better than the SEC/B1G? No. Is it better for Texas? Yes. Context matters.
3. If losing PSU cost the B1G more than adding SUNY Buffalo, then the B1G would add SUNY Buffalo and call it a move to "further solidify a hold in upstate, NY and strengthen the CIC by adding another AAU member."

1. You must live under a rock. RU and Maryland more than made a pile of cash for the BIG, and yes, the cable companies in the area paid them the carriage fees. Monetarily, adding those two large state universities paid off big time. They don't call RU cable box U for nothing. If you don't believe facts, then I can't help you. But rest assured, RU (and MD) more than added a sh*tload of money to the conference. Rest assured, if they didn't they wouldn't have been added. If Delaney is reading this he's laughing all the way to the bank.

(01-20-2016 10:50 PM)penguino Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 10:45 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 10:23 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 08:04 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:58 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Good points...I just don't see a super league of the top 16-24 brands forming.

It won't. IMHO, that's part of why I think that the B1G will have to rethink itself soon. PSU won't tolerate finishing 4th in its division ever year with a guaranteed 3 losses. When PSU is staring down the barrel of continued 7-6 seasons (3 losses to OSU, MSU, and Michigan, a WTF loss, and a crossover/bowl/OOC loss) things will get old quick. Since the Nittany Lions have very real and very legitimate options (i.e. jumping to the ACC), the B1G will have to meet their demands. My guess is that divisions will be reshuffled. PSU's MASSIVE football infrastructure will quickly shift from being an asset to a liability if they keep losing. They literally can't afford to take risks.

Penn State could go to the ACC (or almost anywhere else for that matter) but they'd be stupid to. Likewise, it would be stupid for the Big Ten to cater to Penn State's demands if they didn't plan on doing it anyway. Maryland and Rutgers weren't for Penn State. They were to roll out money printing machines and get the conference paid from carriage in Maryland, New Jersey, New York City, etc. They fit the criteria of a Big Ten school already (big enrollment, research driven, etc.). If Penn State said, "Add Buffalo or we walk," then the Big Ten says, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out."

1. How do RU and UMD add money to the B1G? Why would a cable company arbitrarily pay the conference more per school because of their addition? It would be one thing if they had legions of fans who would be willing to absorb an increase in carriage rates for the content and/or legions of fans to watch the content and by the stuff advertised during the games, but those schools, particularly Rutgers, don't.
2. PSU would only be stupid to bolt if the B1G caved to their demands. Everything is context. Is the Big XII better than the SEC/B1G? No. Is it better for Texas? Yes. Context matters.
3. If losing PSU cost the B1G more than adding SUNY Buffalo, then the B1G would add SUNY Buffalo and call it a move to "further solidify a hold in upstate, NY and strengthen the CIC by adding another AAU member."

1. You must live under a rock. RU and Maryland more than made a pile of cash for the BIG, and yes, the cable companies in the area paid them the carriage fees. Monetarily, adding those two large state universities paid off big time. They don't call RU cable box U for nothing. If you don't believe facts, then I can't help you. But rest assured, RU (and MD) more than added a sh*tload of money to the conference. Rest assured, if they didn't they wouldn't have been added. If Delaney is reading this he's laughing all the way to the bank.

So in your mind there are legions of RU fans who are invisible and don't watch RU games but are willing to pay for it because "what the heck?"

I have a better theory: The B1G's conference payout has been skyrocketing because of the football reforms and because B1G athletics are very much on the upswing, especially at Michigan (aka arguably the biggest name in college sports).

UConn. A legend in the minds of UConn fans, and that's about it.

They suck in football. Their basketball is a relative flash in the pan thanks to one good coach. (The jury's out on whether their current coach can maintain with HIS recruits). They don't deliver in the NYC market regardless of what UConn fans like to think. BUT...they DO have good women's basketball, so there's that, right?

Anyhow, no. The ACC and B1G shouldn't waste their time on UConn. UConn's right where they should be.

(01-20-2016 10:50 PM)penguino Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 10:45 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 10:23 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 08:04 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:58 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Good points...I just don't see a super league of the top 16-24 brands forming.

It won't. IMHO, that's part of why I think that the B1G will have to rethink itself soon. PSU won't tolerate finishing 4th in its division ever year with a guaranteed 3 losses. When PSU is staring down the barrel of continued 7-6 seasons (3 losses to OSU, MSU, and Michigan, a WTF loss, and a crossover/bowl/OOC loss) things will get old quick. Since the Nittany Lions have very real and very legitimate options (i.e. jumping to the ACC), the B1G will have to meet their demands. My guess is that divisions will be reshuffled. PSU's MASSIVE football infrastructure will quickly shift from being an asset to a liability if they keep losing. They literally can't afford to take risks.

Penn State could go to the ACC (or almost anywhere else for that matter) but they'd be stupid to. Likewise, it would be stupid for the Big Ten to cater to Penn State's demands if they didn't plan on doing it anyway. Maryland and Rutgers weren't for Penn State. They were to roll out money printing machines and get the conference paid from carriage in Maryland, New Jersey, New York City, etc. They fit the criteria of a Big Ten school already (big enrollment, research driven, etc.). If Penn State said, "Add Buffalo or we walk," then the Big Ten says, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out."

1. How do RU and UMD add money to the B1G? Why would a cable company arbitrarily pay the conference more per school because of their addition? It would be one thing if they had legions of fans who would be willing to absorb an increase in carriage rates for the content and/or legions of fans to watch the content and by the stuff advertised during the games, but those schools, particularly Rutgers, don't.
2. PSU would only be stupid to bolt if the B1G caved to their demands. Everything is context. Is the Big XII better than the SEC/B1G? No. Is it better for Texas? Yes. Context matters.
3. If losing PSU cost the B1G more than adding SUNY Buffalo, then the B1G would add SUNY Buffalo and call it a move to "further solidify a hold in upstate, NY and strengthen the CIC by adding another AAU member."

1. You must live under a rock. RU and Maryland more than made a pile of cash for the BIG, and yes, the cable companies in the area paid them the carriage fees. Monetarily, adding those two large state universities paid off big time. They don't call RU cable box U for nothing. If you don't believe facts, then I can't help you. But rest assured, RU (and MD) more than added a sh*tload of money to the conference. Rest assured, if they didn't they wouldn't have been added. If Delaney is reading this he's laughing all the way to the bank.

But there is more than a kernel of truth in what NZ says: The move to add Rutgers and Maryland did have a defensive/reactive element. Specifically, it was a reaction to the ACC adding Pitt and Syracuse and thus putting the Northeast corridor in serious jeopardy.

With the ACC having Pitt, Cuse, BC, and Maryland, it was in prime position to lock up the Northeast corridor for itself. Since the B1G also had strategic ambitions in that area, it had to act in order to block the ACC and stake its claim there otherwise the ACC might have taken Rutgers and sewn the area up. Rutgers served to give the B1G a presence in the NYC area, Maryland killed two birds - putting the B1G in the DC area anchor of the corridor while simultaneously booting the ACC out of it.

I bet those moves don't happen when they did had the ACC not taken Cuse and Pitt.

(01-20-2016 10:37 PM)penguino Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 10:23 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 08:04 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:58 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:47 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  IMHO, JR is predicting the past, the present, and the future. TV markets never mattered. The two things that matter are fans' willingness to watch teams, and their willingness to pay for access to those teams. That has always been the case, and it will continue being the case.

RU and UMD were added for PSU, so unless PSU leaves the B1G, decides that they don't want easy wins in front of alums and recruits, and/or becomes less important in the conference, then neither RU nor UMD will ever get dropped.

And an NFL type model will take a LONG time because there are many, many vested interests, but FWIW, I do think that all massive conferences will break apart in the future, albeit not the immediate future.

Good points...I just don't see a super league of the top 16-24 brands forming.

It won't. IMHO, that's part of why I think that the B1G will have to rethink itself soon. PSU won't tolerate finishing 4th in its division ever year with a guaranteed 3 losses. When PSU is staring down the barrel of continued 7-6 seasons (3 losses to OSU, MSU, and Michigan, a WTF loss, and a crossover/bowl/OOC loss) things will get old quick. Since the Nittany Lions have very real and very legitimate options (i.e. jumping to the ACC), the B1G will have to meet their demands. My guess is that divisions will be reshuffled. PSU's MASSIVE football infrastructure will quickly shift from being an asset to a liability if they keep losing. They literally can't afford to take risks.

Penn State could go to the ACC (or almost anywhere else for that matter) but they'd be stupid to. Likewise, it would be stupid for the Big Ten to cater to Penn State's demands if they didn't plan on doing it anyway. Maryland and Rutgers weren't for Penn State. They were to roll out money printing machines and get the conference paid from carriage in Maryland, New Jersey, New York City, etc. They fit the criteria of a Big Ten school already (big enrollment, research driven, etc.). If Penn State said, "Add Buffalo or we walk," then the Big Ten says, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out."

^this. Penn St ain't leaving the B1G, no matter how hard ACC or SEC folks wish to think so - I think there is just as much a chance of Alabama leaving the SEC for the ACC or BXII as their is for Penn St to leave.

It took the B1G along time to add penn st. Then along time to expand again. The expansion was suppose to be RU (which was in the works for > 10 years), then nebraska landed in their laps. And even though Mizzou was begging to be invited, they waited to pry Maryland away from the ACC to add RU to get back to an even number.

They are thinking long term. Unless Texas and ND land in their laps, they will wait and cherry pick who they want, when they want - from the ACC. Unfortunately for UCONN, I don't think they are in the plans, and just because they can't get who they want today, doesn't mean they are going to jump the gun and add somebody just for the sake of adding somebody.

Hmmm Notre Dame No, GTech No, UNC No, UVA No, Cuse No.....

Delaney got Maryland who was hemorrhaging money from AD mismanagement...

Since the Big 10 and ACC have no need to add UConn (and better options if they wanted to add someone), UConn fans are grasping at their last remaining possibility for P5 membership, the Big 12. Of course, even if the Big 12 desired to expand, the odds that UConn would be one of the preferred schools is slim. I know this is tough for UConn fans to accept, but there are probably 7-8 schools with a better chance at securing a Big 12 invitation than UConn. In fact, the top 10 candidates are probably:

1. Cincinnati
2. BYU
3. Houston
4. Memphis
5. UCF
6. Tulane
7. USF
8. A New Mexico school
9. No expansion
10. UConn

UConn should concentrate on building a northeastern conference they can contend in. Maybe they could convince the Colonial to add them along with Georgetown, Temple and UMass.

I wouldn't go that far...if the B12 adds 4 teams

I could see UConn

(01-20-2016 10:46 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 08:48 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 05:25 PM)connecticutguy Wrote:  The rumor mill is filled with speculation the B12 may ask UConn to join. Should the Big10 or ACC act now to prevent the B12 from getting UConn and -- by so doing -- getting an entrance into the metro NYC TV market?

Yes, though I suspect Kaplony, XLance, Rabbit in Red, and H1 the man with ALL the stroke would disagree.

You don't pay attention. Ask some of those folks that you listed where I project UConn landing.

If I don't pay attention, how is it I know you have ALL the stroke?

(01-20-2016 11:00 PM)Rabbit_in_Red Wrote:  UConn. A legend in the minds of UConn fans, and that's about it.

They suck in football. Their basketball is a relative flash in the pan thanks to one good coach. (The jury's out on whether their current coach can maintain with HIS recruits). They don't deliver in the NYC market regardless of what UConn fans like to think. BUT...they DO have good women's basketball, so there's that, right?

Anyhow, no. The ACC and B1G shouldn't waste their time on UConn. UConn's right where they should be.

Like a siren calls a sailor, here's Rabbit in Red to offer his "expert" opinion on UCONN. Did I say "expert"? Oh I'm sorry, I meant to say tall tale as he's a known liar on all things UCONN.

(01-21-2016 12:35 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 10:37 PM)penguino Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 10:23 PM)GE and MTS Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 08:04 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(01-20-2016 07:58 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  Good points...I just don't see a super league of the top 16-24 brands forming.

It won't. IMHO, that's part of why I think that the B1G will have to rethink itself soon. PSU won't tolerate finishing 4th in its division ever year with a guaranteed 3 losses. When PSU is staring down the barrel of continued 7-6 seasons (3 losses to OSU, MSU, and Michigan, a WTF loss, and a crossover/bowl/OOC loss) things will get old quick. Since the Nittany Lions have very real and very legitimate options (i.e. jumping to the ACC), the B1G will have to meet their demands. My guess is that divisions will be reshuffled. PSU's MASSIVE football infrastructure will quickly shift from being an asset to a liability if they keep losing. They literally can't afford to take risks.

Penn State could go to the ACC (or almost anywhere else for that matter) but they'd be stupid to. Likewise, it would be stupid for the Big Ten to cater to Penn State's demands if they didn't plan on doing it anyway. Maryland and Rutgers weren't for Penn State. They were to roll out money printing machines and get the conference paid from carriage in Maryland, New Jersey, New York City, etc. They fit the criteria of a Big Ten school already (big enrollment, research driven, etc.). If Penn State said, "Add Buffalo or we walk," then the Big Ten says, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out."

^this. Penn St ain't leaving the B1G, no matter how hard ACC or SEC folks wish to think so - I think there is just as much a chance of Alabama leaving the SEC for the ACC or BXII as their is for Penn St to leave.

It took the B1G along time to add penn st. Then along time to expand again. The expansion was suppose to be RU (which was in the works for > 10 years), then nebraska landed in their laps. And even though Mizzou was begging to be invited, they waited to pry Maryland away from the ACC to add RU to get back to an even number.

They are thinking long term. Unless Texas and ND land in their laps, they will wait and cherry pick who they want, when they want - from the ACC. Unfortunately for UCONN, I don't think they are in the plans, and just because they can't get who they want today, doesn't mean they are going to jump the gun and add somebody just for the sake of adding somebody.

Hmmm Notre Dame No, GTech No, UNC No, UVA No, Cuse No.....

Delaney got Maryland who was hemorrhaging money from AD mismanagement...

whatever helps you guys sleep at nite.......and hmmmm. nowhere did I say "cuse" cause "cuse" is like UCONN. not in the B1G's plans......we'll just have to wait and see.