Wistrom Disciple

True, however they're also going after the two Bellevue West WR/TE guys in the Class of 2022 among others. Certainly possible that all three would stay at TE but the numbers game may force some adjustments. Would be pretty cool to get that height advantage angle going again though. Seemed to work out very well for Iowa State against Oklahoma's secondary this past weekend.

Definitely on Fidone. Per @Mavric above, Carnie wants to stay on the offensive side as well. Rollins is quiet but the guy looks like he could be a steal once he gets on campus for us similar to Jurgens or Zach Potter who had the body types to be moved around in college and thrive at different spots.

Rollins plays some DE/OLB. Unsure on Fidone or Carnie.

You're right, the amount of eyeballs and product is a big part of the equation. However, the lack of a live product versus the SEC, ACC & Big 12 is definitely going to be a factor. The other conferences will soon be filling air time with their fall sports and not just on Saturdays. Yes, we hope the Big Ten reverses their decision soon and we get back to normal, but the poor publicity/leadership will most certainly be targeted by TV executives on the next round of negotiations. Yes, the conference will still make an ungodly amount of money. I do believe the SEC & ACC are going to be much more competitive in their deals. It is going to be harder to justify that the Big Ten should get $10 million more per school than the ACC or SEC schools knowing that some Big Ten schools could quickly choose to not play at the next crisis in 3, 6, 9 years, etc. Versus the other two conferences who appeared to be solidly committed to finding a way to fulfill their TV contracts to the best of their ability.

Good point, I overlooked that. That said, I still don't believe the conference title game is as important this year.

Oklahoma has been in four of the past five years. The Pac 12 has been in once in the past five years. The Pac 12 has a title game, the Big 12 does not. The title game in a normal year is a benefit. This year, an extra game would be better for BTN as well as the programs who missed out on spring football development and a normal fall camp.

To be fair, the 2016 season you're referring to had Oklahoma as the best team with two non-conference losses. The lack of a conference title game did not factor into the equation. The very first year of the CFP (2014) left out TCU & Baylor as one-loss teams. That said, conference title games are not requirements to make the CFP, especially if that team is undefeated in the Power 5.

Right, but as Oklahoma has proven, a title game isn't necessary to make the CFP. And the Big Ten already has contracted in to get the top teams in the big games in the postseason so a conference title game is kind of irrelevant this year. In short, my argument would be that the conference and the programs would benefit more by getting everyone the ninth game in this weird year.

Maybe I'm missing something but why have a conference title game this season? If money is the reason, I'd assume they could get more by just having a weekend of rivalry games all played as the conclusion of a nine game schedule (six division & three crossovers)?

Would've been nice to have these joyous Badger fans, coaches and administrators speaking up in favor of the season from the beginning. Again, I truly hope all Husker Athletic social media accounts take a page from Jordan and simply post a "You're Welcome." message whenever these games get announced as back on. Ohio State spoke up after a little hesitation but Nebraska was the one school to stay true to the message from the outset and it was the entire lineup of administrators. Rather impressive.

Great point. Although I would imagine Nebraska, Ohio State, etc. would share TV revenues if they got to play and could keep their parking, concessions, ticket money, etc. Not fair to the schools putting their players and coaches out there but at the same time, the current situation isn't fair either. I think the programs wanting to play and keep from firing staff or cutting sports would take whatever they could right now.

To be fair, if they report on these issues they are essentially inviting their audience to unsubscribe until the sports come back. And yes they probably don’t want to piss off the conference office or specific schools by pointing out the decision and that the consequences would only to rile up fan bases. A ‘don’t bite the hand that feeds you’ type of thing.

Looks like the players' lawsuit might not be the only legal action coming (Article) "“Nebraskans expect transparency from nonprofits operating in this state, and the Big Ten Conference is no exception.... The act also says the state cannot regulate internal affairs of a corporation from outside the state that is authorized to conduct business in Nebraska."

Going to be difficult to quantify but tens of millions would be a minimum estimate. A big impact will also be felt on the TV negotiations coming up if the cable providers and major networks punish the Big Ten for the mess created. Going to be harder to get better deals than the ACC & SEC after this debacle.

Exactly this! The Big Ten commish is making $4.5 million each year. What exactly is he being paid for right now?

Edited post, keyboard moving a little too fast. In short, yes the decision has politicians weighing in and some have been speaking up from the start of the postponement. No, it is not just because it is an election year and I agree, the decision to not play football is not based on whether university presidents want Biden or Trump in office.

Delete

I believe that is how you may be interpreting the political references but I would argue that there are also internal politics at these schools playing out. Michigan is the prime example. This postponement has had politicians weighing in from the start (Sasse) and from my perspective it is justified. This is a +$100 million decision for Nebraska in which Nebraska has little to no control over the decision.

I believe some of the political aspects being mentioned are in reference to internal university politics and the egos among the different officials and not necessarily political in the sense of the Presidency. Board of Regents, donors, athletic department officials, coaches, chancellors, university presidents all jostling to get their way. Big lessons in university power structures are going to come from this year and I wouldn't be surprised to see some restructuring going on in the future. For instance, will Boards of Regents take more authority from individual school presidents when deciding important matters regarding the school? Thankfully this isn't an issue for Nebraska now (finally) but many other schools are going to have some serious discussions regarding who leads the school in the future.

Took the Purdue coach all of 48 hours to write up a mock spring plan. These guys have had since March/April and what we've seen is pitiful. Going to be hard pressed for the commish and some of these university presidents to stick around long if this is the type of leadership to be expected.

It's definitely getting political. The ego of some of these university presidents is amazing. They fail to understand that for 13 of the 14, they represent public universities funded, in part, by state tax dollars. I would imagine that the Board of Regents at these universities are having some pretty heavy discussions on where their chancellors/presidents are falling on this issue and their futures. Took us 15 years to get Harvey out of the way, I'd be shocked if it takes half of that time to remove a few of these presidents & chancellors at a place like Michigan.

Hell it could be North Dakota State and Northwest Missouri State for that matter. Just the restrictions of not being allowed to play or make your own schedule for this one odd year is confusing.

Agreed, let the eight play that want to play. The six who want to wait can play an abbreviated spring season. The eight playing in the fall can play the other seven teams. The logic behind all this is just baffling with the rest of the country moving on (West Coast appears content not playing this year).

I'd like to believe this is a good sign for the conference's chances for fall football. Hard to tell whether the university presidents are paying attention to this or are more entrenched in medical reports or their own sets of data. With the lack of transparency so far, it's hard to get a pulse on what exactly is going on internally.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the coaches, ADs and universities were having constant meetings throughout the summer. I recall reading Moos had mentioned that he was having daily AD conference calls with all the other ADs in the conference. Seemed like the athletic departments had established consensus protocols and plans which is why they were all dumbstruck once they postponed despite all the safety measures that were taken since mid-summer.