CatsClaw Wrote:army56mike Wrote:If Mizzou went to the Big Televen are you sure they would gain the Kansas City market? KC is only a few miles from Kansas U. Maybe they have a bunch of fans there, though it is another state.
The Big Ten doesn't want Pitt or Syracuse because they feel they don't need the New York market and Pitt only adds a rival for Penn State,
So, if they are successful in their launch of the Big Ten Network, they will want no part of New York City? Or upstate New York? Hmmm... I would have thought the very fact that they are launching their own network would indicate how important $$$ are too them, but I guess that is simply me.
Or perhaps you didn't realize that upstate New York from Albany to Buffalo and from Binghamton on up to the Canadian border totals more TV households than the entire state of Missouri?
Or that total for upstate New York is about a third of the total number of TVHH in the New York City area?
This new era that may be starting with a successful launch of a BTN is likely to change everything. We can only hope Comcast and TW put the breaks on it somehow.
For those with eyes to see, almost every move the Big Ten has made since the late 80s has been designed to get two prizes - Notre Dame and New York City and in the process protect their current biggest prizes, Chicago and Philadelphia. Detroit, their third biggest prize, needs no protection.
Quote:and, to be blunt, the Big Ten couldn't care less if Penn State was given a travel partner.
First, it's not about a travel partner - the Big Ten isn't the Pac-10.
It's about a 'significant rival' for Penn State so that the Nits can feel they are on the same level as Michigan-Ohio State. And only ND will accomplish that. Not Pitt, not Syracuse, and not Rutgers
Again, your comments on this topic now and in the past show the typical Ohio fan perspective that I, as a Big East fan, am counting on winning the day in the Big Ten.
Without Penn State, their BTN would be less in terms of total value than a potential ACC Network, no less an SEC one. Eight states are better than seven, especially when one of those states is Pennsylvania. And without Penn State, the revenue sharing in terms of ticket sales for conference games will decrease as well.
Of course, the Nits have become such wimps that it wouldn;t surprise me if this attitude doesn't pervade the entire Big Ten. Again, I can only hope it does.
Up until now, they've been stalling with, "Be patient, Notre Dame will eventually come - they'll be your marquee rival game"
Quote:The only reason the Big Ten would add Rutgers is because of academics. But the Big Ten is an arrogant conference, and as good as the above mentioned programs are the Big Ten is only going to add a new midwest market or Notre Dame.
If they don't get Notre Dame within the next few years, they will never get them, imho. And unfortunately for Pitt, while probably the logical choice, the potential new realities of the changing college landscape will mean if they can't get ND and want to get more $$$ to stay ahead of the other conferences, they will likely add Rutgers, Syracuse, or Missouri.
So, for you, that leaves Missouri or no one, I guess. Fine, you're entitled to that opinion.
In the meantime, you won't mind if I hope Big East officials and Big East football presidents are sizing up the situation and making contingency plans for what to do should the Big Ten come after one of their schools or if the ACC should try another end-around, will you?
I'd rather not see the conference go through again, what it went through in 2003 and 2004.
I'm sure you can relate - the Metro, the Great Midwest, C-USA. Maybe you're immune to it by now, but I'd rather not go through it again.
Cheers,
Neil