Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="sufan, post: 433670, member: 262"]
This is why the UL win and now BCS appearance was important in helping to shape perceptions of the ACC, Big 10, UL, RU.
 
However the same article says:
 
"As the Big East devolves into the Little Elsewhere, Rutgers, the least deserving of its defectors, has somehow emerged with what is arguably the best of the next-generation arrangements. Strike up the band and the cash register, too.
 
In the Big Ten, Rutgers will over time dramatically increase its football revenue, along with its exposure via traditional and conference network channels. It will get a natural geographic rival in Penn State, the program to which it has traditionally lost a ton of state-grown talent."
 
 
As far as the Big 10: despite the views of the article, this is a long term play where the Big 10 now has contiguous Statewide flagship teams in PA, MD, NJ: all well rated AAU members doing a lot of research: in this respect, MD and RU are good institutional fits (as were SU and Pitt to the ACC)
 
It's a lot easier to improve the competitiveness of a team than recreate an AAU rated Statewide university in a large, affluent market.
 
 
The trend is toward large conferences with their own Channel and greater bargaining power vs. the networks and the bowls. This trend is fairly clear and the Big 10 expanding beyond its midwest base into the mid-atlantic is comparable to the ACC expanding north and the SEC expanding into Texas/Missouri. It's pretty clear the Big 10 wants to maximize its first mover advantage with respect to its TV channel: somehow I don't believe they will regret adding MD and RU over the long term.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?