Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
Author Message
Pony94 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 21,833
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 614
I Root For: SMU
Location: Bee Cave, TX
Post: #21
Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-01-2019 03:33 PM)Mav Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 02:33 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the Big Ten was going to shift their target from ND and eastern markets to Big 12 programs and content then they needed to go far deeper than Nebraska:

Nebraska
Missouri
Oklahoma
Texas
Texas A&M

If A&M still wanted the SEC then you switch them out for Kansas--not as big a fish but it salvages the plan.
If you want to see Nebraska back out of joining the Big Ten then invite Texas at the same time. Texas is the reason why they left.


Hmmm Texas or Nebraska......
06-01-2019 03:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Mav Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 338
Joined: Jul 2016
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Omaha
Location:
Post: #22
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-01-2019 03:34 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 03:33 PM)Mav Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 02:33 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the Big Ten was going to shift their target from ND and eastern markets to Big 12 programs and content then they needed to go far deeper than Nebraska:

Nebraska
Missouri
Oklahoma
Texas
Texas A&M

If A&M still wanted the SEC then you switch them out for Kansas--not as big a fish but it salvages the plan.
If you want to see Nebraska back out of joining the Big Ten then invite Texas at the same time. Texas is the reason why they left.


Hmmm Texas or Nebraska......
Nebraska won't split the conference in half politically, try to railroad a bunch of "reforms" to screw over their new conference mates and then start flirting with other conferences the moment the rest of the Big Ten becomes too destabilized from their double-dealing, so there's that.
Texas is poison.
06-01-2019 03:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MissouriStateBears Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,559
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 86
I Root For: Missouri State
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-01-2019 01:42 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 12:23 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  PAC would have been very interested in Nebraska. Nebraska is a top 10 brand in college football. It was a slam dunk done deal for the Big Ten. That is why no chatter for the PAC expansion on them.

Texas, A&M, TTU, Okla, Ok St, and Colorado were who they wanted--not Nebraska.

Nebraska was off the table for the PAC. They were already committed to the Big Ten. If they were available, PAC would have went after them.
06-01-2019 04:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pony94 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 21,833
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 614
I Root For: SMU
Location: Bee Cave, TX
Post: #24
Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-01-2019 03:59 PM)Mav Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 03:34 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 03:33 PM)Mav Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 02:33 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the Big Ten was going to shift their target from ND and eastern markets to Big 12 programs and content then they needed to go far deeper than Nebraska:

Nebraska
Missouri
Oklahoma
Texas
Texas A&M

If A&M still wanted the SEC then you switch them out for Kansas--not as big a fish but it salvages the plan.
If you want to see Nebraska back out of joining the Big Ten then invite Texas at the same time. Texas is the reason why they left.


Hmmm Texas or Nebraska......
Nebraska won't split the conference in half politically, try to railroad a bunch of "reforms" to screw over their new conference mates and then start flirting with other conferences the moment the rest of the Big Ten becomes too destabilized from their double-dealing, so there's that.
Texas is poison.


Then you won’t want Oklahoma either. They let Texas do the dirty work but they are very much involved.
06-01-2019 04:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Mav Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 338
Joined: Jul 2016
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Omaha
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-01-2019 04:03 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 03:59 PM)Mav Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 03:34 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 03:33 PM)Mav Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 02:33 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the Big Ten was going to shift their target from ND and eastern markets to Big 12 programs and content then they needed to go far deeper than Nebraska:

Nebraska
Missouri
Oklahoma
Texas
Texas A&M

If A&M still wanted the SEC then you switch them out for Kansas--not as big a fish but it salvages the plan.
If you want to see Nebraska back out of joining the Big Ten then invite Texas at the same time. Texas is the reason why they left.


Hmmm Texas or Nebraska......
Nebraska won't split the conference in half politically, try to railroad a bunch of "reforms" to screw over their new conference mates and then start flirting with other conferences the moment the rest of the Big Ten becomes too destabilized from their double-dealing, so there's that.
Texas is poison.


Then you won’t want Oklahoma either. They let Texas do the dirty work but they are very much involved.
Yeah, Oklahoma was on their half for the longest time, but in the last 3-5 years or so they've realized just what they were in favor of all along and are clawing at the walls trying to get out.
Unfortunately for them, they have an orange and black ball and chain keeping them in the Big 12.
06-01-2019 04:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,774
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 988
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-01-2019 03:59 PM)Mav Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 03:34 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 03:33 PM)Mav Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 02:33 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the Big Ten was going to shift their target from ND and eastern markets to Big 12 programs and content then they needed to go far deeper than Nebraska:

Nebraska
Missouri
Oklahoma
Texas
Texas A&M

If A&M still wanted the SEC then you switch them out for Kansas--not as big a fish but it salvages the plan.
If you want to see Nebraska back out of joining the Big Ten then invite Texas at the same time. Texas is the reason why they left.


Hmmm Texas or Nebraska......
Nebraska won't split the conference in half politically, try to railroad a bunch of "reforms" to screw over their new conference mates and then start flirting with other conferences the moment the rest of the Big Ten becomes too destabilized from their double-dealing, so there's that.
Texas is poison.

The only one that wanted illiterate criminals on the football field was Tom Osborne.
When you lose 11-1, you should take a hint. Osborne never did. He had some awesome football teams in the 90s, perhaps the best ever, but nobody else wanted to go that route.
06-01-2019 04:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Mav Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 338
Joined: Jul 2016
Reputation: 30
I Root For: Omaha
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-01-2019 04:32 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 03:59 PM)Mav Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 03:34 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 03:33 PM)Mav Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 02:33 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  If the Big Ten was going to shift their target from ND and eastern markets to Big 12 programs and content then they needed to go far deeper than Nebraska:

Nebraska
Missouri
Oklahoma
Texas
Texas A&M

If A&M still wanted the SEC then you switch them out for Kansas--not as big a fish but it salvages the plan.
If you want to see Nebraska back out of joining the Big Ten then invite Texas at the same time. Texas is the reason why they left.


Hmmm Texas or Nebraska......
Nebraska won't split the conference in half politically, try to railroad a bunch of "reforms" to screw over their new conference mates and then start flirting with other conferences the moment the rest of the Big Ten becomes too destabilized from their double-dealing, so there's that.
Texas is poison.

The only one that wanted illiterate criminals on the football field was Tom Osborne.
When you lose 11-1, you should take a hint. Osborne never did. He had some awesome football teams in the 90s, perhaps the best ever, but nobody else wanted to go that route.
What he wanted isn't any different than what Boise State is doing now and makes sense when you have a relatively weak conference academically like the Big 8 was. Regardless, that doesn't include making it so laws have to be won 9-3 to pass, giving Texas a functional veto since the four schools in Texas vote as a bloc, and moving the conference offices and football championship game to Dallas from KC.
Besides, I wouldn't say Texas has a strong track record of throwing a bunch of scholars on the field either. Remember Vince Young's Wonderlic?
06-01-2019 04:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TerryD Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,889
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 542
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location: Mouth of Wilson, VA
Post: #28
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-01-2019 12:42 PM)Rob from NJ Wrote:  At the time the expansion with Nebraska was about the additional revenue of a Conference Championship game by adding a 12th school, as well as, adding a top national brand. The expansion East was about the additional revenue from cable boxes. Rutgers and Maryland fit the bill. Penn State already has the Western Pennsylvania cable market covered for BTN, thus, Pitt was duplication and the Syracuse cable marketplace was smaller.

Notre Dame was remaining independent no matter what. Their objective is first to secure independence and then to align with a Conference with access to their post season games. The ACC was perfect fit. The Big Ten not so much.

Delany did exactly what he needed to do and their significant jump in TV revenue since this expansion is point of proof. Of course, it's all opinion and subject to looking back in time with present information.

Completely agree.

ND's primary goal in CR was and is to keep football independent. A secondary goal is to find a good home for basketball, baseball and Olympic sports. Another goal is to have minor bowl access.

ND signed the NBC deal in 1991 to provide the revenues and exposure needed to remain a football independent.

The main reason ND joined the Big East in 1995 was that it was agreeable to a partial/non-football membership, gave it a good other sports home and provided minor bowl access.

ND turned the Big Ten down in 1999 for a lot of reasons, but mainly because it would not do a partial deal that excluded the football program.

ND was not going to place its football program in a conference, especially not the Big Ten.

The ACC was ideal for a bunch of reasons, but mainly because it allowed a partial/non-football membership.

It also provides minor bowl access and a great home for the other sports.

If the ACC had not agreed to a partial deal, ND would have tried to cut a partial/non-football deal (through DeLoss Dodds) with the Big 12.

Failing all that, ND would have gone with the new Big East.



No matter what Jim Delaney did, ND was not going to join the Big Ten in full.
06-01-2019 05:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TIGER-PAUL Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,510
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 34
I Root For: PITT
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
I don’t know but he for sure overreacted to ACC/ND
06-02-2019 09:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 31,011
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 765
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #30
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-01-2019 01:59 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 01:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  The B1G just distributed $55m per school in 2018.

If that's a "botch" what would a success look like?

07-coffee3


While the market model holds up, yes. And those B1G numbers are fudged some. And no amount of athletic profit justifies the negligent manslaughter of a player or organized and covered up pedophilia. If if makes you feel any better I would have removed UNC's accreditation as a university for their academic fraud misdeeds, but that sounds too much like ethics with teeth for the NCAA to stomach. Another round of death penalties for SMU for everyone!

IMO, market models don't have much to do with underlying value. E.g., the past five years there has been a sea-change in the movie industry, as the home media market has plummeted in the face of streaming.

E.g., in 2014, the Disney movie "Frozen" did about $400 million in DVD and Blu-Ray sales. Last year, Black Panther, a movie that did $300m MORE than Frozen at the domestic box office, did a total of $100m in DVD and Blu-Ray business. Overall, the home physical media business was $26B in 2014, $12B and falling last year. And that was a HUGE source of revenue for the film companies.

But guess what? Actors like the Iron Man guy are still making $40m a film, their pay hasn't been cut at all, and companies like Disney and Comcast and Warners are stronger than ever, because the money just shifted to streaming. People didn't stop liking and paying for movies, they just shifted the model.

The same will happen with college football. Whatever happens to cable, streaming, etc. the underlying value of college football will be there, and the conferences will get paid.

Regarding the paedophilia of MSU and PSU, I agree, but all I was talking about was conference money, nothing else.
(This post was last modified: 06-02-2019 09:26 AM by quo vadis.)
06-02-2019 09:24 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 31,011
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 765
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #31
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-01-2019 05:30 PM)TerryD Wrote:  No matter what Jim Delaney did, ND was not going to join the Big Ten in full.

Yes, ND has said that the only thing that would change their mind about conference membership would be if the path to a football national title was closed off, formally or in practice, for independents.

So if you were a Machiavellian commissioner trying to maneuver ND in to your conference, you would want to engineer CFP rules that make it basically impossible for a school outside a conference to make the playoffs.

That's why ND's arrangement with the ACC was genius on the Irish's part: By explicitly stating that if they join a conference in the next 15-20 years it MUST be the ACC, Notre Dame immediately gave the other four P5 conferences a big incentive to keep that indy-path to the title open.
(This post was last modified: 06-02-2019 09:30 AM by quo vadis.)
06-02-2019 09:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoldenWarrior11 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,703
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 229
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #32
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
Delaney and the B1G by no means "botched" expansion during the 2010-2013 cycle, but I do think they underestimated/miscalculated what the SEC was going to do with regards to their expansion plans.

The B1G kicked off the realignment cycle in 2009 when Delaney announced expansion plans (Nebraska was added in June, 2010). I believe that Delaney thought that the SEC was pursuing/was going to pursue A&M (which was public knowledge at that point, considered the Texahoma-PAC expansion plans), as well as Southern ACC programs that would have added new territories for the SEC (Virginia Tech, UNC, Duke, NC State) as well as West Virginia (Big 12). I also believe Delaney believed that Missouri was going to be available/willing for #13 (and beyond). This, IMO, is the only mistake/miscalculation that Delaney made during the cycle (I think the B1G missing out on Missouri was a big mistake). Missouri was announced to the SEC in November, 2011; Rutgers and Maryland were both announced to the B1G in November, 2012 (which were hardly bad fallback options).

If Delaney had grabbed Missouri earlier (and then moved to grab Maryland as #14, instead of Rutgers), I think the SEC would have still acquired Texas A&M and then got Virginia Tech from the ACC. The ACC would have still acquired Syracuse and Pittsburgh, but - here - instead of the ACC getting Louisville to replace Maryland, they acquire West Virginia/Rutgers to replace Virginia Tech. The Big 12 could have looked to West Virginia/Cincinnati/Louisville/TCU to get back to ten, or even twelve, members.
06-02-2019 09:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,774
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 988
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #33
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-01-2019 04:50 PM)Mav Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 04:32 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 03:59 PM)Mav Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 03:34 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 03:33 PM)Mav Wrote:  If you want to see Nebraska back out of joining the Big Ten then invite Texas at the same time. Texas is the reason why they left.


Hmmm Texas or Nebraska......
Nebraska won't split the conference in half politically, try to railroad a bunch of "reforms" to screw over their new conference mates and then start flirting with other conferences the moment the rest of the Big Ten becomes too destabilized from their double-dealing, so there's that.
Texas is poison.

The only one that wanted illiterate criminals on the football field was Tom Osborne.
When you lose 11-1, you should take a hint. Osborne never did. He had some awesome football teams in the 90s, perhaps the best ever, but nobody else wanted to go that route.
What he wanted isn't any different than what Boise State is doing now and makes sense when you have a relatively weak conference academically like the Big 8 was. Regardless, that doesn't include making it so laws have to be won 9-3 to pass, giving Texas a functional veto since the four schools in Texas vote as a bloc, and moving the conference offices and football championship game to Dallas from KC.
Besides, I wouldn't say Texas has a strong track record of throwing a bunch of scholars on the field either. Remember Vince Young's Wonderlic?

He was no Lawrence Phillips. And Nebraska had 23 Prop 16s (or whatever it was called) on one of those teams, more than any other conference in the country.
06-02-2019 10:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,774
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 988
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-02-2019 09:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 05:30 PM)TerryD Wrote:  No matter what Jim Delaney did, ND was not going to join the Big Ten in full.

Yes, ND has said that the only thing that would change their mind about conference membership would be if the path to a football national title was closed off, formally or in practice, for independents.

So if you were a Machiavellian commissioner trying to maneuver ND in to your conference, you would want to engineer CFP rules that make it basically impossible for a school outside a conference to make the playoffs.

That's why ND's arrangement with the ACC was genius on the Irish's part: By explicitly stating that if they join a conference in the next 15-20 years it MUST be the ACC, Notre Dame immediately gave the other four P5 conferences a big incentive to keep that indy-path to the title open.
Notre Dame will join a conference when they find it too difficult to have success as an independent. That time isn't now and it wasn't 2010. Kelly has had a couple of excellent seasons in the last 6-7 years.

They key for them is to recognize that time before their value has significantly declined.
(This post was last modified: 06-02-2019 10:04 AM by bullet.)
06-02-2019 10:03 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,774
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 988
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #35
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-02-2019 09:48 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Delaney and the B1G by no means "botched" expansion during the 2010-2013 cycle, but I do think they underestimated/miscalculated what the SEC was going to do with regards to their expansion plans.

The B1G kicked off the realignment cycle in 2009 when Delaney announced expansion plans (Nebraska was added in June, 2010). I believe that Delaney thought that the SEC was pursuing/was going to pursue A&M (which was public knowledge at that point, considered the Texahoma-PAC expansion plans), as well as Southern ACC programs that would have added new territories for the SEC (Virginia Tech, UNC, Duke, NC State) as well as West Virginia (Big 12). I also believe Delaney believed that Missouri was going to be available/willing for #13 (and beyond). This, IMO, is the only mistake/miscalculation that Delaney made during the cycle (I think the B1G missing out on Missouri was a big mistake). Missouri was announced to the SEC in November, 2011; Rutgers and Maryland were both announced to the B1G in November, 2012 (which were hardly bad fallback options).

If Delaney had grabbed Missouri earlier (and then moved to grab Maryland as #14, instead of Rutgers), I think the SEC would have still acquired Texas A&M and then got Virginia Tech from the ACC. The ACC would have still acquired Syracuse and Pittsburgh, but - here - instead of the ACC getting Louisville to replace Maryland, they acquire West Virginia/Rutgers to replace Virginia Tech. The Big 12 could have looked to West Virginia/Cincinnati/Louisville/TCU to get back to ten, or even twelve, members.

MIssouri is not a fast growing state. CBS was explaining why a top 10 Missouri team didn't get the SEC game of the week-because they were one of the lowest draws in the SEC. That's why CBS didn't pay a dime extra for Missouri and A&M. A&M was no better than average for the SEC and Missouri was below average. CBS still got the same number of games.

Missouri was not a loss. It did nothing for the Big 10.
06-02-2019 10:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,518
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 83
I Root For: Ohio St, MAC
Location:
Post: #36
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-01-2019 05:30 PM)TerryD Wrote:  
(06-01-2019 12:42 PM)Rob from NJ Wrote:  At the time the expansion with Nebraska was about the additional revenue of a Conference Championship game by adding a 12th school, as well as, adding a top national brand. The expansion East was about the additional revenue from cable boxes. Rutgers and Maryland fit the bill. Penn State already has the Western Pennsylvania cable market covered for BTN, thus, Pitt was duplication and the Syracuse cable marketplace was smaller.

Notre Dame was remaining independent no matter what. Their objective is first to secure independence and then to align with a Conference with access to their post season games. The ACC was perfect fit. The Big Ten not so much.

Delany did exactly what he needed to do and their significant jump in TV revenue since this expansion is point of proof. Of course, it's all opinion and subject to looking back in time with present information.

Completely agree.

ND's primary goal in CR was and is to keep football independent. A secondary goal is to find a good home for basketball, baseball and Olympic sports. Another goal is to have minor bowl access.

ND signed the NBC deal in 1991 to provide the revenues and exposure needed to remain a football independent.

The main reason ND joined the Big East in 1995 was that it was agreeable to a partial/non-football membership, gave it a good other sports home and provided minor bowl access.

ND turned the Big Ten down in 1999 for a lot of reasons, but mainly because it would not do a partial deal that excluded the football program.

ND was not going to place its football program in a conference, especially not the Big Ten.

The ACC was ideal for a bunch of reasons, but mainly because it allowed a partial/non-football membership.

It also provides minor bowl access and a great home for the other sports.

If the ACC had not agreed to a partial deal, ND would have tried to cut a partial/non-football deal (through DeLoss Dodds) with the Big 12.

Failing all that, ND would have gone with the new Big East.



No matter what Jim Delaney did, ND was not going to join the Big Ten in full.

Follow the post though--the ACC the Irish would be joining doesn't have Pitt, or Syracuse, or BC.

at this point the Big Ten would have 5 of your rivals/regular opponents and we'd probably go for an 8 game conference schedule for you to accomodate USC, Navy, a G conference home game, and a rotating big time opponent. It's essentially everything the Irish could want only with more media revenue and an easier path to the post season.

Do you really want to join Tobacco Road and friends when the Big Ten has the big urban Catholic markets you want a presence in?

Deloss Dodd might be able to get you a partial Big 12 deal but you're closest opponent is going to be Iowa St and you're going to be playing in the Baptist Belt in a bunch of small towns--that's not Notre Dame's style.

The only way ND maintains their independence if the Big Ten did that expansion is by playing Olympic sports with the Catholic 7.
06-02-2019 01:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 21,040
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 1761
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #37
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-02-2019 10:07 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(06-02-2019 09:48 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Delaney and the B1G by no means "botched" expansion during the 2010-2013 cycle, but I do think they underestimated/miscalculated what the SEC was going to do with regards to their expansion plans.

The B1G kicked off the realignment cycle in 2009 when Delaney announced expansion plans (Nebraska was added in June, 2010). I believe that Delaney thought that the SEC was pursuing/was going to pursue A&M (which was public knowledge at that point, considered the Texahoma-PAC expansion plans), as well as Southern ACC programs that would have added new territories for the SEC (Virginia Tech, UNC, Duke, NC State) as well as West Virginia (Big 12). I also believe Delaney believed that Missouri was going to be available/willing for #13 (and beyond). This, IMO, is the only mistake/miscalculation that Delaney made during the cycle (I think the B1G missing out on Missouri was a big mistake). Missouri was announced to the SEC in November, 2011; Rutgers and Maryland were both announced to the B1G in November, 2012 (which were hardly bad fallback options).

If Delaney had grabbed Missouri earlier (and then moved to grab Maryland as #14, instead of Rutgers), I think the SEC would have still acquired Texas A&M and then got Virginia Tech from the ACC. The ACC would have still acquired Syracuse and Pittsburgh, but - here - instead of the ACC getting Louisville to replace Maryland, they acquire West Virginia/Rutgers to replace Virginia Tech. The Big 12 could have looked to West Virginia/Cincinnati/Louisville/TCU to get back to ten, or even twelve, members.

MIssouri is not a fast growing state. CBS was explaining why a top 10 Missouri team didn't get the SEC game of the week-because they were one of the lowest draws in the SEC. That's why CBS didn't pay a dime extra for Missouri and A&M. A&M was no better than average for the SEC and Missouri was below average. CBS still got the same number of games.

Missouri was not a loss. It did nothing for the Big 10.

And you are wrong in your assessment other than the bolded and underlined portion of your post. CBS didn't pay another dime because there was no addition to their inventory. It wouldn't have mattered if the additions had been Texas and Oklahoma. CBS had 17 games paid for and 17 games was all they were still going to get. That's the beginning, end, and middle of the issue.

The rest is is just hard feelings over two Big 12 schools leaving Texas and buds on their own.
(This post was last modified: 06-02-2019 01:15 PM by JRsec.)
06-02-2019 01:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goofus Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,705
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 48
I Root For: Iowa
Location: chicago suburbs
Post: #38
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
Missouri is a better cultural and geographic fit for the Big Ten.

Regardless of market size, most of the midwest schools in the Big Ten simply don't get the new obsession with East coast expansion and playing bowl games or tourneys in NYC. It would not bother me if I never set foot in New York City ever again. It's just not a great place to visit.
06-02-2019 06:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 31,011
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 765
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #39
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-02-2019 06:37 PM)goofus Wrote:  Missouri is a better cultural and geographic fit for the Big Ten.

I agree. But they aren't a bad fit for the SEC.

SG+TG 6/2/79 - 6/2/19
40 years
06-02-2019 06:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RutgersGuy Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,926
Joined: Nov 2015
Reputation: 125
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #40
RE: Jim Delany botched the 2010-2013 Big Ten Expansion
(06-02-2019 06:37 PM)goofus Wrote:  Missouri is a better cultural and geographic fit for the Big Ten.

Regardless of market size, most of the midwest schools in the Big Ten simply don't get the new obsession with East coast expansion and playing bowl games or tourneys in NYC. It would not bother me if I never set foot in New York City ever again. It's just not a great place to visit.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...........................AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[Image: giphy.gif]
(This post was last modified: 06-02-2019 06:54 PM by RutgersGuy.)
06-02-2019 06:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2019 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, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.