Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

[Dryden]

Lots of words... still not convinced.

The bigger match-ups argument I can buy; but the more teams you add, the less often you play everyone. This gives you diminishing returns at some point. I see no reason why those diminishing returns don't happen when you go from 12 to 14. I'm not saying they do; but the suggestion that going from 12 to 14 is good because it means bigger match-ups only holds water in the years when you actually get the match-ups you want. And what if moving to 14 means we lose the intersectional games that we've had the last few years? Then the net addition is zero.

As for your hypothetical of "locking up the state of Georgia". I'm not buying. You only lock up the TV sets that are watching GT right now, and that's not everyone in the state by a long shot and TV execs, advertisers and their customers know it. You are adding more viewers, but I'm still not convinced you're adding more viewers per game.

Having said all that, my mind is still open on this. There may be an argument that sways me; but I have yet to see it.

It's not about getting 20M viewers tuned into Ohio State vs Nebraska, it's about getting 10M viewers tuned into Nebraska vs Iowa, and then another 10M viewers tuned into Ohio State vs Maryland (or whoever). The more programs in the fold, the more value there is in the highlight shows. If you own the content, the more you can charge ESPN and CBS to license permission to rebroadcast that footage as part of their highlight shows. The broader the distribution of your own network, and the more content you have to offer, then the more you can charge ESPN to buy a package of games. It's leverage.

Even if the big-time matchups happen less often, more is still more.

 

[TexasBuck]

I haven't seen much mention of Boston College as a expansion target. They wouldn't be my top choice but I think they make more sense than Virginia, Rutgers, Syracuse and a few others that keep popping up. Boston College is a great school, has a massive new TV market and decent football. (They've beaten Notre Dame 7 out of the last 10 games)

Notre Dame, Georgia Tech, Boston College, Virginia Tech would be a pretty good haul in my opinion.

 

[knapplc]

Reports are coming in that Baylor has backed down. Statement should be released soon. Expect announcement of A&M to the SEC today, effective 07/01/12.

 

[jlb1705]

I assure you - the SEC doesn't need more money.

Cecil Newton thinks Mississippi State could've used a little more.

 

[SalemBuckeyeFan]

I haven't seen much mention of Boston College as a expansion target. They wouldn't be my top choice but I think they make more sense than Virginia, Rutgers, Syracuse and a few others that keep popping up. Boston College is a great school, has a massive new TV market and decent football. (They've beaten Notre Dame 7 out of the last 10 games)

Notre Dame, Georgia Tech, Boston College, Virginia Tech would be a pretty good haul in my opinion.

Boston College would be a nice addition. I also favor adding Missouri and Kansas. Those three would be optimal if Oklahoma goes to the Pac-12. But Oklahoma would be my first expansion choice.

How about a new poll for expansion candidates?

 

[Ryan36_1]

Let's say TX, OK and their little sisters go west, we strike out (or blow off) ND, and can't convince a solid block of ACC schools to leave (let's say NC, NC St, Duke, UVA). The PAC goes to 16, the SEC follows suit and the ACC and Big East football schools piece together the best 16 teams remaining.

If the options left for the B1G are not great, then what would stop us from just staying at 12? We wouldn't be shut out of any plus one system, we would just have 6 team divisions instead of 8 team. Our conference schedule would be just as strong as the other conferences, as we won't be diluting it with four also-rans. Also we stay a conference and not two 'associated divisions' (is it really still a conference if OSU only travels to Iowa once every eight years? We play our in state schools more often than that)

I know the end game is to increase BTN revenue and footprint, but at what point are those gains offset by diluting the conference?

 

[buckeyemania11]

Am I the only one who thinks the idea of a 16 team football conference is ridiculous?

in basketball........ok

football.......no thanks

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

It's not about getting 20M viewers tuned into Ohio State vs Nebraska, it's about getting 10M viewers tuned into Nebraska vs Iowa, and then another 10M viewers tuned into Ohio State vs Maryland (or whoever). The more programs in the fold, the more value there is in the highlight shows. If you own the content, the more you can charge ESPN and CBS to license permission to rebroadcast that footage as part of their highlight shows. The broader the distribution of your own network, and the more content you have to offer, then the more you can charge ESPN to buy a package of games. It's leverage.

Even if the big-time matchups happen less often, more is still more.

Still looks like a bigger pie cut into more slices to me. First, you have to convince me that the growth is not linear. Then, you have to convince me that the non-linearity will run to the B1G's favor rather than in the opposite direction.

Please note that I am only asking you to convince me; I'm not asking for proof. It is still entirely possible that someone will come up with an argument that I'll buy; but then, who cares? My opinion means precisely squat in all this.

 

[Buckeye737]

Just a weird note: has Kansas grown a lot? If they have 33k enrolled, but only 250k alum, are their life expectancies less than 35?

Think of it this way - at 33K enrollment, they must have about 8K per graduating class. 250K total alumni with 8K per class = over 30 years of alums. Assuming the school has grown and my numbers being very much estimated, that would explain why that figure doesn't come out to around 50 years of alums.

 

[Dryden]

Still looks like a bigger pie cut into more slices to me. First, you have to convince me that the growth is not linear. Then, you have to convince me that the non-linearity will run to the B1G's favor rather than in the opposite direction.

Please note that I am only asking you to convince me; I'm not asking for proof. It is still entirely possible that someone will come up with an argument that I'll buy; but then, who cares? My opinion means precisely squat in all this.

It likely is counterproductive at a certain point when expressed only as TV sets. At some point down the road though, TV sets will go the way of landline telephones and analog music. 20 years from now, the only thing that will matter is how many brands you own, or how much intellectual property you own, because you can sell it anyway you want to digitally on-demand.

I'm sure if George Bodenheimer or Vince Doria had their druthers, there would be one 111-team conference named ESPN.

 

[Mike80]

Honestly, unless the Big Ten pulls anything less than Oklahoma, Missouri, Ntre Ame and Virginia/Maryland/New York based Big East school, the mediots will skewer the Big Ten.

 

[Saw31]

It likely is counterproductive at a certain point when expressed only as TV sets. At some point down the road though, TV sets will go the way of landline telephones and analog music. 20 years from now, the only thing that will matter is how many brands you own, or how much intellectual property you own, because you can sell it anyway you want to digitally on-demand.

I'm sure if George Bodenheimer or Vince Doria had their druthers, there would be one 111-team conference named ESPN.

This is the argument in my imo. Own the content and own/control the distribution.

 

[Oh8ch]

Am I the only one who thinks the idea of a 16 team football conference is ridiculous?

in basketball........ok

football.......no thanks

No more ridiculous than a football coach making 7 figures (Woody never made more than $50k).

I don't like any of it. But this is where things are headed. If the rest of the world goes to super conferences we probably need to go along.

A conference with 16 teams is, logically, going to have more good teams (and more bad - but bad gets ignored more easily) than a conference with 12. There are six ranked teams in the Big XII right now. Wherever those teams go that conference will have more ranked teams than they do today. They are going be perceived as more powerful by the media and the fans. They are going to have more leverage with bowl committees and TV sponsors. It is a clear competitive advantage. The size of the pie slice is very different in the near and far term.

If you want to talk in terms of conferences how can anyone compete with the Big East in basketball? It is not totally unlike other teams deciding to go to 12 players and our deciding to stick with 11.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

Lots of words... still not convinced.

The bigger match-ups argument I can buy; but the more teams you add, the less often you play everyone. This gives you diminishing returns at some point. I see no reason why those diminishing returns don't happen when you go from 12 to 14. I'm not saying they do; but the suggestion that going from 12 to 14 is good because it means bigger match-ups only holds water in the years when you actually get the match-ups you want. And what if moving to 14 means we lose the intersectional games that we've had the last few years? Then the net addition is zero.

As for your hypothetical of "locking up the state of Georgia". I'm not buying. You only lock up the TV sets that are watching GT right now, and that's not everyone in the state by a long shot and TV execs, advertisers and their customers know it. You are adding more viewers, but I'm still not convinced you're adding more viewers per game.

Having said all that, my mind is still open on this. There may be an argument that sways me; but I have yet to see it.

It's all about geometric progression....

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-2NHmwV-do"]Don King's Speech in Head Office - YouTube[/ame]

1 ... 2 ... 4 ... 8 ... 16 ... The numbers boggle the mind!

 

[LordJeffBuck]

I am re-opening the poll with new selections. Because all of the expansion talk is about ultimately reaching 16 teams (or not expanding at all), the poll is multiple choice.

Here are the results of the original poll:

Which Team(s) Should the Big Ten Add?

Missouri...........45.......9.55%
Nebraska...........29.......6.16%
Notre Dame ........85......18.05%
Pittsburgh.........57......12.10%
Rutgers............16.......3.40%
Syracuse............5.......1.06%
Texas ............104......22.08%
Add three teams....53......11.25%
Don't expand.......61......12.95%
Other..............16.......3.40%