• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

Big Ten and other Conference Expansion

Which Teams Should the Big Ten Add? (please limit to four selections)

  • Boston College

    Votes: 32 10.2%
  • Cincinnati

    Votes: 19 6.1%
  • Connecticut

    Votes: 6 1.9%
  • Duke

    Votes: 21 6.7%
  • Georgia Tech

    Votes: 55 17.6%
  • Kansas

    Votes: 46 14.7%
  • Maryland

    Votes: 67 21.4%
  • Missouri

    Votes: 90 28.8%
  • North Carolina

    Votes: 39 12.5%
  • Notre Dame

    Votes: 209 66.8%
  • Oklahoma

    Votes: 78 24.9%
  • Pittsburgh

    Votes: 45 14.4%
  • Rutgers

    Votes: 40 12.8%
  • Syracuse

    Votes: 18 5.8%
  • Texas

    Votes: 121 38.7%
  • Vanderbilt

    Votes: 15 4.8%
  • Virginia

    Votes: 47 15.0%
  • Virginia Tech

    Votes: 62 19.8%
  • Stay at 12 teams and don't expand

    Votes: 27 8.6%
  • Add some other school(s) not listed

    Votes: 25 8.0%

  • Total voters
    313
You guys really think they are doing this to save the B1G or because they are the only ones smart enough to see something no one else does? Tsun is all of a sudden the grown up in the room of institutions?

They are posturing. They are trying to make a better cut for themselves. Look at the language they are using, it's rhetoric and it's aimed at deal terms not the question of doing it or not.

Barclays has been the "multinational financial institution" of rouge nation states, criminal organizations and narco's since forever.

If you paid them to consult, hopefully it was for a solution to money laundering problems.
Those guys only hire the best. I think we’re in good hands with Barclays.
 
Upvote 0
I mean its not the 1800s. You could substitute pretty much any multinational bank and their hands are just as dirty. In a just society they'd all be against the fuckin wall. Its not like BoA, Deutsche Bank, Wells Fargo, Citi, HSBC, Wachovia etc etc etc all haven't been brought to jus...lmao I can't even fake it....been fined a small fraction of their profits for laundering money for Narcos. Thats JUST Narco collaborators and just some and just the last decade or so

I agree but even though they all do it to a degree...Barclays is like the south florida banker in Scarface.

:lol:
 
Upvote 0
I mean its not the 1800s. You could substitute pretty much any multinational bank and their hands are just as dirty. In a just society they'd all be against the fuckin wall. Its not like BoA, Deutsche Bank, Wells Fargo, Citi, HSBC, Wachovia etc etc etc all haven't been brought to jus...lmao I can't even fake it....been fined a small fraction of their profits for laundering money for Narcos. Thats JUST Narco collaborators and just some and just the last decade or so
It’s probably cheaper to pay the fines than it would be to bribe officials to look the other way. It’s almost like the banks wrote the laws that regulate them.
 
Upvote 0
Somewhere in graduate studies, we had a round table about product failure. Turns out the anticipated lawsuits were less than the cost to eradicate the problem with the product, so decision was to let it be. Had trouble with that, and still do. Argued the morality of it all, but got shot down with the talk of the bottom line, price per share drop, etc etc. Sooo, switched to K-12 administration, where regionally (Cali), had a 33% drop out rate. When asked Cabinet what would you do if you had a mfging co, and one out of every three products on the assembly line was defective, all said they'd close the factory. But, when brought it home, with that analogy to CA k-12, everyone hung their heads. Guess I wasn't PC enough.
 
Somewhere in graduate studies, we had a round table about product failure. Turns out the anticipated lawsuits were less than the cost to eradicate the problem with the product, so decision was to let it be. Had trouble with that, and still do. Argued the morality of it all, but got shot down with the talk of the bottom line, price per share drop, etc etc. Sooo, switched to K-12 administration, where regionally (Cali), had a 33% drop out rate. When asked Cabinet what would you do if you had a mfging co, and one out of every three products on the assembly line was defective, all said they'd close the factory. But, when brought it home, with that analogy to CA k-12, everyone hung their heads. Guess I wasn't PC enough.
Love it!
 
Upvote 0
Somewhere in graduate studies, we had a round table about product failure. Turns out the anticipated lawsuits were less than the cost to eradicate the problem with the product, so decision was to let it be. Had trouble with that, and still do. Argued the morality of it all, but got shot down with the talk of the bottom line, price per share drop, etc etc. Sooo, switched to K-12 administration, where regionally (Cali), had a 33% drop out rate. When asked Cabinet what would you do if you had a mfging co, and one out of every three products on the assembly line was defective, all said they'd close the factory. But, when brought it home, with that analogy to CA k-12, everyone hung their heads. Guess I wasn't PC enough.
It's tough being a non PC person in education. I fight it every day. Good for you, Cali
 
Somewhere in graduate studies, we had a round table about product failure. Turns out the anticipated lawsuits were less than the cost to eradicate the problem with the product, so decision was to let it be. Had trouble with that, and still do. Argued the morality of it all, but got shot down with the talk of the bottom line, price per share drop, etc etc. Sooo, switched to K-12 administration, where regionally (Cali), had a 33% drop out rate. When asked Cabinet what would you do if you had a mfging co, and one out of every three products on the assembly line was defective, all said they'd close the factory. But, when brought it home, with that analogy to CA k-12, everyone hung their heads. Guess I wasn't PC enough.
IMG_0066.gif
 
Upvote 0

Big Ten’s $2.4 Billion Private Equity Deal with UC Investments On Hold Due to Opposition from Michigan, USC

The Big Ten’s proposed $2.4 billion deal with UC Investments has been tabled for now due to opposition from Michigan and USC.

UC Investments, which is affiliated with the University of California’s pension fund, announced Monday in a statement that it would not proceed forward with a deal unless all 18 Big Ten schools agree to it.

“We remain convinced that the unity of the 18 Big Ten university members is key to the success of Big Ten enterprises,” UC Investments chief investment officer Jagdeep Singh Bachher wrote in a statement. “We also recognize that some member universities need more time to assess the benefits of their participation. UC Investments likewise requires some additional time to complete our due diligence as recent developments unfold and we continue to engage with the conference.”



The proposed deal between the Big Ten and UC Investments calls for the league to create a new entity, Big Ten Enterprises, which would house the conference’s media rights and sponsorship deals. UC Investments would receive a 10% stake in Big Ten Enterprises in exchange for its $2.4 billion investment. The deal would also extend the Big Ten’s grant of media rights, which is currently set to expire in 2036, through 2046.

Yahoo Sports’ Ross Dellenger reported last week that Big Ten executives were prepared to push forward with a deal even if Michigan and USC continued to oppose the deal. The other 16 schools, including Ohio State, were expected to vote in favor of the deal.

Monday’s announcement came shortly after Jordan Acker, a member of Michigan’s Board of Regents, told SiriusXM Radio that Michigan would consider leaving the Big Ten in 2036 if the conference chose to move forward on the proposed deal without Michigan.


.
.
.
continued
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top