(04-29-2015 10:32 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I agree with OP. Rutgers is in, but doesn't deliver, a market. Neither does Maryland. They both don't fit the attendance and support level profile of other schools that would have jumped.

And if a la carte comes to college football TV, you'll find out rather quickly how much support they really have in DC/Baltimore/Philly/NYC. They have supporters, but that support isn't very strong.

This expansion didn't keep pace with the SEC. Nor can I conceive either Rutgers or Maryland ever really having the support profile of even a mid range SEC program like South Carolina or Missouri.

Ala carte just means that consumers (end users) only have to pay for the content they want.

The deals that content developers (like the BTN) make with content distributors are a level above that.


For example, let's say that Comcast (or whomever) in DC/Balt/Phil/NY allows people to pay for just the channels they want. However, the Fox family of content "channels" (FX, FS1, Fox News, BTN, etc.) can still demand X dollars times the total subscriber base of Comcast in those markets (or in the whole state). Or perhaps they might say something like "we get X dollars for any of your subscriber base that pays for any of our content."

In other words, it isn't necessarily going to be that content distributors are only going to pay content developers X dollars only if/when a customer agrees to pay Y dollars for that channel.


Before you write Maryland off, let me ask you this: 20 years ago would you think that Oregon would be a top college football program in the nation in 20 years?

Maryland has Under Armor, like Oregon has Nike.

(04-29-2015 11:07 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  [quote='Tom in Lazybrook' pid='12018328' dateline='1430321574']

Before you write Maryland off, let me ask you this: 20 years ago would you think that Oregon would be a top college football program in the nation in 20 years?

Maryland has Under Armor, like Oregon has Nike.

I agree. I think Maryland will be fine in football and especially basketball in the B1G. Rutgers has a lot to prove but did deliver cable markets in the NYC DMA and does have good fan support for football.

I think they hit home runs with maryland, rutgers and nebraska. The problem is they have boxed themselves in with expanding to 16. I think it was delusional to think texas, Unc, UVA, or ND would join a 16 team big 10. The big 10 could have landed neb, KU and missouri to jump to 14, than focus on rutgers and maryland to jump to 16. I guess the problem with that move would have been the big 12 is toast which would have moved texas to another league, non-big 10 conference. Yet, the big 10 should have been content at 16 with missouri and Ku to join their current additions. Going forward, i think the big 10 should offer KU for spot 15 than focus on the pool of OU, Missouri, Florida state and maybe Miami for the last spot.

(04-29-2015 08:04 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  Too early to tell but the B1G has driven a wedge into the ACC's northern flank. Maryland and Rutgers were huge pickups geographically.

I agree, that's the biggest justification for the move. The Big Ten needed more of a presence outside its midwestern base, something addressed in this Stewart Mandel column written shortly after the Maryland/Rutgers move was announced.

Maryland became available because they had a new university president who liked the Big Ten well enough to make an end run around the Maryland people who preferred the ACC. (And he wasn't at Maryland when the Big Ten invited Nebraska, so Maryland wasn't available to the Big Ten at that time.) It was a window of opportunity during which it was easier to get Maryland to move, similar to Texas A&M having a window of opportunity to move to the SEC without state-government interference while they had an Aggie governor and an out-of-session state legislature.

(04-29-2015 11:07 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:32 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I agree with OP. Rutgers is in, but doesn't deliver, a market. Neither does Maryland. They both don't fit the attendance and support level profile of other schools that would have jumped.

And if a la carte comes to college football TV, you'll find out rather quickly how much support they really have in DC/Baltimore/Philly/NYC. They have supporters, but that support isn't very strong.

This expansion didn't keep pace with the SEC. Nor can I conceive either Rutgers or Maryland ever really having the support profile of even a mid range SEC program like South Carolina or Missouri.

Ala carte just means that consumers (end users) only have to pay for the content they want.

The deals that content developers (like the BTN) make with content distributors are a level above that.


For example, let's say that Comcast (or whomever) in DC/Balt/Phil/NY allows people to pay for just the channels they want. However, the Fox family of content "channels" (FX, FS1, Fox News, BTN, etc.) can still demand X dollars times the total subscriber base of Comcast in those markets (or in the whole state). Or perhaps they might say something like "we get X dollars for any of your subscriber base that pays for any of our content."

In other words, it isn't necessarily going to be that content distributors are only going to pay content developers X dollars only if/when a customer agrees to pay Y dollars for that channel.


Before you write Maryland off, let me ask you this: 20 years ago would you think that Oregon would be a top college football program in the nation in 20 years?

Maryland has Under Armor, like Oregon has Nike.

I lived in DC for 5 years...I even worked in Prince Georges County for a while. I've been to Byrd Stadium when Maryland was having a good year.

I'm writing them off. Football isn't as popular as it is in other places. There are two NFL teams within 35 miles of the campus. There are 3 within 100 miles of the campus.

Maryland might get hot, but there's way too much competition for them to really do as much as Oregon did with their good run.

---

And Rutgers...dear God. 3 NFL franchises within 50 miles. No history of supporting college football in any significant way. Rutgers will kind of fill up its very small stadium with fans of visiting teams.

---

Watch out for cord cutting. You assume that cable is going to be what people use in 20 years. I don't think that's going to be the case. Its going to turn from potential eyeballs to actual eyeballs.

Face it Maryland and Rutgers look like B1G schools from enrollment numbers if nothing else. The only school in the B1G that resembles and ACC school is Northwestern especially with Maryland leaving.

(04-29-2015 12:07 PM)XLance Wrote:  Face it Maryland and Rutgers look like B1G schools from enrollment numbers if nothing else. The only school in the B1G that resembles and ACC school is Northwestern especially with Maryland leaving.

Realistically Pitt is the only remaining ACC school that "looks like" a B1G school. UVA, UNC and GT are relatively small by B1G standards. Duke is the only other AAU school. Most of the ACC schools are right where they fit best.

(04-29-2015 11:52 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  ?
I lived in DC for 5 years...I even worked in Prince Georges County for a while. I've been to Byrd Stadium when Maryland was having a good year.

I'm writing them off. Football isn't as popular as it is in other places. There are two NFL teams within 35 miles of the campus. There are 3 within 100 miles of the campus.

Maryland might get hot, but there's way too much competition for them to really do as much as Oregon did with their good run.

---

And Rutgers...dear God. 3 NFL franchises within 50 miles. No history of supporting college football in any significant way. Rutgers will kind of fill up its very small stadium with fans of visiting teams.

---

Watch out for cord cutting. You assume that cable is going to be what people use in 20 years. I don't think that's going to be the case. Its going to turn from potential eyeballs to actual eyeballs.

I can't deny the point about proximity of NFL teams. It's a fair point. Particularly since Oregon doesn't have one.

I'm not necessarily saying Maryland will duplicate Oregon. But to say that they'll be to the B1G what Temple was to the Old Big East, I think is ridiculous.

(04-29-2015 12:20 PM)bullet Wrote:  Realistically Pitt is the only remaining ACC school that "looks like" a B1G school. UVA, UNC and GT are relatively small by B1G standards. Duke is the only other AAU school. Most of the ACC schools are right where they fit best.

Yep. Pitt would be a great B1G school, particularly from a research perspective.

But I know they've been with those Big East schools for many years.

(04-29-2015 10:18 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 06:52 AM)omniorange Wrote:  Rutgers was going to be #15 or #16 preferably with Maryland.

They only got pushed up to #14 because the huge targets (ND and Texas) were denied to the B1G and when the ACC expanded with SU and Pitt they were worried that PSU might eventually bolt.

Cheers,
Neil

Rutgers was always out there as a possibility, as the most likely possibility in the east in the same way Utah was for for the PAC-10. I don't think it was a foregone conclusion though. I don't think the Big Ten was looking up and down the ACC, but North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia I think were probably higher on the list (and oddly Georgia Tech, which feels like a poor fit to me being so far away, but was mentioned enough). Similarly, the PAC-10 tried to bypass Utah and go straight for massive expansion from the Big 12.

(04-29-2015 06:58 AM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 11:33 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  How is the state of Texas viewed---- Southwest or Southeast?

The four geographical regions are Northeast, Midwest, South, and West.

Those four regions are usually divided into sub-regions. One version of the geographical sub-regions of the South are West South Central, East South Central, and South Atlantic. Texas would be in the West South Central.

Cheers,
Neil

I always learned in school of 5 regions with Southwest the 5th (and Texas as part of that). I think that's the more traditional teaching (although not one officially used by the federal government).

When speaking about culture, I believe the traditional teaching breakout is 6 regions, New England, Mid-Atlantic, South, Midwest, Southwest and West. Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, and New Mexico are usually the states making up the Southwest.

Cheers,
Neil

Texas is where 3 major Super Regions (The Southeast, The Plains and the Southwest) all meet together and are flavored with our own distinct "Texana" culture.

Houston and East Texas are like the Southeast

Dallas/Fort Worth and North Texas are like the Plains

San Antonio South and West are part of the Southwest

The Hill Country and Central Texas are a hodgepodge of them all.

(04-29-2015 08:04 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 06:52 AM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 06:51 PM)AntiG Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 04:06 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 03:41 PM)TerryD Wrote:  I think that Jim Delany had his sights set in 2010 on Texas and/or Notre Dame, but whiffed.

Everything else since has been Plan B, but Delany has done well with it by having the BTN in his back pocket.

The B1G expansion in 2010 was rumored to be ND, Texas, and Texas A&M.

The latter always wanted the SEC.

Texas claimed to have a "Tech problem".

ND wants to remain independent for football.

As good as JD is, those were HUGE obstacles to overcome, even for him.

Cheers,
Neil

Not really, it was supposed to be ND/Texas and Rutgers if a slot were available, but ND turned them down and Texas is still "considering it" now. Nebraska suddenly became available, so Rutgers was shelved until they were able to get either Texas or another east coast school to come aboard. Fast forward a couple years later and Maryland's chancellor reaches out to Delany and deal is done.

B1G still waiting on Texas' decision as the next step.

Rutgers was going to be #15 or #16 preferably with Maryland.

They only got pushed up to #14 because the huge targets (ND and Texas) were denied to the B1G and when the ACC expanded with SU and Pitt they were worried that PSU might eventually bolt.

Cheers,
Neil

The bigger worry about PSU wasn't that they would bolt but that their brand was being squandered without a supporting cast around them.

Perhaps. But PSU was a loner for a very long time in the B1G without needing two eastern partners. What changed? SU and Pitt joining BC in the ACC with mid-atlantic teams Maryland, UNC, UVa, and VT? While all three of the northeastern teams were in the Big East together that combination wasn't much of a threat to the single titan PSU. But having them join together with the other mid-atlantic programs with FSU, Miami, GT, and Clemson? That had to make the ACC at least enticing to PSU. And the best way to address that was the eastern strategy.

And it was, as Texan Mark pointed out, a good strategy. I believe Gee referred to as the T strategy with SU, Pitt and BC about the top line of the T separated from the base of the T (UVa, VT, UNC) by PSU, RU, and Maryland.

I give the devil JD his due. He is the best of the commissioners, imho. Although sometimes I think he gets too much credit for getting precisely what he wanted. He didn't, in either expansion. But the B1G is secure with what they did get, there is no mistake about that in my mind.

Cheers,
Neil

(04-29-2015 05:32 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  Texas is where 3 major Super Regions (The Southeast, The Plains and the Southwest) all meet together and are flavored with our own distinct "Texana" culture.

Houston and East Texas are like the Southeast

Dallas/Fort Worth and North Texas are like the Plains

San Antonio South and West are part of the Southwest

The Hill Country and Central Texas are a hodgepodge of them all.

A lot of states culturally can be divided up in a similar way. New York has parts of it that are midwestern in culture, a few pockets of being New England in culture, and a lot of it being mid-atlantic in culture.

And this doesn't even account for the influx of non-American, non-Western European culture populations which is true of every state.

Cheers,
Neil

(04-29-2015 05:22 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:18 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 06:52 AM)omniorange Wrote:  Rutgers was going to be #15 or #16 preferably with Maryland.

They only got pushed up to #14 because the huge targets (ND and Texas) were denied to the B1G and when the ACC expanded with SU and Pitt they were worried that PSU might eventually bolt.

Cheers,
Neil

Rutgers was always out there as a possibility, as the most likely possibility in the east in the same way Utah was for for the PAC-10. I don't think it was a foregone conclusion though. I don't think the Big Ten was looking up and down the ACC, but North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia I think were probably higher on the list (and oddly Georgia Tech, which feels like a poor fit to me being so far away, but was mentioned enough). Similarly, the PAC-10 tried to bypass Utah and go straight for massive expansion from the Big 12.

(04-29-2015 06:58 AM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 11:33 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  How is the state of Texas viewed---- Southwest or Southeast?

The four geographical regions are Northeast, Midwest, South, and West.

Those four regions are usually divided into sub-regions. One version of the geographical sub-regions of the South are West South Central, East South Central, and South Atlantic. Texas would be in the West South Central.

Cheers,
Neil

I always learned in school of 5 regions with Southwest the 5th (and Texas as part of that). I think that's the more traditional teaching (although not one officially used by the federal government).

When speaking about culture, I believe the traditional teaching breakout is 6 regions, New England, Mid-Atlantic, South, Midwest, Southwest and West. Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, and New Mexico are usually the states making up the Southwest.

Cheers,
Neil

Definitely different ways to break it up. I always think of the colonial states in and of themselves as New England, Mid-Atlantic, or Southern, but when thinking of large scale big regions of the whole country generally divide the Mid-Atlantic into the northeast and south.

(04-29-2015 05:35 PM)omniorange Wrote:  I give the devil JD his due. He is the best of the commissioners, imho. Although sometimes I think he gets too much credit for getting precisely what he wanted. He didn't, in either expansion. But the B1G is secure with what they did get, there is no mistake about that in my mind.

He's done a good job, but is it the best? As we discussed on this board a few days ago, the Big Ten left a ton of money on the table by waiting so long to add a 12th school. The SEC was 20 years ahead of them on that, and that's on Delany's watch. I think the SEC's 13th and 14th are more valuable to them than Big Ten #13 and #14, as well.

Also, if you want to loosely apply the baseball statistic "Wins Against Replacement" -- any good administrator could have done well with all the advantages the Big Ten has stacked in its favor, and many would have pushed the conference to add Nebraska (or Missouri) much sooner. In contrast, Swofford, with a much weaker hand to begin with, has done really good work. There was much more possible downside for the ACC than there ever was for the Big Ten. If the ACC expansion moves had not gone as well, their presidents might have bickered their way into not adding any schools when they added Miami, VT, and then BC, and then maybe they're not strong enough to consolidate with the more recent moves that were made as the Big East crumbled. For that matter, if those things went poorly for the ACC, then maybe they wouldn't have even been big enough or strong enough to be "P5" when the move from the BCS to the new playoff structure was made.

(04-29-2015 09:50 AM)JRsec Wrote:  I think the SEC will make a run for Texas and Oklahoma and if they have to they might take Texas Tech and Oklahoma State to get them. I'm sure the SEC will continue to eye the markets in Virginia and North Carolina, but unless there is major instability created within the ACC it won't happen. If however the Big 10 is able to pick up someone like Virginia Tech the SEC may make a push for brands within our footprint just to ensure the regional brand identity. Clemson and Florida State would be the brands most closely identified with our own and they may or may not get picked up to add content and protect that brand. We'll see. But in any case no ACC school will be coming to the SEC unless it is a move that ESPN wants to make to protect and consolidate property if times prove to be uncertain again.

Texas Tech offers a ton of eyeballs and fans in the state of Texas. Adding the 3 largest schools in Texas with the most fans automatically makes the entire state covered in SEC programming, fans and big time nationally relevant match ups.

I still believe that Texas Tech will end up in the PAC but the SEC would not be bad at all. Having LSU, Alabama, Auburn come to Lubbock would be a awesome. I would also add that Lubbock would be in the top 5-7 cities in terms of population.

(04-29-2015 05:22 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:18 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 06:52 AM)omniorange Wrote:  Rutgers was going to be #15 or #16 preferably with Maryland.

They only got pushed up to #14 because the huge targets (ND and Texas) were denied to the B1G and when the ACC expanded with SU and Pitt they were worried that PSU might eventually bolt.

Cheers,
Neil

Rutgers was always out there as a possibility, as the most likely possibility in the east in the same way Utah was for for the PAC-10. I don't think it was a foregone conclusion though. I don't think the Big Ten was looking up and down the ACC, but North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia I think were probably higher on the list (and oddly Georgia Tech, which feels like a poor fit to me being so far away, but was mentioned enough). Similarly, the PAC-10 tried to bypass Utah and go straight for massive expansion from the Big 12.

(04-29-2015 06:58 AM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 11:33 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  How is the state of Texas viewed---- Southwest or Southeast?

The four geographical regions are Northeast, Midwest, South, and West.

Those four regions are usually divided into sub-regions. One version of the geographical sub-regions of the South are West South Central, East South Central, and South Atlantic. Texas would be in the West South Central.

Cheers,
Neil

I always learned in school of 5 regions with Southwest the 5th (and Texas as part of that). I think that's the more traditional teaching (although not one officially used by the federal government).

When speaking about culture, I believe the traditional teaching breakout is 6 regions, New England, Mid-Atlantic, South, Midwest, Southwest and West. Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, and New Mexico are usually the states making up the Southwest.

Cheers,
Neil

If you ever were in Vidor, Texas (just across the Louisiana border), you would think it more like Mississippi than New Mexico.

I think Texas is viewed like this--
Anything east of Houston/Baytown up to Lufkin/Nacogdoches is southeast with the most similarities to Louisiana & Mississippi etc

Anything west & north of Houston is Southwest with very little similarities with the rest of the country.

(04-29-2015 06:54 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 05:22 PM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:18 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 06:52 AM)omniorange Wrote:  Rutgers was going to be #15 or #16 preferably with Maryland.

They only got pushed up to #14 because the huge targets (ND and Texas) were denied to the B1G and when the ACC expanded with SU and Pitt they were worried that PSU might eventually bolt.

Cheers,
Neil

Rutgers was always out there as a possibility, as the most likely possibility in the east in the same way Utah was for for the PAC-10. I don't think it was a foregone conclusion though. I don't think the Big Ten was looking up and down the ACC, but North Carolina, Duke, and Virginia I think were probably higher on the list (and oddly Georgia Tech, which feels like a poor fit to me being so far away, but was mentioned enough). Similarly, the PAC-10 tried to bypass Utah and go straight for massive expansion from the Big 12.

(04-29-2015 06:58 AM)omniorange Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 11:33 PM)RaiderRed Wrote:  How is the state of Texas viewed---- Southwest or Southeast?

The four geographical regions are Northeast, Midwest, South, and West.

Those four regions are usually divided into sub-regions. One version of the geographical sub-regions of the South are West South Central, East South Central, and South Atlantic. Texas would be in the West South Central.

Cheers,
Neil

I always learned in school of 5 regions with Southwest the 5th (and Texas as part of that). I think that's the more traditional teaching (although not one officially used by the federal government).

When speaking about culture, I believe the traditional teaching breakout is 6 regions, New England, Mid-Atlantic, South, Midwest, Southwest and West. Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, and New Mexico are usually the states making up the Southwest.

Cheers,
Neil

If you ever were in Vidor, Texas (just across the Louisiana border), you would think it more like Mississippi than New Mexico.

Didn't Vidor have a sign posted as you came into town that was racial?

Honestly, once you leave Baytown, it's hard to distinguish east Texas and Louisiana.

(04-29-2015 11:52 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 11:07 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(04-29-2015 10:32 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I agree with OP. Rutgers is in, but doesn't deliver, a market. Neither does Maryland. They both don't fit the attendance and support level profile of other schools that would have jumped.

And if a la carte comes to college football TV, you'll find out rather quickly how much support they really have in DC/Baltimore/Philly/NYC. They have supporters, but that support isn't very strong.

This expansion didn't keep pace with the SEC. Nor can I conceive either Rutgers or Maryland ever really having the support profile of even a mid range SEC program like South Carolina or Missouri.

Ala carte just means that consumers (end users) only have to pay for the content they want.

The deals that content developers (like the BTN) make with content distributors are a level above that.


For example, let's say that Comcast (or whomever) in DC/Balt/Phil/NY allows people to pay for just the channels they want. However, the Fox family of content "channels" (FX, FS1, Fox News, BTN, etc.) can still demand X dollars times the total subscriber base of Comcast in those markets (or in the whole state). Or perhaps they might say something like "we get X dollars for any of your subscriber base that pays for any of our content."

In other words, it isn't necessarily going to be that content distributors are only going to pay content developers X dollars only if/when a customer agrees to pay Y dollars for that channel.


Before you write Maryland off, let me ask you this: 20 years ago would you think that Oregon would be a top college football program in the nation in 20 years?

Maryland has Under Armor, like Oregon has Nike.

I lived in DC for 5 years...I even worked in Prince Georges County for a while. I've been to Byrd Stadium when Maryland was having a good year.

I'm writing them off. Football isn't as popular as it is in other places. There are two NFL teams within 35 miles of the campus. There are 3 within 100 miles of the campus.

Maryland might get hot, but there's way too much competition for them to really do as much as Oregon did with their good run.

---

And Rutgers...dear God. 3 NFL franchises within 50 miles. No history of supporting college football in any significant way. Rutgers will kind of fill up its very small stadium with fans of visiting teams.

---

Watch out for cord cutting. You assume that cable is going to be what people use in 20 years. I don't think that's going to be the case. Its going to turn from potential eyeballs to actual eyeballs.

Tom, I'm sure you're right about cord-cutting. But do some "cocktail napkin" math and calculate how much more revenue the SEC & B1G might earn in those twenty years. It's not insubstantial. You refer to "potential eyeballs". The eyeballs may be potential, but the carriage fees are real.
SEC & B1G are in no hurry to grow. They will take some time to socialize the newest members of their conferences. When the time comes, if ever, the juiciest prey for both conferences are the states of Virginia and NC. Large and growing populations, compact geographic additions. Delany likes these two, in particular, because of the huge numbers of B1G graduates among the "immigrant" populations there. Same applied to Rutgers and Maryland