B1G was obviously to blinded by $$ to be concerned about athletics.

(04-19-2017 04:57 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  B1G was obviously to blinded by $$ to be concerned about athletics.

The ACC was obviously blinded by $$ to be concerned about academics.

(04-19-2017 07:16 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 04:57 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  B1G was obviously to blinded by $$ to be concerned about athletics.

The ACC was obviously blinded by $$ to be concerned about academics.

Hahahaha

(04-19-2017 07:16 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 04:57 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  B1G was obviously to blinded by $$ to be concerned about athletics.

The ACC was obviously blinded by $$ to be concerned about academics.

This whole exchange is funny because conferences exist really for one reason... to benefit (i.e. $$$$) the member institutions. The whole gist behind the conference-shuffle is ALL ABOUT the $$$.

So, yeah, the Big Ten was not looking for a competitive power-house when they added Maryland and Rutgers...it was all about the cable TV carriage fees and market-share. And the ACC was not looking for "academics" when they added Louisville...they went out and got the best Athletic Department out there. And I think neither the B10 nor the ACC really regret the decisions.

The irony is anyone who acts like it's NOT about the $$$. If any of the available schools or conferences "moved the needle" they wouldn't be available today. That's the one thing the AAC apologists seem to skip right over... The Conference is going to get a massive pay-day...because??? Because we're now "stable" (but only because all the other realignment stuff is done). Because we were "undervalued" on the last go-around (because ESPN and the other networks have all this extra cash lying around...). Because we "deserve" it (like "deserving" has anything to do with anything...). These are business decisions, pure and simple.

Or to bring it back to the start... It's always all about the $$$.

(04-19-2017 07:35 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 07:16 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 04:57 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  B1G was obviously to blinded by $$ to be concerned about athletics.

The ACC was obviously blinded by $$ to be concerned about academics.

This whole exchange is funny because conferences exist really for one reason... to benefit (i.e. $$$$) the member institutions. The whole gist behind the conference-shuffle is ALL ABOUT the $$$.

So, yeah, the Big Ten was not looking for a competitive power-house when they added Maryland and Rutgers...it was all about the cable TV carriage fees and market-share. And the ACC was not looking for "academics" when they added Louisville...they went out and got the best Athletic Department out there. And I think neither the B10 nor the ACC really regret the decisions.

The irony is anyone who acts like it's NOT about the $$$. If any of the available schools or conferences "moved the needle" they wouldn't be available today. That's the one thing the AAC apologists seem to skip right over... The Conference is going to get a massive pay-day...because??? Because we're now "stable" (but only because all the other realignment stuff is done). Because we were "undervalued" on the last go-around (because ESPN and the other networks have all this extra cash lying around...). Because we "deserve" it (like "deserving" has anything to do with anything...). These are business decisions, pure and simple.

Or to bring it back to the start... It's always all about the $$$.

My favorite is the "deserve it" followed closely by "let's add Air Force and Army to the AAC and the P5 will be forced to accept us or we will sue because it will be unpatriotic."

(04-19-2017 07:35 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  This whole exchange is funny because conferences exist really for one reason... to benefit (i.e. $$$$) the member institutions. The whole gist behind the conference-shuffle is ALL ABOUT the $$$.

My first reaction is to say it's not ALL about the money. Some of it is academic politics. But then again, those who have political power in academics tend to have it because of money. So it would be more precise to say, it's not just about the money in university sports ... it's about the money in universities in general.

And it has been since the 1950's and the rise of the "football factory" programs. A big school playing for a conference championship helped keep students, alumni and townspeople coming to the games as the season progressed. A lesser school in the conference got a big home crowd or two when the big school came to town, and often could also develop a rivalry with another lesser school in the conference.

But it was about ticket sales. That's what generated the dollars to keep feeding the beast.

What's changed is what drives the money. And that will change again. And that will lead to more realignment.

But while other aspects of money in universities will enter into it, it will always be primarily about the money generated by the athletics at the big sports schools ... they are the ones that drive the arms races for sports facilities and coaches' salaries and all the rest.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(04-19-2017 04:57 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  B1G was obviously to blinded by $$ to be concerned about athletics.

Maryland was clearly the #13 that drove expansion ... Rutgers was just an available school to pair with Maryland that fit the Big Ten profile and would grab some extra cable carriage $$$.

Grabbing Maryland was all a plot to move into a dominant position in Lacrosse, just in case college football gets shut down one day by all that concussion stuff.

(04-19-2017 07:16 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 04:57 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  B1G was obviously to blinded by $$ to be concerned about athletics.

The ACC was obviously blinded by $$ to be concerned about academics.

OK that was pretty funny.

(04-19-2017 07:16 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 04:57 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  B1G was obviously to blinded by $$ to be concerned about athletics.

The ACC was obviously blinded by $$ to be concerned about academics.

I love how you have an argument for every person in this thread.

Trollytrolltroll.

(04-20-2017 12:18 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 07:16 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 04:57 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  B1G was obviously to blinded by $$ to be concerned about athletics.

The ACC was obviously blinded by $$ to be concerned about academics.

I love how you have an argument for every person in this thread.

Trollytrolltroll.

You mean like you arguing with all those people who disagree with you?

(04-19-2017 07:16 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 04:57 PM)Lenvillecards Wrote:  B1G was obviously to blinded by $$ to be concerned about athletics.

The ACC was obviously blinded by $$ to be concerned about academics.

Louisville didn't bring any additional $ to the ACC & they definitely overlooked academics, it was purely athletic. Either way, whatever reason Louisville & Rutgers were added, they both benefited. The conference benefited as well, the B1G with more $ & the ACC with enhanced athletics.