My summary of myths of conference expansion

[chicagohawk]

#1 Myth: Conspiracy theories.
1. Big ten and Pac ten working together causing an uproar so Big ten can get notre dame.
2. This was all Texas' plan to get their way in the end (please)
3. Everyone out to get Texas A&M surprisingly this was posted and other teams posters gave it validity (silly people)
4. Iowa media conspiring to consolidate state of iowa athletics at just u of i. (just c'mon)
Sorry "the man" rarely exists.

#2 Myth of Villains:
Jim Delaney: big ten wants more teams and championship game. can't blame him, he didn't want big 12 to fail and taking 1 team should never have caused the break-up. Big ten was moving methodically and was looking to do this on the up and up until pac 10, chip brown, and texas went to hyperdrive.

Texas: even they weren't much of a villain until the events of today. Pac-10 made a great offer, very hard to turn down. It looks sincere and I bet they were actually going to take it. They wanted their own network (reasonable if you can get it) pac-10 wouldn't offer it and the big 12 would with lots of concessions. I do believe the additional concessions coming to light today may change my mind.

Beebe's incompetance: Had little control

UI, state, isu officials: Little control

Nebraska: everyone would have done what they did, they didn't break up the conference or even want it, again 1 team changing hands didn't need to cause this commotion

Big Myth #3: ESPN involvement to overpay the big 12 so fox sports doesn't encroach on their territory. The same reporters reporting this also the next day refuted themselves without even realizing it. The claim was that espn promised huge money to the big 12 because they were afraid of fox sports getting texas and a big new contract. Well the next day reports are fox sports gave the huge money and espn just agreed to not devalue (wow, what a powerplay) these journalists are comical


Myth #4 Chip Brown superman blogger: Yes he was accurate of course he was it was Texas way of putting their info out their without having to answer questions. I'm not putting him down but it's not like he was getting leaks and putting out info they he dug up and they didn't want advertised. Texas used him, good for him, i'm sure he'll get great benefit from this. If this was politics he'd be considered a partisen hack. A real reporter would have asked questions when info wasn't consistant. The rest of the media today talking about texas getting rich and the onesidedness of the deal and orangebloods headline is big 12 gets rich. Did he ask his sources about the NU,CU fees, about where the dollar figures come from for new revenue or if texas was mad pac 10 turned them down. of course not.

Myth #5: Texas ruling college football TV: In 2 to 3 years Texas own optimistic forcasts is 25 million in revenue. This year all big 10 teams got 21million. In 2 to 3 years low ball estimates say Texas is making less than any of the big 10 teams.


Finally the sad myth I had that their were more iowa and isu fans that hated each other on the field but off the field understood the importance of the rivalry. I was certain their were more fans like myself and family I spoke to that were heartbroken about the idea of isu being demoted but soon i found out their were more fans and not just message board morons who would have like to see isu's demise. and I heard from many many isu fans who would love to see iowa's athletic program disappear and meant it no matter how unlikely. I guess i was naive

 

[tm3308]

#1 Myth: Conspiracy theories. big ten and pac ten working together causing uproar so big ten can get notre dame. texas never really thinking about pac 10 always planning on staying but playing along to get their way. some guy wrote that everyone was just out to get a&m. Iowa media conspiring to consolidate state of iowa athletics at just u of i. sorry "the man" rarely exists.

#2 Myth of Villains: Jim Delaney: big ten wants more teams and championship game. can't blame him, he didn't want big 12 to fail and taking 1 team should never have caused the break-up. Big ten was moving methodically and was looking to do this on the up and up until pac 10, chip brown, and texas went to hyperdrive.

Texas: even they weren't much of a villain until the events of today. Pac-10 made a great offer, very hard to turn down. It looks sincere and I bet they were actually going to take it. They wanted their own network (reasonable if you can get it) pac-10 wouldn't offer it and the big 12 would with lots of concessions. I do believe the additional concessions coming to light today may change my mind.

Beebe: Had little control

Iowa, state, isu officials: Little control

Nebraska: everyone would have done what they did, they didn't break up the conference or even want it, again 1 team changing hands didn't need to cause this commotion

Big Myth #3: ESPN involvement to overpay the big 12 so fox sports doesn't encroach on their territory. The same reporters reporting this also the next day refuted themselves without even realizing it. The claim was that espn promised huge money to the big 12 because they were afraid of fox sports getting texas and a big new contract. Well the next day reports are fox sports gave the huge money and espn just agreed to not devalue (wow, what a powerplay) these journalists are comical


Chip Brown Myth: Yes he was accurate of course he was it was Texas way of putting their info out their without having to answer questions. I'm not putting him down but it's not like he was getting leaks and putting out info they he dug up and they didn't want advertised. Texas used him, good for him, i'm sure he'll get great benefit from this. If this was politics he'd be considered a partisen hack. A real reporter would have asked questions when info wasn't consistant. The rest of the media today talking about texas getting rich and the onesidedness of the deal and orangebloods headline is big 12 gets rich. Did he ask his sources about the NU,CU fees, about where the dollar figures come from for new revenue or if texas was mad pac 10 turned them down. of course not.

Finally the sad myth I had that their were more iowa and isu fans that hated each other on the field but off the field understood the importance of the rivalry. I was certain their were more fans like myself and family I spoke to that were heartbroken about the idea of isu being demoted but soon i found out their were more fans and not just message board morons who would have like to see isu's demise. and I heard from many many isu fans who would love to see iowa's athletic program disappear and meant it no matter how unlikely. I guess i was naive

I was one who thought Texas was never going to go to the Pac-10. But to be more accurate, I think they would have gone anywhere if it would have gotten them uneven revenue sharing and their own network. The Pac-10 wasn't willing to give them that, but they squeezed it out of the Big 12.

And you forgot possibly the biggest myth of all: that Texas saved the Big 12. Texas was THE REASON that the Big 12 needed saving in the first place. And they didn't stay for the Big 12's sake. They stayed because it was where they could get what they wanted. They would have left if the Big Ten or Pac-10 offered them uneven revenue sharing and the rights to their own network. Texas once again looked out for #1. Calling what they did anything other than that is a total crock.

 

[chicagohawk]

yeah, i'm starting to agree with you on this. Texas is looking more like a villain a couple days later.

Fact is there are a few programs and President's who could pull power trips like Texas and don't. Some because of tradition and others because they are President's of respected academic institutions and although they seem to be CEO's answering to stock holders and always needing to raise revenues at all cost. They actually aren't and do have some responsability to a larger process whether that be fellow state institutions or a conference membership. Everyone has to look out for themselves but many institutions and least appear to understand some boundries.

i fear the day Ohio State, Penn State, and Michigan realize what they could be getting.

 

[tm3308]

yeah, i'm starting to agree with you on this. Texas is looking more like a villain a couple days later.

Fact is there are a few programs and President's who could pull power trips like Texas and don't. Some because of tradition and others because they are President's of respected academic institutions and although they seem to be CEO's answering to stock holders and always needing to raise revenues at all cost. They actually aren't and do have some responsability to a larger process whether that be fellow state institutions or a conference membership. Everyone has to look out for themselves but many institutions and least appear to understand some boundries.

i fear the day Ohio State, Penn State, and Michigan realize what they could be getting.

Those are the 3 big ones. And I think those schools all realize what they COULD be getting. But they realize that it's better for them for the Big Ten to remain stable the way it is. The Big Ten is the most stable and presitigous conference (Ivy League not withstanding) out there, and it pays to be a member. And those big schools also realize that while they could be getting more, they don't NEED more. They have more than enough as it is, so why not strengthen the conference as a whole and spread the wealth? Ohio State's brand of arrogance is of a totally different breed than Texas'. OSU's stops on the edge of the playing field. Texas' carries over into every aspect of the university.

 

[Cydwinder]

I'm glad you took a rational approach to analyzing the events instead of emotional reasoning only.

 

[cybirdie]

#1 Myth: Conspiracy theories.
Finally the sad myth I had that their were more iowa and isu fans that hated each other on the field but off the field understood the importance of the rivalry. I was certain their were more fans like myself and family I spoke to that were heartbroken about the idea of isu being demoted but soon i found out their were more fans and not just message board morons who would have like to see isu's demise. and I heard from many many isu fans who would love to see iowa's athletic program disappear and meant it no matter how unlikely. I guess i was naive

More people should understand why Cyclone fans get agitated so easily...there are so many more hawk fans out there that want to see us fail no matter what, it's like their only point of happiness outside of their wins, very very sad...and not a myth. The thing I find most troubling about all this is that ISU is the school who provides the education for the backbone of our economy, agriculture, yet Iowa has all the fans because when Hayden was making his rise to power they had 540 WHO broadcasting all over the state and ISU didn't have this media connection so Iowa's popularity grew with the farmers.......to add to that the old slick bastard put ANF stickers on the helmets to pander to the farmer and steal him away from the school that actually does care about his livelihood...now that's some sad facts.......Iowa has never played fair and their rise to power was powered by media.

It will be interesting if ISU could develop a web-based HD feed for their games, not sure how this would work and withe the rights etc. but it seems like it might be easier to use this infrastructure to create a web based athletic experience.........has to be 1,000,000 times better than that crap Clone Zone though .

 

[bhawk326]

You guys forgot one other big myth ... Dan Beebe and Texas are depositing 10 million extra dollars into ISU's bank account tomorrow. If you read some of the naive posts on this message board you would believe that money is guaranteed in full and will be delivered in van with balloons like Publisher's Clearinghouse.

ISU will likely see an increase in revenue of less than 1.5 million dollars for 2010 and 2011 and an increase of 1.5 - 2 million dollars for 2012 - 2014. If the conference is still viable then they can renegotiate a bigger payday from the TV contracts.

 

[bhawk326]

cybirdie, the vitriol is seen on both sides. From my experience, the vocal minority of ISU and Iowa fans (most message board posters) love to see the other fail. In reality, the fans at the actual events seem to have a good-natured rivalry that makes the ISU-Iowa game so much fun.

 

[chicagohawk]

More people should understand why Cyclone fans get agitated so easily...there are so many more hawk fans out there that want to see us fail no matter what, it's like their only point of happiness outside of their wins, very very sad...and not a myth. The thing I find most troubling about all this is that ISU is the school who provides the education for the backbone of our economy, agriculture, yet Iowa has all the fans because when Hayden was making his rise to power they had 540 WHO broadcasting all over the state and ISU didn't have this media connection so Iowa's popularity grew with the farmers.......


Let's not pretend this doesn't go both ways and iowa or isu fans who think the other is more hateful spiteful or mean spirited is just fooling themselves that or they have just lived in ames or iowa city their whole life.

by the way hayden helped the disparity but the hawkeye fandom being larger goes way way way way back. from the 20's to Nile Kinnick to Forest Evershevski the hawkeye brand was all over the state well before iowa's lean years and isu's good run in the 1970's. Hayden just brought it back and extended the gap. It's never been equal footing.

 

[Spursfan11]

You are forgetting one thing, and that is why your premise isn't complete.

Fox owns a bunch of the btn. They are the ones that spurred this move. Nebraska doesn't even come close to fitting the bill academically. They did it because they knew that they would be the lynchpin for disolving the Big 12. Plus they played Nebraska and Notre Dame (the real ultimate goal) against each other. ND said no.

Nebraska leaves, and the South schools go to the PAC 10, and a new superconference is formed. Who was scheduled to create that network??? That's right Fox. With this happening (and whoever else the big 10 gets from the East coast), they control football broadcasts from coast to coast, and into the Southwest. They will never get the SEC.

It's telling that the rumors went out that powerful people stopped this from happening. The NCAA and whoever was truly afraid of this monopoly that Fox would have on college sports broadcasting. This is not over, and it will get very interesting.

As far as your big 3, it is really interesting that Ohio State already staked their argument about divisions. They know that they are the big boy. They don't care at all about what happens to the other schools. If they bring in ND, then that could get really interesting.

But you all had better hope that this UT network fails, because if it doesn't the possibilities will be pretty tempting to those three schools.

 

[St8Fan]

The Big Ten is the most stable and presitigous conference (Ivy League not withstanding) out there, and it pays to be a member. And those big schools also realize that while they could be getting more, they don't NEED more. They have more than enough as it is, so why not strengthen the conference as a whole and spread the wealth? Ohio State's brand of arrogance is of a totally different breed than Texas'. OSU's stops on the edge of the playing field. Texas' carries over into every aspect of the university.

OMG are you serious, the Little Eleven and especially OSU saw their markets declining and the southern migration would in the long term undermine their markets and their recruiting. The on field performance and especially on-court performance have not exactly been superior the last several years and their clout for TV contracts had very little national appeal.

They had a very good marketing vision, but just because they got there first doesn't mean they will stay as the only conference network. How much more appealing would an SEC, Big 12 or even Big East Network be because of actual on-field/on-court performance. The Big 10 will enjoy their advantage for a few years, but the markets/other conferences will definitely catch up and probably pass them.

There are many smart people looking to make money...all the Big 10 network has done is opened doors. Keep a close eye on your rearview mirror! :biglaugh:

 

[Stormin]

You are forgetting one thing, and that is why your premise isn't complete.

Fox owns a bunch of the btn. They are the ones that spurred this move. Nebraska doesn't even come close to fitting the bill academically. They did it because they knew that they would be the lynchpin for disolving the Big 12. Plus they played Nebraska and Notre Dame (the real ultimate goal) against each other. ND said no.

Nebraska leaves, and the South schools go to the PAC 10, and a new superconference is formed. Who was scheduled to create that network??? That's right Fox. With this happening (and whoever else the big 10 gets from the East coast), they control football broadcasts from coast to coast, and into the Southwest. They will never get the SEC.

It's telling that the rumors went out that powerful people stopped this from happening. The NCAA and whoever was truly afraid of this monopoly that Fox would have on college sports broadcasting. This is not over, and it will get very interesting.

As far as your big 3, it is really interesting that Ohio State already staked their argument about divisions. They know that they are the big boy. They don't care at all about what happens to the other schools. If they bring in ND, then that could get really interesting.

But you all had better hope that this UT network fails, because if it doesn't the possibilities will be pretty tempting to those three schools.

Dead on Balls accurate. :yes:

 

[tm3308]

OMG are you serious, the Little Eleven and especially OSU saw their markets declining and the southern migration would in the long term undermine their markets and their recruiting. The on field performance and especially on-court performance have not exactly been superior the last several years and their clout for TV contracts had very little national appeal.

They had a very good marketing vision, but just because they got there first doesn't mean they will stay as the only conference network. How much more appealing would an SEC, Big 12 or even Big East Network be because of actual on-field/on-court performance. The Big 10 will enjoy their advantage for a few years, but the markets/other conferences will definitely catch up and probably pass them.

There are many smart people looking to make money...all the Big 10 network has done is opened doors. Keep a close eye on your rearview mirror! :biglaugh:

They are still the most stable conference in the country. They have been for a long time. That's why they were one of the ones EXPANDING. They weren't like the Big 12, which has all the stability of BP's CEO, and that's why the Big 12 was the one worrying about getting run out of town.

 

[chicagohawk]

Sorry this is what I'm talking about with conspiracy theories. Fox owns 49% of the big ten network. 49% is an important number. Fox Sports agreed to be the minority owner, these deals are made for just this case that The Big Ten wouldn't be dictated to on what to do. Teh big 10 network deal is done and the Big 10 has every incentive in the world to make the viewership larger, not being pushed by anyone else. FoxSports wants to profit from Big Ten moves but not more than the Big 10 does themselves and thus they have the controlling share. Fox Sports are partners and I'm sure they talked this out but 51% ownership is HUGE. The big Ten Network provides about 100 million per year to big ten schools in total. Total athletic department revenue is nearing 1 billion. To think Jim Delaney is expanding to Nebraska because Fox pushed him to and the other President's who have billions of research dollars on the line is just laughable. Money/TV are the biggest reasons but only if the school fits.

Nebraska is definately the weakest academic institution in teh big 10 but they did have the basics/requirements which is a large public school with research facilities and member of AAU, their academics aren't far from ISU or Iowa and a few other Big 10 schools for that matter. Big 10 saying academics matters ruled out schools like OKlahoma, Kentucky, West Virginia or a Memphis/Louisville without the research. Big 10's incentives and options in this far surpass Foxsports.

While researching potential additions I'm sure Delaney spoke to media and broadcast experts meaning espn/fox/nbc and consultants on which schools add "potential" value. The big 10 deals weren't going to go away and i'm sure no promises were made by networks in return for schools. Delaney and the Presidents researched and determined their next addition so they can go back to everyone in a couple years and make a new sales pitch. Their are a thousand levers that were being pushed and inspected to determine best avenues. To think it was "the man" is just oversimplistic

 

[trajanJ]

According to Orangeblood here is how it went down.
Orangebloods.com - How the Big 12 came back to life

 

[chicagohawk]

According to Orangeblood here is how it went down.
Orangebloods.com - How the Big 12 came back to life

Very interesting read and I beleive this is in fact how it went down. However their are a couple small sentences in hear that give you some insight into Chip Brown.

First, by his recap it is pretty obvious his entire "sources" he worked was 1 or 2 people inteh athletic department feeding him their side of the story. Texas was in control so it was reality. Big news that had to do with the networks or A&M or Nebraska he had to wait until those people told Texas of their plans and then Texas passed it to Chip. Chip Didn't know what nebraska was offered or what they would do until nebraska announced to Texas. Chip didn't know what A&M was doing he just knew what Texas thought they were doing. Chip didn't know what ESPN/Fox were doing until they told Texas. He did a good job of having a Texas source tell him what they knew.


"Nebraska threw Texas under the bus". Texas through Chip's reporting and some direct quotes did their best to make this sound like Nebraska was the villain. Nebraska was 1 team leaving. Every message board i've gone to outside of texas has fans saying they would leave to the big 10 if offered. Nebraska showed interest and never said that if they leave they were going to take half the league with them. They acted on their own and responsibly. Texas definately threw Nebraska under the bus with the ultimatum and threat they would destroy the league if Nebraska acted.

"Texas thought they would be blamed" This makes it sound like they don't think they should be blamed. By Chips own reporting everything was in their hands, or so they thought; how revenue is split and the future of the league and where teams moved. If A&M doesn't put the brakes on, by Chip's own reporting TEXAS would have destroyed the big 12.

 

[Wesley]

Sorry this is what I'm talking about with conspiracy theories. Fox owns 49% of the big ten network. 49% is an important number. Fox Sports agreed to be the minority owner, these deals are made for just this case that The Big Ten wouldn't be dictated to on what to do. Teh big 10 network deal is done and the Big 10 has every incentive in the world to make the viewership larger, not being pushed by anyone else. FoxSports wants to profit from Big Ten moves but not more than the Big 10 does themselves and thus they have the controlling share. Fox Sports are partners and I'm sure they talked this out but 51% ownership is HUGE. The big Ten Network provides about 100 million per year to big ten schools in total. Total athletic department revenue is nearing 1 billion. To think Jim Delaney is expanding to Nebraska because Fox pushed him to and the other President's who have billions of research dollars on the line is just laughable. Money/TV are the biggest reasons but only if the school fits.

Nebraska is definately the weakest academic institution in teh big 10 but they did have the basics/requirements which is a large public school with research facilities and member of AAU, their academics aren't far from ISU or Iowa and a few other Big 10 schools for that matter. Big 10 saying academics matters ruled out schools like OKlahoma, Kentucky, West Virginia or a Memphis/Louisville without the research. Big 10's incentives and options in this far surpass Foxsports.

While researching potential additions I'm sure Delaney spoke to media and broadcast experts meaning espn/fox/nbc and consultants on which schools add "potential" value. The big 10 deals weren't going to go away and i'm sure no promises were made by networks in return for schools. Delaney and the Presidents researched and determined their next addition so they can go back to everyone in a couple years and make a new sales pitch. Their are a thousand levers that were being pushed and inspected to determine best avenues. To think it was "the man" is just oversimplistic

How does Notre Dame fit the research/academics part or are they a thorn in the Big ten side?

 

[Clone9]

#1 Myth: Conspiracy theories.
1. Big ten and Pac ten working together causing an uproar so Big ten can get notre dame.
2. This was all Texas' plan to get their way in the end (please)
3. Everyone out to get Texas A&M surprisingly this was posted and other teams posters gave it validity (silly people)
4. Iowa media conspiring to consolidate state of iowa athletics at just u of i. (just c'mon)
Sorry "the man" rarely exists.

#2 Myth of Villains:
Jim Delaney: big ten wants more teams and championship game. can't blame him, he didn't want big 12 to fail and taking 1 team should never have caused the break-up. Big ten was moving methodically and was looking to do this on the up and up until pac 10, chip brown, and texas went to hyperdrive.

Texas: even they weren't much of a villain until the events of today. Pac-10 made a great offer, very hard to turn down. It looks sincere and I bet they were actually going to take it. They wanted their own network (reasonable if you can get it) pac-10 wouldn't offer it and the big 12 would with lots of concessions. I do believe the additional concessions coming to light today may change my mind.

Beebe's incompetance: Had little control

UI, state, isu officials: Little control

Nebraska: everyone would have done what they did, they didn't break up the conference or even want it, again 1 team changing hands didn't need to cause this commotion

Big Myth #3: ESPN involvement to overpay the big 12 so fox sports doesn't encroach on their territory. The same reporters reporting this also the next day refuted themselves without even realizing it. The claim was that espn promised huge money to the big 12 because they were afraid of fox sports getting texas and a big new contract. Well the next day reports are fox sports gave the huge money and espn just agreed to not devalue (wow, what a powerplay) these journalists are comical


Myth #4 Chip Brown superman blogger: Yes he was accurate of course he was it was Texas way of putting their info out their without having to answer questions. I'm not putting him down but it's not like he was getting leaks and putting out info they he dug up and they didn't want advertised. Texas used him, good for him, i'm sure he'll get great benefit from this. If this was politics he'd be considered a partisen hack. A real reporter would have asked questions when info wasn't consistant. The rest of the media today talking about texas getting rich and the onesidedness of the deal and orangebloods headline is big 12 gets rich. Did he ask his sources about the NU,CU fees, about where the dollar figures come from for new revenue or if texas was mad pac 10 turned them down. of course not.

Myth #5: Texas ruling college football TV: In 2 to 3 years Texas own optimistic forcasts is 25 million in revenue. This year all big 10 teams got 21million. In 2 to 3 years low ball estimates say Texas is making less than any of the big 10 teams.


Finally the sad myth I had that their were more iowa and isu fans that hated each other on the field but off the field understood the importance of the rivalry. I was certain their were more fans like myself and family I spoke to that were heartbroken about the idea of isu being demoted but soon i found out their were more fans and not just message board morons who would have like to see isu's demise. and I heard from many many isu fans who would love to see iowa's athletic program disappear and meant it no matter how unlikely. I guess i was naive

I don't believe any of the conspiracy theories either, but don't come in here and act like you know exactly what happened. Give me a break. You don't have any clue either. I hate when Hawk fans try and tell us what is up.

 

[cybirdie]

Let's not pretend this doesn't go both ways and iowa or isu fans who think the other is more hateful spiteful or mean spirited is just fooling themselves that or they have just lived in ames or iowa city their whole life.

by the way hayden helped the disparity but the hawkeye fandom being larger goes way way way way back. from the 20's to Nile Kinnick to Forest Evershevski the hawkeye brand was all over the state well before iowa's lean years and isu's good run in the 1970's. Hayden just brought it back and extended the gap. It's never been equal footing.

I grew up near Ames and have lived outside the state for the last seven years, in all my encounters in Chicago, ATL & New York the hawk fans have made a point of putting any and all things Cyclone down, especially after they lose...I can remember as a kid being put down by elders who were friends of my parents who happened to be Hawk fans, the good hawk fan that participates in a healthy rivalry are few and far between.

I love how Iowa fans ignore the entire argument about how ISU is the school which provides for the backbone of the state's economy, agriculture...and how second rate it is that Fry put those pandering stickers on his boys helmets.

 

[chicagohawk]

I don't know what happened, I'm just saying I don't think the conspiracies happened. History tells us it rarely happens. Sorry, I don't believe in "the man"

No body has all the information in the world to push all these levers and no the outcome enough to control it.

Finally Notre Dame isn't the perfect academic fit but it has many other attractive things.

I can't see what is so hard to understand.

Academic prestige
Research academics and large state institution
Quality of athlitic deparment
preceived quality of football
Television sets

All played a role. Nobody ever said it was just 1, show me where delaney said he was offering MIT because it was just academics.

Notre Dame would have excellent qualification in 4 of these 5, not bad. Has great academic prestige and a respected institution just not teh public research, they have many other very unique qualities everyone would want and wouldn't be a stain on the big 10 academic reputation.


Nebraska has 3 of these 5 and their academics aren't horrible (I think) They have the research, quality AD, football, large state institution and money. Academic prestige nope, TV sets nope.

According to many people than if Notre Dame, Rutgers, Nebraska are all considered than the criteria we can throw out as to what the Big 10 is looking for would be:
It's not academic excellence: see Nebraska
Not Research: See Notre Dame
Not good Athletics: Rutgers
Not a good football reputation: See Rutgers
It's not TV sets: See Nebraska

well I guess all criteria are shot, it must be something else. Hmmm, maybe it's a combination of everything. Maybe each school has pro's and con's. Again I'm just saying before assuming all motives and "the man" is lying to you just step back and look at the situtation.

PS ISU would be good on several fronts
Academic presige: pretty good, would be a close #12 but very close to teh bottom 4 or 5 and would be a fine addition.

Research: excellent
large public land grant: excellent
AD: better than given credit for
money, tv sets, football perceived value: Not good