• One concerning aspect of this if Im a bigten fan.....

    From michael anderson@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jul 6 19:13:28 2022
    Of the last 4 schools they have brought in with expansion:

    -1 is a really strong football program
    -2 are mediocre to bad football programs
    -1 is a downright horrific football program

    So of the last 4 teams brought in, only 1 of them actually values college football and has a history of being good at it.

    That scares me when I hear things like the bigten and sec may go to 20(or more), because what if some of those other schools to get to 20 or more are stanford, cal, duke, unc, etc.....

    None of those programs are good football programs. And this is a conference that already has Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, and purdue. You bring in more mediocre to bad football programs, and then the strength of tOSU/
    Michigan/Penn State is diluted even more. Even if ND is one of the next 3 or 4 as anticipated, thats only adding 1 more good football program compared to others that are at best just below average.

    Say what you want about the SEC's expansion, but in contrast of there last 4 additions 3 of them are positive additions from a football program standpoint(say what you want about Texas A&M underachieving but they clearly value football, invest a ton in
    it, and have all the pieces to be good in the near future). The only program that was a bust with respect to football brand/quality was missouri. And as bad as missouri is they are freaking Alabama compared to rutgers.....

    As a fan who loves watching football I don't care all that much about the tv negotiations or how big this market is or the demos in a certain market. What I care about is the football programs and what that means for my college football viewing
    enjoyment. And a scenario where the bigten adds a total of 8 new teams beginning with the maryland/rutgers additions and 6 of those teams aren't good at football......well thats a problem for me and similar minded fans.

    Thats why I prefer if the sec adds from the acc area I much prefer they go after clemson and florida state than UNC.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Michael Falkner@21:1/5 to miande...@gmail.com on Wed Jul 6 20:09:22 2022
    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 7:13:30 PM UTC-7, miande...@gmail.com wrote:
    Of the last 4 schools they have brought in with expansion:

    -1 is a really strong football program
    -2 are mediocre to bad football programs
    -1 is a downright horrific football program

    So of the last 4 teams brought in, only 1 of them actually values college football and has a history of being good at it.

    That scares me when I hear things like the bigten and sec may go to 20(or more), because what if some of those other schools to get to 20 or more are stanford, cal, duke, unc, etc.....

    There's a real chance Stanford and Cal will drop their football programs. The Big Ten would be OUT. OF. THEIR. MINDS. to take either.

    I'm trying to recall the reason: I think it has to do with eventual designation of the football team as employees and the like -- but, yes, there's real discussion that if that (or whatever it is) gets traction, Cal and Stanford will just drop football.

    None of those programs are good football programs. And this is a conference that already has Rutgers, Maryland, Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, and purdue. You bring in more mediocre to bad football programs, and then the strength of tOSU/
    Michigan/Penn State is diluted even more. Even if ND is one of the next 3 or 4 as anticipated, thats only adding 1 more good football program compared to others that are at best just below average.

    Rutgers is getting dropped, first chance they get. I think it's going to come down to how many of "what's left" end up in the Big Ten. But I'd have to think Rutgers is the first to get dropped. Northwestern/Illinois/Purdue/etc in that next tier. They'
    ll end up in whatever "Division II" conference the ACC turns into once Miami, Florida State, and Clemson leave for the SEC.

    (With Vanderbilt, Mississippi State, etc.)

    I think they've hit the natural limit with 32 -- now it's just trading in marquee programs for the "how the Hell are you in the conference/how the Hell did you ever get in the conference" deals.

    If Notre Dame gets put in, look for Rutgers to go. Quickly.

    Say what you want about the SEC's expansion, but in contrast of there last 4 additions 3 of them are positive additions from a football program standpoint(say what you want about Texas A&M underachieving but they clearly value football, invest a ton in
    it, and have all the pieces to be good in the near future). The only program that was a bust with respect to football brand/quality was missouri. And as bad as missouri is they are freaking Alabama compared to rutgers.....

    Rutgers has no business in FBS. None. I'm STILL trying to figure out how they ever got to Division I as a school.

    As a fan who loves watching football I don't care all that much about the tv negotiations or how big this market is or the demos in a certain market. What I care about is the football programs and what that means for my college football viewing
    enjoyment. And a scenario where the bigten adds a total of 8 new teams beginning with the maryland/rutgers additions and 6 of those teams aren't good at football......well thats a problem for me and similar minded fans.

    That's why you drop Rutgers, etc. This is meant to get all the power - ALL OF IT - into this situation.

    Thats why I prefer if the sec adds from the acc area I much prefer they go after clemson and florida state than UNC.

    I'm thinking Clemson, Florida State, and Miami -- and you get rid of Miss. State, Vanderbilt, and a third dreg.

    Mike

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JGibson@21:1/5 to miande...@gmail.com on Thu Jul 7 06:41:50 2022
    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 10:13:30 PM UTC-4, miande...@gmail.com wrote:
    Of the last 4 schools they have brought in with expansion:

    -1 is a really strong football program
    -2 are mediocre to bad football programs
    -1 is a downright horrific football program

    So of the last 4 teams brought in, only 1 of them actually values college football and has a history of being good at it.

    That scares me when I hear things like the bigten and sec may go to 20(or more), because what if some of those other schools to get to 20 or more are stanford, cal, duke, unc, etc.....


    I don't think they are going to just willy-nilly add teams at random. The Rutgers and Maryland adds were specifically for market value ... and it worked. Nebraska was added for football value, and it hasn't panned out that well. USC and UCLA again
    mostly added for market, but you have a traditional power in USC and a sometimes good football team in UCLA.

    My main concern is that you can only play so many games, so all the supposed high profile games that created out of this are not happening every year. USC isn't going to be playing Ohio State and Michigan and Penn State every year.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From xyzzy@21:1/5 to JGibson on Thu Jul 7 14:26:59 2022
    JGibson <james.m.gibson@gmail.com> wrote:
    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 10:13:30 PM UTC-4, miande...@gmail.com wrote:
    Of the last 4 schools they have brought in with expansion:

    -1 is a really strong football program
    -2 are mediocre to bad football programs
    -1 is a downright horrific football program

    So of the last 4 teams brought in, only 1 of them actually values
    college football and has a history of being good at it.

    That scares me when I hear things like the bigten and sec may go to
    20(or more), because what if some of those other schools to get to 20 or
    more are stanford, cal, duke, unc, etc.....


    I don't think they are going to just willy-nilly add teams at random.
    The Rutgers and Maryland adds were specifically for market value ... and
    it worked. Nebraska was added for football value, and it hasn't panned
    out that well. USC and UCLA again mostly added for market, but you have
    a traditional power in USC and a sometimes good football team in UCLA.

    My main concern is that you can only play so many games, so all the
    supposed high profile games that created out of this are not happening
    every year. USC isn't going to be playing Ohio State and Michigan and
    Penn State every year.

    It’s the redux of the old Southern Conference!

    What’s old is new again.

    Plus you don’t want all the high profile teams playing each other all the time because if you do that some of them will end up with losing records.

    Next question is when will these super conferences fragment after the
    rights bubble pops?
    --
    “I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian, liberal personality.” — Altie

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Michael Falkner@21:1/5 to JGibson on Thu Jul 7 10:21:04 2022
    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 6:41:53 AM UTC-7, JGibson wrote:

    I don't think they are going to just willy-nilly add teams at random. The Rutgers and Maryland adds were specifically for market value ... and it worked.

    No it didn't. The only thing Maryland has shown in the Big Ten is that killing people is good business for football. And... Rutgers? REALLY???

    Nebraska was added for football value, and it hasn't panned out that well. USC and UCLA again mostly added for market, but you have a traditional power in USC and a sometimes good football team in UCLA.

    Something happened at Nebraska. I have no idea what.

    My main concern is that you can only play so many games, so all the supposed high profile games that created out of this are not happening every year. USC isn't going to be playing Ohio State and Michigan and Penn State every year.

    Yes they are. You are assuming the dregs of the two remaining conferences are going to still be in said conferences.

    Mike

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Michael Falkner@21:1/5 to xyzzy on Thu Jul 7 10:22:25 2022
    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 7:27:02 AM UTC-7, xyzzy wrote:

    Plus you don’t want all the high profile teams playing each other all the time because if you do that some of them will end up with losing records.

    Fucking wah.

    Next question is when will these super conferences fragment after the
    rights bubble pops?

    The people paying the rights money are going to want best vs. best, and best vs. best ONLY, every week.

    Why am I going to pay for Rutgers vs. Northwestern when neither school should even be in "The New Division I" in football?

    Mike

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ken Olson@21:1/5 to Michael Falkner on Thu Jul 7 15:30:59 2022
    On 7/7/2022 1:21 PM, Michael Falkner wrote:
    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 6:41:53 AM UTC-7, JGibson wrote:

    I don't think they are going to just willy-nilly add teams at random. The Rutgers and Maryland adds were specifically for market value ... and it worked.

    No it didn't. The only thing Maryland has shown in the Big Ten is that killing people is good business for football. And... Rutgers? REALLY???

    Nebraska was added for football value, and it hasn't panned out that well. USC and UCLA again mostly added for market, but you have a traditional power in USC and a sometimes good football team in UCLA.

    Something happened at Nebraska. I have no idea what.

    My main concern is that you can only play so many games, so all the supposed high profile games that created out of this are not happening every year. USC isn't going to be playing Ohio State and Michigan and Penn State every year.

    Yes they are. You are assuming the dregs of the two remaining conferences are going to still be in said conferences.

    Mike

    They need a coach with hot coed daughters,

    --
    ÄLSKAR - Fänga Dagen

    Слава Україні та НАТО

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JGibson@21:1/5 to Michael Falkner on Thu Jul 7 15:34:44 2022
    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 1:21:08 PM UTC-4, Michael Falkner wrote:
    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 6:41:53 AM UTC-7, JGibson wrote:

    I don't think they are going to just willy-nilly add teams at random. The Rutgers and Maryland adds were specifically for market value ... and it worked.
    No it didn't. The only thing Maryland has shown in the Big Ten is that killing people is good business for football. And... Rutgers? REALLY???

    Yes, it worked perfectly from the Big Ten's point of view:

    Quote:
    Good news, Maryland and Rutgers actually are making BTN lots of money

    https://www.landgrantholyland.com/2015/10/5/9453701/big-ten-expansion-west-ohio-state-big-ten-network-maryland-rutgers

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JGibson@21:1/5 to Michael Falkner on Thu Jul 7 15:38:49 2022
    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 1:21:08 PM UTC-4, Michael Falkner wrote:
    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 6:41:53 AM UTC-7, JGibson wrote:

    My main concern is that you can only play so many games, so all the supposed high profile games that created out of this are not happening every year. USC isn't going to be playing Ohio State and Michigan and Penn State every year.
    Yes they are. You are assuming the dregs of the two remaining conferences are going to still be in said conferences.


    Sometimes, the dregs are in hot recruiting areas. You still need your in-roads to the DC area, the Chicago area, etc. Having Rutgers and Maryland in the conference makes it easier for the rest of the Big Ten to recruit New Jersey and the DC area. You'
    ll still want to keep Northwestern and Illinois for the same reason.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Michael Falkner@21:1/5 to JGibson on Thu Jul 7 16:22:16 2022
    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 3:38:51 PM UTC-7, JGibson wrote:

    Sometimes, the dregs are in hot recruiting areas. You still need your in-roads to the DC area, the Chicago area, etc. Having Rutgers and Maryland in the conference makes it easier for the rest of the Big Ten to recruit New Jersey and the DC area. You'
    ll still want to keep Northwestern and Illinois for the same reason.

    Another way I think NIL changes the game. I don't think that matters that much anymore.

    If that were the case, we can kill the Pac-12 right now. No top-flight California HS QB wants to play in that conference.

    Mike

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Michael Falkner@21:1/5 to JGibson on Thu Jul 7 16:21:09 2022
    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 3:34:47 PM UTC-7, JGibson wrote:

    Yes, it worked perfectly from the Big Ten's point of view:

    Quote:
    Good news, Maryland and Rutgers actually are making BTN lots of money

    https://www.landgrantholyland.com/2015/10/5/9453701/big-ten-expansion-west-ohio-state-big-ten-network-maryland-rutgers

    That makes no sense from an on-the-field perspective. And now it really makes no sense, when spots are at a premium and there are several better candidates (Notre Dame, Oregon, etc.).

    Mike

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From RSFC Moderator@21:1/5 to Michael Falkner on Fri Jul 8 10:31:31 2022
    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 7:22:19 PM UTC-4, Michael Falkner wrote:
    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 3:38:51 PM UTC-7, JGibson wrote:

    Sometimes, the dregs are in hot recruiting areas. You still need your in-roads to the DC area, the Chicago area, etc. Having Rutgers and Maryland in the conference makes it easier for the rest of the Big Ten to recruit New Jersey and the DC area. You'
    ll still want to keep Northwestern and Illinois for the same reason.

    Rutgers and Maryland allowed the Big10 network to charge a lot of non-college football fans in DC and NYC $1/month. Rutgers seems a poor fit to me, but I'm not cashing that check. No doubt they hope to do the same in LA.

    If memory serves, before that expansion PSU was already heavily recruiting Maryland and PSU and tOSU both had a big NJ recruiting presence. I'd haven't looked it up, but I'd guess Ohio State's recruiting of that region has actually gone down as they
    basically recruit nationally these days.

    Another way I think NIL changes the game. I don't think that matters that much anymore.

    NIL is a big change. There have always been boosters with $100 handshakes. And some of them have written huge checks in the past--- OkState comes to mind. But bringing those things together is going to surprise us. To the extent recruiting becomes
    more about the Benjamins, it matters a lot more how deep the pockets of your boosters are. The tOSU coach said he thought they needed about $13m/year[1]. This is not a huge sum--- it's less than gate receipts for a single home game--- but it has to
    come from a smaller group of people and the quid pro quo is less clear: they don't get a ticket, they don't get broadcast rights, etc.

    I don't know which schools have boosters like that. Most of the marquee schools have some, I think. But some other schools may be even better: will we see Maryland and OkState and Oregon and Tennessee winning out of NIL?

    If that were the case, we can kill the Pac-12 right now. No top-flight California HS QB wants to play in that conference.

    I don't know about that--- what's the cash offer?

    To what is extent is it about the Benjamins?

    -rsfcm

    [1] $13m is $150,000 per scholarship with a little left over for walkons.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From m syadoz@21:1/5 to JGibson on Sat Aug 13 19:41:05 2022
    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 8:41:53 AM UTC-5, JGibson wrote:
    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 10:13:30 PM UTC-4, miande...@gmail.com wrote:
    Of the last 4 schools they have brought in with expansion:

    -1 is a really strong football program
    -2 are mediocre to bad football programs
    -1 is a downright horrific football program

    So of the last 4 teams brought in, only 1 of them actually values college football and has a history of being good at it.

    That scares me when I hear things like the bigten and sec may go to 20(or more), because what if some of those other schools to get to 20 or more are stanford, cal, duke, unc, etc.....

    I don't think they are going to just willy-nilly add teams at random. The Rutgers and Maryland adds were specifically for market value ... and it worked. Nebraska was added for football value, and it hasn't panned out that well. USC and UCLA again
    mostly added for market, but you have a traditional power in USC and a sometimes good football team in UCLA.


    Scott Frost confirmed WR Decoldest Crawford suffered an injury last week and will be out for an “extended” period of

    https://twitter.com/Sean_Callahan/status/1558487927205904384?s=20&t=0NEqIHNXP6xIlPSDIklUig



    My main concern is that you can only play so many games, so all the supposed high profile games that created out of this are not happening every year. USC isn't going to be playing Ohio State and Michigan and Penn State every year.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)