Sporting News: Nebraska's the wild card in expansion talks

It's nice to finally feel appreciated in this conference. I'm sure Beebe doesn't like the look of things without us. I still think the greatest move in all of this was TO openly stating we would listen to offers. The man is a genius.

 
irafreak said:
It's nice to finally feel appreciated in this conference. I'm sure Beebe doesn't like the look of things without us. I still think the greatest move in all of this was TO openly stating we would listen to offers. The man is a genius.
Click to expand...
I think we should all thank TO, and the Bobfather too, for the appreciation we are feeling. Everyone is talking about what we would bring to the Big 10 by way of tv viewership etc. What we shouldn't overlook here is the "how" we have done it. I'm not so sure we exchange football history with OU we get a Big 10 invite. The Switzer years, the cargate disaster, these are the type of thing the Big 10 wants no part of. We, for the most part, have done things the right way and stayed out of trouble. We have enough going against us as far as Big 10 membership goes. A probation here or there could be enough to have kept us out. When people think Nebraska, they think of TO going for two, calmly chewing his gum on the sidelines sans rants, trying to beat the big boys with walk-ons from small towns in Nebraska. I could see Devaney in the big 10 too, going at it with Schembechler and Hayes. In short, we have a pretty good image, as long as the Big 10 higher ups don't read this board. :hellloooo

 
Nexus said:
I just read a Notre Dame blog the other day about this very same thing and he basically said the exact same thing I quoted above.

2) The myth of capturing "The New York Market"
I keep hearing that the Big Ten really wants to capture the New York City market, and that they hope to do it through expansion. I can understand the reasoning. NYC is the biggest market in the country, and if the Big Ten could get the BTN on basic cable in New York through expansion, it would be a massive coup for the league. Imagine 20 million New Yorkers ponying up $.70 a pop per month for the BTN through their cable providers. You're talking about some major dollars there.

But it's a complete fantasy because it would never happen. If you add Syracuse and Rutgers, that isn't changing the landscape in New York City one bit. Does anyone really think New Yorkers give a crap about Rutgers football or basketball?? Hilarious. Rutgers has a 2,500 seat basketball arena that doesn't even sell out. And I highly doubt that New Yorkers are showing up in droves to watch Rutgers football.

New York is a pro town. Local media coverage goes to the Yanks, Knicks, Mets, Giants, Jets, etc. Even among "local" colleges, Rutgers probably is behind St. Johns and Seton Hall and Syracuse and UConn in terms of interest.

If you want to capture the New York market, the only school worth pursuing is Notre Dame. There's a reason why Notre Dame was asked to play at Yankee Stadium this year ($175 tickets....outrageous!). ND can sell out Yankee Stadium and create buzz in the city. Rutgers does neither.

People aren't thinking this stuff through. If the Big Ten adds Syracuse and Rutgers and then demands that the big New York cable companies add the BTN on basic cable, those cable companies would laugh in Jim Delany's face. They had trouble adding the freaking YES Network to basic cable when it came out for god sakes. Do you really think they're adding a channel that carries Minnesota-Wisconsin women's softball for half the year on basic cable?? No chance. There are too many interests in New York City to create a captive audience. You can force your way onto basic cable in Columbus, Ohio where people are nuts for OSU sports and will demand to see every game. That isn't happening in New York. If Syracuse fans can't see all their hoops games, tough luck. Go to a sports bar.

If I was the Big Ten, I would forget the New York market. There's not enough demand for college sports there. I would go where to places where college sports matter like the Midwest, Great Plains, and the south.

The media seems to buy into this "bigger is better" mantra, but all this looks like to me is a watered-down product. You've taken a Midwestern league and created this unwieldy 16 team mess that adds very little in terms of big time programs or passionate new fanbases.

LINK
Click to expand...
BTW, that ND blog article is decent. If you can get past his Irish bias throughout the article, he does make some good points. He also agrees with the Sporting News article that Nebraska should be the first team the Big Ten should go after.
Click to expand...
I actually would have to counter his arguments, Rutgers doesn't draw great for mens basketball, but their arena does seat 8,000 people.

Almost all cable companies already carry the Big Ten Network along with Dish and Direct, they can then just simply say give me an additional 50 cents per sub or lose the channel. And while it's not uncommon for programming disputes to happen and channels to be pulled, the Big 10 Network would eventually win, and rake in another 20-30 million a month.

Rutgers may not be a "big draw", but the thought of bringing Penn St, Ohio St and Michigan into the sports crazed market of NY will increase intrest, and viewership.

Rutgers has an enrollment figure of 54,600 students (across 3 campuses) and over 380,000 alumni, and they've invested serious $$ into their football program. They are an improving program and the Big 10 could then look to rotate the title game into Chicago, New York/New Jersey, Detroit, Indy, Cincinatti, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, KC, St Louis and Minneapolis if they ever build their stadium. That gives you 10 big cities with NFL stadiums (ignoring Green Bay) that you could have BID for your title game, another huge $$ source.

Rutgers makes perfect sense IMO, maybe even more than NU as much as it pains me to say it.

 
New York is a pro sports town. Why do you think adding Rutgers to the Big 10 would increase attention in the NYC market? They already have ready access to the Big 10 and to Rutgers, and pay them both little attention.

 
knapplc said:
New York is a pro sports town. Why do you think adding Rutgers to the Big 10 would increase attention in the NYC market? They already have ready access to the Big 10 and to Rutgers, and pay them both little attention.
Click to expand...
You don't think Notre Dame, Michigan, Ohio St or Nebraska coming into the area to play a game would increase media coverage and attention? Rutgers has already booked Army to play in the new Meadowlands stadium this fall. If Rutgers starts playing in, and winning some big games, the market WILL follow. Don't believe me? In 2006 when Rutgers played Louisville on ESPN the game drew an 8.1 rating in New York, which was significant, even the Empire State building decided to lite itself in Scarlet for that game. Even if it didn't capture the New York market, New Jersey has 8.7 million residents compared to 7.8 million residents COMBINED in Missouri and Nebraska. Additionally, the Big 10 commissioner Jim Delaney grew up in New Jersey, so he has roots in that area already. Lastly, current athletics director of Rutgers Tim Pernetti is a "TV Guy", he worked for ABC Sports from 94-2003, and was the director of programming, he then moved to CSTV (which became CBS College Sports) and was the Executive Vice President there. He understands TV relationships, and can open doors in that market. New Jersey\New York provides a great recruiting base for the Big Ten, especially in basketball.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-03-01/sports/chi-big-ten-expansion-side-mar02_1_rutgers-athletic-center-big-ten-network-penn-state-rutgers

http://www.scarletknights.com/news/release.asp?prID=4543

 
Nothing in either of those articles does anything to dispel the fact that New York City does not follow college sports. The Big 10 Network is already available in New York through Comcast, Cablevision and Time Warner, so it's not like they're adding markets by adding Rutgers. Further, New York doesn't follow Rutgers (again, being a pro sports town).

Rutgers is not the school they're going after. Notre Dame is that school, and if they can't get Notre Dame they'll gladly take Nebraska. Rutgers is nice, but nobody outside of Rutgers alumnae care about Rutgers.

 
The big thing Rutgers is guaranteed to do is add money through the state of New Jersey. The BTN agreements with the big cable companies have a payout significantly higher for people in a B10 universities state so whether they watch or not that is a big boost in money right there. Any extra eyeballs they get on the games out there is just advertising gravy.

 
knapplc said:
Nothing in either of those articles does anything to dispel the fact that New York City does not follow college sports. The Big 10 Network is already available in New York through Comcast, Cablevision and Time Warner, so it's not like they're adding markets by adding Rutgers. Further, New York doesn't follow Rutgers (again, being a pro sports town).

Rutgers is not the school they're going after. Notre Dame is that school, and if they can't get Notre Dame they'll gladly take Nebraska. Rutgers is nice, but nobody outside of Rutgers alumnae care about Rutgers.
Click to expand...
Notre Dame plays games in Yankees Stadium and the new Meadowlands this fall, Rutgers has a game in the new Meadowlands also. Syracuse is setting up to play USC in 2012 and Notre Dame in 2014 and 2016 in the new Meadowlands. If New York didn't care about college sports, why would they be adding a bowl game back in Yankee Stadium this winter? And that's just football, you can't ignore the college basketball scene where New York annually hosts the finals of the preseason NIT and postseason NIT, as well as the Big East Conference tournament every year.

Where is it a fact that NYC doesn't care about college sports? Links?

 
EDIT - sorry. I'm not trying to be a jerk. Just not feeling well. My apologies.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jliehr said:
knapplc said:
Nothing in either of those articles does anything to dispel the fact that New York City does not follow college sports. The Big 10 Network is already available in New York through Comcast, Cablevision and Time Warner, so it's not like they're adding markets by adding Rutgers. Further, New York doesn't follow Rutgers (again, being a pro sports town).

Rutgers is not the school they're going after. Notre Dame is that school, and if they can't get Notre Dame they'll gladly take Nebraska. Rutgers is nice, but nobody outside of Rutgers alumnae care about Rutgers.
Click to expand...
Notre Dame plays games in Yankees Stadium and the new Meadowlands this fall, Rutgers has a game in the new Meadowlands also. Syracuse is setting up to play USC in 2012 and Notre Dame in 2014 and 2016 in the new Meadowlands. If New York didn't care about college sports, why would they be adding a bowl game back in Yankee Stadium this winter? And that's just football, you can't ignore the college basketball scene where New York annually hosts the finals of the preseason NIT and postseason NIT, as well as the Big East Conference tournament every year.

Where is it a fact that NYC doesn't care about college sports? Links?
Click to expand...
I don't think it really matters what NYC ultimately thinks about college football, as diverse as it is, and a large ex-pat population from other states, it will have enough fans to make it worthwhile. Even if only 1% of NYC are college football fans (which I doubt is that low), that's still 80,000 people. 5% would make it about 1 and a half times the size of Lincoln.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top