They said the Big Ten/PAC-12 alliance was in place of the 9th game though. I don't think it would have been dropped otherwise.

Just another move to suck the fun and destroy what makes college football great. Why do I want to see more conference games. Its fun watching top tier programs from diff conferences play each other. Yeah, more IU vs. Rutgers. No thank you. I like to see them play ooc to see how they stack up.

Destroy rivalries, cut down ooc games, ruin conferences...make it stop!

(02-11-2013 08:59 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  They said the Big Ten/PAC-12 alliance was in place of the 9th game though. I don't think it would have been dropped otherwise.

True. When it was dropped, the alliance was still in place. Now it's not, obviously.

(02-11-2013 09:00 PM)bearcat29 Wrote:  Just another move to suck the fun and destroy what makes college football great. Why do I want to see more conference games. Its fun watching top tier programs from diff conferences play each other. Yeah, more IU vs. Rutgers. No thank you. I like to see them play ooc to see how they stack up.

Destroy rivalries, cut down ooc games, ruin conferences...make it stop!

I'm not a fan of 9 or 10 conference games, but still, Indiana - Rutgers isn't replacing a marquee matchup. It's replacing non-con games like Indiana - Eastern Michigan and Rutgers - UMass.

Quote:I'm not a fan of 9 or 10 conference games, but still, Indiana - Rutgers isn't replacing a marquee matchup. It's replacing non-con games like Indiana - Eastern Michigan and Rutgers - UMass.

I understand that, but I would rather watch Rutgers vs NC State or IU vs UK than Rutgers vs IU.

(02-11-2013 09:00 PM)bearcat29 Wrote:  Just another move to suck the fun and destroy what makes college football great. Why do I want to see more conference games. Its fun watching top tier programs from diff conferences play each other. Yeah, more IU vs. Rutgers. No thank you. I like to see them play ooc to see how they stack up.

Destroy rivalries, cut down ooc games, ruin conferences...make it stop!

This...I enjoy OOC matchups on my team's schedule in watching in general on college football.

If we're talking teams from different conferences, I am probably more likely to watch non-conference, but as far as Ohio State goes, the teams I care most about playing are all Big Ten teams. I didn't want expansion because I don't care about playing Maryland and Rutgers regularly (nothing wrong with a nonconference game here or there, but no reason to play every year). Since that's the way it's going though, I'd rather get more games against Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, etc, than a few random non-conference games (even if it means sacrificing the big ooc game we usually have).

(02-11-2013 06:00 PM)Big 12 Wrote:  I hope they go to ten. Notre Dame has to be feeling the heat.

Why not make it twelve? "Incest is best", I guess. To hell with the Big Ten.

(02-11-2013 07:01 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(02-11-2013 06:00 PM)Big 12 Wrote:  I hope they go to ten. Notre Dame has to be feeling the heat.

Agree with this. Raising the number of conference games is going to squeeze ND....deliberately or otherwise.

Maybe that will "force" ND to join the ACC in full to stabilize things and shitcan further expansionista dreams?

I dont know if anyone said this yet, if they did sorry but I dont have the time right now to go through the whole thread.

To keep it simple I will perform translation for you folks.

9 game schedule = 16 team conference.

10 game schedule = 20 team conference.

Being told that an 8 game schedule is no longer a possible future means the Big Ten is on full go to move forward. The only question that lies is whether the future is 16 teams or 20 teams.

(02-11-2013 11:33 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(02-11-2013 07:01 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(02-11-2013 06:00 PM)Big 12 Wrote:  I hope they go to ten. Notre Dame has to be feeling the heat.

Agree with this. Raising the number of conference games is going to squeeze ND....deliberately or otherwise.

Maybe that will "force" ND to join the ACC in full to stabilize things and shitcan further expansionista dreams?

Have we really come this far Terry that you are making posts about Notre Dame fully joining the ACC?

I really don't think Notre Dame joining the ACC fully would stop teams going to the Big Ten. Even if Notre Dame was in the ACC, the ACC would be at about 21-22 million dollars. I mean, really it'd be 3-4 football games difference. The Big Ten would still be able to offer anyone tv for close to 40 million.

In order for Notre Dame to play multiple B1G teams, ND must have multiple slots open on their schedule. On the other hand, all those B1G teams need to have available is one. I have to think that Michigan State would prefer to play ND than any other specific out-of-conference opponent, and that this would be the last game they would bump, even if it did mean a tougher slate.

(02-11-2013 11:39 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-11-2013 11:33 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(02-11-2013 07:01 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(02-11-2013 06:00 PM)Big 12 Wrote:  I hope they go to ten. Notre Dame has to be feeling the heat.

Agree with this. Raising the number of conference games is going to squeeze ND....deliberately or otherwise.

Maybe that will "force" ND to join the ACC in full to stabilize things and shitcan further expansionista dreams?

Have we really come this far Terry that you are making posts about Notre Dame fully joining the ACC?

Yep, anything to try to jab Jim Delany and the Big 10 in the eye.

(02-11-2013 11:33 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(02-11-2013 07:01 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(02-11-2013 06:00 PM)Big 12 Wrote:  I hope they go to ten. Notre Dame has to be feeling the heat.

Agree with this. Raising the number of conference games is going to squeeze ND....deliberately or otherwise.

Maybe that will "force" ND to join the ACC in full to stabilize things and shitcan further expansionista dreams?

So who will be ACC #16, Terry, Cincinnati, UConn or West Virginia?

(02-12-2013 12:02 AM)TerryD Wrote:  

(02-11-2013 11:39 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(02-11-2013 11:33 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(02-11-2013 07:01 PM)EerMeNow Wrote:  

(02-11-2013 06:00 PM)Big 12 Wrote:  I hope they go to ten. Notre Dame has to be feeling the heat.

Agree with this. Raising the number of conference games is going to squeeze ND....deliberately or otherwise.

Maybe that will "force" ND to join the ACC in full to stabilize things and shitcan further expansionista dreams?

Have we really come this far Terry that you are making posts about Notre Dame fully joining the ACC?

Yep, anything to try to jab Jim Delany and the Big 10 in the eye.

Damn right..

(02-11-2013 11:38 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I dont know if anyone said this yet, if they did sorry but I dont have the time right now to go through the whole thread.

To keep it simple I will perform translation for you folks.

9 game schedule = 16 team conference.

10 game schedule = 20 team conference.

Being told that an 8 game schedule is no longer a possible future means the Big Ten is on full go to move forward. The only question that lies is whether the future is 16 teams or 20 teams.

This might be the dumbest thing you've ever posted, He1nousOne. Delaney TOLD you why they want to go to 9 - what you are suggesting would UNDO what he is trying to do. I could see them going to 10 games AND staying at 14, which still only gives you 4 cross-division games.

What this REALLY means is that Big Ten strength of schedule is about to go into the toilet.

(02-12-2013 06:02 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(02-11-2013 11:38 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I dont know if anyone said this yet, if they did sorry but I dont have the time right now to go through the whole thread.

To keep it simple I will perform translation for you folks.

9 game schedule = 16 team conference.

10 game schedule = 20 team conference.

Being told that an 8 game schedule is no longer a possible future means the Big Ten is on full go to move forward. The only question that lies is whether the future is 16 teams or 20 teams.

This might be the dumbest thing you've ever posted, He1nousOne. Delaney TOLD you why they want to go to 9 - what you are suggesting would UNDO what he is trying to do. I could see them going to 10 games AND staying at 14, which still only gives you 4 cross-division games.

What this REALLY means is that Big Ten strength of schedule is about to go into the toilet.

Right, just like how he said that the Big Ten was fine with 12 teams. It's ok, you are an ACC guy. You are trained to take these guys at their word.

It WOULD mean that....if the Big Ten wasn't planning on adding some more programs. You go right on thinking that though although I am thinking that this may be one of the dumbest things you have ever said if you really think you are outsmarting the Big Ten folks on them flushing their SoS in the toilet.

Believe what you will. The Big Ten is expanding and the schedule talk is evidence of it. Folks can call me all the **** you want to. You are just names on a forum and so am I, which makes it easy for you to act like children. You are forgiven for being brats.

(02-11-2013 06:00 PM)Big 12 Wrote:  I hope they go to ten. Notre Dame has to be feeling the heat.

I know the Big Ten wants to hurt ND with this, but I think they will hurt the MAC and their own TV ratings the most.


Here is how the 2012 season's 48 OOC games last year break down:

ND-3

Pac 12-4 (this doesn't include any of the 3 top teams for the past few years, USC, Oregon or Stanford)

Rest of the BCS-7

(Besides Michigan/Alabama, the other 6 games were against Syracuse(twice), Virginia, BC, Vandy and Iowa St.)

MAC-13

Service academy teams-3

Non-BCS, FBS schools -10

FCS schools-8

Somehow I think the number of games against the MAC and/or BCS schools will decline the most.

I am sure that replacing OOC games like Alabama/Michigan and Notre Dame/Michigan State with the long-awaited Rutgers/Indiana, Rutgers/Minnesota, Maryland/Indiana and Maryland/Minnesota match-ups will be something to see and will be ratings giants.

(02-11-2013 11:55 PM)stever20 Wrote:  I really don't think Notre Dame joining the ACC fully would stop teams going to the Big Ten. Even if Notre Dame was in the ACC, the ACC would be at about 21-22 million dollars. I mean, really it'd be 3-4 football games difference. The Big Ten would still be able to offer anyone tv for close to 40 million.

That $40 million Big Ten number is merely a projection, and may be a dubious one, at that.

How badly does ESPN want to steal ND from NBC? What would they pay? Would many/most/every ND game(s) be on prime time on ABC or ESPN?

The NBC renewal numbers being discussed have to be pretty high, maybe double what they were paying for ND. Lets open up an NBC/ESPN bidding war.

Would ESPN (and ND) insist on a grant of rights? How much of an increase would they have to pay to secure ND and a grant of rights?

Does ESPN tear up the ACC contract and re-negotiate it in its entirety to secure ND?

Does ND demand that ESPN allow the ACC schools (including ND) to re-acquire (or keep in ND's situation) "Tier 3" rights as a condition of it joining the ACC and signing on with ESPN?

Who knows? Maybe, maybe not. But, if so, would that jump start a new, real ACC Network? If so, how much would that pay?

Who would be school #16? UConn? Navy? Cincy? What increase in value would that school bring? UConn basketball? When does the CBS contract for the Army/Navy game end?

Lots of questions to be answered before you dismiss such an option out of hand.