Even if it is, so what? Obviously the Big 10 wanted to get stronger as a conference, otherwise they could have just added Creighton or any other podunk school. The point is, the Big 10 was fine as is, with annual television revenues $37 million greater than the almighty SEC (and $5 million more distributions per team). So the argument is that the Big 10 needed to make more than $37 million more than the SEC? if the Big 10 wanted to "close the talent gap", why would they consider Nebraska or Notre Dame? it's a silly argument, especially since the talent thing is cyclical. I'm sure RedFlash thinks the SEC will dominate for the next 7 decades, but anyone who remembers more than the past 3 years knows they won't