Delaney Adding Nebraska, Maryland and Rutgers
- Thread starter Rick Pigeons
- Start date
Nebraska got its first full share of the B1G contract this year, $51 million! That is six times more than they got in the Big12. They have a $115 million income from sports, and they now give $10 million a year back to the general fund for scholarships. Nebraska will not be leaving the B1G.
Problem is the subscriptions are dropping dramatically, as Netflix, Hulu, etc. Continue to increase at a very rapid rate. A la Carte programming will eventually kill the current model as consumers cut ties on extras.
Conference realignment has been about using a short term financial advantage (tv contracts) to create a long term structural advantage (a growing collection of large, state flagship research schools).
Nebraska was a top 10 football brand that allowed a conference title game. Maryland and Rutgers are perfect institutional fits. Both are great long-term academic/research partners that bring lots of students into the B1G. Iowa isn't much of a beneficiary in this area, but schools like Michigan and OSU have seen their applications take off from NJ/Maryland students. Which was a necessary move due to the demographic shift of the Midwest.
Adding state flagships has been the norm for the power conferences, because of the structural advantages they bring. SEC took Missouri and the one second school that is as valuable as a flagship in Texas A&M. P12 took Utah and Colorado. B1G picked up three.
Nebraska was a top 10 football brand that allowed a conference title game. Maryland and Rutgers are perfect institutional fits. Both are great long-term academic/research partners that bring lots of students into the B1G. Iowa isn't much of a beneficiary in this area, but schools like Michigan and OSU have seen their applications take off from NJ/Maryland students. Which was a necessary move due to the demographic shift of the Midwest.
Adding state flagships has been the norm for the power conferences, because of the structural advantages they bring. SEC took Missouri and the one second school that is as valuable as a flagship in Texas A&M. P12 took Utah and Colorado. B1G picked up three.
It's not about what Rutgers and Maryland are today, it's about what they can be in the future given the proper resources and commitment to their athletic programs.
People will end up paying more for the things they watch a la carte as opposed to having a large package of stuff they don't watch.
No they won't. They are already paying much less. The interest in sports is dropping among younger demographics, and they are cutting the cord......hence ESPN massive layoffs after dramatic losses of subscriptions.
That's very different than what you said the first time. If interest in sports drops, then people will pay less to watch it. If people merely alter the delivery of their sports (or any content) and demand doesn't drop, you can be sure the market will find it's level even as platforms change. Just because people "cut the cord" doesn't necessarily mean they are less interested in sports though.
They are dropping ESPN in huge numbers. That is an indicator in itself.
ESPN used to be the place to go for sports. Now it's just one of many. And there's many people dropping it because it's chosen to make itself a platform for expressing political views rather than just covering sports. If ESPN didn't have any Big Ten rights, I'd have dropped them 10 years ago.
You are naive if you think millions of subscribers are dropping them because of politics.
Rick, Rutgers is a sleeping giant. I'm assuming you are a youngster but they did it under Schiano and they did it under Frank "Major" Burns in the mid 70's. When they finally get their act together in Piscataway, the B1G will be happy they are in the fold. There is no doubt the new society is watching sports a different way today. New technology, new viewing habits, changes in lifestyle all require a different way of looking at this. All I know is when the dust settles, Rick, we are going to want Rutgers saddling up next to us with a little bit of their right coast money.
Thanks for the view Taj. I respect your opinion but wow you really think they were the right add? I think we argued (well strongly discussed!) on the Scarlet Knight board - were you the one who wanted to add Villanova and Cincinnati to the Big Ten instead of Nebraska and Maryland?
That was I. I knew Nova and the Nati weren't going to join the Big 10. I was only making the point that back in '05 Jay Wright and Huggy Bear would have been good additions to the Big Ten. Strong coaches who bring that 3 yards and a cloud of dust attitude to the hardwood. I was always a big fan of Rutgers, for good reason too. The B1G bought low with Rutgers. Mark my words.
Nebraska can't compete with the "Iowa's of the world"? lol
Nebraska is 3-3 since 2011, 8-4 since 1979 and 29-15-3 overall.
What do you mean by "Iowa's of the world"?
Right, easy schedule. Like three teams in the top ten, and usually between 4 and 6 teams in the top twenty five. Every conference has some weaker teams toward the bottom. Yes even the big 12 and mighty SEC.
You think Iowa is God's gift to the Big10 in academics????! And I am an Iowa grad from the Law School. If Nebraska had got its shit together on a single university vs. 3 separate entities of a single university, it would not have lost the AAU. UNMC is a different "entity" than UNL and UNO, and each of their respective research activities and funds dilute their scholarship and requirements for the AAU standards. In actuality, all three are a single university like Iowa. When combined, it would better or at least equal Iowa, MSU, Indiana, & Illinois; and the AAU criteria would have been satisfied resulting in no loss of a "founding" member. But just like life and politics, "divide and conquer" rules and the "Omaha vs. Lincoln" spat got in the way. 
LIkewise, Rutgers and Maryland are significantly better than Iowa academically. Enough said.
UNL will get its act together soon enough athletically. Let's talk then.
LIkewise, Rutgers and Maryland are significantly better than Iowa academically. Enough said.
UNL will get its act together soon enough athletically. Let's talk then.
UNO, UNL and UNMC are three distinctly separate entities. To argue that they should be considered one and the same would be similar to argue that UI, ISU, and UNI should be considered one institution. Which they are not.
I don't think Rutgers will ever awaken. They have no tradition, they have no athletic reputation and there is too much entertainment competition in NY for them to make up ground. How many new schools have broken into the top 25 in football or basketball rankings during the past 30 years? Kids don't want to go to Rutgers to play sports and fans don't want to watch Rutgers play. There simply isn't a interested alumni base. I seriously doubt many NY TVs have been gained by adding Rutgers. Hell, we probably would have added more NY TVs by bringing in the University of Pittsburgh.
I'd add that Rutgers is also an excellent academic and "culture" fit for the Big 10. Also, New Jersey can be pretty talent rich ... and it has traditionally always been a bit of a feeder for the Big 10 in that regard. Having Rutgers in the Big 10 also likely convinces less talent to leak out to other conferences too. For similar reason, I'd say that Maryland is a good fit too. In many respects, given that Maryland is trying to "brand itself" as being an east-coast version of Oregon ... Maryland could potentially be even more of a "sleeping giant."
oh okay that is why they all have a single president???!
The same president as UN-Kearney and Nebraska College of Technical Agriculture. I didn't see you attempting to take credit for those two campuses.
Why does each campus have their own Chancellor?
Many of my students (in Nebraska) tell me that you cannot spell "drunk" without UNK. A ringing endorsement of UN-Kearney.
The problem with conference realignment and increasing size is that in the pursuit of more money, they've lost what was the best part of college football, the rivalries. Nebraska, Maryland, and Rutgers feel like orphans in the Big 10 because they have no history with the other schools. And by increasing the size of the conference, the original schools have lost a lot as well. Iowa only plays OSU and Michigan half the time now.
Its not just the three Big 10 schools. TA&M no longer plays Texas. Missouri no longer plays KU. West Virginia no longer plays Pitt. Syracuse lost all of their rivalries.
Is more money worth sacrificing everything that is wonderful about the game? Do you love lowa football because they can afford to build lots of shiny new buildings or do you love it because there is nothing like being in Iowa City on a Saturday in the Fall when Michigan is in town?
Its not just the three Big 10 schools. TA&M no longer plays Texas. Missouri no longer plays KU. West Virginia no longer plays Pitt. Syracuse lost all of their rivalries.
Is more money worth sacrificing everything that is wonderful about the game? Do you love lowa football because they can afford to build lots of shiny new buildings or do you love it because there is nothing like being in Iowa City on a Saturday in the Fall when Michigan is in town?
Last edited:
I love playing Nebraska every year. They fit more than the others. Just look at the number of Nebbie threads on this board then tell me they don't belong.
Missouri was never an option. They didn't qualify. Schools have to meet several requirements to be considered and Missouri fell short on a couple of them. I believe one of them had to do with their graduate school..
Also, Mizzou is a mess. After all of that nightmarish protesting last year, enrollment continues to plummet. 2017 is the first year that the university wasn't even the #1 choice in the state. I live in the KC area and parents around here flat-out tell their kids they can't go to Mizzou. The dorms are so empty that the university has started advertising rooms for rent to football fans. Two nights for $100. Sports are a disaster as well. An argument could be made that Mizzou would be as bad of a choice as Rutgers..
I'm guessing you are a KU guy. No one remembers or cares what happened on campus, it was all contrived political BS. Mizzou will be back, every school goes through transitory ups and downs. Guarantee Mizzou will be better off in 5 years than Nebraska. Basketball already is, we just need a new football coach.
B1G could have done better. Rutgers is a head scratcher. Missouri would have made more sense than Nebraska.
Mizzou would have been good fit. It is crazy B1G says academics were factor for faculty and they don't do anything about football or basketball player graduation rates. B1G/ NCAA is about making money for insider bureaucrats and coaches.
The B1G.
Big12 was easy victory after easy victory. The B1G is Neb getting blown out after blow out.
Col, Mizzu, T A&M, & Neb all had good/great success in the Big12. They've all sucked in their new conferences.
Yep and Iowa has sucked worse since Neb joined the B1G. Average divisional finish since 2011:
1. Wisconsin
2. Nebraska
3. Io_a
Ya I know - met my wife at Iowa in 1988 and it's a special place for us. Always wanted to have one kid be a Hawkeye to keep the streak going. Have learned to love the Madison and the amazing school but still detest the Badgers even paying for a kid to go there haha
Mizzou made two trips to the SEC championship, so I'd have to disagree. They have sucked the past two years since Pinkel got sick and left (Hayden Fry II), but Mizzou has a lot of natural advantages (like being the only in state Div 1 program) that should make it easy for them to bounce back when they hire a new coach.
Ok, UNL won the first two but is fortunate not to have a 4 game losing streak to us.
Huskers have won by 13, 6, and 3 in OT
Hawks have won by 21, 8, and 30
Don’t try to spin you’ve been better than us the past six years and don’t try to say it’s been even the past few
Huskers have won by 13, 6, and 3 in OT
Hawks have won by 21, 8, and 30
Don’t try to spin you’ve been better than us the past six years and don’t try to say it’s been even the past few
2011-2017
Nebraska 55-31
Iowa 50-34
Trying to understand how Iowa is deemed better during the time period.
Missouri? Have any of you been to Missouri? It is the South, plain and simple. Culturally not a good fit with the BIG. Nebraska is a much better fit than Missouri.
Rutgers, I can't argue right now, they've stunk. They do have the ability to put it all together. It's a project school for the BIG. Give them time to figure it out and elevate their athletics with the resources now available to them.
Rutgers, I can't argue right now, they've stunk. They do have the ability to put it all together. It's a project school for the BIG. Give them time to figure it out and elevate their athletics with the resources now available to them.
And yet with all the footage BTN has they insist on playing the same 3 games per team on loop.
