when the powerhouses with huge fan bases Maryland and Rutgers arrive


And that may help ND stop playing any Big Ten teams and so help itself nationally.

Can't see this making sense for them.

They would not be able to play 8 home and 4 away with a 9 or 10 game league schedule.

That decreases revenue for them. If the non-league games are patsies, even worse.

It just guarantees that members other than Michigan and OSU will schedule home patsies with the remaining games. MSU and Purdue should keeps us on the schedule, but that's about it.

grapie wrote: It just guarantees that members other than Michigan and OSU will schedule home patsies with the remaining games. MSU and Purdue should keeps us on the schedule, but that's about it.

Ill be shocked if the B1G allows its teams to play ND at this point, make em join the confrence or cut em off if they go to 10 in confrence games

SeattleNDfan wrote: Can't see this making sense for them.

They would not be able to play 8 home and 4 away with a 9 or 10 game league schedule.

That decreases revenue for them. If the non-league games are patsies, even worse.

To be able to get cable companies to pay top dollar for the BTN, the BT must have a supply of decent games. Purdue vs. Rutgers and Minnesota vs. Maryland are much better than Purdue vs. East Mich and Rutgers vs. Buffalo.

BrutusBuck11 wrote:

grapie wrote: It just guarantees that members other than Michigan and OSU will schedule home patsies with the remaining games. MSU and Purdue should keeps us on the schedule, but that's about it.

Ill be shocked if the B1G allows its teams to play ND at this point, make em join the confrence or cut em off if they go to 10 in confrence games

ND offended the Big Midwest by offending Mich by canceling. So the Big Ten 'punishing' ND with a new boycott would make Big Ten sense.

The fact is that ND has 0 need to ever play any Big Ten team. ND must remain national in scope, and ND serves all its midwestern needs by playing Home games. No Big Ten games means ND can play more schools in the South, and that is paramount for ND's football future.

No one cares about your opinion or the UNC football program

WoadBlue wrote:

BrutusBuck11 wrote:

grapie wrote: It just guarantees that members other than Michigan and OSU will schedule home patsies with the remaining games. MSU and Purdue should keeps us on the schedule, but that's about it.

Ill be shocked if the B1G allows its teams to play ND at this point, make em join the confrence or cut em off if they go to 10 in confrence games

ND offended the Big Midwest by offending Mich by canceling. So the Big Ten 'punishing' ND with a new boycott would make Big Ten sense.

The fact is that ND has 0 need to ever play any Big Ten team. ND must remain national in scope, and ND serves all its midwestern needs by playing Home games. No Big Ten games means ND can play more schools in the South, and that is paramount for ND's football future.

Dude, chill Woad is making a case for ND not caring about the B1G. I say let the B1G play each other every week. If the B1G plays 10 conference games per year and no one outside the B1G cares, does it really matter. That will be a massive mistake on tMeat$U league.

ND does not need the B1G schools. Hell I would trade a yearly with Alabama ST and Tulane in the South as opposed to playing B1G schools just to increase our footprint in the South. Hell, If I ran ND I would set up satellite campuses in every state and start my own ND Football league. lmao

BitterD wrote: No one cares about your opinion or the UNC football program

WoadBlue wrote:

BrutusBuck11 wrote:

grapie wrote: It just guarantees that members other than Michigan and OSU will schedule home patsies with the remaining games. MSU and Purdue should keeps us on the schedule, but that's about it.

Ill be shocked if the B1G allows its teams to play ND at this point, make em join the confrence or cut em off if they go to 10 in confrence games

ND offended the Big Midwest by offending Mich by canceling. So the Big Ten 'punishing' ND with a new boycott would make Big Ten sense.

The fact is that ND has 0 need to ever play any Big Ten team. ND must remain national in scope, and ND serves all its midwestern needs by playing Home games. No Big Ten games means ND can play more schools in the South, and that is paramount for ND's football future.

WoadBlue wrote:

BrutusBuck11 wrote:

grapie wrote: It just guarantees that members other than Michigan and OSU will schedule home patsies with the remaining games. MSU and Purdue should keeps us on the schedule, but that's about it.

Ill be shocked if the B1G allows its teams to play ND at this point, make em join the confrence or cut em off if they go to 10 in confrence games

ND offended the Big Midwest by offending Mich by canceling. So the Big Ten 'punishing' ND with a new boycott would make Big Ten sense.

The fact is that ND has 0 need to ever play any Big Ten team. ND must remain national in scope, and ND serves all its midwestern needs by playing Home games. No Big Ten games means ND can play more schools in the South, and that is paramount for ND's football future.

0 need to ever play a big ten team? LOL HAHAHAHAHAH

rbiddie wrote: Dude, chill Woad is making a case for ND not caring about the B1G. I say let the B1G play each other every week. If the B1G plays 10 conference games per year and no one outside the B1G cares, does it really matter. That will be a massive mistake on tMeat$U league.

ND does not need the B1G schools. Hell I would trade a yearly with Alabama ST and Tulane in the South as opposed to playing B1G schools just to increase our footprint in the South. Hell, If I ran ND I would set up satellite campuses in every state and start my own ND Football league. lmao

BitterD wrote: No one cares about your opinion or the UNC football program

WoadBlue wrote:

BrutusBuck11 wrote:

grapie wrote: It just guarantees that members other than Michigan and OSU will schedule home patsies with the remaining games. MSU and Purdue should keeps us on the schedule, but that's about it.

Ill be shocked if the B1G allows its teams to play ND at this point, make em join the confrence or cut em off if they go to 10 in confrence games

ND offended the Big Midwest by offending Mich by canceling. So the Big Ten 'punishing' ND with a new boycott would make Big Ten sense.

The fact is that ND has 0 need to ever play any Big Ten team. ND must remain national in scope, and ND serves all its midwestern needs by playing Home games. No Big Ten games means ND can play more schools in the South, and that is paramount for ND's football future.

Massive Mistake? No not even close
for one its probably going to be back to a 2 team league with the way Ohio St and Michigan have recruited the last 2 years compared to the rest of the big 10 and those 2 schools carry so much weight that as long as they go unbeaten or 1 loss they will always be in NC conversation especially with bringing in all the money they do

Look...he's trying to be an SEC, I mean Big Ten homer!

You're not the SEC, dude.  Get over yourself.  Michigan and OSU will pump out 10-11 win seasons every year, but you'll both still get slaughtered by an SEC school every bowl season.

Don't act like you're special because...well...you're not.  Look at your conference, man.  It's terrible. 

BrutusBuck11 wrote:

rbiddie wrote: Dude, chill Woad is making a case for ND not caring about the B1G. I say let the B1G play each other every week. If the B1G plays 10 conference games per year and no one outside the B1G cares, does it really matter. That will be a massive mistake on tMeat$U league.

ND does not need the B1G schools. Hell I would trade a yearly with Alabama ST and Tulane in the South as opposed to playing B1G schools just to increase our footprint in the South. Hell, If I ran ND I would set up satellite campuses in every state and start my own ND Football league. lmao

BitterD wrote: No one cares about your opinion or the UNC football program

WoadBlue wrote:

BrutusBuck11 wrote:

grapie wrote: It just guarantees that members other than Michigan and OSU will schedule home patsies with the remaining games. MSU and Purdue should keeps us on the schedule, but that's about it.

Ill be shocked if the B1G allows its teams to play ND at this point, make em join the confrence or cut em off if they go to 10 in confrence games

ND offended the Big Midwest by offending Mich by canceling. So the Big Ten 'punishing' ND with a new boycott would make Big Ten sense.

The fact is that ND has 0 need to ever play any Big Ten team. ND must remain national in scope, and ND serves all its midwestern needs by playing Home games. No Big Ten games means ND can play more schools in the South, and that is paramount for ND's football future.

Massive Mistake? No not even close
for one its probably going to be back to a 2 team league with the way Ohio St and Michigan have recruited the last 2 years compared to the rest of the big 10 and those 2 schools carry so much weight that as long as they go unbeaten or 1 loss they will always be in NC conversation especially with bringing in all the money they do

Are they really that much better?

---------------------------------------------
--- WoadBlue wrote:

SeattleNDfan wrote: Can't see this making sense for them.

They would not be able to play 8 home and 4 away with a 9 or 10 game league schedule.

That decreases revenue for them. If the non-league games are patsies, even worse.

To be able to get cable companies to pay top dollar for the BTN, the BT must have a supply of decent games. Purdue vs. Rutgers and Minnesota vs. Maryland are much better than Purdue vs. East Mich and Rutgers vs. Buffalo.

---------------------------------------------

Half the B1G are patsies themselves and will have trouble scheduing any OOC game they can win.



.

SeattleNDfan wrote: Can't see this making sense for them.

They would not be able to play 8 home and 4 away with a 9 or 10 game league schedule.

That decreases revenue for them. If the non-league games are patsies, even worse.

grapie wrote: It just guarantees that members other than Michigan and OSU will schedule home patsies with the remaining games. MSU and Purdue should keeps us on the schedule, but that's about it.

The only way they could keep us is if they played a 7-5 home-away schedule with 9 conferece games.  That would leave them 1 road game every 2 years to schedule a home-home series with a team like Notre Dame.  That would also mean that ND is the only rivalry game anyone could play.  The other 2 games each year would be home only patsies.  Therefore, if the BIG adopts 9 or 10 conference games, then I don't think we play them anymore.

To be clar, 10 conference games is tough.  That would force everyone on the BIG to play 7-5 home away schedule and all five road games are taken up by conference play.  Therefore, no out of conference rivalry games.  Every game played out of conference would be, by default, a home-only crap team.

WhiskeyFoxtrot wrote:

To be clar, 10 conference games is tough.  That would force everyone on the BIG to play 7-5 home away schedule and all five road games are taken up by conference play.  Therefore, no out of conference rivalry games.  Every game played out of conference would be, by default, a home-only crap team.

Sounds about right for the B1G

I believe ND WILL play big10 teams, but please explain why ND NEEDS to play them?  I really want to understand why you think playing your conference, in the locations that they reside, benefits ND in any way...


Spoiler alert...it doesn't.

BrutusBuck11 wrote:

WoadBlue wrote:

BrutusBuck11 wrote:

grapie wrote: It just guarantees that members other than Michigan and OSU will schedule home patsies with the remaining games. MSU and Purdue should keeps us on the schedule, but that's about it.

Ill be shocked if the B1G allows its teams to play ND at this point, make em join the confrence or cut em off if they go to 10 in confrence games

ND offended the Big Midwest by offending Mich by canceling. So the Big Ten 'punishing' ND with a new boycott would make Big Ten sense.

The fact is that ND has 0 need to ever play any Big Ten team. ND must remain national in scope, and ND serves all its midwestern needs by playing Home games. No Big Ten games means ND can play more schools in the South, and that is paramount for ND's football future.

0 need to ever play a big ten team? LOL HAHAHAHAHAH

You are right biddie.  Woad is making good points IMO...

rbiddie wrote: Dude, chill Woad is making a case for ND not caring about the B1G. I say let the B1G play each other every week. If the B1G plays 10 conference games per year and no one outside the B1G cares, does it really matter. That will be a massive mistake on tMeat$U league.

ND does not need the B1G schools. Hell I would trade a yearly with Alabama ST and Tulane in the South as opposed to playing B1G schools just to increase our footprint in the South. Hell, If I ran ND I would set up satellite campuses in every state and start my own ND Football league. lmao

BitterD wrote: No one cares about your opinion or the UNC football program

WoadBlue wrote:

BrutusBuck11 wrote:

grapie wrote: It just guarantees that members other than Michigan and OSU will schedule home patsies with the remaining games. MSU and Purdue should keeps us on the schedule, but that's about it.

Ill be shocked if the B1G allows its teams to play ND at this point, make em join the confrence or cut em off if they go to 10 in confrence games

ND offended the Big Midwest by offending Mich by canceling. So the Big Ten 'punishing' ND with a new boycott would make Big Ten sense.

The fact is that ND has 0 need to ever play any Big Ten team. ND must remain national in scope, and ND serves all its midwestern needs by playing Home games. No Big Ten games means ND can play more schools in the South, and that is paramount for ND's football future.

People with sense do care. For example, I predicted on this board before the BT ever added Nebraska that the coming BT plan would be to play at least 9 league games. 

Well before that I told this board that ND would be part of the ACC sooner rather than later.

BitterD wrote: No one cares about your opinion or the UNC football program

WoadBlue wrote:

BrutusBuck11 wrote:

grapie wrote: It just guarantees that members other than Michigan and OSU will schedule home patsies with the remaining games. MSU and Purdue should keeps us on the schedule, but that's about it.

Ill be shocked if the B1G allows its teams to play ND at this point, make em join the confrence or cut em off if they go to 10 in confrence games

ND offended the Big Midwest by offending Mich by canceling. So the Big Ten 'punishing' ND with a new boycott would make Big Ten sense.

The fact is that ND has 0 need to ever play any Big Ten team. ND must remain national in scope, and ND serves all its midwestern needs by playing Home games. No Big Ten games means ND can play more schools in the South, and that is paramount for ND's football future.

Genert wrote:

WhiskeyFoxtrot wrote:

To be clar, 10 conference games is tough.  That would force everyone on the BIG to play 7-5 home away schedule and all five road games are taken up by conference play.  Therefore, no out of conference rivalry games.  Every game played out of conference would be, by default, a home-only crap team.

Sounds about right for the B1G

Even with only 9 league games, each BT team is unlikely to ever play more than 1 major OOC foe, leaving 2 assumed cupcakes for Home games (say, a 1AA and a MAC). 

The BT is not like, say, FSU or Miami or Clemson or more than a few other ACC schools that try to play tough OOC slates (FSU last year got screwed by having WVU drop the game last minute - just as UNC as had Tennessee and Colorado and Minnesota and others drop games over the past decade). 

That being the case, I don't see Purdue and Mich St wanting more from ND than perhaps sharing 1 slot, Purdue for 2 years followed by Mich St for 2 years. After all, just as ND needs more exposure in the South, so do almost all BT teams in order to try to land recruits from the South.

So, Purdue is going to need room to try to play SEC teams and ACC teams in the South and TX teams, and if it plays ND annually on top of 9 BT games, it has almost no room to do so and hope to have a winning record.

Maybe not. But simply because they are conference games, they ring better, much better. 

Plus, the rest of this is that old time BT members are not happy about not playing OSU and Meesh as often as they used due to expansion. Other old BT rivalries also are cut up. The only way to address those issues is to play at least 9 league games.

That is the reason Delaney said that 8 is not an option and 10 is. I think a number of major BT power brokers actually want 10 league games.

After all, if the BT does not play anybody OOC, we can't be certain how weak and overrated the BT is until postseason.

grapie wrote: Are they really that much better?

---------------------------------------------
--- WoadBlue wrote:

SeattleNDfan wrote: Can't see this making sense for them.

They would not be able to play 8 home and 4 away with a 9 or 10 game league schedule.

That decreases revenue for them. If the non-league games are patsies, even worse.

To be able to get cable companies to pay top dollar for the BTN, the BT must have a supply of decent games. Purdue vs. Rutgers and Minnesota vs. Maryland are much better than Purdue vs. East Mich and Rutgers vs. Buffalo.

---------------------------------------------