Printable View
I agree with this. The B10/11 won't sacrifice its standards for a few extra bucks. There is plenty of extra money that can be made with the addition of very strong academic and a fully rounded athletics programs beyond FB.Quote:
Originally Posted by snowcraig2.0
I should have added, if they go to 12, it will be all about money, but with 14 or 16, not all of the schools added will be about money. The Big 10 has an academic reputation to maintain that is important to the schools presidents.Quote:
Originally Posted by isuno1fan
As it pertains to money, its not just about football and TV money. ISU's grant and academic prowess means just as much. A lot of Big 10 schools are very academic research focused, and don't be surprised if they look at Iowa St. simply because it bolsters the conference's opportunities for scientific research grants. This decision goes beyond athletics. Penn St. was attractive at the time because it is an outstanding research institution.Quote:
Originally Posted by BryceC
I am biased (women's basketball), but you are kidding yourself if you don't think the Big 10 doesn't find ISU's volleyball, women's basketball, gymnastics, and wrestling attractive.
The Director's Cup does mean something, otherwise the athletic directors wouldn't have worked to create it.
You are really reaching. The Big 10 is doing this for money from sports alone. They want more tv's and a bigger footprint for their network. If it was about grants and academic prowess they would have done it a long time ago. When they added one team years ago they went with one that wasn't currently in their area and happened to be a national contender in football.
The Directors Cup was set up to give the AD's credit for the other sports because they know what matters is Football and men's basketball and if those two aren't winning they are fired.
ISU isn't even in the CONVERSATION of Big 10 expansion, so they don't give a crap about our olympic sports. If they do it's a nice pat on the head to tell us we have done such a nice job.Quote:
Originally Posted by twistedredbird
If they add Nebraska we'll know it's about money because they aren't even near the academic level of the other Big 10 schools. And we KNOW they are in conversations with them because they have said as much.
Every year there is a bus rodeo in Des Moines for bus drivers in the area to go compete and get crowned the best bus driver. How much do you think that matters to the riders of CyRide? That's how much winning the freaking directors cup is worth. Be real about it.
I must have missed this, where can I read where Delany has said they are in conversations with Nebraska?Quote:
Originally Posted by BryceC
And you know this how? Did you have dinner with Jim Delaney recently?Quote:
Originally Posted by BryceC
Here's some "reality" for you...those "other" sports matter...and here's why...it is not feasible to fill your TV network with MBB and FB 24/7, because to do so would require showing lots of non-live or re-run events. A variety of live (or non-rerun) events are necessary to maintain a sports network's ratings. People like to watch college WBB (check out the WBB attendance figures at Hilton). Other people like to watch college baseball (check out the CWS sometime). People in the midwest like to watch wrestling, etc. The non-revenue sports have their niches, and if the sport is competitive and high quality, people will watch it.Quote:
Originally Posted by BryceC
Those "other" sports are essential to making a conference sports TV network successful, apart from having 16+ teams so that the majority of the programming could be live MBB and FB, or doing a multi-conference network. If the Big 12 tries to do a network by itself, I'll bet you a nice dinner that the quality of and attractiveness to viewers of Big 12 baseball and WBB (perhaps even VB now as well) will be used as a selling point to cable and dish operators.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BryceC
Link? I haven't seen this either.
Nebraska has denied this as well, Delany has to get the Presidents of the Big 10, buy off before they even consider speaking with them.Quote:
Originally Posted by twistedredbird
No way Nebraska will even talk to the Big 10 if there is a risk of them not being
voted in, that would be a huge slap in the face.
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by jbhtexas
It's comical that most are treating this about FB and nothing else.
+1, and to add to that, the Big 10 network rarely has a marquee football match-ups on anyway, those are on national TV. For basketball, there are more simply because of the quantity of games, but the Big 10 Network is chalked full of women's basketball, volleyball, baseball, softball, gymnastics, and wrestling. They also might like to add a football program like Iowa St., that doesn't have as many national televised games, simply so they can have can have more live football games on.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbhtexas
I am not saying that ISU is top of the list, but if Big 10 goes to 16, I see ISU in the discussion along with Mizzou, Nebby, and 2 Big East schools.
Thsi argument is ridiculous. Even if they are money losers, if you have a fan base like we do for WBB and VB, you lose less money. I would guess we don't lose much money on WBB. VB probably but aI would bet it is way less than average.Quote:
Originally Posted by trajanJ
You lose plenty of money on WBB and VB and always will. Just because you have a nice attendance at games doesn't mean you are taking in a lot of money. You can go to 5 WBB games for $38. Plus the majority of the donors are giving up the big money to see MBB and Football improve.
Yes the Big 10 Network needs "fill" and they will use the non-revenue sports for that, but that isn't what they are making their money on. Look at the ratings for an average WBB game compared to MBB. Or look at the ratings of any non-revenue sport compared to football. They are light years apart. It's a nice little story but it isn't what this expansion is about.
This expansion is about increasing the Big 10's Network footprint. Everything else is icing on the cake. It has nothing to do with ISU's status in the classroom or on the playing field. The Big 10 Network already has their footprint in the state of Iowa so there is no reason to look there. That's not a knock on ISU, just bad luck that Iowa is already in the conference.
I don't think ISU is in the Big 10 conversation but how great would be a division with:
MN
Wis
Neb
ISU
Iowa
Mizz
Illni
NW
All are within driving distance for away games and ISU would be surrounded by all geographical rivals - one in-state and the rest border wars.
ISU is IN the conversation for this. That said, getting in is ceratinly not close to happening at this time. Without getting specific, I can almost guarantee you, they are in the conversation.
If you asked somebody at ISU about this, they would honestly tell you that they have no ida what will happen- because they do not. Maybe Jamie has an IDEA of what is going on but it is only that. This process is not as far along as some speculate. We will all know much more when the Big Ten AD's meet at the end of May and the traditional school year is over.
Football and revenue are driving this but the decision to add is not exclusive to this.
Too many people are conditioned by bloggers and radio hosts who provide conjecture that is so loud that we take it to be truth. Frank the Tank (whoever he is) and Jon Miller (who I enjoy listening to) are just mouthpieces who are providing opinion.
ISU is IN the conversation- it likely is not in the conversation enough to have a daily thread at this time.
That is all for now.