|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Pat Costilow added to this discussion on June 11, 2010
|
Bob, to be fair, a nasty D-line made that Nebraska-Texas game what it was (and that line was more than just Suh). I do love Nebraska for the tradition and great uniforms, not to mention solid wrestling program.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on June 11, 2010
|
well Pat,
great D-lines have a way of winning games in the Big Ten, after all Ohio states D-line made this past season a success. And in 2002 Ohio states D-line led their unbeaten 14 & 0 season, and stymied Miami's mighty offense in the BCS national title game.
Bo Polini, ex Ohio st captain, is NEB head coach. He was the defensive coordinator for LSU when they whipped Ohio st in the BCS title game a few years ago, that LSU team had quite a D-line, i know the buckeyes couldnt handle it. --- so get used to those NEB D-lines, imo. s/BobP
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Hank Kornblut added to this discussion on June 12, 2010
|
Mizzou a good academic institution with lots of solid sports programs. Plus, as Josh points out, they are popular in two big markets. While football tradition matters, this expansion is money driven and Missouri makes a lot of sense. I'd like to see them in the Big Ten as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on June 12, 2010
|
Missouri's ok but no prize imo, yes i know its trendy to talk about "marketing", i see all the buzz words quoted ---
too much reliance on "marketing" can ruin a product, its not the be all. Marketing mistakes helped bring down Detroit, it brought down alot of well know companies who forgot about what made their brand name strong and instead bowed to "marketing" and the "beancounters".
build a strong product which the Big Ten has done, thats the key, keep it strong. Dilute your product and you are eventually going downhill.
the media found their way to Lincoln Nebraska alot since 1970-- under coach Tom Osbourne NEB won 3 football NATIONAL championships in the mid-90s. Nebraska football probably had more fans in the KC & st Louis areas for most of those years since 1970 than Missouri who was a loser much of that time. Missouri football cannot compare. Why should the Big Ten dilute a good product? we already have a handful of perennially mediocre football teams.
what special does Missouri bring to the table? and why is no other conference courting them, according to ESPN? s/BobP
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Rex Holman added to this discussion on June 12, 2010
|
Marketing and markets are two related concepts. A market addresses an audience who is interested in your product. Marketing is getting the product in front of an intended audience. Marketing includes promotion and all avenues which are capable of accomplishing this task.
Buzz words, you gotta be kidding me.
The Nebraska product is what it is because of resources allocated and management that made good on those resources. It has tradition because it provided a great product years ago and continues to do so unto today.
Rivalry is a promotional tool, which acts on an innate desire to identify with a team, person, or school.
Being nostaglic is an emotional experience rife with pitfalls as we tend to ameliorate those things which we embrace and diminish those which we do not.
The automakers lost out because their product and value were not what the market wanted. Market forces almost drove them out of business.
Josh, I am with you Mizzou is a welcome addition as they have relevant and excellent sports programs. Maybe not back in the 1970s but in today's world.
|
Last edited by Rex Holman on June 12, 2010; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Mark Niemann added to this discussion on June 12, 2010
|
ameliorate... I had to look that one up.
...To make or become better. To improve.
Well done, Rex.
Add Mizzou +1 (They have wrestling!!!)
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Ben Golden added to this discussion on June 12, 2010
|
|
Quote from Bob Preusse's post:
|
|
"
what special does Missouri bring to the table? "
|
A good wrestling program! What more do you need?! I thought it was clear that this expansion is about improving the Big 10's wrestling reputation...
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Mark Niemann added to this discussion on June 12, 2010
|
Wait. Ben, are you implying that there are people out there that DO NOT think this expansion was about wrestling!? Yeah. Right! As if were about fencing, soccer or any other sport.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on June 13, 2010
|
Rex posts, "Being nostaglic is an emotional experience rife with pitfalls as we tend to ameliorate those things which we embrace and diminish those which we do not."
---------------------------------------
Rex, thank you for the sarcasm-- and thank you for the lecture on nostalgia, marketing, and rivalries.
btw theres a difference between "nostalgia" --which i don't hang on to -- and "tradition" which embodies sports, without it sports is greatly diminished. I respect tradition and i know it.
and i know what "marketing" is-- i was a director for both tourn when we successfully marketed the Ironman and before that in the 90s the Reno T of C, into nationally known super tourn. i know marketing firsthand.
where i differ from some people is: "keeping the product strong" is most important to me, more than mere marketing.
Nebraska was a big add. Now if we add again its a lesser add since ND is not coming apparently.
And keep in mind with NEB the Big Ten has now 12 teams, a number that allows for a conference title game which apparently the Big Ten wants.
Add Missouri and the Big Ten is at 13 so they must also add still another team to get to an even number which would be 14. So then gotta add 2 more after NEB which would further DILUTE the Big Ten tradition & product--- imo.
i think with NEB the product is very strong -- beyond NEB i see dilution overtaking marketing, s/BobP
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Pat Costilow added to this discussion on June 13, 2010
|
Here is an odd Nebraska fact- when the Cornhuskers play a home football game, the attendance at the game is enough to be the state's third largest city.
Personally, I am glad ND isn't coming- guess I am just a hater. I don't feel too compelled to welcome a school that cut wrestling.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on June 13, 2010
|
Pat, well u and i like NEB i guess.
one thing many are missing, Nebraska football has a big following in states like North & S Dakota, Montana, & Wyoming too. All are rugged farmer/rancher states in remote areas. i didnt realize they had that following until i talked to various wrestling people in different states around the country, but apparently they do have it.
NEB football National Champs in 1994, 1995 and co-champs with Michigan in 1997 aint that long ago. If its football thats moving this expansion, NEB is a big add. s/BobP
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Rex Holman added to this discussion on June 14, 2010
|
Bob-
I totally understand what you are saying now.
I apologize for coming across as I did but I had a hard time with the belittling of the Mizzou and marketing ideas.(btw I majored in marketing and probably have some of the same issues with it as you do)
Nebraska is a huge addition as their fan base has a lot in common with the Bucks. No major league football or basketball in a large metro city. Plus, years of developing a fan base which is huge.
On the other hand I don't buy into tradition. I buy into people and have a hard time projecting it onto the group. OSU's win over Michigan last year in football was just a win over a mediocre team to me.
Same thing for ND. They were an average football team with some very good skill players. I watched some of their product but was left wanting.
I know that once people align with a team, school, or institution, they are very hard to unseat which is the driver of millions of dollars in revenue on a large scale basis, which ultimately is the reason for a conference to extend an offer to a tradition rich school.
Me. I respect levels of development and the way in which a game is played. I cherish watching the elite and am amazed at the skill and intelligence which go into a high level performance. But, the athlete has to be a champion off the field as well or he is just proliferating the stereotype of entitlement, of which I can't swallow either.
I was literally upset that Mike Pucillo was only able to compete at a percentage of his ability this year. It made me angry, which was pointless as it served no end other than to be in opposition to reality.
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Bob Preusse added to this discussion on June 14, 2010
|
Rex, apology accepted.
i guess we differ on this point-- U say "On the other hand I don't buy into tradition. I buy into people and have a hard time projecting it onto the group. OSU's win over Michigan last year in football was just a win over a mediocre team to me."
However, "tradition" is big with me, i think it adds so much in sports --- and the Ohio St--Michigan tradition is a great one, depite the fact U of M not up to their high standard lately, but they will get back to it. As an Ohio st alum, i still enjoy the Buckeyes beating them just because U of M still wears the maize & blue with the winged helmet. And i am sure many of their alums would be ecstatic for a win over the Buckeyes next season.
So, of course, you and i see this Big Ten expansion thing a bit differently since we differ so much re tradition, but thats ok. s/BobP
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Roe Fox added to this discussion on June 14, 2010
|
I'm not sure anyone disagrees with the tradition argument. I cannot imagine Texas in the Big 10 or Pac 10. The reality is that money is driving these decisions whether you like them or not.
I remember when there was a Southwetern Conference that had great football for years.. The Cotton Bown meant a lot. Now it is an afterthought.
If there is a silver lining, these conferences may get so big that we will effectively have a playoff system. Who knows?
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion Topic: Musings & Rumblings
Bill Watson added to this discussion on June 14, 2010
|
I am one, that is for the expansion, let's be honest the big ten networked helped wrestling in the big ten. If the Pac Ten gets a network what stops them from trying to compete with the big ten? While some of these sports may not be "money makers" they will be part of the total package that is the network. So I would fel these sports add value to the network.
I also feel I'd like a 16 team big ten, if it included ND, WVU, Cuse, and a few others could be the fourth BC, Rutgers, Mizzou, Kansas, Iowa State
realistically I think ND, feels they can come whenever and if they do they will be number 16, WVU has good basketball and football programs, cuse has a huge market, Boston College isn't on the plate but with them and syracuse would mean serious money, Rutgers, not as high on them, Mizzou, think they don't bring enough to the table financially, Kansas, let's be honest basketball is a money maker and kansas has a decent football team as of late but no tradition, Iowa State, in state Iowa matchup and a good academic school
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
