Second in a series re-examining the leagues after re-alignment. Today: the Big Ten
Once again, I will take a look first at the economics and then the basketball and football implications with winners and losers in all.
Economics: The Big Ten went looking for new money to add value to the Big Ten Network and their other television contracts. What they got is one of the storied programs in college football history and maybe the best possible option other than Notre Dame without going to 16 teams or some crazy super-conference idea (more on that when I cover the Pac-12 in a couple of weeks). While Nebraska doesn't a have a huge population to add, they have a rabid national fanbase. Heck, they have a flagship radio station to cover their games in Las Vegas. In that city, they are one of five teams with that distinction along with Nevada, UNLV (the two givens), Notre Dame and USC. The Cornhuskers bring a lot of paying customers from other areas of the country that will be willing to pay to get the Big Ten Network to see their team, making both the Big Ten happy and the television partners happy. Needless to say, the current Big Ten members are quite happy. Nebraska is even happier. They are out of the Texas league (Big 12) and into a league with some equality in revenue distribution. They also will make more money off the deal than they did in the Big 12. They are big winners here, even more so than the other members of the league.
Football: The Big Ten has botched the divisional setup royally. There is no other way to put it. What is wrong with East and West. It's not like there is a Texas or California in the conference footprint that everyone needs to have access to. Sure Michigan and Ohio St. might have complained about being in the same division as Penn St. while leaving Iowa and Wisconsin with Nebraska, but the imbalance would never have been as bad as the Big 12 was. In fact, it would likely look more like the SEC does. In that league, the East is generally stronger, but the West almost always fields at least one nationally relevant team and every so often, the pendulum swings their way (like right now) for a couple of years. So it would be with the East and West in the Big Ten if that had been the case with its divisions.
Instead we get the leaders and legends and in the process, some rivalries have been harmed greatly. Michigan and Ohio St. for example are now in different divisions. Ask Tennessee how that works (the Vols do love their SEC setup though). When the SEC split, the annual matchup with Alabama, while still significant, lose some relevance and was replaced in the pecking order of Tennessee rivalries with Florida, a team that hadn't been an annual opponent before re-alignment in the early 90s. Also, Wisconsin has lost its rivalries. With desired rival Nebraska and current rivals Minnesota and Iowa all in the other division, the Badgers only get to keep one rival on an annual basis.
That said, there are some winners here despite the dumb alignment. Michigan St. in particular does well for itself. The Spartans are in a division with Nebraska and Michigan, but it could be a lot worse. A true East-West split would have left Sparty with Penn St., Michigan and Ohio St. in the division, placing them a clear fourth in the pecking order. Also, Iowa gets everything is could have possibly wanted. They get the rivalry with Nebraska, keep their rivalry with Minnesota, keep the draw of Michigan as an opponent every other year and are rid of Ohio St., Wisconsin and Penn St. as divisional foes.
Basketball: The league loses here except in the games inventory department. Nebraska is a doormat that has been bringing the Big 12 down for years. In the Cornhuskers case, they are a winner though. While The Big Ten and the Big 12 are roughly equal, Nebraska will likely find the slower pace of the league more to its liking than having to play against Kansas, Missouri and the rest of the fast-paced occasionally bordering on warp speed tempo of the Big 12.
Ultimate winners: Nebraska is a huge winner. New money, no major ill effects for football, a chance to actually compete in basketball. Rid of Texas. No complaints there. The league as a whole is also a winner with the new money Nebraska will win. Only Notre Dame would have been better and that was unrealistic from the start.
Ultimate losers: Fans are the losers here, but only because of the stupid divisional decisions made. Rivalries and history are everything, especially in football. Selling out the Ohio St.-Michigan rivalry and making it less relevant for the possibility of making a few more dollars off the conference title game is dumb as is taking Wisconsin's rivals away. Basketball bubble teams have reason to fear also as Nebraska in most years is a bad loss waiting to happen and generally isn't going to help the league. Also, in baseball, Nebraska is immediately the best team by far, no questions asked. Only Michigan has any sort of precedent of being able to compete like Nebraska on a national level and even then it is fleeting. Remember though, that the Big Ten is essentially a non-BCS league in baseball because of the weather at this time of year when the games are beginning. They play all their early season games on the road.
No comments:
Post a Comment