Online Now 810

Terps Sports

Visitor discussion of University of Maryland and college sports

On this Board 129
Record: 4726 (10/4/2012)

Online now 836
Record: 11761 (2/27/2012)

Boards ▾

Inside Scoop

The Web's No. 1 forum for coverage and discussion of Terps sports

Terps Sports

Visitor discussion of University of Maryland and college sports

General Sports Water Cooler

A place for lively discussion for all other sports unrelated to Maryland athletics

Off-Topic

Test/Feedback Forum

Feedback for IMS and 247Sports

The Ticket Exchange

Reply

CFN's take on conference realignment, MD to Big Ten

  • fwiw

    http://cfn.scout.com/2/1095334.html

    We may be ripe for the pickin with our budget problems.

    The 2014 Version Will Probably Be …
    Leaders – Indiana, Maryland, Ohio State, Penn State, Pitt, Purdue, Rutgers, Syracuse
    Legends – Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Michigan State, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin

    The Big Ten wanted Texas, but that was never going to happen with the Longhorn Network in the works. The BTN is going to be a cash machine if the right ad markets are added to the mix, and New York is the right ad market. Connecticut will be in the discussions, but there’s no need for the Huskies if the Big Ten can get a few other key Big East schools. The idea of bringing in Pitt didn't seem to matter before, considering the league already owns Pennsylvania with Penn State, but with Missouri likely off to the SEC, and with no interest in Iowa State or Kansas, getting Pitt gets another decent market while setting up some nice rivalry games. Rutgers and Syracuse will bring in New York City, Buffalo, and everywhere in between, and Maryland expands the TV reach to Baltimore and Washington D.C. Illinois and Wisconsin will move over from the Leaders Division with the Illini being paired with Northwestern and the Badgers having a natural tie-in with Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska.

    This post has been edited 4 times, most recently by everterp on 8/15/2011 at 8:46 AM

    http://www.coacheshotseat.com/CoachesHotSeatRanking.htm

    everterp

  • thread title :frode

    RDurr

  • Jesus fix the thread title

    b1210k

  • Hmm, I'm not buying Carolina, Duke, and Virginia wanting to be in a conference with UCF, USF, and ECU.

    jkrterp

  • b1210k said...

    Jesus fix the thread title

    Wow. Terrible title. I thought we were done to B10. SMH.

    A.B.E.

    tooch43

  • Texas isn't going independent. There's probably a better chance of us joining the SEC than seeing Texas go out on its own.

    fuzzy510

  • we should be so lucky

    winterps ●

  • The ACC is going to take East Carolina UCF and USF over Pitt, UConn, WVU and Louisville? LOL, mods please lock and ban.

    ACCwha

  • Thread title fixed.

    OrangeTerrapin

  • fuzzy510 said...

    Texas isn't going independent. There's probably a better chance of us joining the SEC than seeing Texas go out on its own.

    It could happen as a last resort - if they can't fix the B12 and the P12/B1G can't resolve their issues with the LHN. Not likely, though.

    TerpDaddy

  • Basketball is nothing in a Big 10 football conference. This is all about football money and TAMU just solidified it. I am convinced we are on the outside looking in. Don't give me that we are so good in soccer, lax, field hockey, competitive cheer whatever. Nobody cares. And don't give me media market. Cable negates any of that talk. The Big 10 doesn't need an actual school in a media footprint to show games and collect ad money. I'm sure the Big 10 network is going to love showing 25,000 people in a 56,000 stadium on it's game of the week. Oh - they're not. Because I have it and I never see Northwestern on the friggin channel.

    Somebody please tell me why the Big 10 would want us. And remember, media market is not a factor. And our stellar history in football isn't either. The Big 10 is a football conference. Plain and simple. We don't have it.

    We are destined for the watered down version of the Big East/ACC conference. Great.

    artielange

  • artielange said...

    The Big 10 doesn't need an actual school in a media footprint to show games and collect ad money. I'm sure the Big 10 network is going to love showing 25,000 people in a 56,000 stadium on it's game of the week. Oh - they're not. Because I have it and I never see Northwestern on the friggin channel.

    Their games may not be on the main feed, but they do get shown on the secondary channels as every game that is not picked up by ABC/ESPNs is shown on the BTN.

    This post was edited by OrangeTerrapin on 8/14/2011 at 10:27 PM

    OrangeTerrapin

  • OrangeTerrapin said...

    Their games may not be on the main feed, but they do get shown on the secondary channels as they show every game that is not picked up by ABC/ESPNs on the BTN.

    You just proved my point. Believe me, I am not happy with this. Who gives a shit about secondary feed. I work in sports marketing, secondary feed is a free throw in to make the sponsors happy and embellish what sponsors get for their money. Main feed is the only thing that counts. I have no confidence in Swofford, et. all., to save the conference.

    artielange

  • TerpDaddy said...

    It could happen as a last resort - if they can't fix the B12 and the P12/B1G can't resolve their issues with the LHN. Not likely, though.

    They might consider dropping the LHN before going independent if they look at it from a big-picture standpoint. Going independent is fine for football, but completely torpedoes every other sport that Texas has. Either they go independent there as well, which will make it nearly impossible for them to make an NCAA tournament in a lot of sports ever again, or they'll join a second-tier conference the same way that BYU just did. And I'll give you a hint: Texas isn't going to elect to play a WAC or Southland basketball schedule anytime soon.

    Hell, for all I know, there might be a clause in the LHN contract with ESPN that allows them to get out of it or pay less money in that kind of a shift. Lord knows they didn't pay $300 million over 20 years to get a team that plays the Idahos and San Jose States of the world for their conference matchups.

    fuzzy510

  • artielange said...

    Who gives a shit about secondary feed. I work in sports marketing, secondary feed is a free throw in to make the sponsors happy and embellish what sponsors get for their money. Main feed is the only thing that counts.

    Basically, the secondary feed is saying the game is on BTN2. Is it really THAT much different if you are talking about a game between two lower half teams that no one besides each teams fans wants to watch anyways?

    And I am now starting to recall that the BTN will always carry the local game on the primary feed. Not totally sure on this though.

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by OrangeTerrapin on 8/14/2011 at 10:48 PM

    OrangeTerrapin

  • fuzzy510 said...

    They might consider dropping the LHN before going independent if they look at it from a big-picture standpoint. Going independent is fine for football, but completely torpedoes every other sport that Texas has. Either they go independent there as well, which will make it nearly impossible for them to make an NCAA tournament in a lot of sports ever again, or they'll join a second-tier conference the same way that BYU just did. And I'll give you a hint: Texas isn't going to elect to play a WAC or Southland basketball schedule anytime soon.

    Hell, for all I know, there might be a clause in the LHN contract with ESPN that allows them to get out of it or pay less money in that kind of a shift. Lord knows they didn't pay $300 million over 20 years to get a team that plays the Idahos and San Jose States of the world for their conference matchups.

    Nope. Best thing to ever happen to Texas athletics. They now corner the market on state of Texas high school football games. It was a brilliant move on Texas' part. And I get why TAMU is pissed. They should be. Texas is one of the few schools that can go independent and still be fine. In fact, be better off. Who gives a shit about Texas vs. Iowa State when you could have Texas vs. anybody good. While Notre Dame football has sucked for the last few years, their Big East affiliation with every sport other than football has worked out quite well for them. And my guess is that even if Texas wanted to go CUSA just for the other sports, they would have no problem getting in. They are in the driver's seat - don't doubt that for a second.

    artielange

  • artielange said...

    Nope. Best thing to ever happen to Texas athletics. They now corner the market on state of Texas high school football games. It was a brilliant move on Texas' part. And I get why TAMU is pissed. They should be. Texas is one of the few schools that can go independent and still be fine. In fact, be better off. Who gives a shit about Texas vs. Iowa State when you could have Texas vs. anybody good. While Notre Dame football has sucked for the last few years, their Big East affiliation with every sport other than football has worked out quite well for them. And my guess is that even if Texas wanted to go CUSA just for the other sports, they would have no problem getting in. They are in the driver's seat - don't doubt that for a second.

    You're comparing apples to oranges here. Notre Dame's affiliation with the Big East has worked out beautifully because it's the Big East, and the primary sport of concern here is basketball. Notre Dame was independent in football, and placed the rest of their sports with an elite basketball conference. The only way that the same thing happens for Texas is if they join somebody like the Pac-12 or SEC on a non-football basis, which will never, ever happen. In any other scenario, they're seriously hurting their other sports - which DOES matter to Texas.

    Besides, if Texas looked at going indy as anything other than a last resort, they'd have done it the second they had the LHN deal inked.

    fuzzy510

  • OrangeTerrapin said...

    Basically, the secondary feed is saying the game is on BTN2. Is it really THAT much different if you are talking about a game between two lower half teams that no one besides each teams fans wants to watch anyways?

    Yes. Are you, as a non-alum, tuning in to Indiana vs. Northwestern?

    artielange

  • fuzzy510 said...

    You're comparing apples to oranges here. Notre Dame's affiliation with the Big East has worked out beautifully because it's the Big East, and the primary sport of concern here is basketball. Notre Dame was independent in football, and placed the rest of their sports with an elite basketball conference. The only way that the same thing happens for Texas is if they join somebody like the Pac-12 or SEC on a non-football basis, which will never, ever happen. In any other scenario, they're seriously hurting their other sports - which DOES matter to Texas.

    Besides, if Texas looked at going indy as anything other than a last resort, they'd have done it the second they had the LHN deal inked.

    If you don't think the Longhorn Network wasn't the first salvo in the Univ of Texas going independent than you are sorely naive. The University of Texas has such cache that they would have no problem at all in getting opponents in every other sport. Keep thinking this is not about money. Do you really think that if the Univ of Texas approached any men's basketball opponent for a regular season game - that the other school wouldn't beg for the game. Haha. Oh - I would much rather watch the Terps play Bum diddlify fuck SUNY Stony Brook Wolves than the independent Texas Longhorns.

    Get Real. Again, I am not happy about this because I think the Terps lose.

    artielange

  • artielange said...

    Yes. Are you, as a non-alum, tuning in to Indiana vs. Northwestern?

    Little chance I am turning into that game no matter if it is on ESPNU, BTN, or "BTN2". That is how I see how it makes little difference. If there so happens to be two decent Big Ten games on at the same time, it is not going to matter to me which feed it is on.

    I know not everyone is like me in this way, which means of course more neutral eyeballs will be on the main feed, but it is not like any of the BTNs are something you turn into by mistake like the ESPNs.

    It may not exactly be about "markets" for BTN, but the DC/Baltimore market is HUGE, and in the end, the Big Ten is not going to care if our stadium is half filled for a game against Indiana when it stands to get millions from all the extra premium subscribers it gains.

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by OrangeTerrapin on 8/14/2011 at 11:10 PM

    OrangeTerrapin

  • OrangeTerrapin said...

    Little chance I am turning into that game no matter if it is on ESPNU, BTN, or "BTN2". That is how I see how it makes little difference. If there so happens to be two decent Big Ten games on at the same time, it is not going to matter to which feed it is on.

    I know not everyone is smart enough to figure out the difference between the different feeds, which means of course more neutral eyeballs will be on the main feed, but it is not like any of the BTNs are something you turn into by mistake like the ESPNs.

    Listen, bottom line - I'm not trying to be a dick. But this TAMU move is more major than Joe Six Pack thinks. And I have little confidence in the ACC powers that be to save the conference. So my biggest fear is UMD to Conference USA. And all this UMD to the Big 10 is bullshit. They expanded Penn State and Nebraska. They ain't expanding to a middle of the road ACC football program. As much as I hate to admit it.

    artielange

  • It may not exactly be about "markets" for BTN, but the DC/Baltimore market is HUGE, and in the end, the Big Ten is not going to care if our stadium is half filled for a game against Indiana when it stands to get millions from all the extra premium subscribers it gains.

    Again, they have the market as long as the Big 10 Network is on the local cable system. It has nothing to do with whether UMD or any other local school is in the conference. Believe me, all the OSU, Michigan and Penn State fans are going to watch the channel and not give two shits that Maryland isn't in the conference. Thus, the channel makes money from the advertisers.

    artielange

  • artielange said...

    And don't give me media market. Cable negates any of that talk. The Big 10 doesn't need an actual school in a media footprint to show games and collect ad money.

    I must have missed this bit. How exactly do you expect the Big Ten to command anywhere near what they want for carriage rates when they don't have a presence in a given market? You said it yourself - as a non-alum, what interest do you have in Indiana-Northwestern? The only market for those games are in the areas where those teams are located.

    If anything, the Big Ten Network's function as a way to put on the leftovers is EXACTLY why they'd want a team in a large media market. The marquee games are never going to make it onto the Big Ten Network, so the idea that you have of the Big Ten adding teams to draw national appeal to the Big Ten Network is completely ridiculous - the games that are of interest to subscribers outside of the Big Ten footprint will be on national TV anyway.

    Ergo, the only way that expansion helps the Big Ten Network is by getting the Big Ten Network to be of interest to large markets that aren't already a part of the footprint, which is precisely why Rutgers and Maryland get mentioned (and the ONLY reasons why Rutgers and Maryland get mentioned).

    fuzzy510

  • artielange said...

    Again, they have the market as long as the Big 10 Network is on the local cable system. It has nothing to do with whether UMD or any other local school is in the conference. Believe me, all the OSU, Michigan and Penn State fans are going to watch the channel and not give two shits that Maryland isn't in the conference. Thus, the channel makes money from the advertisers.

    But doesn't the Big Ten charge like 10x more to Comcast if we join their footprint? I though it goes from like 10 cents/subscriber to a $1/subscriber.

    And I would think the current Big Ten schools would actually like some of the new teams to be teams they exactly do not have to be worried about. biggrin.

    This post was edited by OrangeTerrapin on 8/14/2011 at 11:24 PM

    OrangeTerrapin

  • artielange said...

    Again, they have the market as long as the Big 10 Network is on the local cable system.

    Which it isn't, at least not on the basic tiers.

    fuzzy510

Maryland
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports