USC and UCLA to the B1G

[Red Five]

I find it hard to believe that ESPN can void their ACC deal w/o all (or a majority) of ACC schools agreeing.

 

Also, the ACC deal is vary favorable to ESPN long term.  Makes zero sense for them to get out of it.

[VectorVictor]

3 hours ago, Toe said:

To expand on what @mrandyk said, AAU membership is based heavily on how much the school brings in for competitive research grants. The easiest way to have a large total for that is to have a large medical school and research hospital. But since UNMC is separate from UNL, its research grant money isn't counted. IIRC there was one AAU member that has its med school on a separate campus, but was organized as a single unit, so they count their grant money there.

 

On a side note, Iowa State 'resigned' from the AAU just a couple months ago. Five members have left the AAU to date. UNL was the only one actually voted out, the others saw the writing on the wall and left on their own.

 

3 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

And, at the same time, they don't count the agriculture research that UNL is heavily involved in.

 

And there's no reason that the Ag research dollars *shouldn't* be counted. OTOH, it also helped UNL (et al) realize we rely too heavily on ag research and we need to diversify. 

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, Red Five said:

I find it hard to believe that ESPN can void their ACC deal w/o all (or a majority) of ACC schools agreeing.

 

Also, the ACC deal is vary favorable to ESPN long term.  Makes zero sense for them to get out of it.

 

You're talking about the network that is still overpaying Texass for BevoTV. 

[Red Five]

3 minutes ago, VectorVictor said:

You're talking about the network that is still overpaying Texass for BevoTV. 

 

ESPN got out of that bad contract by helping Texas get into the SEC (and in dissolving the LHN) where they feel they can make more money.  So they are taking something bad and making it good for them.

 

ESPN dissolving the ACC contract would be taking something good for them (paying the ACC below market rates) and making it cost more (having to pay the SEC more money with these new schools).

[nic]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

 

Saw the same retweet from Michigan 247 beat writer, Zach Shaw. I guess one guy can tweet something and it can go viral. The big10 might be bummed about NC and UVA, but this would push ND, Miami and some PAC12 leftovers our way….maybe Duke or Kansas.

[BigRedBuster]

1 hour ago, VectorVictor said:

And there's no reason that the Ag research dollars *shouldn't* be counted. OTOH, it also helped UNL (et al) realize we rely too heavily on ag research and we need to diversify. 

I don't know about that.  I believe UNMC is still progressing with their research as they had been before.  However, they have taken steps to build the relationship more between UNL and UNMC.

[Notre Dame Joe]

20 hours ago, ZRod said:

Being "good" with the LA teams doesn't make sense to me. You don't just pluck two teams off the west coast purely for the TV market with zero ties to the rest of the region or even the states between Nebraska and Cali.

 

Even after the addition of ND I think there would probably be 2 or 3 more teams West of the Mississippi the B1G would be courting; ala Oregon, Washington, and Stanford. But I wouldn't be shocked to see KU or CU come up in conversation either.

The big schools are trying to form an NFL for college.  Because of American demography the real NFL has some divisions that make no geographic sense.  

1 hour ago, Red Five said:

I find it hard to believe that ESPN can void their ACC deal w/o all (or a majority) of ACC schools agreeing.

 

Also, the ACC deal is vary favorable to ESPN long term.  Makes zero sense for them to get out of it.

I am sure the contract says it is void if X number of schools vote to void it, or blow up the conference altogether. Would ESPN  be happy to stop paying Wake Forest but overpay for the NFL of college?  I don't know but they have been subsidizing every move in that direction.

[BigRedBuster]

4 hours ago, hskrpwr13 said:

 

I would argue that fandom had nothing to do with the exaggerated ratings. It had to do with the game potentially having an impact on the CFP. If OSU had won, decent chance they'd have gotten in over Cincinnati.

College football fandom is much more prevalent in the midwest and other less populated areas than big cities like LA or NYC.

[FLusker]

If you go to some of the Michigan message boards, I do find it interesting that the sentiment from their fan base is very much anti-nebraska when the BIG expansion to include USC/UCLA is brought up. Lots of commentary amongst a few on kicking Nebraska out to let others in - or just kicking us out - holding us in the same regard as Rutgers - whether it is for not fitting in generally or the AAU thing (which is not well understood by most of them - at least its circumstances). Just interesting I suppose - especially from a team that compares so similarly to Nebraska historically speaking. I know we have not been good, like at all, since joining the Big Ten... but Im not sure they are have been lightyears ahead of us in that span either. I don't hate Michigan necessarily, don't like losing to them - but that feeling holds true for everyone in every conference. Not sure why that sentiment seems to be so prevalent - especially since most their 11 claimed national titles happened when there were leather helmets and multiple national champions crowned each year. 

[Decked]

Michigan fans are exceptionally entitled. They are just the red headed step brother of OSU. And will never top them. 

[Dogs In A Pile]

14 minutes ago, FLusker said:

I know we have not been good, like at all, since joining the Big Ten... but Im not sure they are have been lightyears ahead of us in that span either.

 

Maybe not light years but substantially better.

 

2011-2021

 

Mich

92-44 - 67.7%

 

NU

71-64 - 52.6%

[Red Five]

 

[JoeHuskers!]

2 minutes ago, Dogs In A Pile said:

 

Maybe not light years but substantially better.

 

2011-2021

 

Mich

92-44 - 67.7%

 

NU

71-64 - 52.6%

 

Man, 2015-present sure killed that percentage 

[BigRedBuster]

18 minutes ago, Decked said:

Michigan fans are exceptionally entitled. They are just the red headed step brother of OSU. And will never top them. 

What they are obviously being cluless about is what these decisions are based off of.  Nebraska continues to bring in some of the top viewed TV games in the conference.  Quite opposite of Rutgers.

[FLusker]

26 minutes ago, Dogs In A Pile said:

Maybe not light years but substantially better.

 

2011-2021

 

Mich

92-44 - 67.7%

 

NU

71-64 - 52.6%

 

Yeah I totally agree with you that they have been better - especially in the past 7 years. I guess my struggle is the sentiment of 21 more wins over a decade warrants the boot from the league. Seems a bit out of touch on their part. Especially since last season made up for +9 of that differential on their part. 

[TGHusker]

47 minutes ago, JoeHuskers! said:

 

Man, 2015-present sure killed that percentage 

Yes and during this time, OU, Yale, TX, PSU & I believe ND jumped us  on the all time win list.   I remember when NU was ranked 5th on this list.  We were 7th in 2019. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NCAA_football_teams_by_wins#:~:text=Measured in total wins%2C the,all divisions with 976 wins.

Rank	Team	Won	Lost	Tied	Pct	Total Games
1	Michigan	976	352	36	.729	1364
2 (T)	Ohio State	942	329	53	.731	1324
2 (T)	Alabama	942	333	43	.731	1318
4	Oklahoma	931	331	53	.728	1312
5	Notre Dame	929	330	42	.730	1301
6	Texas	928	385	33	.702	1346
7	Yale	921	385	55	.697	1361
8	Penn State	909	404	41	.686	1354
9	Nebraska	908	409	40	.684	1357