Nate Silver's analysis of B1G expansion candidates
Nate Silver's analysis of the best expansion candidates, with a few surprises in his conclusions.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/where-should-the-big-ten-expand-next-we-crunched-the-numbers/
August 26th, 2022 at 11:23 AM ^
Maynard, I strongly agree. One of the things about college football - especially in the B1G - is the on campus Game Day experience. The attendance figures in most of the PAC-12 are, hmmm - not very impressive.
Now, when USC / UCLA join the B1G, my guess is - B1G alumni on the west coast will “travel well” when their alma mater plays either of those teams.
August 26th, 2022 at 4:30 PM ^
I think you can make an analogy (in football terms at least) between Cal in the Bay Area and Rutgers in NYC. Neither one has a huge following in its local market, but that doesn't actually matter. What matters is the huge number of alums and fans of current B1G schools who live in the Bay Area and ARE interested in football, basketball, etc, and would attend or watch a Cal game if Cal were playing their school. Having a foothold in NYC allowed the B1G to rationalize having the men's BB conference tournament at MSG, and that seems to have gone pretty well. No reason you couldn't leverage that same effect at the Chase Center or the Oakland Arena.
August 26th, 2022 at 11:14 AM ^
But we already have the DC market via MD. Maybe we'd get the Hampton Roads market (if we don't already have it), but at that point, why are we adding a school just to get the 37th largest metro area. I get that UVA is a decent fit otherwise, but I'm not really in favor of expansion candidates unless they really move the needle...
August 26th, 2022 at 11:31 AM ^
Agreed. UVa is a perfect fit except for one reason. They are redundant with Maryland already in.
NC, Ga Tech, FSU, Notre Dame, Stanford (IF replacing UCLA or partner with ND) are the only slam dunks I see.
If I were a betting man, unless ND jumps on board there will be no additions until the ACC grant of rights can be financially overcome.
August 26th, 2022 at 11:32 AM ^
This is a "Rutgers or Nebraska" debate, isn't it? As a fan, I prefer Nebraska. And much as I lament commercials and super leagues, I wonder if Rutgers has helped make BTN be more available to me as a fan who's no longer in the midwest. From an "expanding the pie" perspective, I'm not sure which of those two was more important.
But nowadays, the BTN is usually on the same tier as ESPN (slingTV the exception) - so I think that the goal of the Big Ten is to get Nebraskas, not Rutgers.
As a fan...I mostly am just shrugging my shoulders and accepting that, ugh, yes, this is probably happening.
August 26th, 2022 at 11:19 AM ^
So OSU has a market score of 98, PSU 93 and Michigan 90?
I'm going to question the methodology there.
August 26th, 2022 at 11:35 AM ^
All 3 are big, nationally known schools with long histories of football success. And Pennsylvania and Ohio are bigger than Michigan. I believe OSU has raked in slightly more revenue than Michigan and Penn St - maybe negligibly more, but nevertheless still more. This doesn't sound crazy to me.
August 26th, 2022 at 11:59 AM ^
And Pennsylvania and Ohio are bigger than Michigan.
Yes, but what about fans beyond these states? Other than ND, I'm not sure any other school in the country has our national reach.
(Of course, Silver's a Spartan so maybe I shouldn't expect too much...)
August 26th, 2022 at 12:21 PM ^
What is a “conference” difference between Michigan and the Bucks / PSU?
There’s only one B1G school in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Michigan has two. So, there might be more “natural” - instate - competition - for fans, media, etc…
August 26th, 2022 at 6:52 PM ^
I would offer three, lots of folks in SW Michigan follow the Irish.
August 26th, 2022 at 12:37 PM ^
While Penn State alums may stay in the Northeast a bit more - probably because of economic opportunities - I definitely meet Buckeyes everywhere in this world, and Nits aren't too far behind, altho I think there are a few less of them here on the west coast than us and the Bucks.
His methodology probably isn't granular enough, we may not be behind Penn St or we may be closer or even ahead of Ohio State - but it passes the smell test. And either way, he's not that concerned with schools in the 90s on any metric. The resolution matters more at the bottom, when deciding between Rutgers or Syracuse.
August 26th, 2022 at 11:22 AM ^
#1: Obviously, kick Rutgers out.
#2: for a 24-school league, add Washington, Oregon, North Carolina & Florida State?
Though North Carolina's not the only school that cheats, their cheating scandal which they barely paid for still rankles, and Florida State just feels wrong
#3: Silver's 4 division split includes most of the traditional Big Ten teams, with a UM division that's tougher than it already is:
Pacific: Cal, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington
Great Plains: Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisconsin
Great Lakes: Indiana, Michigan, Michigan State, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Purdue
Atlantic: Florida State, Maryland, Miami, Rutgers, North Carolina, Penn State
August 26th, 2022 at 11:33 AM ^
Not to be annoyingly pedantic, but... perhaps swap Northwestern for one of the Indy schools since NU is literally aside a Great Lake?
August 26th, 2022 at 11:48 AM ^
For football, we don't need divisions. In every other sport for sure - just to cut down on travel at the very least. But for football? Give everyone some 4-year matchups (X), some 2 year matchups(Y), and some once-in-four year matchups (Z).
In a 16 team league, X-Y-Z would be 3-6-0, you'd see the whole league in 4 years (or 3-0-6/0-3-6 and you'd see them in 2)
18: 3-5-1... 20: 3-4-2...22: 3-3-3...24: 3-2-4...26: 3-1-5...28: 3-0-6 (oh god make it stop)
X could be mostly rivals, but for someone like M with only 2 permanent rivals, the 3rd game could change every 4 years. For Iowa, it probably wouldn't. For, say, Indiana, 2 of those 3 could change. If the Big Ten goes to 30 schools, we'd have to play a 10th conference game. But at that point, who isn't in the conference?
Every other sport should be regionalized. But if we're making these coast to coast conferences for football, we should actually play a coast to coast schedule. At the end of the season, best record(s) are regular season (co)champions, and if needed a tie breaker can determine #1 to the BTCG. The best team that hasn't played them yet will be their challenger (Seth's Showcase idea). Or, roll it somehow into the expanded national playoff.
August 26th, 2022 at 1:15 PM ^
I want North Carolina... I think they would be a good fit.... plus I am moving to Raleigh next year
August 26th, 2022 at 4:39 PM ^
Cut right to the chase in football with two-tiered division play.
The "Elite" Division: OSU, Michigan, Penn State, Notre Dame, Miami, Florida State, Iowa, Wisconsin, Oregon, UCLA, USC and Washington to begin the first season. Every year the bottom two teams from the Elite Division exchange places with the top two teams from the "Other" Division. So, you are playing an 11-game, in-division schedule and there are no phony championships. And, you have a stunning schedule of must-see games to televise every Saturday.
August 26th, 2022 at 11:36 AM ^
I just liked that he cited an article from ESPN in 2012 on if Rutgers really brought the NYC market.
August 26th, 2022 at 11:40 AM ^
Interesting analysis - but, there’s also something to be said about a “gut” feel.
Will the B1G strategy be to surround and flank the SEC and force their only directions of growth to be into the Gulf of Mexico - or the southern plain states of the (not as big as it used to be) Big 12. If so, what schools might be in that group? Virginia, UNC, Clemson, and FSU to the East - and a degree to the south.
I think USC / UCLA need some “company” out west - and, tradition, athletics, academics, market(s), are all important to consider. The schools that come to mind - we all know - Stanford, Washington, Oregon Cal, and possibly Arizona.
Other schools - Colorado, Pitt, Utah, etc.. - they all seem lower on the list.
August 26th, 2022 at 12:00 PM ^
He kind of lost me at "Clemson".
August 26th, 2022 at 12:44 PM ^
I think one flaw in this analysis is that he seems to be viewing "market" the same as "ratings".
Both are important, but the size of the local TV market has got to be the more heavily weighted criteria. It doesn't matter as much if the household watches the game. It matters that they have signed up for a programming tier that includes BTN, etc. Case in point, Rutgers.
That's why a team like Washington, which checks the market box AND the academic fit, makes a lot of sense.
August 26th, 2022 at 12:48 PM ^
I might be among the least surprised of readers here about FSU's inclusion among the no-brainers, but I'm still surprised. Better do it fast; the sense is that Ron DeSantis and the legislature are putting both UF and FSU--Florida's flagships--at great risk with threats to free speech, etc. currently. I mentioned the other day that 70 percent of UF faculty are looking for work elsewhere, and UF is the number five-ranked public u the last time I looked. (Yes, such ratings are horribly problematic; we can skip that convo, too.) My wife, who is on the English faculty, says the goal for years has been to become a member of the AAU; she says that the sense that this could happen has dimmed of late.
August 26th, 2022 at 6:54 PM ^
Fortunately DeSantis is temporary.
August 26th, 2022 at 1:00 PM ^
I've been on the FSU train for a while. Glad to see it borne out by the numbers too.
August 26th, 2022 at 1:08 PM ^
I'm a little confused on his analysis of the current B1G schools. How is Michigan's market lower? Because we share the state with MSU? Obviously Detroit is a larger market than Columbus. Help me understand how we're rated lower in that category.
August 26th, 2022 at 1:16 PM ^
Immediately stopped after reading;
I grew up in East Lansing.
August 26th, 2022 at 3:53 PM ^
I've been keeping a similar spreadsheet for the last few years. The trouble is always in deciding how to weight each category.
Is the goal here to replicate what the Big Ten decision-makers are thinking? Because they certainly have their own spreadsheets and being able to anticipate their decisions is most relevant to this discussion.
Or is it to try and deduce the "best" expansion decisions? That has its own value, but requires so many weighting decisions that it's difficult to remain objective.
I appreciate Silver's work here, but it's hard to conclude that his tiers and the ranking numbers are anything more than subjective in the end.
[quote]While the Big Ten gives a lot of lip service to academic and athletic “fit,” here’s what I suspect it cares about most: a school’s market size, popularity and TV ratings.[/quote]
Is it that absolute? At any rate "Google Trends" searches get a 3x and revenue from all sports gets a 2x. This 2x is boosted by the 3x from football ratings, there's a lot of overlap there, but the Trends get a boost from the 2x from a fan map the NYT created in 2014.
We come out of this with numbers that suggest that Oregon's "market" would rank fifth in the Big Ten, and ahead of any other Pac-12 market. Intriguing, but Eugene is a minor television market and Portland, which is 21st in the country, is out of reception range from Eugene. So the argument is all about brand and marketing, and that feels very Nike and transient. Just like Oklahoma State with the influx of money from T. Boone Pickens - a boost that's already dying.
In trying roughly the same exercise as Silver, I weight the academics higher and come up with different conclusions. No sense posting the details, because the same criticisms obviously apply. I used college endowment instead of number of students, because that will reflect a long-term commitment to the academic world as well as the strength of the alumni base. I also used number of varsity sports instead of NCAA championships, for several reasons.
Sure, Notre Dame is up there, but they don't want to be in the Big Ten. And the ACC schools (and Notre Dame) have the financial handcuffs. I don't think any remaining Big 12 school comes that close to warrant serious consideration. Which leaves the Pac-12. Eliminating Oregon State and Washington State for obvious reasons, there are eight more candidates there.
Going back to "lip service" to academic fit... is the AAU a requirement (only Arizona isn't in this group of eight)? What about endowment? Nebraska is 12th in the Big Ten, Maryland 13th and Rutgers 14th. Arizona, Arizona State, Oregon and Utah are far below Rutgers (Oregon is 11th in the Pac-12, its QS World academic ranking is last in the Pac 12, and below any Big Ten school).
Somewhat subjectively, I've concluded there are four realistic current candidates for further expansion - Stanford, Cal, Washington and Colorado - the first three somewhat above "replacement level" for the Big Ten, and Colorado right around that line.
August 26th, 2022 at 5:04 PM ^
Instead, in 2014, we got … Rutgers, which was supposed to deliver the New York metro market to the Big Ten. I’m a huge sports fan who’s been living in New York since 2009, and I have had exactly zero conversations about Rutgers sports. Since joining the Big Ten, the football team’s conference record is 12-58.
It sounds like he’s saying Rutgers DIDN’T deliver the NYC market. And that’s just not true. Rutgers absolutely brought the NYC market. People keep having this misconception that you have to WATCH the team in that market for the benefit to be there.
August 26th, 2022 at 5:21 PM ^
FSU being in Tier-1 is the only real surprise to me.
North Carolina, Notre Dame, Oregon, and Washington would be great adds.
We might have to take Cal.
There is no one else that is even moderately appealing to me.