The CEO of Under Armour, Kevin Plank, is a big MD booster, and rumors are flying that he’s poised to sell $65 million of stock to facilitate the exit fee.
This obviously is a slam dunk for Rutgers, should the invite be formally extended. While they haven’t been a traditional power by any metric, they have been pretty successful this past decade.
Can’t answer any of the other questions really since I don’t follow much college ball, but I have BTN in Montgomery county on Verizon as part of my cable structure. I’m sure a lot of others around here do as well.
I’d only heard about this this morning and was surprised, especially with the loss of a number of athletic programs Maryland cut this past year. They also said there were not a whole lot of people at the game this past weekend.
There wasn’t. Most of my section was peewee football teams waiting to play later, and the others left at the half.
From what I’ve read on other boards, the B1G is doing this because, while the BTN is already in DC and NYC, getting these schools counts as having a footprint in the markets. Take with a grain of salt or two, but apparently the BTN gets $0.10 per subscriber in those markets currently, but the footprint aspect would increase the fee to something like $0.40/subscriber. The other speculation is that this gets the league to 14 teams, and basically tells Notre Dame, “Look, we’ve got 2 spots left. The ACC has just become weaker. Get in before we’re full.” I don’t know who that 15th (16th) school would be if the B1G convinces ND to join. Georgia Tech is one option. The other name bandied about was UNC. I can’t see UNC leaving the ACC. But if the B1G adds ND, and gets UNC on board, that $50m becomes peanuts for the league.
Fun times, right?! I can’t wait til the bubble bursts and we go back to 8, 9, and 10 team conferences.
Personally its strange to me that its these two schools being discussed. I went to Maryland and grew up in the shadow of Rutgers.
For Rutgers I’m not sure. They have not reached the level until this year to seriously fight for the Big East crown. We’ll see after the Louisville game. They might get lost in another conference. But the Big East seems to be dying off.
Maryland I just don’t understand. They are a basketball school and the ACC is the place to be if you are a basketball school.
I think I misread something as saying it was $10m for each of the next 5 years.
The UConn-to-ACC rumors probably come from UConn people. 
If the ACC thought Connecticut would bring in more money than competition, they’d be in already.
Re the Big East: There’s UCF, Navy, Houston, SMU, Boise State, and San Diego State coming in. Plus, UMass and maybe Buffalo would one helluva lot rather be there than the MAC, and it doesn’t make sense for Navy but not Army to be in.
This will (mostly) get back to some range of sense once the BCS playoff system is finally set, and automatic conference eligibility is out. After a round of buyouts, I look for WVU to go to the ACC, Boise and SDSU staying in the MW, Houston and SMU to the Big 12, with the Big East having UCF, UMass, Navy, Army, UConn, possibly Buffalo in addition to the ones you list.
Not true. In 2006, they controlled their fate going into Morgantown in the regular season finale, would’ve won the league title with a win. They lost 41-39, a coulda, shoulda, it included a dropped pass in the end zone; finished up 11-2 and ranked 12th nationally. They also had a chance to win the league last year, but got blown out in the last game up in Storrs, against UConn, a team which Rutgers has traditionally beaten handily.
Also, if Louisville loses this week against UConn (highly unlikely), Rutgers wins the league outright.
(Psst … the UConn stadium is in East Hartford, not Storrs)
Oops! Ignorance fought - thanks EL.
I’m all for putting the Big 10 Network on an opt-in basis, rather than making it part of the basic cable package. That would cut its cash flow way down, because its non-football programming is duller than dirt.
Yes, and I think this expansion sucks dead animals.
I guess every college conference is now a pro league, which has to have a presence in every part of the country to make money. Hell, kick out Michigan State, Purdue, and Illinois–more than one school in a state is a waste of eyeballs!–and add Washington, UCLA, and Texas. Expand that footprint, baby!
But guess what, as an alumnus and a fan that’s not what I want. I want geographic-based rivalries, where I’m likely to live and work alongside alumni of rival schools, and can actually, like, travel to road games. And as for your precious TV network, I have no interest in watching eastern schools which will probably play in the opposite division and which my school (Illinois) will play once in six years, and I have no intention of watching them on your network.
But I’m sure my cable company will keep paying you to carry your network, and that’s all that matters.
You of course are right. I didn’t mean they were totally out of it in years past but this year (at least on paper) seems to be their best shot with Louisville losing what should have been an easy win. In 2006 they were the underdog. Few thought they had a shot going into WV with as tough as they are at home. But the season is not over yet. I am not underestimating their ability to blow games that they should win. Like the Pitt game coming up.
+1, I have nothing to add
No doubt, Loach. The Cincy game, particularly the effort put in by Huggins, gives me a wee bit more confidence that they’ll win, though. Just control the line and continue to keep Nova under wraps just enough.
I think this is key. The cable companies are getting loaded up on “must pay” networks, and people are starting to find other alternatives. A la carte is the future and that’s going to devastate the Big1G Network (and much of the ESPN family - along with a host of other grouped networks).
Note to Comcast, Dish, and CenturyLink, the first company to offer “pick-a-channel” gets my business…
Nebraska alum and fan here. I don’t feel so special anymore.
We too are a recent expansion team, but it just feels different. NU was invited to join the conference because we fit in with elite Midwestern schools. I still believe they chose us over bigger-market Missouri, due to our historic traditions (5 national titles, 3 Heismans, 300+ sellouts, etc). Sure would be nice to get that AAU thing back (come on NU, get it together!).
We felt screwed over by Texas in the Big XII, and the Big Ten was a better fit for our Midwest culture. Playing Michigan and Ohio State seemed more appropriate than Texas Tech and Baylor. And the Big Ten did a lot to make it feel special for Husker fans. Like making sure we get Leaders* Ohio State, Penn State, and Wisconsin in our first rotation!
Rutgers & Maryland, as mediocre products, seems like a blatant grab for the NYC & DC markets. It just cheapens the whole affair.
*or it is Legends? I admit I still don’t know…
Zak-Fox owns the Big 1G Network.
This Wisky fan & alum is disappointed that we’ll be playing Iowa and Northwestern even less than we already are scheduled to. The Badgers are now the oddball western team in the Leaders if the rumors that both MD and Rutgers end up in there and Illinois swaps. Maybe time to rename the divisions East and West.
As a Ohio State fan I don’t really like it. I don’t care about Maryland or Rutgers, and have little desire to watch them play the Buckeyes. Nebraska was different. They are a storied program that fit in culturally with the Big 10. Maryland and Rutgers are different. They are decent programs, but they are far from storied or a national contender. In fact, they are probably slightly below the average of the Big 10. But let’s be honest, they have potential. The D.C. - NYC market lacks football powers, but I’m sure there is a lot of talent there. With the right coaches they should be able to be good.