College Football Nation: Harvey Perlman
Campus sites: Did B1G give up too easily?
May, 16, 2012
May 16
11:00
AM ET
By
Adam Rittenberg | ESPN.com
CHICAGO -- When the college football playoff push kicked off, Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith planted himself in the campus-sites camp.
Smith favored having the semifinals on the campuses of the higher-seeded teams. The setup would give Big Ten teams like Ohio State an advantage they've never enjoyed in the current BCS/bowl setup -- nationally significant games on Midwest soil in late December or early January. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany was among the first major college football figures to stump for campus sites this winter.
"We've shifted," Smith told ESPN.com on Tuesday. "I was originally for campus sites, and I still go back there mentally every now and then as discussions occur, but the bowls have a really good system set up to host."
The reasons for the Big Ten's shift are well known by now. Nebraska athletic director Tom Osborne said Tuesday that a playoff outside of the existing bowls would "pretty much destroy the bowl system." Preserving and protecting the Rose Bowl is paramount to Delany and the rest of the Big Ten brass.
Smith also thinks there are operational advantages to keeping the biggest games at bowl sites.
"There are certain schools that would put it on and host it extremely well," he said. "Others might be challenged with that. Bowls have done this a long time. They have great local organizing committees. ... And it's good for the game."
The strongest counterargument is that campus sites would ease the burden on college football fans. Rather than make separate trips for a league title game, a national semifinal and a national championship game, fans of some teams could have one of those games closer to their homes.
Another apparent plus for Big Ten backers is the potential weather advantage Big Ten teams could exploit by hosting games. Unlike squads in the South and West, Big Ten teams are conditioned to play cold-weather football, but they typically face the best from the SEC, Pac-12 and Big 12 in ideal conditions at places like the Rose Bowl, the Mercedes-Benz Superdome and University of Phoenix Stadium.
The thought of a college football playoff in the snow is both novel and exciting to some Big Ten fans. But Smith actually sees it as a drawback.
Brace yourselves, Woody and Bo ...
"Let's say Ohio State is hosting and it's January or December, and let's say it is 5 degrees," Smith said. "Is that right for the game? We're not pro. We need to figure out what's best for the game, and I think a fast surface, good weather is important for the game. It's important for the kids."
Delany, Osborne and others acknowledge that campus sites could favor the Big Ten, which hasn't won a national championship since after the 2002 season. But in surveying presidents, athletic directors, coaches and even players, the overwhelming majority favored the bowl sites.
"It would be a competitive advantage to have semifinal games at home fields," Osborne said. "... but the bowls have been good to us."
The sentiment isn't sitting well with some folks. The Big Ten might have been alone in advocating for campus sites, but it's fair to ask if the Big Ten gave up on the crusade far too easily.
Yahoo! Sports' Dan Wetzel writes today:
Of the Big Ten groups advocating for playoffs at bowl sites, the coaches' position makes the least sense. These are guys who typically capitalize on every possible advantage presented to them. But they seem to value their players' bowl experience over the possibility of making Alabama or USC play them in the snow.
Why should the Big Ten care if TCU and Oregon have small stadiums and can't accommodate the media and the corporate sponsors? The Big Ten, for the most part, doesn't have those problems.
In my recent interview with Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman, I asked him why so many powerful people in the Midwest care so much about bowl games located so far away.
"It's part of the tradition of college football," Perlman said. "It is a good experience for student-athletes. It makes more sense in terms of ending the season than some kind of playoff. It helps the communities that have been supportive of intercollegiate football for a long time."
What about the local communities Big Ten schools can serve by keeping games on campus?
Wetzel writes:
That's not going to happen. The campus-sites ship has sailed. Perhaps it's a tradeoff the Big Ten made to ultimately ensure strong playoff access for league champions.
If and when the Big Ten champion qualifies for a playoff, however, it will more than likely play a virtual road game. The team will have to fight like heck to win.
A lot harder than the league did to have meaningful games on campus.
Smith favored having the semifinals on the campuses of the higher-seeded teams. The setup would give Big Ten teams like Ohio State an advantage they've never enjoyed in the current BCS/bowl setup -- nationally significant games on Midwest soil in late December or early January. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany was among the first major college football figures to stump for campus sites this winter.
"We've shifted," Smith told ESPN.com on Tuesday. "I was originally for campus sites, and I still go back there mentally every now and then as discussions occur, but the bowls have a really good system set up to host."
The reasons for the Big Ten's shift are well known by now. Nebraska athletic director Tom Osborne said Tuesday that a playoff outside of the existing bowls would "pretty much destroy the bowl system." Preserving and protecting the Rose Bowl is paramount to Delany and the rest of the Big Ten brass.
Smith also thinks there are operational advantages to keeping the biggest games at bowl sites.
"There are certain schools that would put it on and host it extremely well," he said. "Others might be challenged with that. Bowls have done this a long time. They have great local organizing committees. ... And it's good for the game."
The strongest counterargument is that campus sites would ease the burden on college football fans. Rather than make separate trips for a league title game, a national semifinal and a national championship game, fans of some teams could have one of those games closer to their homes.
Another apparent plus for Big Ten backers is the potential weather advantage Big Ten teams could exploit by hosting games. Unlike squads in the South and West, Big Ten teams are conditioned to play cold-weather football, but they typically face the best from the SEC, Pac-12 and Big 12 in ideal conditions at places like the Rose Bowl, the Mercedes-Benz Superdome and University of Phoenix Stadium.
The thought of a college football playoff in the snow is both novel and exciting to some Big Ten fans. But Smith actually sees it as a drawback.
Brace yourselves, Woody and Bo ...
"Let's say Ohio State is hosting and it's January or December, and let's say it is 5 degrees," Smith said. "Is that right for the game? We're not pro. We need to figure out what's best for the game, and I think a fast surface, good weather is important for the game. It's important for the kids."
Delany, Osborne and others acknowledge that campus sites could favor the Big Ten, which hasn't won a national championship since after the 2002 season. But in surveying presidents, athletic directors, coaches and even players, the overwhelming majority favored the bowl sites.
"It would be a competitive advantage to have semifinal games at home fields," Osborne said. "... but the bowls have been good to us."
The sentiment isn't sitting well with some folks. The Big Ten might have been alone in advocating for campus sites, but it's fair to ask if the Big Ten gave up on the crusade far too easily.
Yahoo! Sports' Dan Wetzel writes today:
Somewhere Mike Slive of the SEC and Larry Scott of the Pac-12 are kicking back with a cackle of delight. These guys are angling for every possible edge while the Big Ten and the Rose Bowl sit in adjacent bathtubs, holding hands and waiting for the moment to be right.
Wait, the rest of college football has to be asking, you're not even going to fight and try to make us look like wimps for arguing against football in the cold?
Wait, you seriously are going to ask the same fan base to travel three times in a month -- Big Ten title game, semifinals and championship game, the last two at least via airplane? And you think we won't end up with the majority of the crowd?
The Rose Bowl's power over the Big Ten is something to behold. It makes normally intelligent men say ridiculous things.
Of the Big Ten groups advocating for playoffs at bowl sites, the coaches' position makes the least sense. These are guys who typically capitalize on every possible advantage presented to them. But they seem to value their players' bowl experience over the possibility of making Alabama or USC play them in the snow.
Why should the Big Ten care if TCU and Oregon have small stadiums and can't accommodate the media and the corporate sponsors? The Big Ten, for the most part, doesn't have those problems.
In my recent interview with Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman, I asked him why so many powerful people in the Midwest care so much about bowl games located so far away.
"It's part of the tradition of college football," Perlman said. "It is a good experience for student-athletes. It makes more sense in terms of ending the season than some kind of playoff. It helps the communities that have been supportive of intercollegiate football for a long time."
What about the local communities Big Ten schools can serve by keeping games on campus?
Wetzel writes:
There's no question Big Ten fans love the Rose Bowl, although not as much as they once did. They also like to win, also would like to shut the SEC up and also really like showing off their legendary stadiums and great cities, fighting against the idea that they live in some inhospitable, rusted-out region.
Plenty of them could use the economic impact of staging these massive events in the Midwest too.
That's not going to happen. The campus-sites ship has sailed. Perhaps it's a tradeoff the Big Ten made to ultimately ensure strong playoff access for league champions.
If and when the Big Ten champion qualifies for a playoff, however, it will more than likely play a virtual road game. The team will have to fight like heck to win.
A lot harder than the league did to have meaningful games on campus.
Nebraska's Perlman: Plus-one still preferred
May, 3, 2012
May 3
4:40
PM ET
By
Adam Rittenberg | ESPN.com
The sense coming out of last week's BCS meetings is that college football soon will adopt a four-team playoff model with two designated semifinals and a championship game.
But don't count out the so-called "plus-one," where the top two teams are selected after the bowl games and face one another for the national championship about a week later.
The plus-one is still very much alive, University of Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman told ESPN.com on Thursday. Perlman, who serves on the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee, said that during informal discussions between Big Ten and Pac-12 presidents and chancellors, the plus-one model has the most support.
"It is clear the presidents will still make the final decision," Perlman told ESPN.com "We've had some informal meetings, the Big Ten presidents and the Pac-12 presidents, and I think we're largely aligned in thinking a plus-one with a different ranking after the bowl games to select No. 1 and 2 would be acceptable. Our second choice would probably be a four-team playoff inside the bowls. Our highest priority is to preserve the status of the Rose Bowl and our connection to it."
He later added: "I don't think we would be very enthusiastic about any of the other options."
That includes a proposal to have semifinal games played on campus, which Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany has supported. The plan seemed to lose steam last week at the BCS meetings in Florida, but SI.com reported Monday that it remains on the table.
"I don't think that's acceptable to us at this point," Perlman said of the campus-sites plan. "There would be some advantages to the Big Ten in doing it that way, but the end result would be that the bowl system and the Rose Bowl would be kind of like the NIT in basketball. If you have a playoff system outside the bowls, it would do serious damage to the bowls. ... I don't think anybody would pay attention to the bowls."
Perlman has long opposed a college football playoff and hasn't changed his position, saying Thursday, "I can't figure out a good reason to have a playoff to start with." But like many, he acknowledges changes will be made, and in his view, the plus-one is the simplest option and the best option. It preserves the bowl system and keeps player welfare in mind.
"We play enough football games," he said.
Some more notes from my conversation with the Nebraska chancellor:
While many of you disagree with Perlman's view, as do I, he deserves credit for actually speaking up about this topic. Brian Bennett and I reached out to more than half the Big Ten's presidents and chancellors for interviews and were repeatedly turned down.
The Big Ten presidents hold their annual spring meeting June 3 at league headquarters, and the Collegiate Commissioners Association meets June 20 in Chicago.
"At some point, the commissioners will make a recommendation or a series of recommendations to us," Perlman said, "and we will meet and make the [final] decision hopefully before July 1."
But don't count out the so-called "plus-one," where the top two teams are selected after the bowl games and face one another for the national championship about a week later.
The plus-one is still very much alive, University of Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman told ESPN.com on Thursday. Perlman, who serves on the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee, said that during informal discussions between Big Ten and Pac-12 presidents and chancellors, the plus-one model has the most support.
"It is clear the presidents will still make the final decision," Perlman told ESPN.com "We've had some informal meetings, the Big Ten presidents and the Pac-12 presidents, and I think we're largely aligned in thinking a plus-one with a different ranking after the bowl games to select No. 1 and 2 would be acceptable. Our second choice would probably be a four-team playoff inside the bowls. Our highest priority is to preserve the status of the Rose Bowl and our connection to it."
He later added: "I don't think we would be very enthusiastic about any of the other options."
That includes a proposal to have semifinal games played on campus, which Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany has supported. The plan seemed to lose steam last week at the BCS meetings in Florida, but SI.com reported Monday that it remains on the table.
"I don't think that's acceptable to us at this point," Perlman said of the campus-sites plan. "There would be some advantages to the Big Ten in doing it that way, but the end result would be that the bowl system and the Rose Bowl would be kind of like the NIT in basketball. If you have a playoff system outside the bowls, it would do serious damage to the bowls. ... I don't think anybody would pay attention to the bowls."
Perlman has long opposed a college football playoff and hasn't changed his position, saying Thursday, "I can't figure out a good reason to have a playoff to start with." But like many, he acknowledges changes will be made, and in his view, the plus-one is the simplest option and the best option. It preserves the bowl system and keeps player welfare in mind.
"We play enough football games," he said.
Some more notes from my conversation with the Nebraska chancellor:
- The selection for a plus-one or a four-team playoff is tricky, and Perlman has no preferred model because, in his view, there isn't one. "If you don't like computers, then you'll think it's wrong," he said. "If you don't like committees, you'll think it's wrong. I think we'll just pick one, the system that seems to have the most fan confidence, and use it. I don't think it's possible to pick the two best teams in the country to play. In football, that just doesn't work."
- Any type of change to the postseason structure increases the burden for fans. "I don't think it's overblown," he said. "That's one of the reasons why I've never been in favor of a playoff to start with. In order to be successful, it would have to become kind of a corporate event, rather than a school event. While we'd probably do well, given the television revenues, I don't know that it's a favorite of the fans of the schools who participate."
- Nebraska fans and some local media members don't seem as enthralled by the Rose Bowl as those in other parts of the Big Ten. But Perlman certainly falls in line with the view shared by Delany and the other Big Ten presidents and chancellors. Here's what he said when asked about the potential of having nationally significant games in or close to the Big Ten footprint at neutral sites: "If the last game was bid out, it would certainly be advantageous for us. But on the other hand, would Nebraska fans, in the first week in January, rather travel to Pasadena or Indianapolis? There clearly is a competitive advantage if you're playing in the Rose Bowl against a Pac-12 team, or if you're playing in the Sugar Bowl against LSU or in the Orange Bowl against Florida. But so what? It’s a bowl game. That's just the lay of the land."
- Although his playoff stance hasn't changed, he thinks elements of the BCS can be improved, such as the elimination of the automatic-qualifying status which has "created incentives for some pretty strange conference realignments that wouldn't have taken place otherwise." Like Nebraska athletic director Tom Osborne, Perlman favors a system that creates better matchups in the major bowls and eliminates some of the clunkers we've seen recently. "With some tweaks," Perlman said, "you could create a series of games in five or six bowls that would be compelling, and would possibly end up producing a No. 1 or a No. 2 team."
- Perlman favors a model that reclaims New Year's Day but ends before the start of the winter academic term. He also supports the proposal to give conference champions the most consideration for the title game or the semifinals. "You ought to be able to win your conference to be a national champion," he said.
While many of you disagree with Perlman's view, as do I, he deserves credit for actually speaking up about this topic. Brian Bennett and I reached out to more than half the Big Ten's presidents and chancellors for interviews and were repeatedly turned down.
The Big Ten presidents hold their annual spring meeting June 3 at league headquarters, and the Collegiate Commissioners Association meets June 20 in Chicago.
"At some point, the commissioners will make a recommendation or a series of recommendations to us," Perlman said, "and we will meet and make the [final] decision hopefully before July 1."
INDIANAPOLIS -- Rules violations and reform have been the key buzz words in the college football offseason. Now it's time to see if more talk can produce any substantial change.
A group of more than 50 university presidents, plus a handful of athletic directors, conference commissioners and other officials convene this afternoon in Indianapolis for a two-day retreat to discuss how to reform college sports. The issues that are officially on the agenda are fiscal sustainability, academic performance of student-athletes and integrity.
"I don't want to be melodramatic, but this meeting is very important," NCAA president Mark Emmert told ESPN.com's Dana O'Neil. "We do have serious challenges, and we do need to make some serious reforms. I don't think there is any debate about that. I want us to be able to build a consensus around those things that are most important for the NCAA to pay attention to and then address those things quickly."
Here are the Big Ten representatives at this week's retreat:
Gee will be spending a lot of time in Indy this week; Ohio State's case before the infractions committee will be held here on Friday.
The key question from this whole retreat will be whether the group comes up with specific recommendations and changes, or if like many university and NCAA endeavors, it simply leads to more reports and committees. The Big Ten, led by commissioner Jim Delany, has been out front in the call for changes to NCAA rules and practices, including cost-of-attendance increases to athletic scholarships. The league has some powerful people at the retreat to push forward those ideas.
I'll be here for both days and reporting on the developments. Stay tuned.
A group of more than 50 university presidents, plus a handful of athletic directors, conference commissioners and other officials convene this afternoon in Indianapolis for a two-day retreat to discuss how to reform college sports. The issues that are officially on the agenda are fiscal sustainability, academic performance of student-athletes and integrity.
"I don't want to be melodramatic, but this meeting is very important," NCAA president Mark Emmert told ESPN.com's Dana O'Neil. "We do have serious challenges, and we do need to make some serious reforms. I don't think there is any debate about that. I want us to be able to build a consensus around those things that are most important for the NCAA to pay attention to and then address those things quickly."
Here are the Big Ten representatives at this week's retreat:
- Gordon Gee, Ohio State president
- Michael McRobbie, Indiana president
- Harvey Perlman, Nebraska chancellor
- Lou Anna Simon, Michigan State president
- Graham Spanier, Penn State president
- Jo Potuto, Nebraska faculty athletic representative, Nebraska
Gee will be spending a lot of time in Indy this week; Ohio State's case before the infractions committee will be held here on Friday.
The key question from this whole retreat will be whether the group comes up with specific recommendations and changes, or if like many university and NCAA endeavors, it simply leads to more reports and committees. The Big Ten, led by commissioner Jim Delany, has been out front in the call for changes to NCAA rules and practices, including cost-of-attendance increases to athletic scholarships. The league has some powerful people at the retreat to push forward those ideas.
I'll be here for both days and reporting on the developments. Stay tuned.
Nebraska to celebrate B1G arrival Friday
June, 30, 2011
6/30/11
11:00
AM ET
By
Adam Rittenberg | ESPN.com
Bo Pelini won't be trading his signature ballcap for one of these on Friday.
The Nebraska coach has no big plans to celebrate the Huskers' official arrival as a member of the Big Ten. Yes, I know you're all shocked.
"It doesn't signify anything for me," Pelini said. "It's just a date, as far as I'm concerned."
Friday will be a slightly bigger deal to Nebraska fans and to the school. After being approved for admission into the Big Ten more than a year ago, Nebraska can finally call itself an official member of the league.
The school will recognize the occasion with a brief, informal ceremony at 9 a.m. local time Friday. Chancellor Harvey Perlman will make a celebratory announcement and read some welcoming statements from key figures from the Big Ten. Gov. Dave Heineman will be on hand to sign a proclamation recognizing Nebraska's entry into the Big Ten.
The event will be held at the Van Brunt Visitors Center at the city campus and is open to the public.
Programming note: Brian and I will be celebrating Nebraska's Big Ten arrival throughout Friday, so be sure and check the blog early and often.
The Nebraska coach has no big plans to celebrate the Huskers' official arrival as a member of the Big Ten. Yes, I know you're all shocked.
"It doesn't signify anything for me," Pelini said. "It's just a date, as far as I'm concerned."
Friday will be a slightly bigger deal to Nebraska fans and to the school. After being approved for admission into the Big Ten more than a year ago, Nebraska can finally call itself an official member of the league.
The school will recognize the occasion with a brief, informal ceremony at 9 a.m. local time Friday. Chancellor Harvey Perlman will make a celebratory announcement and read some welcoming statements from key figures from the Big Ten. Gov. Dave Heineman will be on hand to sign a proclamation recognizing Nebraska's entry into the Big Ten.
The event will be held at the Van Brunt Visitors Center at the city campus and is open to the public.
Programming note: Brian and I will be celebrating Nebraska's Big Ten arrival throughout Friday, so be sure and check the blog early and often.
Q&A: Dan Beebe on the Big 12's future
February, 10, 2011
2/10/11
3:00
PM ET
By
David Ubben | ESPN.com
We're in transition on the Big 12 blog this week, saying goodbye to Nebraska and Colorado, but Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe has been dealing with that transition since the decisions to leave were made in June.
I caught up with the commish this week and covered a wide range of topics about the Big 12's future, like a possible name change for the league, his thoughts on Texas' new television network, Texas A&M's future as a member of the Big 12 and the creation of a Big 12 television network.
David Ubben: The season's been over for awhile, and obviously there's basketball being played, but what have you been working on the past few weeks as it relates to the Big 12 and its future?
Dan Beebe: Well, we're preparing and we've been doing a lot of work preparing for our future negotiation for television [with Fox Sports later this spring]. It's going to be a very critical thing for us, and I'm on the men's basketball committee, so I've got games of basketball dancing through my head at all hours and all times, and we're also working with the branding company in Boston on what's our position, how we want to position ourselves moving forward with 10 members. So, all that should be aiming toward the spring meetings. That's kind of the launch point for all these things.
What about the conference name and logo? Anything definitive happening there?
DB: We're looking at all that. By June, we want to have a decision on it. This group has done a great job of going around and gathering information from our people and trying to figure out what is our purpose and how we want to position ourselves going forward.
As far as branding the league moving forward, are there any changes that you feel like definitely will be coming?
DB: Well, not at this point. Right now we're still studying all that. We have some direction, but we need to run it through our membership and see if it resonates with them first, before we do anything about it. But we're excited about the things that they've captured and the ideas that they have, and we just need to vet it with our membership and make sure it resonates there before we do anything publicly.
What ideas that they've presented do you feel strongly enough about that you'd want to push hard to the membership when you meet in June?
DB: I want to look hard at the name change, but I think a lot of people feel like the name we have is one that banners have been won under and all that, so we'd have to look very hard at that, and we have a lot of equity in it. Really, I'm just open to what's discovered being the benefits that we have. I mean, obviously, we're going to be different than some of our peer conferences in terms of having complete round-robin play in football and double round-robin in basketball, and I think that's an exciting way to position ourselves going forward.
I caught up with the commish this week and covered a wide range of topics about the Big 12's future, like a possible name change for the league, his thoughts on Texas' new television network, Texas A&M's future as a member of the Big 12 and the creation of a Big 12 television network.
David Ubben: The season's been over for awhile, and obviously there's basketball being played, but what have you been working on the past few weeks as it relates to the Big 12 and its future?
[+] Enlarge
AP Photo/Cody DutyCommissioner Dan Beebe remains confident about the future of the Big 12.
AP Photo/Cody DutyCommissioner Dan Beebe remains confident about the future of the Big 12.What about the conference name and logo? Anything definitive happening there?
DB: We're looking at all that. By June, we want to have a decision on it. This group has done a great job of going around and gathering information from our people and trying to figure out what is our purpose and how we want to position ourselves going forward.
As far as branding the league moving forward, are there any changes that you feel like definitely will be coming?
DB: Well, not at this point. Right now we're still studying all that. We have some direction, but we need to run it through our membership and see if it resonates with them first, before we do anything about it. But we're excited about the things that they've captured and the ideas that they have, and we just need to vet it with our membership and make sure it resonates there before we do anything publicly.
What ideas that they've presented do you feel strongly enough about that you'd want to push hard to the membership when you meet in June?
DB: I want to look hard at the name change, but I think a lot of people feel like the name we have is one that banners have been won under and all that, so we'd have to look very hard at that, and we have a lot of equity in it. Really, I'm just open to what's discovered being the benefits that we have. I mean, obviously, we're going to be different than some of our peer conferences in terms of having complete round-robin play in football and double round-robin in basketball, and I think that's an exciting way to position ourselves going forward.
None more 'interesting' than Nebraska
February, 8, 2011
2/08/11
10:30
AM ET
By
David Ubben | ESPN.com
I first (briefly) stated my argument on Twitter: No team in college football was more interesting on and off the field for more reasons in the last year than Nebraska.
A lot of those reasons for interest were positive for the program. Others were negative. But I would argue that no team had more headline-worthy happenings on campus than the Huskers in the past year.
I hear the arguments for USC (coaching change, sanctions), Notre Dame (coaching change, student death, anticlimactic realignment) and Florida (Urban Meyer postseason flip-flop, "You're a bad guy" media incident, offensive collapse, coaching change).
I disagree.
A refresher course on the past 12 months in Nebraska football, for those who have forgotten:
Spring 2010: Starting quarterback Zac Lee is forced to sit out spring practice, and rumors about the progress of a redshirt freshman, Taylor Martinez, start to emerge. Martinez validates those rumors with a memorable spring game performance that leaves fans buzzing.
May-June 2010: Realignment rumors build into reality, and days after Big 12 spring meetings close, Nebraska leaves the Big 12 for the Big Ten, by far the biggest move of the summer's realignment. It becomes official on July 1, 2011.
August 2010: During fall camp, linebacker Sean Fisher (broken leg) and cornerback Anthony Blue (torn ACL) were injured during a closed practice, and rumors of their injuries leaked onto message boards. As a result, media members tried to reach family members, at one point, while Fisher was undergoing surgery. As a result, coach Bo Pelini banned the media from accessing his team for three days.
Sept. 4, 2010: No starter was officially announced before the season opener against Western Kentucky, but the speedy Martinez was announced during starting lineups to a raucous reception from the fans. He becomes the first freshman to start a season opener in Nebraska history. On his first career career carry, he runs for a 46-yard touchdown. Nebraska wins 49-10.
Oct. 7, 2010: Martinez had considerable buzz after rushing for 496 yards and eight scores in his first four games, but his coming out party was a nationally-televised, Thursday night game against Kansas State. He ran for four touchdowns, 241 yards and led the Huskers to a 48-13 road conference win over the bowl-bound Wildcats. That's Heisman-type stuff, and for the first time, he realistically threw his name into the Heisman race (alongside shoo-in Heisman winner Denard Robinson) and then-No. 5 Nebraska was looking like a very real national championship contender. Martinez would not score another rushing touchdown the rest of the season.
Oct. 16, 2010: Nine days later, they hit the first of many speed bumps. Texas' free fall lessened the impact of what looked like the biggest game of the year, but the Longhorns, who finished 5-7, were still able to remind Nebraska of the mysterious mojo they have over the Huskers. Martinez struggled, was benched in the fourth quarter and Nebraska suffered its first loss, 20-13, at home, in a shocker. The loss moved Nebraska to 1-9 against Texas since the Big 12 began in 1996.
Oct. 30, 2010: Roy Helu Jr. runs for 307 yards to help beat Missouri and gives the Huskers control of the Big 12 North. Martinez suffers a sprained ankle late in the first half and doesn't play in the second half. It eventually proves as one of the biggest moments of Nebraska's season.
Nov. 6, 2010: Martinez sits against Iowa State with an injured ankle, and the Cyclones erase a 24-10 lead to send the game into overtime. The Huskers score first, but intercept a wobbly pass on a fake punt to win the game, 31-30, and maintain control of the Big 12 North, which they eventually win.
Nov. 20, 2010: Nebraska is flagged a school-record 16 times, compared to Texas A&M's two. The worst of the 16 flags is a phantom roughing the passer call that extends Texas A&M's game-winning drive in the 9-6 win.
The biggest news, though, has little to do with the on-field action that resulted in a second loss.
Martinez starts, but re-injures the ankle early and heads to the locker room. There, he returns a call from his father in violation of team rules. Upon learning this information, Pelini screams inches away from a stone-faced Martinez while jabbing his chest with a finger. ESPN's cameras catch the controversial interaction, which re-airs countless times over the following days.
After the game, Pelini chases an official off the field while screaming inches away from his face as well, a scene seen on the sideline during the game. As Texas A&M fans storm the field, his brother, defensive coordinator Carl Pelini, throws down a cameraman's camera, breaking off a few detachable pieces, but doing no permanent damage to the equipment.
After the game, Pelini makes his players off-limits and briefly addresses media.
Nov. 21, 2010: Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman publicly criticizes Pelini's actions during the game. Pelini later apologizes, saying he "let it get personal" toward officials.
Throughout the day, rumors that Martinez planned transfer swirl after the freshman misses a team workout. Later, it's revealed that Martinez also suffered turf toe on his left foot to pair with his sprained right ankle. Pelini denies rumors that Martinez planned to transfer.
Nov. 23, 2010: Top receiver/kick returner Niles Paul suffers a broken foot in practice. He misses the season-ending, Big 12 North-clinching win over Colorado and the Big 12 title game but returns for the bowl game. (That's a wholly terrible four-day stretch, no?)
Dec. 4, 2010: Nebraska closes its run in the Big 12 by reviving one of the league's great rivalries, one final game against Oklahoma. The Huskers' early 17-0 lead is erased, Martinez takes seven sacks and the Huskers lose, 23-20, to land in the Holiday Bowl for the second consecutive season against Washington, a team it beat in Seattle 56-21 in September.
Dec. 30, 2010: Nebraska, 17-point favorites, suffers a shocking loss to Washington, 19-7. They finish 10-4, and lose three of their final four games.
Jan 5, 2011: Martinez's father, Casey Martinez, confirms to ESPN.com that Taylor will return to Nebraska for the 2011 winter semester, ending rumors of a transfer.
Jan. 11, 2011: Defensive tackle Jared Crick announces he'll return to Nebraska for his senior season.
Jan 26, 2011: Nebraska ends its licensing agreement with Corn Fed, Inc., Casey Martinez's apparel company. The deal paid Nebraska 10 percent royalties on all merchandise sold and began in June 2007.
Feb. 3, 2011: In Indiana, new Hoosiers coach Kevin Wilson announces that his assistant, Corey Raymond, is leaving for Nebraska to coach the secondary. Huskers secondary coach Marvin Sanders is still employed.
Pelini hasn't spoken with the media in five weeks.
Later, during his signing day teleconference, Pelini refuses to answer any questions about his staff, and says no staff members have been hired or fired yet.
Nebraska signs 20 players and four ESPNU recruits for the nation's No. 14 recruiting class, which ranks No. 3 in the Big 12 and No. 2 in the Big Ten.
Later that night, Sanders, receivers coach Ted Gilmore and offensive coordinator Shawn Watson are absent from an Omaha recruiting dinner.
Feb. 4, 2011: Sanders announces his resignation for "family and personal reasons" amid reports of possible disciplinary action toward the coach for a nonfootball issue.
Feb. 5, 2011: Charles Jackson, Nebraska's only cornerback signee, tells the Omaha World-Herald he found out about Sanders' departure from a stranger via Facebook, and expresses discontent at not being notified that any moves had occurred or that they would follow his signing. He also adds he probably would have signed with Nebraska if he had been told.
Later in the day, his father goes on Omaha radio to diffuse the situation, and says his son is content and excited to start his career.
Feb. 7, 2011: Former Huskers star Scott Frost elects to stay at Oregon as receivers coach, rather than join his alma mater, who was reportedly unwilling to offer him playcalling duties.
Today: Gilmore and Watson are still employed, and Pelini says he knew nothing of an ad posted on Nebraska's website last week looking for an offensive assistant.
Now that, folks is a whole lot of stuff that's happened in the last year. We can only assume 2011 will offer plenty more headlines in the Big Ten.
Can anybody top that? I say absolutely no way.
A lot of those reasons for interest were positive for the program. Others were negative. But I would argue that no team had more headline-worthy happenings on campus than the Huskers in the past year.
I hear the arguments for USC (coaching change, sanctions), Notre Dame (coaching change, student death, anticlimactic realignment) and Florida (Urban Meyer postseason flip-flop, "You're a bad guy" media incident, offensive collapse, coaching change).
I disagree.
A refresher course on the past 12 months in Nebraska football, for those who have forgotten:
Spring 2010: Starting quarterback Zac Lee is forced to sit out spring practice, and rumors about the progress of a redshirt freshman, Taylor Martinez, start to emerge. Martinez validates those rumors with a memorable spring game performance that leaves fans buzzing.
May-June 2010: Realignment rumors build into reality, and days after Big 12 spring meetings close, Nebraska leaves the Big 12 for the Big Ten, by far the biggest move of the summer's realignment. It becomes official on July 1, 2011.
August 2010: During fall camp, linebacker Sean Fisher (broken leg) and cornerback Anthony Blue (torn ACL) were injured during a closed practice, and rumors of their injuries leaked onto message boards. As a result, media members tried to reach family members, at one point, while Fisher was undergoing surgery. As a result, coach Bo Pelini banned the media from accessing his team for three days.
Sept. 4, 2010: No starter was officially announced before the season opener against Western Kentucky, but the speedy Martinez was announced during starting lineups to a raucous reception from the fans. He becomes the first freshman to start a season opener in Nebraska history. On his first career career carry, he runs for a 46-yard touchdown. Nebraska wins 49-10.
Oct. 7, 2010: Martinez had considerable buzz after rushing for 496 yards and eight scores in his first four games, but his coming out party was a nationally-televised, Thursday night game against Kansas State. He ran for four touchdowns, 241 yards and led the Huskers to a 48-13 road conference win over the bowl-bound Wildcats. That's Heisman-type stuff, and for the first time, he realistically threw his name into the Heisman race (alongside shoo-in Heisman winner Denard Robinson) and then-No. 5 Nebraska was looking like a very real national championship contender. Martinez would not score another rushing touchdown the rest of the season.
Oct. 16, 2010: Nine days later, they hit the first of many speed bumps. Texas' free fall lessened the impact of what looked like the biggest game of the year, but the Longhorns, who finished 5-7, were still able to remind Nebraska of the mysterious mojo they have over the Huskers. Martinez struggled, was benched in the fourth quarter and Nebraska suffered its first loss, 20-13, at home, in a shocker. The loss moved Nebraska to 1-9 against Texas since the Big 12 began in 1996.
Oct. 30, 2010: Roy Helu Jr. runs for 307 yards to help beat Missouri and gives the Huskers control of the Big 12 North. Martinez suffers a sprained ankle late in the first half and doesn't play in the second half. It eventually proves as one of the biggest moments of Nebraska's season.
Nov. 6, 2010: Martinez sits against Iowa State with an injured ankle, and the Cyclones erase a 24-10 lead to send the game into overtime. The Huskers score first, but intercept a wobbly pass on a fake punt to win the game, 31-30, and maintain control of the Big 12 North, which they eventually win.
Nov. 20, 2010: Nebraska is flagged a school-record 16 times, compared to Texas A&M's two. The worst of the 16 flags is a phantom roughing the passer call that extends Texas A&M's game-winning drive in the 9-6 win.
The biggest news, though, has little to do with the on-field action that resulted in a second loss.
Martinez starts, but re-injures the ankle early and heads to the locker room. There, he returns a call from his father in violation of team rules. Upon learning this information, Pelini screams inches away from a stone-faced Martinez while jabbing his chest with a finger. ESPN's cameras catch the controversial interaction, which re-airs countless times over the following days.
After the game, Pelini chases an official off the field while screaming inches away from his face as well, a scene seen on the sideline during the game. As Texas A&M fans storm the field, his brother, defensive coordinator Carl Pelini, throws down a cameraman's camera, breaking off a few detachable pieces, but doing no permanent damage to the equipment.
After the game, Pelini makes his players off-limits and briefly addresses media.
Nov. 21, 2010: Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman publicly criticizes Pelini's actions during the game. Pelini later apologizes, saying he "let it get personal" toward officials.
Throughout the day, rumors that Martinez planned transfer swirl after the freshman misses a team workout. Later, it's revealed that Martinez also suffered turf toe on his left foot to pair with his sprained right ankle. Pelini denies rumors that Martinez planned to transfer.
Nov. 23, 2010: Top receiver/kick returner Niles Paul suffers a broken foot in practice. He misses the season-ending, Big 12 North-clinching win over Colorado and the Big 12 title game but returns for the bowl game. (That's a wholly terrible four-day stretch, no?)
Dec. 4, 2010: Nebraska closes its run in the Big 12 by reviving one of the league's great rivalries, one final game against Oklahoma. The Huskers' early 17-0 lead is erased, Martinez takes seven sacks and the Huskers lose, 23-20, to land in the Holiday Bowl for the second consecutive season against Washington, a team it beat in Seattle 56-21 in September.
Dec. 30, 2010: Nebraska, 17-point favorites, suffers a shocking loss to Washington, 19-7. They finish 10-4, and lose three of their final four games.
Jan 5, 2011: Martinez's father, Casey Martinez, confirms to ESPN.com that Taylor will return to Nebraska for the 2011 winter semester, ending rumors of a transfer.
Jan. 11, 2011: Defensive tackle Jared Crick announces he'll return to Nebraska for his senior season.
Jan 26, 2011: Nebraska ends its licensing agreement with Corn Fed, Inc., Casey Martinez's apparel company. The deal paid Nebraska 10 percent royalties on all merchandise sold and began in June 2007.
Feb. 3, 2011: In Indiana, new Hoosiers coach Kevin Wilson announces that his assistant, Corey Raymond, is leaving for Nebraska to coach the secondary. Huskers secondary coach Marvin Sanders is still employed.
Pelini hasn't spoken with the media in five weeks.
Later, during his signing day teleconference, Pelini refuses to answer any questions about his staff, and says no staff members have been hired or fired yet.
Nebraska signs 20 players and four ESPNU recruits for the nation's No. 14 recruiting class, which ranks No. 3 in the Big 12 and No. 2 in the Big Ten.
Later that night, Sanders, receivers coach Ted Gilmore and offensive coordinator Shawn Watson are absent from an Omaha recruiting dinner.
Feb. 4, 2011: Sanders announces his resignation for "family and personal reasons" amid reports of possible disciplinary action toward the coach for a nonfootball issue.
Feb. 5, 2011: Charles Jackson, Nebraska's only cornerback signee, tells the Omaha World-Herald he found out about Sanders' departure from a stranger via Facebook, and expresses discontent at not being notified that any moves had occurred or that they would follow his signing. He also adds he probably would have signed with Nebraska if he had been told.
Later in the day, his father goes on Omaha radio to diffuse the situation, and says his son is content and excited to start his career.
Feb. 7, 2011: Former Huskers star Scott Frost elects to stay at Oregon as receivers coach, rather than join his alma mater, who was reportedly unwilling to offer him playcalling duties.
Today: Gilmore and Watson are still employed, and Pelini says he knew nothing of an ad posted on Nebraska's website last week looking for an offensive assistant.
Now that, folks is a whole lot of stuff that's happened in the last year. We can only assume 2011 will offer plenty more headlines in the Big Ten.
Can anybody top that? I say absolutely no way.
I just got off of a teleconference with Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, Michigan State president Lou Anna Simon, Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman and Nebraska athletic director Tom Osborne about Nebraska becoming the 12th member of the Big Ten.
There are so many subtopics to discuss in the coming months, but here's a bit more about what we know now:
Further Big Ten expansion: It definitely could happen. Delany and Simon both said the league remains within its 12- to 18-month time frame to study expansion and could act again depending on the climate. The Big Ten only acted now because of circumstances with the Big 12 and Nebraska. Delany admitted the league might not have been ready to act three months ago. The Big Ten now will return to "the slower tempo sort of game" with expansion, but Delany said the league is prepared to act quickly again. "We have two-thirds of study period left to go and we’re real anxious to work with Jim and others around the next step," Simon said. Added Delany: "If we can be as successful with a 13th or 14th member as we were with Nebraska, that would be great."
Championship game: Delany has never been rah-rah about them, but he expects the Big Ten to begin playing a championship game in football in 2011. Venues and locations haven't been discussed, but Big Ten associate commissioner for television administration Mark Rudner and others will begin examining the possibilities. Feedback from athletic directors and coaches will be gathered before any decisions are made. "It’s important to get it right, and there’s no silver bullet," Delany said. "There will be different views on it."
Division alignment: The Big Ten also must figure out divisions in the coming months. Delany listed three main criteria for sorting them out: competitive fairness, maintenance of rivalries and geography. He stressed that competitive fairness is the No. 1 priority, which I believe to be the correct approach. Geography shouldn't determine divisions. You don't want another Big 12 South scenario.
Scheduling: Osborne hinted that the number of conference games could increase in the new Big Ten. He expects at least three nonconference games and, like many Big Ten athletic directors, wants to keep as many of those at home as possible. The Big Ten's challenge will be figuring things out for Nebraska's arrival in September 2011. "Mark Rudner and Mike McComiskey have done a lot of models," Delany said. "The issue for us it the short turnaround."
Rivalries: Delany has often talked about the intimacy of a league and how vital rivalries are to its fabric. "They're part of who we are," he said Friday. But he added that rivalries have to be evaluated independently to see which ones are worth preserving in an expanded league. "We’re going into this with the idea that rivalries really matter," Delany said. "But not all rivalries are equal."
Timeline with Nebraska: Delany and other Big Ten officials met with Nebraska officials three or four weeks ago to have informal discussions in an undisclosed location (it wasn't Lincoln, where Delany made his first trip Friday, or Chicago). Osborne also had briefly discussed expansion with Ohio State head coach Jim Tressel and Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez (a former Nebraska player and coach), both of whom told him the Big Ten was considering the Huskers. The process only really heated up after the Big 12 issued stay-or-go ultimatums to its members. If the Big 12 -- and Pac-10 -- didn't speed things up, the Big Ten would have continued to move along slowly. But Nebraska seems happy with the way things worked out. "We don’t feel like we’re walking into a room of strangers," Perlman said. Added Osborne: "We feel we share a lot of common values with what we know of Big Ten institutions."
There are so many subtopics to discuss in the coming months, but here's a bit more about what we know now:
Further Big Ten expansion: It definitely could happen. Delany and Simon both said the league remains within its 12- to 18-month time frame to study expansion and could act again depending on the climate. The Big Ten only acted now because of circumstances with the Big 12 and Nebraska. Delany admitted the league might not have been ready to act three months ago. The Big Ten now will return to "the slower tempo sort of game" with expansion, but Delany said the league is prepared to act quickly again. "We have two-thirds of study period left to go and we’re real anxious to work with Jim and others around the next step," Simon said. Added Delany: "If we can be as successful with a 13th or 14th member as we were with Nebraska, that would be great."
Championship game: Delany has never been rah-rah about them, but he expects the Big Ten to begin playing a championship game in football in 2011. Venues and locations haven't been discussed, but Big Ten associate commissioner for television administration Mark Rudner and others will begin examining the possibilities. Feedback from athletic directors and coaches will be gathered before any decisions are made. "It’s important to get it right, and there’s no silver bullet," Delany said. "There will be different views on it."
Division alignment: The Big Ten also must figure out divisions in the coming months. Delany listed three main criteria for sorting them out: competitive fairness, maintenance of rivalries and geography. He stressed that competitive fairness is the No. 1 priority, which I believe to be the correct approach. Geography shouldn't determine divisions. You don't want another Big 12 South scenario.
Scheduling: Osborne hinted that the number of conference games could increase in the new Big Ten. He expects at least three nonconference games and, like many Big Ten athletic directors, wants to keep as many of those at home as possible. The Big Ten's challenge will be figuring things out for Nebraska's arrival in September 2011. "Mark Rudner and Mike McComiskey have done a lot of models," Delany said. "The issue for us it the short turnaround."
Rivalries: Delany has often talked about the intimacy of a league and how vital rivalries are to its fabric. "They're part of who we are," he said Friday. But he added that rivalries have to be evaluated independently to see which ones are worth preserving in an expanded league. "We’re going into this with the idea that rivalries really matter," Delany said. "But not all rivalries are equal."
Timeline with Nebraska: Delany and other Big Ten officials met with Nebraska officials three or four weeks ago to have informal discussions in an undisclosed location (it wasn't Lincoln, where Delany made his first trip Friday, or Chicago). Osborne also had briefly discussed expansion with Ohio State head coach Jim Tressel and Wisconsin athletic director Barry Alvarez (a former Nebraska player and coach), both of whom told him the Big Ten was considering the Huskers. The process only really heated up after the Big 12 issued stay-or-go ultimatums to its members. If the Big 12 -- and Pac-10 -- didn't speed things up, the Big Ten would have continued to move along slowly. But Nebraska seems happy with the way things worked out. "We don’t feel like we’re walking into a room of strangers," Perlman said. Added Osborne: "We feel we share a lot of common values with what we know of Big Ten institutions."
Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany followed his protocol, placing a call to Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe on Friday morning to notify him that they would be accepting Nebraska's application into the Big Ten.
Beebe had no further comments on Nebraska's departure, calling it "disappointing."
But Delany didn't mention another team looking for inclusion to the Big Ten, Missouri.
"My understanding is there aren't any other conference members considered by the Big Ten," Beebe said.
That's a big uh-oh in Columbia for a school that's turned the Forgotten Four into the Forlorn Five over the course of the past week. Missouri may end up getting a Big Ten invite when the conference makes its next move toward expansion, something Delany said could happen in the future. But Delany, altering his previously stated timeline, shows just how badly he wanted the Huskers in his league.
"We were ready to move more quickly when this opportunity arose,” he said.
But it also shows that Missouri won't be placed on the fast track for membership. And if five Big 12 South teams split for the Pac-10 next week, Missouri's position in the league will only become more awkward. With the Big Ten still in play, don't expect Missouri to fully commit to the other four teams whose best bet include a partnership with the Mountain West Conference, Conference USA, or obliterating the Big 12 for a move to the Big East.
"When 'the dust settles,' Mizzou will be in a strong position nationally," athletic director Mike Alden said in a statement. "We don't know the timeline of all of these activities, so your patience and commitment is appreciated."
Alden has a lot of faith, and he should. As the head of the athletic department, he has to. He didn't place any qualifiers on that statement. But the second half is more telling: Missouri may still have to abide by the Big Ten's original timeline.
In short, Missouri's future could be in limbo through 2010 and into next year. How far -- and if it ends -- is up to Delany.
Delany apologized on Friday for leaving schools unsure of their future. Clearly, Missouri falls under that umbrella.
Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman pointed to comments from Missouri "not fully supportive of the Big 12" as a reason for leaving, and it was a good one. That's not going to change until an opportunity to join the Big Ten is completely off the table.
Missouri deserves a good amount of blame in a Big 12 breakup, too, but unlike Kansas and Kansas State, they can't fully commit to a cleanup -- however that ends up looking.
If Missouri spends the next six to 12 months riding the fence between committing to the remaining members of the Big 12 and positioning itself for an invitation to the Big Ten, its relationship with schools like Kansas and Kansas State will only splinter further. And unless that invitation to apply arrives in the end, Missouri better get used to a whole lot of awkwardness.
Beebe had no further comments on Nebraska's departure, calling it "disappointing."
But Delany didn't mention another team looking for inclusion to the Big Ten, Missouri.
"My understanding is there aren't any other conference members considered by the Big Ten," Beebe said.
That's a big uh-oh in Columbia for a school that's turned the Forgotten Four into the Forlorn Five over the course of the past week. Missouri may end up getting a Big Ten invite when the conference makes its next move toward expansion, something Delany said could happen in the future. But Delany, altering his previously stated timeline, shows just how badly he wanted the Huskers in his league.
"We were ready to move more quickly when this opportunity arose,” he said.
But it also shows that Missouri won't be placed on the fast track for membership. And if five Big 12 South teams split for the Pac-10 next week, Missouri's position in the league will only become more awkward. With the Big Ten still in play, don't expect Missouri to fully commit to the other four teams whose best bet include a partnership with the Mountain West Conference, Conference USA, or obliterating the Big 12 for a move to the Big East.
"When 'the dust settles,' Mizzou will be in a strong position nationally," athletic director Mike Alden said in a statement. "We don't know the timeline of all of these activities, so your patience and commitment is appreciated."
Alden has a lot of faith, and he should. As the head of the athletic department, he has to. He didn't place any qualifiers on that statement. But the second half is more telling: Missouri may still have to abide by the Big Ten's original timeline.
In short, Missouri's future could be in limbo through 2010 and into next year. How far -- and if it ends -- is up to Delany.
Delany apologized on Friday for leaving schools unsure of their future. Clearly, Missouri falls under that umbrella.
Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman pointed to comments from Missouri "not fully supportive of the Big 12" as a reason for leaving, and it was a good one. That's not going to change until an opportunity to join the Big Ten is completely off the table.
Missouri deserves a good amount of blame in a Big 12 breakup, too, but unlike Kansas and Kansas State, they can't fully commit to a cleanup -- however that ends up looking.
If Missouri spends the next six to 12 months riding the fence between committing to the remaining members of the Big 12 and positioning itself for an invitation to the Big Ten, its relationship with schools like Kansas and Kansas State will only splinter further. And unless that invitation to apply arrives in the end, Missouri better get used to a whole lot of awkwardness.
Smart choice, but contradiction for Huskers
June, 11, 2010
6/11/10
6:27
PM ET
By
David Ubben | ESPN.com
Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman and athletic director Tom Osborne stood before the university's board of regents, and if there was a shred of doubt among the board, there couldn't have been when the two men finished.
They confidently laid out a compelling case for the program they love so much to shift its affiliation to the Big Ten, and anyone who voted against the motion might not have made it out of the meeting room alive.
But twelve sure-voiced "yes" votes later, Nebraska's board of regents unanimously approved submitting an application to the Big Ten.
Osborne got out in front of the criticisms, knocking them out one-by-one like he did 25 straight opponents in 1994 and 1995 on the way to back-to-back national titles.
Financial risk? Nebraska is submitting its application with the assurance that the university not receive any less money from the Big Ten than they would from the Big 12, and allowing the conference to ease them into full financial membership.
People who want to paint the Huskers as disloyal?
"Schools that were urging us to stay had talked to as many as three conferences," Osborne said. "At that point you begin to wonder where you’re going to get yourself if you make a commitment."
Concerns over increased --and more difficult -- student athlete travel?
"We may have to fly a little more, the connections will be a little bit better," Osborne said. "We will not spend any more time on the road -- maybe less."
You're just mad about the conference's shift to the South, Tom!
"You don’t make a decision of this size based on where you’re going to play the Big 12 championship game," Osborne said. "That’s not even an issue."
So what happens when Nebraska's recruiting trail in Texas stops being beaten?
Osborne admits they may lose a few recruits in Texas, but they won't stop recruiting the state, and have now gained access to states like Ohio. And with more national broadcasts -- even in nonrevenue sports -- on the Big Ten Network, they may be able to recruit the oft-mentioned Sun Belt more than some people realize.
You won't hear an argument from me against the Huskers leaving. Not that I want to see them go, but Osborne and Perlman both made the case that Nebraska is better aligned with the Big Ten academically, culturally and even in climate. He twice took a poll of coaches and administrators to gauge their feelings on a move to the Big Ten, and like the board of regents, they unanimously supported the move.
It was a smart choice. But Nebraska, don't try to shill the idea that you didn't break up this conference. That instead, Texas, Missouri or Colorado is to blame. The big fault in Perlman and Osborne's presentation to the board is its obvious self-contradiction.
Perlman confirmed that schools were given an ultimatum at last week's Big 12 meetings. Texas said if Missouri left, it would stay and not leave for the Pac-10. The same for Colorado.
"They could not commit if both left," Perlman said.
But if Nebraska stayed, Texas made it clear they would, too.
Then, minutes after Perlman chastised Missouri for its wandering eye, saying that school officials' statements did not demonstrate a clear commitment to the Big 12, Osborne passed the onus for the Big 12's looming end off to Texas.
"One school leaving does not break up a conference. Two schools leaving does not break up a conference," he said. "Six schools leaving breaks up a conference."
So, to be clear, Texas says they'll stay if you stay. Then you leave. I'm not saying it's a bad decision, but if we're placing blame for decimating the conference, point to Lincoln.
They may not be the grenade, but Osborne knew by leaving, he was pulling the pin. He emphasized that all discussions in Kansas City were "professional and civil," emphasized his respect for leaders like Texas' DeLoss Dodds and hoped they felt the same way about him.
Well, they might, but you're not helping when you give them no choice but to stay in the Big 12 and lose money or leave and make more.
So, please, Nebraska. Spare us your deflection of blame. You made the decision (an easy one) that was right for your university. That's your right. I applaud that. I would have made the same decision.
But if the Big 12 ultimately ceases to exist, it's your fault.
They confidently laid out a compelling case for the program they love so much to shift its affiliation to the Big Ten, and anyone who voted against the motion might not have made it out of the meeting room alive.
[+] Enlarge
AP Photo/Nati HarnikAfter Perlman and Osborne made the case for Nebraska applying to join the Big Ten, the board of regents approved the move on a 12-0 vote.
AP Photo/Nati HarnikAfter Perlman and Osborne made the case for Nebraska applying to join the Big Ten, the board of regents approved the move on a 12-0 vote.Osborne got out in front of the criticisms, knocking them out one-by-one like he did 25 straight opponents in 1994 and 1995 on the way to back-to-back national titles.
Financial risk? Nebraska is submitting its application with the assurance that the university not receive any less money from the Big Ten than they would from the Big 12, and allowing the conference to ease them into full financial membership.
People who want to paint the Huskers as disloyal?
"Schools that were urging us to stay had talked to as many as three conferences," Osborne said. "At that point you begin to wonder where you’re going to get yourself if you make a commitment."
Concerns over increased --and more difficult -- student athlete travel?
"We may have to fly a little more, the connections will be a little bit better," Osborne said. "We will not spend any more time on the road -- maybe less."
You're just mad about the conference's shift to the South, Tom!
"You don’t make a decision of this size based on where you’re going to play the Big 12 championship game," Osborne said. "That’s not even an issue."
So what happens when Nebraska's recruiting trail in Texas stops being beaten?
Osborne admits they may lose a few recruits in Texas, but they won't stop recruiting the state, and have now gained access to states like Ohio. And with more national broadcasts -- even in nonrevenue sports -- on the Big Ten Network, they may be able to recruit the oft-mentioned Sun Belt more than some people realize.
You won't hear an argument from me against the Huskers leaving. Not that I want to see them go, but Osborne and Perlman both made the case that Nebraska is better aligned with the Big Ten academically, culturally and even in climate. He twice took a poll of coaches and administrators to gauge their feelings on a move to the Big Ten, and like the board of regents, they unanimously supported the move.
It was a smart choice. But Nebraska, don't try to shill the idea that you didn't break up this conference. That instead, Texas, Missouri or Colorado is to blame. The big fault in Perlman and Osborne's presentation to the board is its obvious self-contradiction.
Perlman confirmed that schools were given an ultimatum at last week's Big 12 meetings. Texas said if Missouri left, it would stay and not leave for the Pac-10. The same for Colorado.
"They could not commit if both left," Perlman said.
But if Nebraska stayed, Texas made it clear they would, too.
Then, minutes after Perlman chastised Missouri for its wandering eye, saying that school officials' statements did not demonstrate a clear commitment to the Big 12, Osborne passed the onus for the Big 12's looming end off to Texas.
"One school leaving does not break up a conference. Two schools leaving does not break up a conference," he said. "Six schools leaving breaks up a conference."
So, to be clear, Texas says they'll stay if you stay. Then you leave. I'm not saying it's a bad decision, but if we're placing blame for decimating the conference, point to Lincoln.
They may not be the grenade, but Osborne knew by leaving, he was pulling the pin. He emphasized that all discussions in Kansas City were "professional and civil," emphasized his respect for leaders like Texas' DeLoss Dodds and hoped they felt the same way about him.
Well, they might, but you're not helping when you give them no choice but to stay in the Big 12 and lose money or leave and make more.
So, please, Nebraska. Spare us your deflection of blame. You made the decision (an easy one) that was right for your university. That's your right. I applaud that. I would have made the same decision.
But if the Big 12 ultimately ceases to exist, it's your fault.
Big Ten and Nebraska make a great match
June, 11, 2010
6/11/10
6:22
PM ET
By
Adam Rittenberg | ESPN.com
It will take some time to get used to the Big Red in the Big Ten.
College football is built on tradition and long-term associations, and Nebraska always has been linked to Colorado, Oklahoma and others from the former Big 8. It'll feel odd to see the Huskers invade the Big House, The Horseshoe, State College and even Iowa City.
That's OK. Change isn't supposed to feel normal.
But give it time and you'll realize that these Huskers are a lot like you.
They love to run the football! They love walk-ons! They don't mind cold weather!
They boast loads of tradition in football -- Nebraska is the fourth winningest program of all time and owns five national titles -- complete with legendary coaches (Bob Devaney, Tom Osborne) and unforgettable players (Mike Rozier, Dave Rimington, Johnny Rodgers), just like your favorite teams. College football is everything to their fans, just like it is in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Iowa. Their fans live in the same area of the country and treasure the same values in both football and life as you do. Nebraska is an Association of American Universities member, just like the rest of the Big Ten.
I've never been to a game in Lincoln, but I can't wait to see one. You should be fired up, too.
Many folks went into this thinking only Notre Dame and Texas would add great value to the Big Ten. I'd like to direct you to Forbes' list of the most valuable college football teams. Texas and Notre Dame are Nos. 1 and 2, but Nebraska comes in at No. 4 with a team value of $93 million and a profit of $49 million. Nebraska is ahead of both Ohio State and Michigan in the rundown.
Need more evidence? Nebraska apparently was valuable enough to several Big 12 South schools to determine whether they stay in the league. Although Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman said Friday that one school leaving a conference doesn't break the conference (six schools leaving does), all eyes were on the Big Red.
"I [asked Big 12 presidents] 'What if Nebraska stayed and Missouri left?' Perlman said. "The response was that they would stay. I said, 'What happens if Nebraska stays and Colorado leaves,' and the response was they would stay. I said, "What happens if both Missouri and Colorado leave and Nebraska stays?' And they could make no commitment that they would then stay in the Big 12."
So Nebraska matters, people. And it will be a strong addition to the Big Ten.
Just think of the potential rivalries. Farmageddon between Iowa and Nebraska. The Barry Alvarez Invitational between Wisconsin and Nebraska. Put Nebraska against Penn State, Michigan or Ohio State, and TV execs will drool.
I don't like shaping divisions based on geography, but Nebraska certainly strengthens the western edge of the Big Ten. While I'd urge Jim Delany to break up the Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State bloc, a division with Nebraska, Wisconsin and Iowa looks pretty solid.
Notre Dame and Texas would be slam-dunk additions to the Big Ten, but both schools bring different types of baggage with them. Nebraska isn't a prima donna. And the Huskers really, really like the Big Ten.
You might shake your head in disbelief when Nebraska plays its first Big Ten Conference game in 2011. But before long, you'll nod and see that this makes too much sense.
College football is built on tradition and long-term associations, and Nebraska always has been linked to Colorado, Oklahoma and others from the former Big 8. It'll feel odd to see the Huskers invade the Big House, The Horseshoe, State College and even Iowa City.
That's OK. Change isn't supposed to feel normal.
But give it time and you'll realize that these Huskers are a lot like you.
They love to run the football! They love walk-ons! They don't mind cold weather!
They boast loads of tradition in football -- Nebraska is the fourth winningest program of all time and owns five national titles -- complete with legendary coaches (Bob Devaney, Tom Osborne) and unforgettable players (Mike Rozier, Dave Rimington, Johnny Rodgers), just like your favorite teams. College football is everything to their fans, just like it is in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Iowa. Their fans live in the same area of the country and treasure the same values in both football and life as you do. Nebraska is an Association of American Universities member, just like the rest of the Big Ten.
I've never been to a game in Lincoln, but I can't wait to see one. You should be fired up, too.
Many folks went into this thinking only Notre Dame and Texas would add great value to the Big Ten. I'd like to direct you to Forbes' list of the most valuable college football teams. Texas and Notre Dame are Nos. 1 and 2, but Nebraska comes in at No. 4 with a team value of $93 million and a profit of $49 million. Nebraska is ahead of both Ohio State and Michigan in the rundown.
Need more evidence? Nebraska apparently was valuable enough to several Big 12 South schools to determine whether they stay in the league. Although Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman said Friday that one school leaving a conference doesn't break the conference (six schools leaving does), all eyes were on the Big Red.
"I [asked Big 12 presidents] 'What if Nebraska stayed and Missouri left?' Perlman said. "The response was that they would stay. I said, 'What happens if Nebraska stays and Colorado leaves,' and the response was they would stay. I said, "What happens if both Missouri and Colorado leave and Nebraska stays?' And they could make no commitment that they would then stay in the Big 12."
So Nebraska matters, people. And it will be a strong addition to the Big Ten.
Just think of the potential rivalries. Farmageddon between Iowa and Nebraska. The Barry Alvarez Invitational between Wisconsin and Nebraska. Put Nebraska against Penn State, Michigan or Ohio State, and TV execs will drool.
I don't like shaping divisions based on geography, but Nebraska certainly strengthens the western edge of the Big Ten. While I'd urge Jim Delany to break up the Ohio State/Michigan/Penn State bloc, a division with Nebraska, Wisconsin and Iowa looks pretty solid.
Notre Dame and Texas would be slam-dunk additions to the Big Ten, but both schools bring different types of baggage with them. Nebraska isn't a prima donna. And the Huskers really, really like the Big Ten.
You might shake your head in disbelief when Nebraska plays its first Big Ten Conference game in 2011. But before long, you'll nod and see that this makes too much sense.
Nebraska officials gush about Big Ten
June, 11, 2010
6/11/10
5:05
PM ET
By
Adam Rittenberg | ESPN.com
Nebraska has formally applied for membership in the Big Ten, and listening to chancellor Harvey Perlman and athletic director Tom Osborne, it's easy to see why.
Perlman and Osborne gushed about the Big Ten at the Nebraska Board of Regents meeting Friday, as the school took another step closer to officially switching leagues. They identified Big Ten strong points such as stability (especially in relation to the Big 12), academic excellence, the Big Ten Network and tradition.
Even Big Ten weather, which always seems to be a knock against the league, actually appeals to Nebraska.
"We're obviously not [located] in the Sun Belt," Osborne said. "And we find some of our sports at a disadvantage because of that. Most young people who are golfers or play tennis or play baseball or play softball, sometimes even soccer, would prefer to go someplace where they can practice outside year-round. ... So we would probably be having, in comparison, more of apples to apples [with Big Ten teams]. It doesn't mean that we can't compete.
"We can compete, but it's just more difficult."
Stability clearly was the big selling point for Perlman and Osborne, who didn't want to commit to a league they didn't believe was viable in the long term. They clearly viewed the Big Ten, both athletically and academically, in a different light.
"The Big Ten is all members of the AAU, which is of considerable importance when you try and recruit faculty, when you seek research grants, when you do other things in the academic environment," Perlman said. "The Big Ten operates the Big Ten Network. It will allow all Nebraskans to see almost all of Nebraska's competitive games: not just football, not just men's basketball."
He also pointed out the Committee of Institutional Cooperation and its benefits on research for a university.
"This will bring Nebraska the stability that the Big 12 cannot offer," Perlman said.
Other quick hits from Perlman and Osborne:
Perlman and Osborne gushed about the Big Ten at the Nebraska Board of Regents meeting Friday, as the school took another step closer to officially switching leagues. They identified Big Ten strong points such as stability (especially in relation to the Big 12), academic excellence, the Big Ten Network and tradition.
[+] Enlarge
AP Photo/Nati HarnikTom Osborne views the Big Ten, both athletically and academically, as a good match for Nebraska.
AP Photo/Nati HarnikTom Osborne views the Big Ten, both athletically and academically, as a good match for Nebraska."We're obviously not [located] in the Sun Belt," Osborne said. "And we find some of our sports at a disadvantage because of that. Most young people who are golfers or play tennis or play baseball or play softball, sometimes even soccer, would prefer to go someplace where they can practice outside year-round. ... So we would probably be having, in comparison, more of apples to apples [with Big Ten teams]. It doesn't mean that we can't compete.
"We can compete, but it's just more difficult."
Stability clearly was the big selling point for Perlman and Osborne, who didn't want to commit to a league they didn't believe was viable in the long term. They clearly viewed the Big Ten, both athletically and academically, in a different light.
"The Big Ten is all members of the AAU, which is of considerable importance when you try and recruit faculty, when you seek research grants, when you do other things in the academic environment," Perlman said. "The Big Ten operates the Big Ten Network. It will allow all Nebraskans to see almost all of Nebraska's competitive games: not just football, not just men's basketball."
He also pointed out the Committee of Institutional Cooperation and its benefits on research for a university.
"This will bring Nebraska the stability that the Big 12 cannot offer," Perlman said.
Other quick hits from Perlman and Osborne:
- Osborne said there won't be an immediate financial windfall for the athletic department for joining the Big Ten.
Perlman said Nebraska expects to be an equal financial partner in the Big Ten eventually, which shouldn't be a problem. - Osborne said that aside from short trips to Kansas and Kansas State, the Big 12 has a similar footprint to the Big Ten, and the Big Ten would provide easier air travel because it has more schools closer to major airports.
- Osborne on recruiting: "Sometimes you hear people say, 'Well, this will really affect your Texas recruiting, and it might.' We will continue to recruit Texas. We will continue to get some players out of Texas, maybe not as many, but we certainly can get more, probably, in the Midwest and the East Coast." Does he know something about the Big Ten's next expansion move?
- Perlman expects to hear "relatively quickly" whether the Big Ten's Council of Presidents/Chancellors has voted in Nebraska as a new member. Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany has said this will be a quick process, and no one will be embarrassed by it. Translation: We'll get a formal announcement soon.
- Perlman acknowledged informal discussions took place between Nebraska officials and Big Ten officials, but things didn't really pick up steam until Wednesday, when Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe called and asked for Nebraska to make a commitment to his league.
Unlike the Big Ten, the main course at this week's Big 12 spring meetings is on the menu. Expansion was discussed informally at last month's Big Ten spring meetings, but the issue will come up during daily meetings on Thursday.
Likely Big Ten targets Missouri and Nebraska will be in the spotlight, with Colorado and Texas possibly feeling pressure to make commitments -- or not -- to the Big 12 as well.
“It’s an incredible time nationally,” Missouri chancellor Brady Deaton told the Kansas City Star. “Everybody is concerned about that. It will be a topic of discussion.”
But no one's quite sure how hard commissioner Dan Beebe will push, and those talking are keeping their answers quiet.
“I doubt if I would put whatever message I have in the paper,” Nebraska athletic director Tom Osborne told the Lincoln Journal Star. “I really don’t have a particular agenda. I’ll certainly be interested in what people have to say. I’ll listen very carefully. I’m probably going to listen more than I’m going to do a great deal of speaking."
Drama could emerge from attempts to set a date -- perhaps this week but much more likely some time before the season begins -- for programs to commit to the conference. The main point Beebe has been trying to get across: He's not operating on the Big Ten's schedule, which could make a formal move toward expansion as early as December. He wants control, and he'll try to grab it this week with possible increased monetary penalties for teams that wish to leave the conference. Without two-year notice, schools lose 80 percent of their revenue from the conference, and the percentage lost rises as the amount of notice given shrinks. Any change to that will have to be approved by the conference's board of directors, but schools looking elsewhere might not appreciate the sudden rule change.
I'm heading to Kansas City this afternoon, making my way to the Intercontinental Hotel in the Country Club Plaza on Wednesday morning, well before the big (possible) fireworks.
But expansion isn't the only issue that could be resolved this week. Television contracts and bowl agreements will be part of those expansion conversations, but the location of the Big 12 title game will likely be finalized this week.
Cowboys Stadium in Arlington, Texas, will host this year's game, and looks close to a lock to host the 2011, 2012 and 2013 games. Beebe has been given clearance to negotiate the terms of a contract with the stadium brass, according to Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman. It's been written about here before, but making that move could lead to Arlington hosting the game permanently.
An Arlington location obviously favors the South teams that, by the way, enter 2010 with a 10-4 record in championship games. Nebraska coach Bo Pelini told the Journal Star he, along with Osborne, favors rotating the site. Pelini also said he didn't believe Texas had a competitive advantage in last year's game, won by the Longhorns, 13-12 in the first-ever championship game at Cowboys Stadium.
So stay tuned through the rest of the week. It could be a historic one for the conference, and possibly the rest of college football.
Likely Big Ten targets Missouri and Nebraska will be in the spotlight, with Colorado and Texas possibly feeling pressure to make commitments -- or not -- to the Big 12 as well.
“It’s an incredible time nationally,” Missouri chancellor Brady Deaton told the Kansas City Star. “Everybody is concerned about that. It will be a topic of discussion.”
But no one's quite sure how hard commissioner Dan Beebe will push, and those talking are keeping their answers quiet.
“I doubt if I would put whatever message I have in the paper,” Nebraska athletic director Tom Osborne told the Lincoln Journal Star. “I really don’t have a particular agenda. I’ll certainly be interested in what people have to say. I’ll listen very carefully. I’m probably going to listen more than I’m going to do a great deal of speaking."
Drama could emerge from attempts to set a date -- perhaps this week but much more likely some time before the season begins -- for programs to commit to the conference. The main point Beebe has been trying to get across: He's not operating on the Big Ten's schedule, which could make a formal move toward expansion as early as December. He wants control, and he'll try to grab it this week with possible increased monetary penalties for teams that wish to leave the conference. Without two-year notice, schools lose 80 percent of their revenue from the conference, and the percentage lost rises as the amount of notice given shrinks. Any change to that will have to be approved by the conference's board of directors, but schools looking elsewhere might not appreciate the sudden rule change.
I'm heading to Kansas City this afternoon, making my way to the Intercontinental Hotel in the Country Club Plaza on Wednesday morning, well before the big (possible) fireworks.
But expansion isn't the only issue that could be resolved this week. Television contracts and bowl agreements will be part of those expansion conversations, but the location of the Big 12 title game will likely be finalized this week.
Cowboys Stadium in Arlington, Texas, will host this year's game, and looks close to a lock to host the 2011, 2012 and 2013 games. Beebe has been given clearance to negotiate the terms of a contract with the stadium brass, according to Nebraska chancellor Harvey Perlman. It's been written about here before, but making that move could lead to Arlington hosting the game permanently.
An Arlington location obviously favors the South teams that, by the way, enter 2010 with a 10-4 record in championship games. Nebraska coach Bo Pelini told the Journal Star he, along with Osborne, favors rotating the site. Pelini also said he didn't believe Texas had a competitive advantage in last year's game, won by the Longhorns, 13-12 in the first-ever championship game at Cowboys Stadium.
So stay tuned through the rest of the week. It could be a historic one for the conference, and possibly the rest of college football.
Posted by ESPN.com's Tim Griffin
Defending champions Missouri and Oklahoma are overwhelming choices to repeat as Big 12 division titlists in a media poll released Wednesday by the Big 12.
Missouri was the unanimous choice of 51 voters to win the North Division. And Oklahoma, which will be gunning for its record third-straight conference title, was the choice of 49 of the 51 voters. Texas received the other two first-place votes in the South Division.
The balloting was:
| North | ||
| 1. | Missouri (51) | 306 |
| 2. | Kansas | 234 |
| 3. | Nebraska | 183 |
| 4. | Colorado | 181 |
| 5. | Kansas State | 108 |
| 6. | Iowa State | 59 |
| South | ||
| 1. | Oklahoma (49) | 304 |
| 2. | Texas (2) | 230 |
| 3. | Texas Tech | 227 |
| 4. | Oklahoma State | 140 |
| 5. | Texas A&M | 118 |
| 6. | Baylor | 52 |
First-place votes in parentheses
BACK TO TOP
Page: 1
ABOUT THIS BLOG
College Football Nation
Have a question about college football? Ask our bloggers:
