Jump to content

HoosierDom

Members
  • Posts

    573
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

440 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I don't see us going 11 deep. Seems to me that if Leal wants playing time, he is going to either have to take it from Kopp or Stewart. If Galloway wants it, he is going to have to shoot.
  2. I won't pretend to know how many years a guy like Race wants to stay in college, but IU brings in a lot more money than some 2nd tier European league, so I would guess the NIL will cause IU players to make more than those guys. It's one thing to leave a year of eligibility on the table to go start making money (basketball or otherwise), but to do so and take a pay cut makes a lot less sense. But, that is contingent on IU boosters being proactive in a way that I have no evidence of them doing. I would love to be wrong, but Kopp seems a long way from declaring for the draft.
  3. Where does the talk of Kopp and Race leaving after this year come from? They're starters that have virtually no chance of playing in the league. They can probably go to Europe if they choose, but I doubt they would make the high paying leagues. It very much seems like they will be with us for 2 more years.
  4. You think all of those guys are leaving after this year? Other than TJD, I don't see any going pro, so seems they would only leave if things weren't working for them here.
  5. Sure, and if he becomes a 6'9" Steph Curry, he will be the top pick overall. But, realistically, he hasn't shown the ability to be an outside shooter, and it would be pretty unusual to all of a sudden develop that in one off season. Hopefully IU boosters get their act together and the kid brings in a couple hundred thousand dollars this year and he faces the real possibility that being a second round pick is a pay cut. To me, that would be a bigger recruiting boost than getting a guy or two to the league. Any kid outside of the top 10 should realize that getting to the league is far from certain, but if you can make some serious money either way, that should be appealing to the 20-50 ranked kids and those are the kids I want anyway.
  6. The second biggest football school in a state with 4 million people. I don't see conferences fighting over them.
  7. It's not just bad luck that causes schools to keep leaving the Big 12. Those remaining teams are not appealing conference mates and no one is going to want them.
  8. In the second half of the first game, he did a great job creating space for himself. If he can do that, he will be a deadly player. If he's just a catch and shoot guy, I will be happy enough (we sure could have used one of those the last couple of years), but I was impressed with his ability to get his own shot. I didn't see any evidence that he can get to the rim, but he made space.
  9. Yes, I mean the second thing. UM and OSU have everything they could ever ask for here: they don't want to move. If Michigan wanted to have a killer schedule, they could easily schedule 4 powerhouse non-conference games. But, that isn't what they, or anyone else, is looking for. I think that's a big part of what a lot of the conversation in this thread is missing. Top schools don't want a loaded schedule. The unmistakable proof of that is that no school goes out and loads up their non-conference schedule. They still sell our their 100k stadiums when they play Northern Michigan, so they want the wins and good times that come along with that. They need some big games, but the BIG provides enough of those. If it ever stops doing that, you go get those games in the non-conference. To me, that SI article is akin to saying Chipotle is trying to hire Nick Saban because he saw a help wanted sign when he went to get his burrito. I'm sure they would love him, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense from his point of view. As I've said before, I think the only thing the SEC could offer that would truly entice UM and OSU is if they are making a move to abandon the NCAA and run their own thing as they see fit, but with the NIL, I think that is far less likely. The only things I have seen about this conference huddling up are vague terms of cooperation that make it seem like they're not even talking about doing anything of substance, so what they end up agreeing to will likely be close to nothing. But, the articles I've seen are so unclear that it's hard to read the situation precisely.
  10. But the Big Ten is not the Big Twelve. Just look at an electoral map to make the numbers easy to see. Texas DOMINATES the Big 12, no other state is even close. So the Big 12 just doesn't offer much. The Big Ten has a lot more people and they are a lot more spread out. Big schools that are only okay at football: that's the dream every top team wants to fill their conference with and the BIG is loaded with them. No one wants to give that up. Texas wasn't getting much from the Big 12 and they were running a real risk of falling behind A&M. Michigan and OSU don't have that same kind of pressure.
  11. Sorry, this just doesn't make sense. What money? Less than 1/3rd of the money OSU and UM bring in comes from TV. Maybe the SEC could increase the TV deal a little, but only maybe and only a little. BTN makes so much money because cable subscribers pay for the channel and Chicago, DC, NYC are all in Big Ten country. Just look at an electoral college map to easily see the population of these places. Illinois, PA, Ohio, MI are big, even MN, WI are all bigger than places like MS, AL, Arkansas, Louisiana. The numbers just aren't there. And, even more importantly, BIG schools have huge alumni bases. The SEC is better at football, but they can't compete with those numbers. The schools are smaller and the cities are smaller. Plus, Michigan would be mediocre, at best, if they have to compete weekly in the SEC. They know it and don't want it. They benefit from being in a conference with large schools that are only okay at football. Smaller schools that are better at football is a minus, not a plus.
  12. Is the conference looking to improve its average SAT scores?
  13. I agree, though, to my mind, Georgia is the bigger power there. I don't actually know their relative sizes, but that's my impression. And I doubt we could steal them.
  14. I have to disagree with a lot of what is being discussed here. - The risk of a B1G implosion is minimal, almost non-existent. Our tv contract is still richer than the SEC's - that may change with their next deal, but we will likely pass them back next time ours gets redone. But, even if we stay behind, we're talking about 10% or so they will beat us by, and we're only talking about tv money which is less than 1/3rd of the total revenue the big schools bring in. UM and OSU are going to risk blowing up a good thing to increase their revenue by 3% (10% of 33%)? Michigan is certainly not. The SEC would destroy their talk of a "Michigan Man", and they know they can't be consistently competitive in the SEC. OSU probably thinks they can hang down there, and maybe they're right, but they have so little to gain and Ohio weather is not going to steal recruits from down south. - Our past expansion was driven by specific goals. When we added Nebraska, I believe we had to get to 12 schools to have a conference championship in football, so that 12th school added a lot of value. Maryland and Rutgers come with the biggest and 6th biggest media markets in the country, so they brought value. How many other schools are going to increase the Big 10 pie by more than the slice they will take? Very few. Notre Dame is the only non-media market school that might. If we don't get them, we have to get a big city. Maybe Boston, but there doesn't seem to be a fit. Maybe Philly, but again, I don't see a fit. We seem locked out of Texas. That leaves LA or San Fran, I would think that could be on the table, but it creates a lot of problems. So, it seems very likely things stay the same. - The only way I could see a major change happening is if the power conferences are going to break from the NCAA and run their own thing, but with the NIL, the impetus to do that is greatly reduced.
  15. Someone convince me that I care what the SEC does. Let's say they succeed in adding Texas, OU, let's throw in FSU and Clemson, so the SEC is just stacked with football powers. Why does that affect me as a Big Ten fan? That conference will win a lot of national championships, but I would think individual Big Ten programs will continue winning at their normal rates. It seems to me that the only reason I would care is if the SEC stops participating in things like the playoffs. But, I'm sure it's still in the SEC's financial interest to have some sort of meaningful competition with other top programs, so I don't see the BIG losing much. Why would their move force the BIG to respond? I don't see it right now.
×
×
  • Create New...