(07-06-2019 01:32 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(07-06-2019 01:25 PM)Mav Wrote:  

(07-06-2019 12:46 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I stand by the conclusion the Big Ten's 21st Century expansion has been underwhelming and the returns on that investment will continue to diminish.

Nebraska is a blue blood that's past its prime and while they have some brand equity they are going to continue to fade. Sure they were great once but so too were Army and Yale, neither of which have made any buzz for three quarters of a century.

Maryland is a basketball school. Rutgers really has no athletic accolades to boast about. You can argue academic and institutional fit and that they help pad the football records od their conference mates but Indiana, Purdue, and Illinois were doing just fine in that role.

Yes, the Big Ten is rolling in money right now but Maryland and Rutgers only improved the T3 revenue and that's solely based on their location in large population centers. The media market model has been replaced by a content driven one so while profitable in the short term, the long term gains will ultimately be minimal.

Texas A&M and Notre Dame were the only crown jewel prizes that moved and the value of the Notre Dame acquisition is diminished by the fact that they only got 5/8ths of their football.

Overall, of the 5 Power Conferences they faired 2nd best in realignment, ahead of the Big 12, PAC 12, and ACC, but it could have and should have been a more decisive expansion.

Not really sure how aTm is a better program than Nebraska. They haven't accomplished much in basketball and apart from Manziel they haven't done anything really all that remarkable in football either. They don't offer much to the SEC other than a chance for Houston recruits to visit close to home once every other year.

A&M has been a slightly above average performer from a large population state. Nebraska has been a barely above average performer from a small population state. Advantage A&M and it really isn't that close.