Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Big home run
Author Message
The Cutter of Bish Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,247
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 78
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #41
RE: Big home run
The zipper idea isn't bad for the Big Ten. What really messes things up are those from the original ten that are unwilling to give others up on a yearly basis. "Tradition" has been this thing the Big Ten will jam down your throat...with the original ten, scaled to serve "the game." There's no reason you couldn't have a cluster of three eastern schools and then four western ones in one side, four eastern, three western in the other. The problem is, when you cluster those like PSU, UMD, and Rutgers...are the western schools like Minnesota and Wisconsin going to throw fits because they lose Iowa, Illinois, Purdue, and Northwestern, while again being distanced from Ohio State and the Michigans?

And if I'm Nebraska, I'm still a little annoyed by what lengths were given to help Maryland not only get money quickly, but how Maryland football gets the three biggest football programs making bi-yearly visits, whereas Nebraska has to wait. Nebraska lost its yearly clashes with Oklahoma, with these political additions getting to hog both the Longhorns AND Sooners. Among a shopping list of other gripes, Nebraska has enough, and walks away, feeling like a trade of Oklahoma and others is worthwhile for Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State. Only...it never happens.

And, really, if I'm Nebraska, and I'm seeing most of High Point Solutions empty because Ohio State is beating Rutgers like a drum, I'm getting really pissed. Concede what you must...but giving both Maryland AND Rutgers that kind of rub...I wouldn't say the "home run" of Maryland is one keeps the score well propped for the Big Ten, because there are other stressors to consider. Heck, are we forgetting that UMD was picked to appease/replace Penn State?
(This post was last modified: 01-08-2018 09:36 AM by The Cutter of Bish.)
01-08-2018 09:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gamecock Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,905
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 73
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #42
RE: Big home run
(01-08-2018 09:32 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  The zipper idea isn't bad for the Big Ten. What really messes things up are those from the original ten that are unwilling to give others up on a yearly basis. "Tradition" has been this thing the Big Ten will jam down your throat...with the original ten, scaled to serve "the game." There's no reason you couldn't have a cluster of three eastern schools and then four western ones in one side, four eastern, three western in the other. The problem is, when you cluster those like PSU, UMD, and Rutgers...are the western schools like Minnesota and Wisconsin going to throw fits because they lose Iowa, Illinois, Purdue, and Northwestern, while again being distanced from Ohio State and the Michigans?

And if I'm Nebraska, I'm still a little annoyed by what lengths were given to help Maryland not only get money quickly, but how Maryland football gets the three biggest football programs making bi-yearly visits, whereas Nebraska has to wait. Nebraska lost its yearly clashes with Oklahoma, with these political additions getting to hog both the Longhorns AND Sooners. Among a shopping list of other gripes, Nebraska has enough, and walks away, feeling like a trade of Oklahoma and others is worthwhile for Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State. Only...it never happens.

And, really, if I'm Nebraska, and I'm seeing most of High Point Solutions empty because Ohio State is beating Rutgers like a drum, I'm getting really pissed. Concede what you must...but giving both Maryland AND Rutgers that kind of rub...I wouldn't say the "home run" of Maryland is one keeps the score well propped for the Big Ten, because there are other stressors to consider. Heck, are we forgetting that UMD was picked to appease/replace Penn State?

Nebraska could solve much of this problem by adding Oklahoma to the non-conference schedule
01-08-2018 09:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Cutter of Bish Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,247
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 78
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #43
RE: Big home run
(01-08-2018 09:50 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Nebraska could solve much of this problem by adding Oklahoma to the non-conference schedule

I totally agree. It's eventually coming back, perhaps without regularity, but, this was a casualty with the move. And, not just Oklahoma...EVERY Big 8 foe. That's not the Big Ten's fault...Nebraska didn't do its business when it looked for the escape hatch. I'm looking at how Colorado struggled early on in the PAC and had a lot of questions about how those two didn't find each other almost immediately. Quite honestly, renewing THAT game would get Nebraska back on the right track because it puts the darn school back into the "west coast."

I'll say the same of the other three "new" Big Ten members. PSU could have fought harder to retain Pitt, maybe even on its place in the schedule. Rutgers didn't even seem to bother keeping Army and Navy annual things (but, sure, please do keep your MEAC body-baggers), and we know the UMD-ACC nuclear war pretty much destroyed Maryland's bridges to those ACC rivals. And these games are easy money for all. And more likely to find themselves on the dial, rather than relegated to other outlets. Clearly, with the Big Ten trying to mandate its members schedule P5 or "special non-P5 exceptions," the conference gets it. But you can't tell university leaders anything.
(This post was last modified: 01-08-2018 10:30 AM by The Cutter of Bish.)
01-08-2018 10:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Gamecock Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,905
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 73
I Root For: South Carolina
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Big home run
(01-08-2018 10:09 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 09:50 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Nebraska could solve much of this problem by adding Oklahoma to the non-conference schedule

I totally agree. It's eventually coming back, perhaps without regularity, but, this was a casualty with the move. And, not just Oklahoma...EVERY Big 8 foe. That's not the Big Ten's fault...Nebraska didn't do its business when it looked for the escape hatch. I'm looking at how Colorado struggled early on in the PAC and had a lot of questions about how those two didn't find each other almost immediately. Quite honestly, renewing THAT game would get Nebraska back on the right track because it puts the darn school back into the "west coast."

I'll say the same of the other three "new" Big Ten members. PSU could have fought harder to retain Pitt, maybe even on its place in the schedule. Rutgers didn't even seem to bother keeping Army and Navy annual things (but, sure, please do keep your MEAC body-baggers), and we know the UMD-ACC nuclear war pretty much destroyed Maryland's bridges to those ACC rivals. And these games are easy money for all. And more likely to find themselves on the dial, rather than relegated to other outlets. Clearly, with the Big Ten trying to mandate its members schedule P5 or "special non-P5 exceptions," the conference gets it. But you can't tell university leaders anything.

Looking at future schedules, they are doing their best to bring both games back:

Oklahoma: 2021, 2022, 2029, 2030
Colorado: 2018, 2019, 2023, 2024

So that's 8 times in the next 13 years, which is a start. I have to imagine Frost wants to bring both games back and if he has a high level of success it makes it easier for the AD to justify scheduling those.
01-08-2018 10:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BadgerMJ Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 786
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 55
I Root For: Wisconsin / ND
Location: Wisconsin
Post: #45
RE: Big home run
(01-08-2018 10:48 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 10:09 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 09:50 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Nebraska could solve much of this problem by adding Oklahoma to the non-conference schedule

I totally agree. It's eventually coming back, perhaps without regularity, but, this was a casualty with the move. And, not just Oklahoma...EVERY Big 8 foe. That's not the Big Ten's fault...Nebraska didn't do its business when it looked for the escape hatch. I'm looking at how Colorado struggled early on in the PAC and had a lot of questions about how those two didn't find each other almost immediately. Quite honestly, renewing THAT game would get Nebraska back on the right track because it puts the darn school back into the "west coast."

I'll say the same of the other three "new" Big Ten members. PSU could have fought harder to retain Pitt, maybe even on its place in the schedule. Rutgers didn't even seem to bother keeping Army and Navy annual things (but, sure, please do keep your MEAC body-baggers), and we know the UMD-ACC nuclear war pretty much destroyed Maryland's bridges to those ACC rivals. And these games are easy money for all. And more likely to find themselves on the dial, rather than relegated to other outlets. Clearly, with the Big Ten trying to mandate its members schedule P5 or "special non-P5 exceptions," the conference gets it. But you can't tell university leaders anything.

Looking at future schedules, they are doing their best to bring both games back:

Oklahoma: 2021, 2022, 2029, 2030
Colorado: 2018, 2019, 2023, 2024

So that's 8 times in the next 13 years, which is a start. I have to imagine Frost wants to bring both games back and if he has a high level of success it makes it easier for the AD to justify scheduling those.

With any luck those 2029/30 games will be conference games......
01-08-2018 10:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CliftonAve Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 12,184
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 345
I Root For: Bearcats
Location:
Post: #46
RE: Big home run
Maybe its just me... but I think the ACC has come out in a much better situation than Maryland in all of this. Maryland is going to continue to struggle to be middle of the road in FB and they haven't exactly torn it up in hoops either since they joined the B1G.

Meanwhile, despite the issues off the field at Louisville, North Carolina, Miami, etc. all those schools still land on their feet and ESPN keeps pumping them up with additional exposure and $$$.
01-08-2018 11:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 13,257
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 413
I Root For: California
Location: Bear Territory
Post: #47
RE: Big home run
(01-08-2018 10:53 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 10:48 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 10:09 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 09:50 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Nebraska could solve much of this problem by adding Oklahoma to the non-conference schedule

I totally agree. It's eventually coming back, perhaps without regularity, but, this was a casualty with the move. And, not just Oklahoma...EVERY Big 8 foe. That's not the Big Ten's fault...Nebraska didn't do its business when it looked for the escape hatch. I'm looking at how Colorado struggled early on in the PAC and had a lot of questions about how those two didn't find each other almost immediately. Quite honestly, renewing THAT game would get Nebraska back on the right track because it puts the darn school back into the "west coast."

I'll say the same of the other three "new" Big Ten members. PSU could have fought harder to retain Pitt, maybe even on its place in the schedule. Rutgers didn't even seem to bother keeping Army and Navy annual things (but, sure, please do keep your MEAC body-baggers), and we know the UMD-ACC nuclear war pretty much destroyed Maryland's bridges to those ACC rivals. And these games are easy money for all. And more likely to find themselves on the dial, rather than relegated to other outlets. Clearly, with the Big Ten trying to mandate its members schedule P5 or "special non-P5 exceptions," the conference gets it. But you can't tell university leaders anything.

Looking at future schedules, they are doing their best to bring both games back:

Oklahoma: 2021, 2022, 2029, 2030
Colorado: 2018, 2019, 2023, 2024

So that's 8 times in the next 13 years, which is a start. I have to imagine Frost wants to bring both games back and if he has a high level of success it makes it easier for the AD to justify scheduling those.

With any luck those 2029/30 games will be conference games......

As a Wisconsin fan, you shouldn't want that to happen.

The larger the Big Ten becomes, the more likely an east-west split becomes. And it's very possible that such a split would leave Wisconsin in the "Nebraska-Oklahoma conference" rather than the far more desirable "Ohio State-Michigan conference".
01-08-2018 11:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Cutter of Bish Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,247
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 78
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #48
RE: Big home run
(01-08-2018 11:15 AM)Wedge Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 10:53 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 10:48 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 10:09 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 09:50 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Nebraska could solve much of this problem by adding Oklahoma to the non-conference schedule

I totally agree. It's eventually coming back, perhaps without regularity, but, this was a casualty with the move. And, not just Oklahoma...EVERY Big 8 foe. That's not the Big Ten's fault...Nebraska didn't do its business when it looked for the escape hatch. I'm looking at how Colorado struggled early on in the PAC and had a lot of questions about how those two didn't find each other almost immediately. Quite honestly, renewing THAT game would get Nebraska back on the right track because it puts the darn school back into the "west coast."

I'll say the same of the other three "new" Big Ten members. PSU could have fought harder to retain Pitt, maybe even on its place in the schedule. Rutgers didn't even seem to bother keeping Army and Navy annual things (but, sure, please do keep your MEAC body-baggers), and we know the UMD-ACC nuclear war pretty much destroyed Maryland's bridges to those ACC rivals. And these games are easy money for all. And more likely to find themselves on the dial, rather than relegated to other outlets. Clearly, with the Big Ten trying to mandate its members schedule P5 or "special non-P5 exceptions," the conference gets it. But you can't tell university leaders anything.

Looking at future schedules, they are doing their best to bring both games back:

Oklahoma: 2021, 2022, 2029, 2030
Colorado: 2018, 2019, 2023, 2024

So that's 8 times in the next 13 years, which is a start. I have to imagine Frost wants to bring both games back and if he has a high level of success it makes it easier for the AD to justify scheduling those.

With any luck those 2029/30 games will be conference games......

As a Wisconsin fan, you shouldn't want that to happen.

The larger the Big Ten becomes, the more likely an east-west split becomes. And it's very possible that such a split would leave Wisconsin in the "Nebraska-Oklahoma conference" rather than the far more desirable "Ohio State-Michigan conference".

Split the difference and hope they become a reincarnation of B1G-PAC?

From whatever has been said about future B1G growth, while the Big XII's "imminent" collapse makes sense for potential members, why the conference has mentioned southeastern growth still has me wondering what's going on. For sure, it would push the western boundary a bit further east, giving Wisconsin and others something from Michigan back.

I think the ACC was right to push for the single-line thing with CCG and scheduling autonomy. The Big Ten fighting that is needless...you can retain/preserve so much more out of this, as well as lay the foundation down for semi-final games if universal thirteen-game schedules remain a challenge obtaining.
(This post was last modified: 01-08-2018 11:34 AM by The Cutter of Bish.)
01-08-2018 11:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BadgerMJ Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 786
Joined: Mar 2017
Reputation: 55
I Root For: Wisconsin / ND
Location: Wisconsin
Post: #49
RE: Big home run
(01-08-2018 11:15 AM)Wedge Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 10:53 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 10:48 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 10:09 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 09:50 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  Nebraska could solve much of this problem by adding Oklahoma to the non-conference schedule

I totally agree. It's eventually coming back, perhaps without regularity, but, this was a casualty with the move. And, not just Oklahoma...EVERY Big 8 foe. That's not the Big Ten's fault...Nebraska didn't do its business when it looked for the escape hatch. I'm looking at how Colorado struggled early on in the PAC and had a lot of questions about how those two didn't find each other almost immediately. Quite honestly, renewing THAT game would get Nebraska back on the right track because it puts the darn school back into the "west coast."

I'll say the same of the other three "new" Big Ten members. PSU could have fought harder to retain Pitt, maybe even on its place in the schedule. Rutgers didn't even seem to bother keeping Army and Navy annual things (but, sure, please do keep your MEAC body-baggers), and we know the UMD-ACC nuclear war pretty much destroyed Maryland's bridges to those ACC rivals. And these games are easy money for all. And more likely to find themselves on the dial, rather than relegated to other outlets. Clearly, with the Big Ten trying to mandate its members schedule P5 or "special non-P5 exceptions," the conference gets it. But you can't tell university leaders anything.

Looking at future schedules, they are doing their best to bring both games back:

Oklahoma: 2021, 2022, 2029, 2030
Colorado: 2018, 2019, 2023, 2024

So that's 8 times in the next 13 years, which is a start. I have to imagine Frost wants to bring both games back and if he has a high level of success it makes it easier for the AD to justify scheduling those.

With any luck those 2029/30 games will be conference games......

As a Wisconsin fan, you shouldn't want that to happen.

The larger the Big Ten becomes, the more likely an east-west split becomes. And it's very possible that such a split would leave Wisconsin in the "Nebraska-Oklahoma conference" rather than the far more desirable "Ohio State-Michigan conference".

I want what's best for the B1G and adding OU would be good for the conference.

That being said, Purdue, NW, or U of I would be more likely to be shifted east, I don't think they'd break up the Iowa/WI/MN triangle.
01-08-2018 11:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MissouriStateBears Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,227
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 74
I Root For: Missouri State
Location:
Post: #50
RE: Big home run
(01-08-2018 09:32 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  And if I'm Nebraska, I'm still a little annoyed by what lengths were given to help Maryland not only get money quickly, but how Maryland football gets the three biggest football programs making bi-yearly visits, whereas Nebraska has to wait. Nebraska lost its yearly clashes with Oklahoma, with these political additions getting to hog both the Longhorns AND Sooners. Among a shopping list of other gripes, Nebraska has enough, and walks away, feeling like a trade of Oklahoma and others is worthwhile for Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State. Only...it never happens.

Nebraska sells out regardless who shows up to Lincoln.
01-08-2018 11:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NJ2MDTerp Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 968
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation: 21
I Root For: Maryland
Location:
Post: #51
RE: Big home run
(01-07-2018 08:38 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  It’s worked out well for Maryland
Yes, indeed!
01-08-2018 11:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Cutter of Bish Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,247
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 78
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #52
RE: Big home run
(01-08-2018 11:50 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  Nebraska sells out regardless who shows up to Lincoln.

Right, but coming from someone who went to a school where that also used to be true, that eventually ends if the success and regional association ends. It did at Penn State...when PSU could pretty much show up and get no worse than third or fourth in the conference, the 100K+ crowds were easy. Then came the 2000-2004 stretch, and the lack of success only pronounced the inability of other Big Ten schools (I'm looking at those in Illinois, Indiana, and Minnesota) to show up. And it never really bounced back between 2005-2010/11 (ahead of the Sandusky scandal). Especially more pronounced in some of the extremely lousy/shameful non-conference games.

It's still relatively new in Lincoln. But just wait as Maryland and Rutgers become more common to the schedule, as well as Indiana or Purdue. Those guys (IU and PU) suck when it comes to fan travel (we're lucky at PSU that Rutgers and UMD draw both ways). And they aren't fun games to watch, unless you like watching the bench play early on.
(This post was last modified: 01-08-2018 12:48 PM by The Cutter of Bish.)
01-08-2018 12:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,260
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 783
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #53
RE: Big home run
(01-08-2018 12:27 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 11:50 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  Nebraska sells out regardless who shows up to Lincoln.

Right, but coming from someone who went to a school where that also used to be true, that eventually ends if the success and regional association ends. It did at Penn State...when PSU could pretty much show up and get no worse than third or fourth in the conference, the 100K+ crowds were easy. Then came the 2000-2004 stretch, and the lack of success only pronounced the inability of other Big Ten schools (I'm looking at those in Illinois, Indiana, and Minnesota) to show up. And it never really bounced back between 2005-2010/11 (ahead of the Sandusky scandal). Especially more pronounced in some of the extremely lousy/shameful non-conference games.

It's still relatively new in Lincoln. But just wait as Maryland and Rutgers become more common to the schedule, as well as Indiana or Purdue. Those guys (IU and PU) suck when it comes to fan travel (we're lucky at PSU that Rutgers and UMD draw both ways). And they aren't fun games to watch, unless you like watching the bench play early on.
There have been two fatal flaws in realignment of late. First, the abandonment of the games that built the programs history. It's one thing for Nebraska to leave behind Iowa State, Kansas, and Kansas State. It's quite another to drop half of your national identity by failing to keep Oklahoma on the schedule. Such moves cut ties not only to a national appeal for that game, but to alumni for whom that game was the cornerstone of the schedule.

Second, the moves, and cut relationships, tend to lessen the importance of the transferring school to the prospects in their old recruiting grounds. Kids tend to want to play close enough to home for their family to attend. Taking one school out of its old context with no other old ties kills their relevance among their old relations. And that hurts recruiting.

In Nebraska's case they not only cut their most visible annual game, but suffered greatly from the loss of emphasis in their old recruiting grounds. Adding the fact that they are no longer permitted so many county scholarships from their home state to fund walk ons and the whole focus of their recruiting strategy was turned on its head. It's no wonder they've had great difficulties.

But the Big 10 was not alone in this mistake. While Texas A&M had ties to some SEC schools (especially with a historical rivalry with L.S.U. which though dormant for years was still in the public's memory), Missouri did not have a single school in the SEC outside of A&M that they had even 10 games with historically and the vast majority of the SEC had faced Mizzou less than 5 times in over a 100 year history of the game. While virtually limited to regional scope, the Kansas game defined both of their football programs. Missouri is struggling for an identity touchstone because of it. It will take time for Arkansas to become that rival they so deeply miss.

And while A&M is fine, they would be wise to encourage the return of Texas to their annual schedule. So many of their traditions are built on that rivalry that one day they will wake up and find those traditions to be hollow without Bevo to hate.

IMO if the SEC wants to complete its expansion, and the ACC is truly off limits, then pushing hard for Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas, and doing what it takes to land them is crucial to cement Arkansas, Missouri and A&M into a long range trajectory of success. Give their old fans enough familiar to celebrate and their young fans time to grow into a tradition of playing new neighbors and the transition won't be so painful. Successful realignment should maintain the essence of the new program's traditions while grafting that program into the new associations.
(This post was last modified: 01-08-2018 01:42 PM by JRsec.)
01-08-2018 01:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 13,257
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 413
I Root For: California
Location: Bear Territory
Post: #54
RE: Big home run
(01-08-2018 01:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  It's one thing for Nebraska to leave behind Iowa State, Kansas, and Kansas State. It's quite another to drop half of your national identity by failing to keep Oklahoma on the schedule.

That was Oklahoma's doing. Nebraska wanted to keep OU on their schedule every year when the Big 8 became the Big 12; OU didn't. OU was fine with rotating Nebraska in and out as if that game was no more important to them than playing Iowa State or Kansas, and OU got what they wanted.
01-08-2018 01:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 15,260
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 783
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #55
RE: Big home run
(01-08-2018 01:50 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 01:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  It's one thing for Nebraska to leave behind Iowa State, Kansas, and Kansas State. It's quite another to drop half of your national identity by failing to keep Oklahoma on the schedule.

That was Oklahoma's doing. Nebraska wanted to keep OU on their schedule every year when the Big 8 became the Big 12; OU didn't. OU was fine with rotating Nebraska in and out as if that game was no more important to them than playing Iowa State or Kansas, and OU got what they wanted.

I would argue that it's really Texas's doing. The Big 12 hasn't maintained a single rivalry with a school that has moved. No Kansas / Missouri, no A&M / Texas, no Colorado / Nebraska / Oklahoma / Kansas etc., and of course no Oklahoma / Nebraska. OU seems to realize what their schedule is missing, and of course Boren had flirted with the Big 10 so a home & home is scheduled twice in the future. There's talk of a thaw on the A&M / Texas game as well. But Texas's heavily influences Big 12 policy. I'm sure these vacated rivalries didn't occur in a vacuum.
01-08-2018 01:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,066
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 37
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #56
RE: Big home run
I think the Big Ten owes Nebraska a pair of western adds in the next expansion. Frankly they should have made more of an effort to land Missouri when they were still available.

Rutgers and Maryland were terrible adds they contribute nothing long term. I get there was this whole push to go after a bunch of the ACC AAUs but while academic juggernauts they are, college football juggernauts they are not.

The smarter move would have been the Big 12 AAUs. At the time that list included Nebraska, Missouri, Iowa St, Kansas, Colorado, Texas, and Texas A&M and who can argue that that list doesn't have a few schools that both university presidents and ADs would salivate over.
01-08-2018 10:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Cutter of Bish Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,247
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 78
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #57
RE: Big home run
(01-08-2018 01:55 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 01:50 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 01:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  It's one thing for Nebraska to leave behind Iowa State, Kansas, and Kansas State. It's quite another to drop half of your national identity by failing to keep Oklahoma on the schedule.

That was Oklahoma's doing. Nebraska wanted to keep OU on their schedule every year when the Big 8 became the Big 12; OU didn't. OU was fine with rotating Nebraska in and out as if that game was no more important to them than playing Iowa State or Kansas, and OU got what they wanted.

I would argue that it's really Texas's doing. The Big 12 hasn't maintained a single rivalry with a school that has moved. No Kansas / Missouri, no A&M / Texas, no Colorado / Nebraska / Oklahoma / Kansas etc., and of course no Oklahoma / Nebraska. OU seems to realize what their schedule is missing, and of course Boren had flirted with the Big 10 so a home & home is scheduled twice in the future. There's talk of a thaw on the A&M / Texas game as well. But Texas's heavily influences Big 12 policy. I'm sure these vacated rivalries didn't occur in a vacuum.

Veers close to Stockholm Syndrome. That conference pretty much tolerates the every whim of Texas. Now, I could see why some in the conference would have grown tired of Nebraska...there were known challenges and issues they had with a lot of the direction of the conference. For Colorado, I think they just checked out and didn't care...they were ever so close to the PAC just before the Big XII began, anyway. The anger for Missouri...that I just never understood why it got as bad as it seemed. Yet, how Okie and Okie State could literally get this walkabout with the PAC and then come back fully embraced? Hmm.

But, I don't think anyone really did it right, maybe other than Notre Dame and their hybrid affiliation with the ACC and Navy once joining the AAC. It was very clear there were games that would not move, and that conferences had to work around that. And even with Notre Dame, they chose their PAC rivalries over Michigan State. I get the impression that will be the going rate for anyone doing business with those schools...as it should be.
(This post was last modified: 01-09-2018 10:10 AM by The Cutter of Bish.)
01-09-2018 10:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wolfman Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,850
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 145
I Root For: The Game
Location: Raleigh, NC
Post: #58
RE: Big home run
I agree that Maryland was a good add for the B1G. However, in the 3 years since UMD left, the ACC has played in all 3 and won 2 of the NCAA titles. Despite being highly ranked, Maryland lost in the 3rd, 3rd and 1st rounds during that period. I hope it continues to get worse for the ACC.
01-10-2018 11:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 24,366
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 939
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #59
RE: Big home run
(01-07-2018 03:03 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-07-2018 02:38 PM)Bogg Wrote:  
(01-07-2018 02:21 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-07-2018 11:28 AM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  The fact that Feinstein actually wrote that "it was Louisville basketball that Swofford and company were courting" is laughable when every major move for the last 20 years has been completely motivated by capitalizing on football and football markets. Not to mention it is completely ignorant of how things actually played out in the ACC when UL was actually invited. It's a damn shame, as he used to be one of the best, but is either intentionally or unintentionally obtuse to college athletics outside of the world of college hoops, or just engaging in being an absolute shill.

Scandals and all, it is hard to argue that the ACC didn't upgrade athletically with UL. And the ACC, like all athletic conferences outside the Ivy, is in the business of athletics and making money through athletics, and not anything else. Losing Maryland was costly to the ACC primarily because it opened the door to the eastern media markets, which the ACC had designs on monopolizing since at least 2003, to another power conference; not because of any prowess of Maryland athletics itself or the loss of any particularly significant high profile rivalry games for any other members of the conference.

There were some strategic aspects in taking Louisville as well. The Big 12 might have found some added stability if Cincinnati and Louisville had ever been taken. By taking Louisville the ACC not only improved their athletics, but they essentially removed the obviously better of the two potential candidates for the Big 12 essentially sealing their position as the less viable conference. Until the revenue gap between the Big 12 and ACC is closed it is important perceptually to be the more stable. I think ESPN realized this and last year's entourage of would be applicants to the Big 12 proves this move to have been advantageous in that regard.

Well, that and FSU/Clemson had made arrangements to leave if they didn't get the football school of their choice. It's really no more complicated than that - with no GOR in place at the time the football schools had a figurative gun to the conference's head.

Well that's the sanitized public version of the story, so yes.

Whats the potentially much more interesting unsanitized version?
01-10-2018 11:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 24,366
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 939
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #60
RE: Big home run
(01-08-2018 01:37 PM)JRsec Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 12:27 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  
(01-08-2018 11:50 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  Nebraska sells out regardless who shows up to Lincoln.

Right, but coming from someone who went to a school where that also used to be true, that eventually ends if the success and regional association ends. It did at Penn State...when PSU could pretty much show up and get no worse than third or fourth in the conference, the 100K+ crowds were easy. Then came the 2000-2004 stretch, and the lack of success only pronounced the inability of other Big Ten schools (I'm looking at those in Illinois, Indiana, and Minnesota) to show up. And it never really bounced back between 2005-2010/11 (ahead of the Sandusky scandal). Especially more pronounced in some of the extremely lousy/shameful non-conference games.

It's still relatively new in Lincoln. But just wait as Maryland and Rutgers become more common to the schedule, as well as Indiana or Purdue. Those guys (IU and PU) suck when it comes to fan travel (we're lucky at PSU that Rutgers and UMD draw both ways). And they aren't fun games to watch, unless you like watching the bench play early on.
There have been two fatal flaws in realignment of late. First, the abandonment of the games that built the programs history. It's one thing for Nebraska to leave behind Iowa State, Kansas, and Kansas State. It's quite another to drop half of your national identity by failing to keep Oklahoma on the schedule. Such moves cut ties not only to a national appeal for that game, but to alumni for whom that game was the cornerstone of the schedule.

Second, the moves, and cut relationships, tend to lessen the importance of the transferring school to the prospects in their old recruiting grounds. Kids tend to want to play close enough to home for their family to attend. Taking one school out of its old context with no other old ties kills their relevance among their old relations. And that hurts recruiting.

In Nebraska's case they not only cut their most visible annual game, but suffered greatly from the loss of emphasis in their old recruiting grounds. Adding the fact that they are no longer permitted so many county scholarships from their home state to fund walk ons and the whole focus of their recruiting strategy was turned on its head. It's no wonder they've had great difficulties.

But the Big 10 was not alone in this mistake. While Texas A&M had ties to some SEC schools (especially with a historical rivalry with L.S.U. which though dormant for years was still in the public's memory), Missouri did not have a single school in the SEC outside of A&M that they had even 10 games with historically and the vast majority of the SEC had faced Mizzou less than 5 times in over a 100 year history of the game. While virtually limited to regional scope, the Kansas game defined both of their football programs. Missouri is struggling for an identity touchstone because of it. It will take time for Arkansas to become that rival they so deeply miss.

And while A&M is fine, they would be wise to encourage the return of Texas to their annual schedule. So many of their traditions are built on that rivalry that one day they will wake up and find those traditions to be hollow without Bevo to hate.

IMO if the SEC wants to complete its expansion, and the ACC is truly off limits, then pushing hard for Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas, and doing what it takes to land them is crucial to cement Arkansas, Missouri and A&M into a long range trajectory of success. Give their old fans enough familiar to celebrate and their young fans time to grow into a tradition of playing new neighbors and the transition won't be so painful. Successful realignment should maintain the essence of the new program's traditions while grafting that program into the new associations.

^^^^THIS^^^^^

I grew up watching SWC football. The Texas vs Aggie game was a Thanksgiving tradition. Even today, I still find it shocking that such a storied piece Texas college football lore was tossed aside with nary a second thought by either participant. Hey, I understand that money talks-----but in this case, both parties dumped a potentially huge money making game that didnt have to go away. Inexplicable.
01-10-2018 11:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.