Big Ten Expansion Invites...

Home ▸ Archive ▸ College Sports ▸ Big Ten Expansion Invites...
gibby08's avatar

gibby08

Senior Member

1,581 posts
May 11, 2010 12:26 AM
ohiobucks1 wrote: All 4 of those schools trump the 4 you just mentioned, academically especially Texas
You honestly think the BIg 10 gives a fuck about academics?? They don't all they care about is money
May 11, 2010 12:26am
ohiobucks1's avatar

ohiobucks1

USA American

4,915 posts
May 11, 2010 12:28 AM
Missouri: 102
Texas: 47
A&M: 61
Nebraska: 98

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/national-universities-rankings

UK: 122
LSU:128
Bama: 96
Auburn: 88

So as you can see, Tx and Tx A&M are big improvements

Nebraska and Missouri are washes with Alabama and Auburn, but they would bring in more money so I'd take them.
May 11, 2010 12:28am
gibby08's avatar

gibby08

Senior Member

1,581 posts
May 11, 2010 12:30 AM
If you really think the average CFB fan would pay more money to see Nebraska/Missouri play Ohio State than Alabama/Auburn..you really are retarded
May 11, 2010 12:30am
ohiobucks1's avatar

ohiobucks1

USA American

4,915 posts
May 11, 2010 12:30 AM
gibby08 wrote:
ohiobucks1 wrote: All 4 of those schools trump the 4 you just mentioned, academically especially Texas
You honestly think the BIg 10 gives a fuck about academics?? They don't all they care about is money
You called me an idiot... If you think they would take ANY SEC school that isn't part of the AAU

(all of the 4 I listed are) (all of the 4 you listed are not)
May 11, 2010 12:30am
ohiobucks1's avatar

ohiobucks1

USA American

4,915 posts
May 11, 2010 12:31 AM
gibby08 wrote: If you really think the average CFB fan would pay more money to see Nebraska/Missouri play Ohio State than Alabama/Auburn..you really are retarded
I'd love for you to show me where I said that? You are a fool.
May 11, 2010 12:31am
E

elbuckeye28

Senior Member

919 posts
May 11, 2010 12:31 AM
gibby08 wrote:
ohiobucks1 wrote: All 4 of those schools trump the 4 you just mentioned, academically especially Texas
You honestly think the BIg 10 gives a fuck about academics?? They don't all they care about is money
Yes I think they do. The Big 10 takes pride in having some elite academic institutions.
May 11, 2010 12:31am
ohiobucks1's avatar

ohiobucks1

USA American

4,915 posts
May 11, 2010 12:32 AM
elbuckeye28 wrote:
gibby08 wrote:
ohiobucks1 wrote: All 4 of those schools trump the 4 you just mentioned, academically especially Texas
You honestly think the BIg 10 gives a fuck about academics?? They don't all they care about is money
Yes I think they do. The Big 10 takes pride in having some elite academic institutions.
Don't tell Gibby that. He thinks CFB is all that decides a conference
May 11, 2010 12:32am
gibby08's avatar

gibby08

Senior Member

1,581 posts
May 11, 2010 12:32 AM
Nebraska and Missouri are washes with Alabama and Auburn, but they would bring in more money so I'd take them.
[/quote]

Right there in black and white ass clown
May 11, 2010 12:32am
ohiobucks1's avatar

ohiobucks1

USA American

4,915 posts
May 11, 2010 12:35 AM
Football is not the ONLY money maker you fuckstick (<<< great word btw)

Nebraska + Missouri would make more for the B10 then Alabama Auburn when its all said and done. You are so simple minded it is ridiculous. Did you go to UK? Or maybe LSU?
May 11, 2010 12:35am
gibby08's avatar

gibby08

Senior Member

1,581 posts
May 11, 2010 12:36 AM
Please..please explain to me how they would bring in more money than Alabama or Auburn

Football is not the only moneymaker...but it is the biggest
May 11, 2010 12:36am
E

elbuckeye28

Senior Member

919 posts
May 11, 2010 12:38 AM
gibby08 wrote: Please..please explain to me how they would bring in more money than Alabama or Auburn

Football is not the only moneymaker...but it is the biggest
Well speaking strictly about football, I think Nebraska and Alabama would be basically a wash when it comes to making money. I will say Auburn would probably bring in more than Missouri.
May 11, 2010 12:38am
ohiobucks1's avatar

ohiobucks1

USA American

4,915 posts
May 11, 2010 12:39 AM
TV revenue. Both bring fanbases all over the country (Nebraska especially...but the B10 says Missouri would add 1.3 mil per month to the B10 Network revenue due to the amount of households who would now be in the B10network coverage area)

Tickets are not the only way to make money... Just because Bama makes more than Missouri for THEIR OWN school doesnt mean it would make the B10 more money
May 11, 2010 12:39am
ohiobucks1's avatar

ohiobucks1

USA American

4,915 posts
May 11, 2010 12:40 AM
More:

Missouri brings two of the nation's biggest TV markets in Kansas City (31st) and St. Louis (21st), along with another good market in Springfield (74th). This would give the B10 the St. Louis monopoly with Illinois on the other side of the border.

Nebraska brings a ton of tradition and further locks down Kansas City, where there is a large contingent of Husker alum. Nebraska travels well and is nationally famous.

Both schools fit the Big Ten mold, bringing two new border states into the conference. They also add five top 100 TV markets (Omaha and Lincoln are ranked 76 and 100th, respectively).
May 11, 2010 12:40am
2quik4u's avatar

2quik4u

Senior Member

4,388 posts
May 11, 2010 12:40 AM
the big 10 schools make the most money
May 11, 2010 12:40am
E

elbuckeye28

Senior Member

919 posts
May 11, 2010 12:40 AM
ohiobucks1 wrote: More:

Missouri brings two of the nation's biggest TV markets in Kansas City (31st) and St. Louis (21st), along with another good market in Springfield (74th). This would give the B10 the St. Louis monopoly with Illinois on the other side of the border.

Nebraska brings a ton of tradition and further locks down Kansas City, where there is a large contingent of Husker alum. Nebraska travels well and is nationally famous.

Both schools fit the Big Ten mold, bringing two new border states into the conference. They also add five top 100 TV markets (Omaha and Lincoln are ranked 76 and 100th, respectively).
Good points.
May 11, 2010 12:40am
ohiobucks1's avatar

ohiobucks1

USA American

4,915 posts
May 11, 2010 12:41 AM
More:

With the addition of NE and Missouri, TX and TX A&M would be 10x more likely to join the Big 10, and lets be real, the B10 wants TX
May 11, 2010 12:41am
gibby08's avatar

gibby08

Senior Member

1,581 posts
May 11, 2010 12:43 AM
ohiobucks1 wrote: TV revenue. Both bring fanbases all over the country (Nebraska especially...but the B10 says Missouri would add 1.3 mil per month to the B10 Network revenue due to the amount of households who would now be in the B10network coverage area)

Tickets are not the only way to make money... Just because Bama makes more than Missouri for THEIR OWN school doesnt mean it would make the B10 more money
You really don't understand so there is no sense arguing with a mental midget like you

I would bet everything I own that given the chance,the Big 10 would take Alabama,LSU,and UK over Texas A&M,Missouri,and Nebraska
May 11, 2010 12:43am
ohiobucks1's avatar

ohiobucks1

USA American

4,915 posts
May 11, 2010 12:45 AM
gibby08 wrote:
ohiobucks1 wrote: TV revenue. Both bring fanbases all over the country (Nebraska especially...but the B10 says Missouri would add 1.3 mil per month to the B10 Network revenue due to the amount of households who would now be in the B10network coverage area)

Tickets are not the only way to make money... Just because Bama makes more than Missouri for THEIR OWN school doesnt mean it would make the B10 more money
You really don't understand so their is no sense arguing with a mental midget like you

I would bet everything I own that given the chance,the Big 10 would take Alabama,KSU,and UK over Texas A&M,Missouri,and Nebraska
You are out of your fucking mind. You don't understand that there is life outside of CFB. I just gave you plenty of examples why the B10 would take who I have mentioned and not who you have mentioned...And yet you still call me the "mental midget"


I will put them in terms you can understand:

Academics-
AAU universities (NONE of your schools are. All of mine are)
Total Revenue (TV markets, State Grants)
Geographical Boundaries (border states)

grow up
May 11, 2010 12:45am
ts1227's avatar

ts1227

Senior Member

12,319 posts
May 11, 2010 12:45 AM
elbuckeye28 wrote:
gibby08 wrote:
ohiobucks1 wrote: All 4 of those schools trump the 4 you just mentioned, academically especially Texas
You honestly think the BIg 10 gives a fuck about academics?? They don't all they care about is money
Yes I think they do. The Big 10 takes pride in having some elite academic institutions.
The AAU bullshit just sounds good, but in terms of the athletes it means nothing.

Sure, they're all a bunch if elite research institutions, but that's almost all happening at the graduate level.

The connection between the AAU and anything having to do with the playing field does not exist. Why this athletic conference still insists their schools be members of a consortium that no one gives a shit about and has nothing to do whatsoever with their athletics is beyond me. The only thing it does is send a false impression that they have smart athletes (which works in their favor in terms of image, even if its wrong), though they're the same as every BCS league.
May 11, 2010 12:45am
ohiobucks1's avatar

ohiobucks1

USA American

4,915 posts
May 11, 2010 12:46 AM
I also like how you took TX out of the equation. Considering that if we got A&M, we'd get TX I would consider them as "one" for the subject of this debate.


TX > ANY SEC school in almost every single way
May 11, 2010 12:46am
ohiobucks1's avatar

ohiobucks1

USA American

4,915 posts
May 11, 2010 12:48 AM
ts1227 wrote:
elbuckeye28 wrote:
gibby08 wrote:
ohiobucks1 wrote: All 4 of those schools trump the 4 you just mentioned, academically especially Texas
You honestly think the BIg 10 gives a fuck about academics?? They don't all they care about is money
Yes I think they do. The Big 10 takes pride in having some elite academic institutions.
The AAU bullshit just sounds good, but in terms of the athletes it means nothing.

Sure, they're all a bunch if elite research institutions, but that's almost all happening at the graduate level.

The connection between the AAU and anything having to do with the playing field does not exist. Why they still insist their schools be members of that consortium that no one gives a shit about is beyond me. The only thing it does is send a false impression that they have smart athletes, though they're the same as every BCS league.

huh?

I'm not saying the athletes are smarter... The B10 REQUIRES schools to be members of the AAU in order to be members. AAU only allows prestigious research institutions to join.

The only school that MAY be able to get AAU membership of those Gibby listed is 'Bama...And thats not even for sure
May 11, 2010 12:48am
ts1227's avatar

ts1227

Senior Member

12,319 posts
May 11, 2010 12:59 AM
I know they require it, but it makes no sense.

The Big Ten is an athletic conference first and foremost.
The AAU has nothing to do with that whatsoever because by and large all that means is you have a good graduate program (research money).

I am saying there is no purpose to their stupid stipulation other than the benefit that they do get from people who are not familiar with all of that stuff assuming it means they have smart athletes, or are better undergraduate schools (because by and large, they are no different than anyone else at the undergraduate level, all of that research is at the Masters and PhD level).

I'm not saying you made that assumption, I'm just saying it exists.
May 11, 2010 12:59am
ohiobucks1's avatar

ohiobucks1

USA American

4,915 posts
May 11, 2010 1:11 AM
Gotcha, and to and extent I agree with you.

However, I disagree on your premise that all the B10 cares about is athletics. If that was the case, we would be the SEC ;)
May 11, 2010 1:11am
S

sjmvsfscs08

Senior Member

2,963 posts
May 11, 2010 2:41 AM
I think everyone can agree that this move is about the Big Ten Network's expansion, and it is interesting to see how a school in Indiana can add tens of millions of viewers to the Big Ten Network. While I don't have access to any Notre Dame alumni databases, or NBC's TV statistics, I think I have a rather unscientific yet interesting way of looking at what markets would be added. Assuming the areas of the country that have a larger quantity of Irish fans have more applicants and thus more students and alumni, one can assume that the top ten areas of where Irish alumni reside would add TV markets. Again, extremely unscientific but interesting.

TV Markets in the top ten places Notre Dame's young alumni reside:
-Chicago (#3 TV market)
-South Bend
-Washington DC (#9 TV market)
-New York City (#1 TV market)
-Los Angeles (#2 TV market)
-Minneapolis (#15 TV market)
-Boston (#7 TV market)
-Indianapolis (#25 TV market)
-Philadelphia (#4 TV market)
-Atlanta (#8 TV Market)

The bold are the markets currently outside of the BTN's reach (Philadelphia?). I'm sure they'd love the national fan base that would want to watch Notre Dame's game like they have been for years with NBC.
May 11, 2010 2:41am
ytownfootball's avatar

ytownfootball

Bold faced liar...

6,978 posts
May 11, 2010 9:45 AM
The AAU membership is really nothing more than a stipulation the Big 10 has required it's member schools to be a part of. It's not a bad thing, they're requiring a higher standard. It's no different than say (for example) Notre Dame holding their student athletes to a higher standard, albeit on a conference level. It's what separates the Big 10 from other conferences and while it may not mean a lot to most, it certainly lends a sense of pride to those member schools, and let's face it, most in the college landscape fan wise don't know nor do they give a shit about the AAU and what it means. That's fine, fans of the Big 10 will wear that feather in their cap and not give a shit if anyone thinks it's worthy of note or not.

The reason for all the talk about expansion not just for the Big 10, but for all conferences is the BCS. Reading between the lines it's obvious that the NCAA has NO plans to institute a SANCTIONED play-off system. Were this a thought there would be no reason for expanding conferences. The BCS although no perfect has done the two things well that the NCAA and member schools want, provide a concensus National Champion and generate a ton of money. As a member of a BCS conference you get a nice share whether you're in or not, so conferences are getting as big and as strong (from a monetary standpoint ie; TV revenue) as they can. The Big 10 is ahead of the curve in making this happen sooner rather than later. They'll be the rapers rather than the rapee.

All this expansion is due to the BCS being so widely accepted. Other conferences better realize if you can't beat 'em, join 'em or they're going to be left sucking dirt.
May 11, 2010 9:45am