And Mark Schlabach wins the Intertubes today with this gem.
Category Archives: Big Ten Football
Interesting report in the Omaha World-Herald that claims back in 2010, when Texas was jerking the Big 12 around with its (then) Pac-10 flirtation, five teams from that conference (Oklahoma, Nebraska, Texas A&M, Kansas and Iowa State) approached the Big Ten as a group about coming on board.
The stumbling block? I’m sure you can guess it had something to do with money.
The feedback from Big Ten school officials was positive, both sources said. The sticking point was devising a revenue-sharing plan to satisfy all. It would have taken at least three to four years for that many incoming schools to hit the financial payoffs sought for moving.
Considering the level of anti-Texas motivation on one side and Delany’s ego on the other, you have to figure it must have been a lot of jack.
Just another reason to wonder what the long-term health of the Big 12 is going to be.
I don’t know if the SEC East is catching up to the West or not, but based on these odds for winning a conference championship, it’s a damned sight closer to parity than anything the Big Ten’s got going for it.
The programming question for the Big Ten Network: how soon do you start talking up the national championship?
An Ohio State blogger looks at what Big Ten expansion hath wrought and concludes, outside of jacking up revenues, not a whole lot.
Which, when you think about it, is a conclusion you can draw for all of the P5 conferences. Not that any of the folks running them could care about what you conclude.
How ’bout this as a dramatic lede?
No league gets its people on the same page quite like the Big Ten.
Only somebody forgot to tell Ohio State AD Gene Smith to keep his honesty to himself.
“Things are so different. I’ve moved away from the amateurism,” Smith said. “I never call our athletes amateurs anymore.”
So much for “cohesion is a fundamental requirement”.
Not that it matters. Check out the latest spin on The Year of Readiness:
The Big Ten floated the “year of readiness” plan mostly as a ploy to get people focused on discussing more academic and student-welfare issues, or what Glass called “less controversial and more doable” reforms.
The thing is, cohesive or not, why should anybody take what’s coming out of their mouths at face value?