B1G

[Husky25]

My sister went there, so yes. I have.

I'm not going to post anymore tonight. I've had a couple. Dont want to cause any trouble. Good night folks.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[itgoeslike]

Connecticut is not a great football area. Massachusetts is not even half as intense as Connecticut.

I'm not familiar with this map, but it appears Connecticut is on par with Maryland, West Virginia, Illinois, etc. What's interesting is that I often read that Rutgers and Maryland were taken for their fertile recruiting grounds. UCONN appears to be on par with at least one of those schools.

 

[Hoophound]

BC is not "in the city" - they are much more of a suburban campus than an urban campus, in reality somewhere in between, skewing to suburban.

I don't really agree with that. Chestnut Hill is part of the city. We're splitting hairs if Cleveland Circle is the city (it is) and BC 1000 feet up the road is not.

 

[UPitt]

Connecticut is not a great football area. Massachusetts is not even half as intense as Connecticut.

Where did you get this map? I'm interested if there was additional information from an article and would like to read it.

Also it is interesting that the map shows the national norm is 1.00 but only 13 states are above average. I think that shows that the southern states have much larger advantage in recruiting blue chip recruits than most people realize.

 

[UPitt]

I'm not familiar with this map, but it appears Connecticut is on par with Maryland, West Virginia, Illinois, etc. What's interesting is that I often read that Rutgers and Maryland were taken for their fertile recruiting grounds. UCONN appears to be on par with at least one of those schools.

Connecticut is a 0.41 and Maryland is a 0.70, meaning that Maryland is nearly twice as strong for producing blue chip recruits. But with Baltimore, I would have expected a larger difference. I also agree that reasoning for selecting Maryland looks weak per the map, but a school like Maryland being in the B1G, allows schools like PSU and OSU to target neighboring states to Maryland that have better recruiting. But mostly Maryland was taken to give PSU a flanker state and to target ACC teams such as Virginia and UNC.

 

[huskymedic]

Connecticut is a 0.41 and Maryland is a 0.70, meaning that Maryland is nearly twice as strong for producing blue chip recruits. But with Baltimore, I would have expected a larger discrempancy.

Also 2+million more peeps...

 

[NickyNewark]

Where did you get this map? I'm interested if there was additional information from an article and would like to read it.

Also it is interesting that the map shows the national norm is 1.00 but only 13 states are above average. I think that shows that the southern states have much larger advantage in recruiting blue chip recruits than most people realize.

I'm from N.J. and that map is crazy BOGUS!I know NJs a very good state for talent but not deeper than Pa?And NY on the same level as the Dakota's, Alaska ?Calif as populated and deep in talent as it is get's only a 1.03 ??Delete it ,it is a complete joke and on what formula was it determined on?And yes, I'm a friend of UConn but NO fool Md is a much better HS FB state talent and depth wise!

 

[whaler11]

Connecticut is a 0.41 and Maryland is a 0.70, meaning that Maryland is nearly twice as strong for producing blue chip recruits. But with Baltimore, I would have expected a larger difference. I also agree that reasoning for selecting Maryland looks weak per the map, but a school like Maryland being in the B1G, allows schools like PSU and OSU to target neighboring states to Maryland that have better recruiting. But mostly Maryland was taken to give PSU a flanker state and to target ACC teams such as Virginia and UNC.

Maryland was taken because the BTN thinks Baltimore and DC have a lot of cable boxes they can get fees from. They also thought Maryland might jar loose the schools they really wanted (North Carolina).

Do you think the Big 10 took Nebraska because of the local football talent?

 

[upstater]

I don't really agree with that. Chestnut Hill is part of the city. We're splitting hairs if Cleveland Circle is the city (it is) and BC 1000 feet up the road is not.

The difference is one of landscape. Suburban homes, urban homes. Charlestown looks nothing like Chestnut Hill.

 

[upstater]

Here's the article folks!

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id...in-big-ten-expanding-include-maryland-rutgers

The difference may be that NJ and Md have more recruits, but that map was blue chips.

A few years ago, Conn. had players by the NFL in one draft like Amari Spievey, Aaron Hernandez, David Reed, Marcus Easley, Bruce Campbell, Chris Baker, John Moffitt, Terrence Knighton, Vladimir Ducasse. So, if the total numbers of kids given schollies to D1 schools was 15 to 20 out of 3.5 million people, the number of good players was much higher.

 

[Marty Jackson]

The difference is one of landscape. Suburban homes, urban homes. Charlestown looks nothing like Chestnut Hill.

BC is right on the fringe of the city. Once you pass BC's campus you get into some extremely expensive neighborhoods that one could classify as suburban.
a good analogy is UHart to Hartford (location standpoint).

 

[Marty Jackson]

" Besides the obvious value of adding Texas, if the Big 12 were poachable, Kansas would be the most attractive target for the Big Ten out of the Big 12. One thing to remember is that basketball actually matters quite a bit for the purposes of the Big Ten Network, where the sheer volume of hoops content drives the need for cable companies to carry that channel. As a result, the normal “football means everything” mantra that normally applies to conference realignment and TV rights doesn’t necessarily hold for the BTN. Kansas actually made the most revenue off of third tier TV rights in the Big 12 prior to the formation of the Longhorn Network due to the strength of Jayhawks basketball. On a related note, that also means that the value of Maryland basketball is as important to the Big Ten as Maryland football in terms of being able to monetize that school" - FTT (2012)

I find this quote interesting. Does any school bring more BB value to the Big10 than UConn?
If the Big10 wants to break into NYC, it might want to use a sport that has actually gained a foothold with the locals...

Sorry Frank, but I don't think you can make that claim with Kansas and not look at UConn the same way.

 

[itgoeslike]

Connecticut is a 0.41 and Maryland is a 0.70, meaning that Maryland is nearly twice as strong for producing blue chip recruits. But with Baltimore, I would have expected a larger difference. I also agree that reasoning for selecting Maryland looks weak per the map, but a school like Maryland being in the B1G, allows schools like PSU and OSU to target neighboring states to Maryland that have better recruiting. But mostly Maryland was taken to give PSU a flanker state and to target ACC teams such as Virginia and UNC.

The schools are in same quintile, albeit Maryland on the high end and UCONN on the lower end. In any event, both schools lag Southern schools by quite a bit, which isn't surprising. I grew up and lived in the Northeast but now live in the South. Sports here are a year-round endeavor—even hockey. There's also significantly more year-round local media that provides a platform for Southern players that Northern players don't benefit from.

The map posted was built around blue chip recruits. But, when you look at who actually gets drafted it's a somewhat different story. Coaching and player development may come into play. The fact that UCONN drafted more players this year than all Big Ten schools (without any coming in ranked higher than 3 stars) is a big deal. It may also suggest that high school recruiting is not an exact science—more than 30 "unranked" players were drafted this year. Heres's a quick synopsis for 2013 which shows that California was the home state to nearly three times more draftees than Louisiana which was at or near the top of blue chip recruit map.

http://gamedayr.com/gamedayr/2013-n...g-rankings-home-state-conference-affiliation/

USA today did a pretty good job compiling data on NFL draft picks (it doesn't include 2013). It allows you to select different ranges, etc. to spit out custom data. Browsing by "High School' provides data that relates to home states. When you look at the data you'll see that the South, at least when it comes to NFL draft picks (aside from Texas and Florida), is not so far ahead of some northern states.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/draft-history-graphic.htm?loc=interstitialskip

 

[SubbaBub]

BC is right on the fringe of the city. Once you pass BC's campus you get into some extremely expensive neighborhoods that one could classify as suburban.
a good analogy is UHart to Hartford (location standpoint).

If you are with a 1500 feet of the green, red, orange or blue lines you are in the city. Doubly so if you are within 1500 feet of a guy named Sully who wears a Sox hat to formal occasions.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Dooley]

" Does any school bring more BB value to the Big10 than UConn?

Nope. Especially not if you consider both men's and women's. If we were just talking men's, I suppose Kansas would be on an equal level as UConn. And if the ACC GOR is bogus, UNC and Duke would be. But that would be it if we just considered schools who have excellent academic reputations and are in conferences that might be raided. Adding UConn would give the B1G and instant northeast basketball presence, a foot in the door for MSG or Barclay's scheduling, and even more credibility come tournament selection time. Put it this way, a conference that included Indiana, UConn, Michigan State, OSU, Wisconsin, Michigan (in good years), and Maryland (in good years) would make it a little bit more of a argument for "best conference" with the ACC.

 

[B1GALUM]

Put it this way, a conference that included Indiana, UConn, Michigan State, OSU, Wisconsin, Michigan (in good years), and Maryland (in good years) would make it a little bit more of a argument for "best conference" with the ACC.

An argument that could be settled on the court ... B1G vs. ACC challenge.

 

[Dooley]

An argument that could be settled on the court ... B1G vs. ACC challenge.

Oh man, could you imagine the ratings with a more competitive B1G that included UConn and Kansas (just as example)? IU, UConn, KU, MSU, and OSU could beat any ACC team and vice versa. The buildings would be electric, especially if you pit old rivals against each other (like UConn vs the Fruit and Maryland vs Duke) and the basketball would be tremendous. I'd guess that more would be interested in these games than most NCAA/Conference tourney games!!

 

[upstater]

The schools are in same quintile, albeit Maryland on the high end and UCONN on the lower end. In any event, both schools lag Southern schools by quite a bit, which isn't surprising. I grew up and lived in the Northeast but now live in the South. Sports here are a year-round endeavor—even hockey. There's also significantly more year-round local media that provides a platform for Southern players that Northern players don't benefit from.

The map posted was built around blue chip recruits. But, when you look at who actually gets drafted it's a somewhat different story. Coaching and player development may come into play. The fact that UCONN drafted more players this year than all Big Ten schools (without any coming in ranked higher than 3 stars) is a big deal. It may also suggest that high school recruiting is not an exact science—more than 30 "unranked" players were drafted this year. Heres's a quick synopsis for 2013 which shows that California was the home state to nearly three times more draftees than Louisiana which was at or near the top of blue chip recruit map.

http://gamedayr.com/gamedayr/2013-n...g-rankings-home-state-conference-affiliation/

USA today did a pretty good job compiling data on NFL draft picks (it doesn't include 2013). It allows you to select different ranges, etc. to spit out custom data. Browsing by "High School' provides data that relates to home states. When you look at the data you'll see that the South, at least when it comes to NFL draft picks (aside from Texas and Florida), is not so far ahead of some northern states.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/draft-history-graphic.htm?loc=interstitialskip

What do you mean by "even hockey?" Are you saying they play hockey in summer down there? They do play hockey north in summer, but it's surprising that they also play it down south in summer.

 

[upstater]

The schools are in same quintile, albeit Maryland on the high end and UCONN on the lower end. In any event, both schools lag Southern schools by quite a bit, which isn't surprising. I grew up and lived in the Northeast but now live in the South. Sports here are a year-round endeavor—even hockey. There's also significantly more year-round local media that provides a platform for Southern players that Northern players don't benefit from.

The map posted was built around blue chip recruits. But, when you look at who actually gets drafted it's a somewhat different story. Coaching and player development may come into play. The fact that UCONN drafted more players this year than all Big Ten schools (without any coming in ranked higher than 3 stars) is a big deal. It may also suggest that high school recruiting is not an exact science—more than 30 "unranked" players were drafted this year. Heres's a quick synopsis for 2013 which shows that California was the home state to nearly three times more draftees than Louisiana which was at or near the top of blue chip recruit map.

http://gamedayr.com/gamedayr/2013-n...g-rankings-home-state-conference-affiliation/

USA today did a pretty good job compiling data on NFL draft picks (it doesn't include 2013). It allows you to select different ranges, etc. to spit out custom data. Browsing by "High School' provides data that relates to home states. When you look at the data you'll see that the South, at least when it comes to NFL draft picks (aside from Texas and Florida), is not so far ahead of some northern states.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/draft-history-graphic.htm?loc=interstitialskip

Part of the culture of the south is the phenomenon of keeping boys back to be bigger for football. This is why you see so many 19 year olds boys graduating from high school.

 

[B1GALUM]

Oh man, could you imagine the ratings with a more competitive B1G that included UConn and Kansas (just as example)? IU, UConn, KU, MSU, and OSU could beat any ACC team and vice versa. The buildings would be electric, especially if you pit old rivals against each other (like UConn vs the Fruit and Maryland vs Duke) and the basketball would be tremendous. I'd guess that more would be interested in these games than most NCAA/Conference tourney games!!

Absolutely. I would love to see these games.

 

[tzznandrew]

If you are with a 1500 feet of the green, red, orange or blue lines you are in the city. Doubly so if you are within 1500 feet of a guy named Sully who wears a Sox hat to formal occasions.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

Eh. Malden, Medford, Revere, Newton, and a number of other places have acces to one of those lines, and they're not in the city.

BC is technically in the city (its on Comm Ave, so, yeah), but it's location relative to the city, and its feel, are suburban.

 

[pj]

Eh. Malden, Medford, Revere, Newton, and a number of other places have acces to one of those lines, and they're not in the city.

BC is technically in the city (its on Comm Ave, so, yeah), but it's location relative to the city, and its feel, are suburban.

Sure, but just a mile to the east and you have an urban feel along Beacon and Commonwealth. The green line has an urban feel. On the other hand it does take half an hour to get downtown. I think it's a great location for a university. Not a great location for top-level college sports however. Not enough space, can't build.

 

[UConnJim]

Eh. Malden, Medford, Revere, Newton, and a number of other places have acces to one of those lines, and they're not in the city.

BC is technically in the city (its on Comm Ave, so, yeah), but it's location relative to the city, and its feel, are suburban.

Technically, BC is located in Chestnut Hill, which is not in the city and is a suburb. A small part of the campus is located in Boston, though.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

Sure, but just a mile to the east and you have an urban feel along Beacon and Commonwealth. The green line has an urban feel. On the other hand it does take half an hour to get downtown. I think it's a great location for a university. Not a great location for top-level college sports however. Not enough space, can't build.

With respect to the ethos of the city of Boston, BC is not in the city. Being near the green line is not a qualification of being in the city. Large sections of Newton, Needham, and Wellesley are located near the green line and are by no means anywhere near urban. The city line shoots right down the middle of Conte Forum and Alumni Stadium, leaving the vast majority of their campus in Newton. It's near a section of Boston, but by no means near the heart of the city, its population, its centers of business/work/entertainment/anything. You cannot reasonably walk from BC to any part Boston that could be considered a center of it - Cleveland Circle is actually technically in Brookline for the most part, and even still is not really a hub or destination for anyone outside of the immediate area. Very few people go out of their way to hop on the T to get to Cleveland Circle, as they would Fenway/Kenmore, the South End, even the Allston bars and Coolidge Corner get more local visitors so to speak. BC is very, very much removed from the city, and city life - the students and people there will readily admit this! They like it! Whether or not it's a good location for a university is a different argument, but it is most definitely not "in the city" by any means.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

Eh. Malden, Medford, Revere, Newton, and a number of other places have acces to one of those lines, and they're not in the city.

And Quincy, and Braintree, and Somerville, and Cambridge, and Chelsea.... Hell, if you tell someone from East Boston that they're from "the city" they'll probably punch you in the face. If you tell someone from Cambridge that they're from "the city" they'll probably protest outside your front door for a week.