knapplc

They have a huge contract with ESPN, so yeah, they make a lot of money in football. But overall the CIC money dwarfs everything being discussed with TV revenue. the SECs contract still isnt as large as the big10s tv contracts Agreed. I'm just throwing out ideas. I have no idea why they would have said that.

I'm not getting too concerned over this report that the Pac-10 has the "OK to expand." The Pac-10 has been wanting to form a TV alliance with the Big 12 for a while now. With Nebraska and Missouri leaving the Big 12, two large assets (Nebraska's national TV draw and Missouri's regional draw) are gone. So it's in the Pac-10's interest to keep the Big 12 intact. I have no doubt that if the Big 10 formed a 16-team superconference that the SEC would follow suit, forcing the hand of the Pac-10 to merge or add teams or whatever. The Pac-10's motivation is two-fold - 1) it's better to lead than follow in this climate. Conferences who move quick could have the edge in adding the bigger names like Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, etc. So it behooves the Pac-10 not to sit on their duff and watch the action. 2) by rattling their saber like this, the Pac-10 could force the Big 12 to remain whole, quashing the Big 10's expansion efforts and maintaining the status quo in college football, while at the same time keeping their hopes of a TV merger alive. Getting the OK to expand is like getting permission to try and get in Sweet Mary Jane's Daisy Dukes by her older brother. He won't beat you up, but you still have to convince Sweet Mary Jane that you're the love of her life - at least for one night. Unfortunately for the Pac-10, Sweet Mary Jane's daddy (the role of Sweet Mary Jane's daddy will be played by the Texas legislature this evening) has a shotgun, and he's got some stipulations that go along with conjugating with his daughter - namely, taking care of her ugly sister, Baylor. The Pac-10 has to weigh their options and decide whether Sweet Mary Jane's crown jewels are worth giving up your principles with a Baylor. Easier said than done.

They have a huge contract with ESPN, so yeah, they make a lot of money in football. But overall the CIC money dwarfs everything being discussed with TV revenue.

There's always a bottom man on the totem pole. And Nebraska is working hard to improve academics, including the creation of a large research campus, which breaks ground this year. We're behind, but not far behind. And with our share of CIC money, we'll be able to catch up quickly. Look what Penn State did after they joined the Big 10.

That would make sense. There's also the fact that Notre Dame is the pinnacle Catholic university in America, and gets a tremendous amount of support from many of those folks. 68 million Catholics is a lot of people buying merchandise and watching your games and donating to your University, even if it's only a percentage of them.

Who hasn't tried that? Pretty much anyone with an inkling of what the consequences are. That only takes a little bit of common sense. But 150 isn't "harmless." You're still talking about 2nd- and 3rd-degree burns at that temperature. Further, the cool-down time is far less relevant than the temperature at the time of initial contact - that's when the majority of a burn happens.

The obvious question... Why isn't Notre Dame overwhelmingly interested in their chunk of that 6 billion? You make it sound as if there is 500 million waiting for whoever signs up. This is obviously a false assertion. The CIC exists and it is a fact that they get the lion's share of the six billion dollars in grant money available for research. I have no idea why Notre Dame values their independence so highly, but the fact that they do doesn't obviate the fact that there is money to be made through the CIC.

Bill Callahan's problem was never recruiting, it was coaching. He felt he just had to bring in talent and let it do its thing. Bo knows you have to mold talent into something useful. The difference between Bill Callahan and Bo Pelini is this: What Bill Callahan put on the field: What Bo Pelini puts on the field:

170 or 180, you're still going to get third-degree burns in the event that you stick that cup of joe in your crotch at an incline toward your body, remove the lid, then proceed to clumsily dump it on your potty parts, especially if it stays on there as long as Ms. Liebeck left the coffee on her jumblies.

Never say die, eh? In the face of the conversation going on here, you're sticking to your guns. Gotta admire that about you, bob.

You completely ignore the issue of the CIC, of course, but that's to be expected since it trounces any argument you have. But whatever. Addressing your points: 1. You continue to show a lack of understanding of the way recruiting works. First, tOSU, PSU and Michigan have not, until recently, put a premium on recruiting from California, Texas and/or Florida. Their recruiting apparatuses are minimal in these areas. This reflects a long-standing philosophy of recruiting in-region out of a belief in a certain kind of football. It isn't that they can't recruit down there, they simply chose not to - again, until recently. The rest of the Big 10 doesn't have the cachet it takes to recruit heavily out of region. Cold weather or no, kids aren't lining up to come to Illinois, Minnesota, Northwestern, etc. Second, Nebraska has had a long-standing philosophy of recruiting nationwide. One would think that a fan of the Huskers like you would know this, and understand our recruiting structure. It's somewhat surprising that you don't grasp this... or maybe it isn't. Because of this long-standing philosophy, we have recruiting inroads across the nation, from the East Coast to Florida to the South to Texas to California and most points in between that have football talent. The coaches in these schools know us, and they know what Tom Osborne and his protege, Bo, bring to the table. We're already seeing dividends in Pelini's recruiting, and we'll continue to see those dividends no matter which conference we're in because of the relationships we have with these schools, with these coaches. Again, a Nebraska fan should know these things. It's basic to our culture. 2 1) Players desire to play for coaches and teams that are successful and will continue to be successful. They gain that desire through the development of the relationships of our coaches with their high school/JUCO coaches. Weather isn't a factor. Funny - nobody bats an eyelash when a Miami player gets drafted by New England, or the Jints, or the Packers. And you never seem to hear those players complaining about the cold. Kinda seems like football is football, no matter where you play it. 2) Kids venture "that far from home" right now. We have a plethora of kids on our roster and 2011 class from Florida and California. This is a non-issue. 3) 1 and 2 are not correct, and we will not have to create new recruiting sources. And if we needed to go into tOSU's backyard and recruit we would, and have. Braylon Heard ring a bell? Kevin Williams? Maybe you don't follow recruiting, but I don't really follow recruiting and I know about these kids from Ohio. Odd that you don't. The more you post, the more it seems like you really don't "get" recruiting. It almost seems like you think a school just has to open its door and four or five kids fall into the coach's lap. Kind of like a certain southern school I know, one deep in the heart of Texas.

You're making the mistake of thinking that the decision-makers in this situation have the same concerns as the average joe posting messages in an online forum. These are men and women in control of hundreds of millions of dollars in assets, responsible for the success of their institutions. This has nothing to do with "emotion" and not feeling "appreciated," and everything to do with what's best for the institution. Period. What evidence do you have that moving to the Big 10 will hurt NU athletically? Why should it?

Hell Temple's probably as far from me as Austin. You know where Temple is? temple, texas? yes. anyone associated with health care knows where temple texas is. i can see that you are more than just curious. you want to somehow diminish my opinion because you think i live somewhere other than salina. fine go ahead if you please but just come out and say it from now on. Sorry for the questions, but when your ISP is clearwire, which isn't available in Salina, and your IP shows that you post from Temple, TX, I get a bit curious.

that network thing is something that they already have - bevo tv or something of that order - it's a joke. I wouldn't get too worked up about it. heck if it's that big of a deal then we should have our own "network" too. (hey, we do already - the pinnacle sports network!!!). this bevo tv thing is way over blown. Is Bevo TV available in Salina?

Hell Temple's probably as far from me as Austin. You know where Temple is?

Curious that it says you post from Temple, TX though. And through Clearwire, not Hughes.

But your provider doesn't cover Salina, KS. That's what's most strange about it.

That's weird, because the IP you post from resolves from Texas.

Dan Beebe throws a Texas-sized hissy fit.

If you don't mind me asking, RedNeck, who's your internet provider?

So what happens if Nebraska and Missouri say, "Sure, boys, we're staying in the Big 12" and then six months from now when the Big 10 gets in gear and lets NU and MU know their applications would be accepted? What are they going to do, demand hostages as signs of good faith from these two schools? Legally they can't force them to stay, and whatever contractual bind they put on us would have to apply to all schools, meaning Texas and Co. can't go to the Pac-10 at their discretion, either. Further, this kind of thing makes no sense. The Big 10 would take Texas in a heartbeat. Texas would make more money in the Big 10. The travel distances aren't much different via air for the Big 10 vs. the Pac-10 for Texas. The academic money from the CIC dwarfs what Texas would get from the Pac-10. This appears to be a lot of saber rattling, and not much else. The scenarios that would have to take place for this to have teeth are less likely than those involving a move to the Big 10 by Nebraska and Missouri. If it were me, I'd call their bluff.

Sorry bud, but that ship sailed for knapplc a looong time ago! By all means, bob, if you have any information to refute the information that I've presented in this discussion, feel free to share them with the group. We're all ears.

You drive to most games? From where? Which state do you live in?

He's not a Senior yet. His birthday is in August, so when he's a Sr he'll be 21. Several of us posted earlier in this thread that we have August birthdays and were in the same situation as Paul in school.

There are no guarantees that anyone gets invited anywhere, including the rumored six teams invited to the Pac-10. Judging by the standards of the Pac-10 and the Big 10, it seems far more likely that Nebraska will get invited to the Big 10 than all six teams, including OU, Oklahoma State and Texas Tech, will get invited to the Pac-10. Tying schools into package deals due to political maneuvering doesn't make the host conference happy - just ask Stanford. Further, all ten Pac-10 schools have to agree to allow all six of those rumored teams to join or that whole scenario is dead in the water, and Stanford has very little interest in schools like Texas Tech, OU and Okie Light, none of which are AAU schools. Nebraska, however, is an AAU school, along with Missouri, Kansas, Texas and aTm. That makes schools like Nebraska and Missouri very attractive to a conference like the Big 10, as does Missouri's population base and Nebraska's national following, both of whom would draw large ratings for the BTN. Again, you seem very uninformed about what's going on. Sometimes it's best to listen more than speak.