bukie

MN was one that jumped out at me. Other than you, I've never met a MN fan outside the state. Even if they have that many fans, how many are watching cfb (or the gophers)? The Minneapolis/St. Paul area is a good sized market on its own merit, though, and the fans there are largely hockey/football fans. The Vikings are probably the primary draw, but U of Minnesota is the only decent game in town as colleges go.

I'm not sure there's a better way to get data on college football interest across the country than what he's getting. Why do you question the numbers so much, because somehow Notre Dame isn't #1? They look pretty reasonable across the board to me. Silver is simply recognizing that the SEC and Big Ten are in good shape market-wise right now, so the only expansions that make sense for them would be to increase the average market, which adding PSU, Nebraska, and A&M do. Whereas the ACC adding Pitt and Syracuse, and the Pac-10 adding Colorado and Utah, do not. Thank you for assuming bias. More like I don't understand where you're coming from on the numbers to the point where the most reasonable explanation is bias.

Why are Pitt and Cuse smart additions? Middling additions, at best. And of course the conference that adds Texas and Oklahoma is going to look a lot better. Until the Pac-12 does that, though, their additions were a little baffling from a market perspective.

Interesting article though I think it's a touch flawed. The conclusion - that the Big Ten and SEC are in their prime positions due to selectivity in expansion - is bordering on dumb. You take two conferences in the areas of the country where cfb is the most important (outside Texas) and full of several big schools and then you give one a contract with cbs and one it's own tv network. Which conferences will be most stable in an era where colleges have lost their minds chasing cfb $? The ACC and Big 12 are in just as much CFB-dominated areas of the country as the Big Ten and SEC. The Pac-10 expanded with two teams that really don't pull in much market share. They're really only in good shape if they land Texas and Oklahoma. After the Big East got raided for Miami and Virginia Tech, there just isn't much left there for football markets. oh, his V Tech idea for the Big Ten was the one I was most surprised by, and maybe makes some sense. Of course, the huge sticking point now to grabbing an ACC team is the huge buyout.

I'm not sure there's a better way to get data on college football interest across the country than what he's getting. Why do you question the numbers so much, because somehow Notre Dame isn't #1? They look pretty reasonable across the board to me. Silver is simply recognizing that the SEC and Big Ten are in good shape market-wise right now, so the only expansions that make sense for them would be to increase the average market, which adding PSU, Nebraska, and A&M do. Whereas the ACC adding Pitt and Syracuse, and the Pac-10 adding Colorado and Utah, do not.

Interesting article though I think it's a touch flawed. The conclusion - that the Big Ten and SEC are in their prime positions due to selectivity in expansion - is bordering on dumb. You take two conferences in the areas of the country where cfb is the most important (outside Texas) and full of several big schools and then you give one a contract with cbs and one it's own tv network. Which conferences will be most stable in an era where colleges have lost their minds chasing cfb $? The ACC and Big 12 are in just as much CFB-dominated areas of the country as the Big Ten and SEC. The Pac-10 expanded with two teams that really don't pull in much market share. They're really only in good shape if they land Texas and Oklahoma. After the Big East got raided for Miami and Virginia Tech, there just isn't much left there for football markets.

On the plus side, you'll be able to keep your rivalries with Kansas State and Baylor, and add new rivalries with storied programs like South Florida, Central Florida, and maybe even Rice.

Basically, Silver concludes that the only way further expansion makes sense for the Big Ten is if they were to add Notre Dame and/or Texas. Along with one or both of them, adding Missouri or Rutgers makes sense to add those markets, or possibly Kansas/UConn if the conference were concerned with a basketball following. No other schools would be worth it. He also mentions that it makes sense for Notre Dame to remain independent while they can, since they have such a national following at this point.

I read that opposite, since Kansas had a stronger fan base they would be the favorites. The only thing running contrary to that was Rutgers strong showing in NYC itself. But I really didnt read any conclusion by Silver, did I miss it? In what way did you read that Kansas had a stronger fan base than Rutgers?

Here is an interesting article by Nate Silver about the geography of college football fans, and why Rutgers is a more attractive school than Kansas.

The Cubs' draft position is now projected for 8th, behind Houston, Minnesota, Baltimore, Seattle, San Diego, Kansas City and Pittsburgh. With just 8 games remaining, it's extremely unlikely the Cubs will climb any higher than 5th or fall any lower than 11th, despite mathematically still being able to climb to 2nd or fall to 17th.

Nah, Lopez has gone 7-8. That's the record of all others besides him. I've got them at 5-27. POINT REMAINS.

Incoming home loss to Western Michigan.

Holy crap Illinois is ranked. And if they don't start the season 6-0 now it'll be horrendous.

Also, the Cards all of a sudden aren't too far behind the Braves in the wild card chase. And the Cubs have improved to 5-28 on the year when they start someone not in the opening day rotation.

Boston lost again this afternoon. 5-15 in their last 20, and now lead Tampa by 1.5 games (1 in loss column).

The Big Ten would be more likely to add BYU than Iowa State. And by that I don't mean the Big Ten would be likely to add BYU.

I think the Big East and Big 12 can(and probably will) implode, but we don't end up at 4x16. If the ACC is pillaging the Big East to get to 16 and the Pac-12 takes the public Big 12 South schools to get to 16, I just don't see many attractive options to justify the Big 10 and SEC going to 16. I think you're more likely to see Conference USA and the Mountain West grow their numbers, and the Mountain West may even get to AQ status in the wake of the Big 12 and Big East. That said, I'd think the teams at most risk are ISU, Baylor, TCU, South Florida, and maybe Cincy and Louisville. Well, here's what I think will happen next: - UConn and Rutgers/Louisville to ACC (Rutgers wants in, but I think Louisville would fit better) so ACC is at 16 - A&M and, let's say, West Virginia to SEC to get to 14 in SEC - Texas, Oklahoma, OSU, and BYU/Texas Tech(?) to Pac to get them to 16 - ND/Big Ten makes too much sense not to happen at this point, so the Big Ten adds them and Cincy/Louisville/Rutgers/Missouri to get to 14. That leaves an absence of 4 spots (2 each in SEC/Big Ten) for the 4x16 layout, and leaves Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, South Florida, TCU, one of BYU/Texas Tech, and two of Cincy/Louisville/Rutgers/Missouri out. Maybe those 8 teams can form another conference from the ashes along with Boise State and a couple other high-profile MWC teams?

So, hypothetical situation here. Let's say the Big East and Big 12 implode to create four 16-team superconferences. There are currently 66 teams in the 6 conferences, not even including schools like Notre Dame, BYU, TCU and Boise State. Who gets left out when the games of musical chairs end? I think this is a large part of why Rutgers wants to hop on a conference now rather than wait to see how things shake out.

The schedule is potentially set up for a really special season, but I don't want to get ahead of myself at this point. Western Michigan next week in a game they have to win to make this week mean anything.

So...4th down for Illinois, 4 seconds to play. Do you punt it, or just try to kill 4 seconds? I'd try to just kill 4 seconds here and don't commit a penalty. EDIT: Yep, Scheelhaase took a deep snap and just sprinted backwards for 4 seconds. It'll kill his rushing average, but the game is won!

4th down, one more stop... STOP! One minute to go, 2 ASU TOs, can they run out the clock then?

Well, game is up to the defense, then.

Huge call on this review, since they can't measure anymore. EDIT: Probably the right call, but damn, moved the spot by 3 yards.

I was about to say this is what can happen for ND when they don't average a turnover per quarter...but they still are.