Mandel: Big Ten Fighting for Survival | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Mandel: Big Ten Fighting for Survival

Status
Not open for further replies.
But....seriously...it is about the ability to recruit well...SEC can do this...FSU can do this...Texas should be able to do this...
 
.-.
We could be talking about lawnmowers and FSU would find its way into the conversation. I'm enabling the highjacking of this thread so I'm going to stop now. . .
 
clmssun said:
1) And yet the B1G places high value on both BC and GT (and UVa and UNC).
Expand ...

BC isn't on the Big Ten's radar. The only non-research institution that has a prayer of a chance of getting invited is Notre Dame. Yes, the Big Ten likes Georgia Tech because it's a research powerhouse, but liking them and taking the next step and offering a position assuming they can bring the money the conference hopes they'll bring are two VERY different things. The Big Ten likes GT. It's really not sure they'd be worth the money. Like I said, it's because not many people in Atlanta care.

clmssun said:
2) Absolutely, Atlanta is a UGa town, and to a large extent, it is a "SEC" town; while not specifically a Tech town, Atlanta is also well represented by several ACC schools (though not as well as the rest of the SEC). If Delany thinks he can swoop into Atlanta and feed them "GT-Rutgers" or "GT-Northwestern" football and command high carriage fees for BTN, he is either a genuine, supremely confident magician or he is clinically insane.
Expand ...

Even in the reports that have stated the Big Ten *might* be interested in Tech, I have never seen one that implies the Big Ten thinks it could get high carriage fees for Georgia Tech. And that is exactly why I'm responding the way I did to your first point. They love Georgia Tech as an institution. It's a great school. But it doesn't make (dollars) sense.

clmssun said:
3) Similar arguments for Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, Greenville-Spartanburg, Richmond. These cities have some B1G alums who watch their B1G events, These cities have loads of ACC alums who watch ACC events, and loads of SEC alums who watch SEC events. There are also numerous folks in these cities who just love the SEC.... and no, the B1G does not equal the SEC in their eyes. (and nor does the ACC equal the SEC in their eyes).
Expand ...

I think you'd have a hard time selling the notion that the SEC trumps the ACC in or north of Charlotte.

clmssun said:
Yes, the B1G has the states of Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio which have a demographic crisis on their hands, as Mandel describes.

Yes, the B1G also has Nebraska and Pennsylvania in the footprint, but any local fandom there is just gravy to the B1G, as it is the national drawing power of Penn State, Nebraska, Michigan, and Ohio State where the B1G's fortune has lain (and will continue to lie).
Expand ...

Your and Mandel's use of the term "crisis" is pretty much sensationalism. Only one Big Ten state 'lost' population in the last census compared the one the before. That's hardly a crisis. The population shift has been something that's occurred slowly over the last 3-4 decades. That's hardly a "crisis." If it continues, then it could be projected to be an issue 30-50 years down the road. But honestly, no one has any clue what athletics might look like in three decades, so it's ridiculous to call it a crisis. Fact is, even the Big Ten states are growing. They're just not all growing at the same rate as some other states in the union.

clmssun said:
Miami is a national brand who draw television viewers nationwide... just not locals into the stadium.
Expand ...

Local ratings still comprise a majority of viewers. If Miami isn't on top of its game, not a lot of people are watching. The locals certainly aren't and the fact is that is responsible for the lion's share of eyeballs.
 
kyleslamb said:
BC isn't on the Big Ten's radar. The only non-research institution that has a prayer of a chance of getting invited is Notre Dame. Yes, the Big Ten likes Georgia Tech because it's a research powerhouse, but liking them and taking the next step and offering a position assuming they can bring the money the conference hopes they'll bring are two VERY different things. The Big Ten likes GT. It's really not sure they'd be worth the money. Like I said, it's because not many people in Atlanta care.



Even in the reports that have stated the Big Ten *might* be interested in Tech, I have never seen one that implies the Big Ten thinks it could get high carriage fees for Georgia Tech. And that is exactly why I'm responding the way I did to your first point. They love Georgia Tech as an institution. It's a great school. But it doesn't make (dollars) sense.



I think you'd have a hard time selling the notion that the SEC trumps the ACC in or north of Charlotte.



Your and Mandel's use of the term "crisis" is pretty much sensationalism. Only one Big Ten state 'lost' population in the last census compared the one the before. That's hardly a crisis. The population shift has been something that's occurred slowly over the last 3-4 decades. That's hardly a "crisis." If it continues, then it could be projected to be an issue 30-50 years down the road. But honestly, no one has any clue what athletics might look like in three decades, so it's ridiculous to call it a crisis. Fact is, even the Big Ten states are growing. They're just not all growing at the same rate as some other states in the union.



Local ratings still comprise a majority of viewers. If Miami isn't on top of its game, not a lot of people are watching. The locals certainly aren't and the fact is that is responsible for the lion's share of eyeballs.
Expand ...
Finally some refreshing sanity here. Mandels article seemed like a rehash though sensationalized of stuff we've been over adnauseum! Nothing new there. I see some of these ACC posters seem to have a complex !?! I mean whose achieved less in the old P6 including the OBE in the BCS period? Yet there one team with any degree of respect(FSU) does 1 thing and they crow like they've never been there before as though it compensates for 10 tears of sub mediocrity!
 
Without a doubt the worst thing about college sports is the arguing amongst fans/media which conferences are better.

The most confusing part is why people have these arguments on a board about a team that isn't in any of the conferences they argue about.
 
.-.
I see that folks do not get my point...it is not about repping FSU...

It is about whether a program can compete (even in the ACC)...or whether comparative conference talk is all that when it comes to an individual program.

Just how disadvantaged is a team like FSU by not playing in the Big Ten or SEC?


No doubt that the Big Ten brings in the moola. And has for some time with their huge fan bases.

The Big Ten has only won 2 Football National Championships since 1970,

The Big Ten has only won 1 Men's Basketball Championship in the past 25 years.



If...If the purpose of an athletic program is to win the mythical money title....Texas and the Big Ten teams will have it locked up for a decade or more.

Maybe the new measure for team success is:

1. Money

2. Money

3. Extra money

4. Exposure for the school to make more Money

5. Even more money to try and win mythical money title
 
billybud said:
Scale didn't help Ohio State in its loss to Clemson in the Orange Bowl...

When I went to Michigan's Big House, FSU seated 42,000...I was in awe of the 100,000 plus crowd....but that big school scale did nothing to prevent FSU from scoring 51 points on a team that went undefeated in the Big Ten that year.

Wisconsin brings in tens of more millions than does FSU...has it helped? The only time that the two have met was in a recent bowl and FSU won by 29.

It is about recruiting....if you have an advantageous recruiting situation, scale goes out of the window.

You know...Wake, in the past, has beaten the eventual Big Ten Champ....
Expand ...

Are we really talking about Clemson's bowl record as a positive? I mean it's a nice program, running down the hill, Howards Rock, and all that, but Clemsoning is still a well used phrase in CFB.
 
billybud said:
I see that folks do not get my point...it is not about repping FSU...

It is about whether a program can compete (even in the ACC)...or whether comparative conference talk is all that when it comes to an individual program.

Just how disadvantaged is a team like FSU by not playing in the Big Ten or SEC?


No doubt that the Big Ten brings in the moola. And has for some time with their huge fan bases.

The Big Ten has only won 2 Football National Championships since 1970,

The Big Ten has only won 1 Men's Basketball Championship in the past 25 years.



If...If the purpose of an athletic program is to win the mythical money title....Texas and the Big Ten teams will have it locked up for a decade or more.

Maybe the new measure for team success is:

1. Money

2. Money

3. Extra money

4. Exposure for the school to make more Money

5. Even more money to try and win mythical money title
Expand ...

What is the purpose of a football program to the following groups of people:

1. Students

2. Everyday fans

3. Alumni

4. Big donor alumni and fans

5. The schools themselves
 
dayooper said:
What is the purpose of a football program to the following groups of people:

1. Students

2. Everyday fans

3. Alumni

4. Big donor alumni and fans

5. The schools themselves
Expand ...

By the way, FSU will only be disadvantaged by itself. They play in one of the most talent rich states and have a very strong traditional reputation. It really doesn't matter what P5 conference they play in as long as they have the right coach and don't get into too much trouble.
 
I agree with your point...

If a team can recruit...a team can compete regardless of conference.

And, while it helps to sit in a national recruiting hotbed like Florida...teams now must go national.

Even FSU has their starting QB from Alabama, backup from Pennsylvania, starting OG from Georgia, other starting OG from New Jersey, a starting OT from Georgia, 2nd TE from New Jersey, starting DE's from Texas and Alabama, starting DT from Washington, DC, starting Safeties from Maryland and Georgia.

I think that a team like UConn or Rutgers can succeed on the big stage....but to do so they will have to successfully recruit nationally for great athletes.
 
ND-game-sites.gif



ND agrees with the article. It has shifted its recruiting focus sharply to the Southeast.

There are no non-home ND games scheduled in the Midwest the next three seasons.

The Purdue game is a "Shamrock Series" ND home game moved to Indianapolis.

ND wants to play football games in the Southeast, Southwest and East Coast for recruiting exposure.

Besides these games, ND and Georgia are close to announcing a series.

The Big Ten is of no help to ND here, quite the opposite. That is one reason why ND doesn't mind jettisoning annual games against Michigan, Michigan State and Purdue.

It wants the flexibility to add more games in the South and West in lieu of Big Ten games.
 
.-.
SubbaBub said:
Are we reTanning"lking about Clemson's bowl record as a positive? I mean it's a nice program, running down the hill, Howards Rock, and all that, but Clemsoning is still a well used phrase in CFB.
Expand ...
It would seem more appropriate to use the phrase "Big Tenning", as there is a longer, more consistent behavior (spanning multiple schools under one umbrella) of spitting the bit on the big stage.

(But yes, Big Ten, you make more money than Clemson..oh wait, that makes the Big Ten look worse. Never mind.)
 
TerryD said:
View attachment 6228


ND agrees with the article. It has shifted its recruiting focus sharply to the Southeast.

There are no non-home ND games scheduled in the Midwest the next three seasons.

The Purdue game is a "Shamrock Series" ND home game moved to Indianapolis.

ND wants to play football games in the Southeast, Southwest and East Coast for recruiting exposure.

Besides these games, ND and Georgia are close to announcing a series.

The Big Ten is of no help to ND here, quite the opposite. That is one reason why ND doesn't mind jettisoning annual games against Michigan, Michigan State and Purdue.

It wants the flexibility to add more games in the South and West in lieu of Big Ten games.
Expand ...

http://the-boneyard.com/threads/a-visitors-guide-to-our-board.59726/
 
billybud said:
Ahhh...the basketball board
Expand ...

So you come to a UConn board to spout off about how only schools that have national champions are good enough for the P5 and forget about our 4 Men's Hoops titles? When the last one was 2 months ago? Why don't you crawl into a Cuse hole or something? I believe they won a football title back in the 50's. What's that, they consider FSU nouveau riche and not on par with them? Too bad. I'm sure the Louisville board will love you.
 
StevieDude said:
http://the-boneyard.com/threads/a-visitors-guide-to-our-board.59726/
Expand ...

Mine was not a bash Big Ten post. I don't ridicule that conference or call it or its schools any derogatory names.

My post merely reflected the trends brought up in the article about demographics and recruiting. I mention no conference as superior.

Here is Fishy's quote:

"If the level of your contribution here doesn't rise past a constant drumbeat as to why your conference is superior, if you're here to call the Big Ten "BUG" or Michigan "Meatchicken" or any of a thousand other annoyances, you're not welcome.

We rarely if ever ban anyone here, but visitors are now standing on a trap door. Contribute and behave...no problem. Post nonsense....we'll bounce you.

I trust that's clear enough."

Show me where my post does any of that.
 
TerryD said:
View attachment 6228


ND agrees with the article. It has shifted its recruiting focus sharply to the Southeast.

There are no non-home ND games scheduled in the Midwest the next three seasons.

The Purdue game is a "Shamrock Series" ND home game moved to Indianapolis.

ND wants to play football games in the Southeast, Southwest and East Coast for recruiting exposure.

Besides these games, ND and Georgia are close to announcing a series.

The Big Ten is of no help to ND here, quite the opposite. That is one reason why ND doesn't mind jettisoning annual games against Michigan, Michigan State and Purdue.

It wants the flexibility to add more games in the South and West in lieu of Big Ten games.
Expand ...

I see nothing wrong with this post. I think it's sad that the UM-ND series is cancelled. Some of the best games have been played in the last 20 years with in this series.
 
.-.
Nobody here really cares about your friggn school. Can you find a Notre dame board where people might care?

Also you left out the 1st part of his quote

"This board is for UConn fans to talk about realignment and how it affects our school and program."

How is your post UConn related?
 
TerryD said:
Mine was not a bash Big Ten post. I don't ridicule that conference or call it or its schools any derogatory names.

My post merely reflected the trends brought up in the article about demographics and recruiting. I mention no conference as superior.

Here is Fishy's quote:

"If the level of your contribution here doesn't rise past a constant drumbeat as to why your conference is superior, if you're here to call the Big Ten "BUG" or Michigan "Meatchicken" or any of a thousand other annoyances, you're not welcome.

We rarely if ever ban anyone here, but visitors are now standing on a trap door. Contribute and behave...no problem. Post nonsense....we'll bounce you.

I trust that's clear enough."

Show me where my post does any of that.
Expand ...


What your post fails to mention is that ND trolled around for a hybrid deal and the only conference that would give them one was the ACC. As I have posted before, the resentment will build in the ACC when clearly superior football programs (FSU, Clemson etc.) witness an underachieving, passé program get special benefits because of ancient history. It's not that ND wants to focus on the southeast, it is because that is where the conference that got sucked into the ND web is located. If Delany et al and the B1G allowed ND to "half commit" to the conference, ND would have happily talked about the importance of maintaining historic rivalries with Mich, MSU etc. Look, it's simple - you guys hoodwinked the ACC. For that I'll tip my hat. But please - no self justification of an obvious self-centered move gets ND the special treatment that it feels entitled to.
 
A couple of fundamental points on these "conference revenues" and "conference successes" subjects:

1) There is unquestionably a threshold of financial resources necessary for ultimate success. UConn must attain ACC or B1G membership "soon" (within ten years, and hopefully sooner) to main competitiveness, IMHO. (As I am sure most BoneYarders agree)

2) Beyond that threshold, I argue (with factual support), more money does not equal more success, and more money's equation to "better" is in the eye of the beholder.

Having some education from UConn, I am particularly interested in UConn's current success and aspirations for greater future success. It seems that "my ACC school" has been against UConn in the ACC, but I am most certainly for UConn in the ACC. And if the B1G works out for UConn, that is great, too. But there is all kinds of twisted irony in UConn going to the B1G, given that UConn has won so many more basketball titles than the entire B1G in recent years and that the common perception is that UConn must "upgrade" football to B1G levels when UConn has already shown itself to be quite competitive with B1G in football (last year's Michigan game, beating a frequent B1G opponent [ND] in South Bend, producing many NFL draftees...). UConn is already better (athletically) than much of the B1G, and yet, yes, in many ways, UConn is beholden to the B1G to be "saved." I just hope UConn athletics find their just place in the Power 5, wherever that may be,
 
UConn9604 said:
If this piece is accurate, unless the Big Ten values basketball in its quest for survival, our chances of receiving an invite probably remain low.

Much of Connecticut has a great deal in common with the demographics of the midwestern states (shrinking, getting older) and if Big Ten schools' fans object to adding Rutgers or Maryland, they may not have the stomach to add another Rutgers or Maryland in football, even if it is accompanied by a pair of world-class basketball programs.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20140618/big-ten-expansion/
Expand ...

Unfortunately I had a very similar feeling after reading. Two other thoughts that popped in my head:

1. Delaney from South Orange, NJ - helps explain Rutgers addition?
2. I felt it was almost comical when Mandel (who I like) tried to talk up RU sports with the Woman's BB team going to a couple Final 4's half a decade ago and the pumping of a nationally ranked Wrestling Squad - unintentional comedy
 
Last edited:
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,336
Messages
4,565,400
Members
10,465
Latest member
agiglax


Top Bottom