Dennis Dodd: Big Ten expansion not done...stay tuned

[amory]

If we ever do find our way into the B1G I'm going to go troll the Syracuse board harder than I've ever trolled anyone before.

It will be glorious.

 

[BCINGYA]

Dude, re-read my post. The conference doesn't get to keep the rights to home games free and clear; they keep the rights so long as they continue to pay that school for the duration of the agreement. If a conference were to keep all of the rights and not pay I can 99.8% guarantee that a court would refuse to enforce such a provision.

Research A.C.C GOR thats all I have to say. Its a legal binding contract signed with free will. NO court will excuse a school from opting out of such a contract. I would like to sue my current bank/home mortgage company and break my contract. Reasons; Im tired of living in my current home and the bank down the street will set me up with a better place and a sweeter financial deal. Judge.....HELL NO.

 

[pj]

Research A.C.C GOR thats all I have to say. Its a legal binding contract signed with free will. NO court will excuse a school from opting out of such a contract. I would like to sue my current bank/home mortgage company and break my contract. Reasons; Im tired of living in my current home and the bank down the street will set me up with a better place and a sweeter financial deal. Judge.....HELL NO.

Won't need to be contested, because the ACC is still required to pay for a school's media rights even if it leaves the conference. The GoR is a 2-way deal, quid pro quo.

The GoR is a paper barrier to movement; it doesn't protect the conference or the school from realignment, it protects the TV network from losing the school. Schools can change conferences but they can't change TV networks. That's what a GoR is about. That protection is why ESPN was willing to sweeten the ACC pot for a GoR.

 

[PRHusky]

Research A.C.C GOR thats all I have to say. Its a legal binding contract signed with free will. NO court will excuse a school from opting out of such a contract. I would like to sue my current bank/home mortgage company and break my contract. Reasons; Im tired of living in my current home and the bank down the street will set me up with a better place and a sweeter financial deal. Judge.....HELL NO.

Just like no court would excuse the Big East/AAC clause of 27 month notification?!? Yeah right... GOR are worthless in the sense that no court could ultimately enforce them. Schools would simply need to pay a huge amount of money to get out of GOR.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

No one is walking out of a GOR. Think of it as trying to sell a house you have already sold. The TV rights no longer belong to the school to sell again.

 

[woomba]

It's the same by high school and with intra-state details:

Your maxpreps image (linked above) is also telling. Connecticut high schools produced 24 current NFL players. That ties Indiana and beats Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska -- most of which have a larger population than Connecticut. On a per capita basis, Connecticut is nearly as good as New Jersey and beats Pennsylvania and Michigan and Maryland as a producer of NFL talent. Ohio is the only B1G state that is distinctly better on a per capita basis.

...

My point is that in terms of the recruiting territory it brings with it, UConn would not bring the B1G down. We are essentially at the B1G state average as a source of high-level football players; and if UConn in the B1G brings a greater emphasis on football regionally, in NY and NE, then we may even help the B1G recruit.

Poor recruiting in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska is why the Big Ten is actively searching for better recruiting grounds and one of the reasons why MD and NJ were chosen- saying that UConn is on par with those 4 states isn't really reassuring since you're confirming that UConn will be a 'taker' in recruiting.

You're also confusing # of pro players with # of collegiate players - that is not a good 1:1 correlation since different players have different length of careers, and many good athletes at the college level get passed up at the pro level due to various reasons.

Here's a table with # of FBS signees - http://footballrecruiting.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1470883 - only 6 athletes from CT sign with an FBS school in a typical year and those numbers aren't much better for the rest of NE - CT,MA,NY combine for about the same number of signees as NJ in a typical year.

Edit : I guess this board edits out r-i-v-a-l-s-.-c-o-m ?

 

[Gurleyman]

Texas is never going to the Pac12 and without it Oklahoma isn't either. I've heard Dodds indicate that they WILL keep the Big 12 together, but if they were EVER to go anywhere, it would be east. Has to do with travel for athletes...if they have to continually go west to compete, the kids don't get home until mid morning the following day. Too hard on them physically and educationally. Forget the PAC12. If Texas isn't going, the whole Big 12 isn't going anywhere either.

Texas has the money to charter everyone. Football isn't a factor, and the PAC has a travel partner system where you play Thursday-Saturday for hoops, Friday-Saturday for volleyball and Friday-Sunday for soccer, or Friday-Saturday-Sunday for baseball/softball. No matter what the sport you'd be getting back on the weekend, late at night on Sunday at the worst.

If that's being used as an excuse, it's probably something they are hiding behind to cloak their real reasons (probably maintaining value of their own tv network).

 

[UC990411]

link doesn't work

 

[woomba]

link doesn't work

Sorry - looks like the board doesn't like the recruiting site I'm using.

Search Google for "Where the Division I signees are from" and the top few links should be the data for the past 3 years

 

[pj]

Poor recruiting in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska is why the Big Ten is actively searching for better recruiting grounds and one of the reasons why MD and NJ were chosen- saying that UConn is on par with those 4 states isn't really reassuring since you're confirming that UConn will be a 'taker' in recruiting.

You're also confusing # of pro players with # of collegiate players - that is not a good 1:1 correlation since different players have different length of careers, and many good athletes at the college level get passed up at the pro level due to various reasons.

Here's a table with # of FBS signees - http://footballrecruiting. /content.asp?CID=1470883

Edit : I guess this board edits out r-i-v-a-l-s-.-c-o-m ?

1) I said Connecticut was better than Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska.
2) Although only Connecticut produces significant football talent in the NY-NE region, I believe that with Rutgers and UConn in the B1G, interest will pick up throughout the region and New York and Massachusetts have a chance to become significant producers. Syracuse to the ACC may also promote regional high school football, as well as Buffalo and UMass to the MAC.
3) I argued that UConn would not be a 'taker' from the B1G recruiting wise, but neutral -- adding as much as it loses.
4) I didn't confuse pro players with BCS recruits. I think pro players is a better indicator of impact talent. There are a ton of 2* and lower 3* players who can provide depth, and it's not hard to recruit them. It's the impact players that make universities competitive for BCS bowls and the national playoffs.
5) Yes, the board doesn't permit r i v a l s or s c o u t. Use bitly or tinyurl if you want to make a functional link.

 

[woomba]

5) Yes, the board doesn't permit r i v a l s or s c o u t. Use bitly or tinyurl if you want to make a functional link.

2011 : http://Post original url/gKnOTN
2012 : http://Post original url/xjBCfH
2013 : http://Post original url/YRmxxh

3) I argued that UConn would not be a 'taker' from the B1G recruiting wise, but neutral -- adding as much as it loses.
4) I didn't confuse pro players with BCS recruits. I think pro players is a better indicator of impact talent. There are a ton of 2* and lower 3* players who can provide depth, and it's not hard to recruit them. It's the impact players that make universities competitive for BCS bowls and the national playoffs.

I don't think the actual numbers support these claims - CT has only produced 5-6 D-1 athletes on average the past few recruiting cycles and MA isn't much better. NY is decent but Big Ten already pulls pretty well and Rutgers should improve that further.

 

[WestHartHusk]

Research A.C.C GOR thats all I have to say. Its a legal binding contract signed with free will. NO court will excuse a school from opting out of such a contract. I would like to sue my current bank/home mortgage company and break my contract. Reasons; Im tired of living in my current home and the bank down the street will set me up with a better place and a sweeter financial deal. Judge.....HELL NO.

It's fine you want to visit our board, but while you are here can you PLEASE READ what we are saying. I agree it is a legal contract - and part of that contract is that the schools sign over their TV rights to the conference to be sold to a TV network(s) IN EXCHANGE FOR PAYMENT. If a school leaves they don't get to take their TV rights, but the conference isn't excused from paying them either.

You analogy does not make sense to our discussion. A better analogy is that your agreement with a bank to repay your mortgage isn't contingent upon you living in the house. You can move out if you want, but you are still obliged to pay the mortgage back.

 

[WestHartHusk]

No one is walking out of a GOR. Think of it as trying to sell a house you have already sold. The TV rights no longer belong to the school to sell again.

Re-read my posts. There are a number of reasons you might walk out, especially if you think the league is going to crumble at the end. Going back to the Kansas example, they keep getting the Big12 money and join the CIC, B1G gets KU for scheduling (appealing for winter inventory) and may get BTN added at a higher rate in MO/KS because they would own the rights to KU road games.

The more I think about the GOR in the absence of an exit fee the less of a protection it appears to be for the conferences.

 

[Sea Goat]

Here are the 2013 recruiting numbers by state:

BY THE NUMBERS
A state-by-state breakdown of Division I FBS signees per participant. Data collected from participation stats distributed by the National Federation of High School Sports and signees as reported by Division I FBS schools and the Rivals.com database.
State

Signees​

Players​

Ratio​

Florida

332​

41,127​

124​

Georgia

184​

32,726​

178​

Utah

36​

8,212​

229​

Hawaii

20​

4,875​

244​

Louisiana

81​

20,293​

251​

Alabama

83​

22,715​

274​

Maryland/D.C.

49​

15,639​

320​

Ohio

145​

46,463​

321​

Oklahoma

35​

11,298​

323​

Virginia

79​

25,456​

323​

Arizona

36​

12.237​

340​

California

251​

104,334​

416​

Pennsylvania

63​

26,370​

419​

New Jersey

56​

25,592​

457​

North Carolina

73​

35,338​

485​

Texas

346​

167,477​

485​

Nevada

14​

7,059​

505​

Tennessee

40​

22,994​

575​

Indiana

38​

22,050​

581​

Illinois

77​

47,445​

617​

Mississippi

34​

22,306​

657​

Missouri

35​

23,178​

663​

Colorado

23​

15,595​

679​

Michigan

62​

42,743​

690​

Arkansas

15​

11,440​

763​

South Carolina

24​

18,854​

786​

Kentucky

17​

14,042​

826​

Washington

26​

22,090​

850​

Delaware

3​

3,028​

1010​

Oregon

13​

13,243​

1019​

Idaho

7​

7,217​

1031​

Connecticut

10​

10,602​

1061​

Wisconsin

24​

28,426​

1185​

New York

27​

35,552​

1317​

Kansas

9​

14,246​

1583​

Massachusetts

10​

19,865​

1987​

Nebraska

5​

10,041​

2009​

West Virginia

3​

6,089​

2030​

New Mexico

3​

6,764​

2255​

Iowa

8​

19,519​

2440​

Wyoming

1​

2,680​

2680​

Rhode Island

1​

2,953​

2953​

Minnesota

7​

23,816​

3403​

South Dakota

1​

3,606​

3606​

Vermont

0​

1,172​

0​

Alaska

0​

2,063​

0​

North Dakota

0​

3,201​

0​

New Hampshire

0​

3,530​

0​

Maine

0​

3,721​

0​

Montana

0​

4,691​

0​

PAST YEARS | Class of 2012 | Class of 2011 | Class of 2010

 

[Rumrunner]

The number of recruits in the Big Ten's footprint is not the driver of Big Ten expansion.

It is the number of people therein that would be entertained by the Big Ten Network that is driving the bus. There is a higher premium on number of alumni in a given state because that group is more likely to watch their alma mater and conference teams. Exhibit A: New Yawk. Delany isn't pumping the Big Ten push into NY because it has 12 3* recruits for goodness sakes.

 

[clmssun]

Re-read my posts. There are a number of reasons you might walk out, especially if you think the league is going to crumble at the end. Going back to the Kansas example, they keep getting the Big12 money and join the CIC, B1G gets KU for scheduling (appealing for winter inventory) and may get BTN added at a higher rate in MO/KS because they would own the rights to KU road games.

The more I think about the GOR in the absence of an exit fee the less of a protection it appears to be for the conferences.

From: http://espn.go.com/college-football...media-rights-deal-lock-schools-okd-presidents

"The ACC's grant of rights makes it untenable financially for a school to leave, guaranteeing in the 14 years of the deal that a school's media rights, including revenue, for all home games would remain with the ACC regardless of the school's affiliation." (Emphasis added)

I realize that is not a "legal" article, but nonetheless it substantiates the "power" of the Grant of Rights which has been talked about so much. Indeed, if schools could switch conferences on a whim where their old conference "retains their media rights" but yet the old conference then conveys those revenues directly to the school, then there is no "power" (or purpose) to a Grant of Rights.

While I think it is disingenuous and extreme, I do think Grants of Rights are effective at ensuring stability for the conference, and stability for the conference is generally perceived as "good" and "beneficial" to the member institutions -- that is the school's part of the quid pro quo. EDIT: Further, if the old conference conveyed the revenue to the school in their new conference, what exactly was the old conference's benefit(/quid pro quo)?

As has been discussed here previously, an additional "strength" of the Grant of Rights is that since four of the Power Five have them, those Four are probably going to be reluctant to try to legally challenge another's Grant of Rights.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

Texas is never going to the Pac12 and without it Oklahoma isn't either. I've heard Dodds indicate that they WILL keep the Big 12 together, but if they were EVER to go anywhere, it would be east. Has to do with travel for athletes...if they have to continually go west to compete, the kids don't get home until mid morning the following day. Too hard on them physically and educationally. Forget the PAC12. If Texas isn't going, the whole Big 12 isn't going anywhere either.

I would argue that Texas will only go West because in the PAC it is likely to receive the best deal or at the least have the most control in the PAC if it was to leave the XII. The only school in the PAC that may be able match Texas’s weight is USC. While the B1G has interest in Texas, no way will Texas receive special treatment in the B1G and Ohio State has the ability to counter them (if Michigan is on the same page, which is often the case off the football field, combined they will outweigh Texas). Same applies to the SEC, where all schools are treated equally and while no school is quite at the level of Texas, LSU, Alabama, Georgia & Florida combined would have the upper hand (and I wonder how Texas A&M would act to Texas in that situation). The ACC would be insane to have yet another prima donna on top of the three they already have (ND, UNC & Florida St) and geographic reasons.

 

[woomba]

The number of recruits in the Big Ten's footprint is not the driver of Big Ten expansion.

It is the number of people therein that would be entertained by the Big Ten Network that is driving the bus. There is a higher premium on number of alumni in a given state because that group is more likely to watch their alma mater and conference teams. Exhibit A: New Yawk. Delany isn't pumping the Big Ten push into NY because it has 12 3* recruits for goodness sakes.

There's multiple drivers - recruiting's admittedly a secondary piece to the puzzle.

 

[DarthGrumpy]

No one is walking out of a GOR. Think of it as trying to sell a house you have already sold. The TV rights no longer belong to the school to sell again.

The GOR is an effective tool; but, it has never been challenged in Court so no one knows if it will hold-up or not. I think the school most likely to challenge the GOR in court could be West Virginia several years down the road if the XII does not add an eastern partner to the conference. Otherwise, it is possible that travel costs and other pressure (several losing seasons in football due to 3 trips to Texas and Oklahoma in a month) would make an offer from the ACC or SEC (doubtful, but who knows) financially viable to WVU. WVU can go to court and say - ‘We agreed to the GOR; but, the XII promised an eastern partner to help defray travel costs. Its now X years into the contract and they have not added a partner. This deal is bankrupting us. We want out of the GOR without penalty due to the XII not fulfilling their portion of the contract.’

 

[WestHartHusk]

From: http://espn.go.com/college-football...media-rights-deal-lock-schools-okd-presidents

"The ACC's grant of rights makes it untenable financially for a school to leave, guaranteeing in the 14 years of the deal that a school's media rights, including revenue, for all home games would remain with the ACC regardless of the school's affiliation." (Emphasis added)

I realize that is not a "legal" article, but nonetheless it substantiates the "power" of the Grant of Rights which has been talked about so much. Indeed, if schools could switch conferences on a whim where their old conference "retains their media rights" but yet the old conference then conveys those revenues directly to the school, then there is no "power" (or purpose) to a Grant of Rights.

While I think it is disingenuous and extreme, I do think Grants of Rights are effective at ensuring stability for the conference, and stability for the conference is generally perceived as "good" and "beneficial" to the member institutions -- that is the school's part of the quid pro quo. EDIT: Further, if the old conference conveyed the revenue to the school in their new conference, what exactly was the old conference's benefit(/quid pro quo)?

As has been discussed here previously, an additional "strength" of the Grant of Rights is that since four of the Power Five have them, those Four are probably going to be reluctant to try to legally challenge another's Grant of Rights.

Power & Purpose. There is definitely a power and purpose to the GOR. The fact that the conference was able to go out to bid (or even renegotiate as was the case with the ACC) with a set stable of inventory allowed them to negotiate a higher price which benefited all parties: ESPN knows exactly what the bought; and the ACC presumably got a better deal by assuring FSU/GT/CU content through 2022 or whatever year. If the GOR was an end-all-be-all please explain why the ACC retained a $50M exit fee?

Additional Strength. I think that is largely a fair point. But, there are two factors that could complicate that calculation. First, if Fox thinks they are in a stronger position than ESPN then they might not be worried about challenging it (e.g. Clemson would leave the ACC but there is no risk of OSU leaving the B1G). Second (which assumes the first), it may make sense for Fox to move inventory within their universe. There may be a case to be made that Fox, on the whole, could make more money with OK/TX in the B1G than in the B12.

Back to the Big12. There are four factors (in my mind) that make those teams the most likely to be poached. First, they have no exit fee. Second, their GOR expires first. Third, its members own their own T3 rights so they can pledge these into the BTN. And fourth, the demographics in that league are terrible so to the extent a University wants to market itself beyond TX/OK/KS/IO/WV they are going to be looking elsewhere.

 

[clmssun]

Power & Purpose. There is definitely a power and purpose to the GOR. The fact that the conference was able to go out to bid (or even renegotiate as was the case with the ACC) with a set stable of inventory allowed them to negotiate a higher price which benefited all parties: ESPN knows exactly what the bought; and the ACC presumably got a better deal by assuring FSU/GT/CU content through 2022 or whatever year. If the GOR was an end-all-be-all please explain why the ACC retained a $50M exit fee?

Additional Strength. I think that is largely a fair point. But, there are two factors that could complicate that calculation. First, if Fox thinks they are in a stronger position than ESPN then they might not be worried about challenging it (e.g. Clemson would leave the ACC but there is no risk of OSU leaving the B1G). Second (which assumes the first), it may make sense for Fox to move inventory within their universe. There may be a case to be made that Fox, on the whole, could make more money with OK/TX in the B1G than in the B12.

Back to the Big12. There are four factors (in my mind) that make those teams the most likely to be poached. First, they have no exit fee. Second, their GOR expires first. Third, its members own their own T3 rights so they can pledge these into the BTN. And fourth, the demographics in that league are terrible so to the extent a University wants to market itself beyond TX/OK/KS/IO/WV they are going to be looking elsewhere.

Yes, but again, there is no power or strength in a GoR to ensure stability if the school can still get paid from the old conference as a member of a new conference. So maybe we are in violent agreement here.

I think it is an incontrovertible fact that the ACC is stronger and more stable, for the present and future, than the Big 12. Texas, Kansas, and Oklahoma will always be safe. Arguably -- but not 100% assuredly -- Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, and Kansas State are safe by extension. Iowa State, TCU, and Baylor are far from safe, IMHO. While right now WVU looks fat in the Big12, I'd argue that UConn has/will have the brighter future the instant it gets into a Power 5 Conference; if Big12 imploded, I'd think B1G and ACC would welcome UConn far ahead of WVU. And I have my doubts SEC wants WVU, either. (With regard to UConn: If B1G or ACC do not call UConn, I hope the Big 12 does call UConn, but that would be stopgap measure; the long-term goal should remain B1G or ACC.)

 

[CTMike]

P on the importance of in-state recruiting and continuing to develop CT football at all levels :

http://Post original url/14IxeCB

 

[WestHartHusk]

Yes, but again, there is no power or strength in a GoR to ensure stability if the school can still get paid from the old conference as a member of a new conference. So maybe we are in violent agreement here.

I think it is an incontrovertible fact that the ACC is stronger and more stable, for the present and future, than the Big 12. Texas, Kansas, and Oklahoma will always be safe. Arguably -- but not 100% assuredly -- Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, and Kansas State are safe by extension. Iowa State, TCU, and Baylor are far from safe, IMHO. While right now WVU looks fat in the Big12, I'd argue that UConn has/will have the brighter future the instant it gets into a Power 5 Conference; if Big12 imploded, I'd think B1G and ACC would welcome UConn far ahead of WVU. And I have my doubts SEC wants WVU, either. (With regard to UConn: If B1G or ACC do not call UConn, I hope the Big 12 does call UConn, but that would be stopgap measure; the long-term goal should remain B1G or ACC.)

We will agree to disagree regarding the GOR, but I 100% agree with you regarding the Big12 v. ACC.

On a side note, I have been to a few Clemson games and have always had a great time. I was actually down there for Lou Holtz's last game with uSC - the brawl - what a great time that was right from the fight before kick-off at the bottom of the hill. I was really hoping we would get the ACC invite so I could go see the Huskies in DV.

 

[Sea Goat]

From: http://espn.go.com/college-football...media-rights-deal-lock-schools-okd-presidents

"The ACC's grant of rights makes it untenable financially for a school to leave, guaranteeing in the 14 years of the deal that a school's media rights, including revenue, for all home games would remain with the ACC regardless of the school's affiliation." (Emphasis added)

I realize that is not a "legal" article, but nonetheless it substantiates the "power" of the Grant of Rights which has been talked about so much. Indeed, if schools could switch conferences on a whim where their old conference "retains their media rights" but yet the old conference then conveys those revenues directly to the school, then there is no "power" (or purpose) to a Grant of Rights.

While I think it is disingenuous and extreme, I do think Grants of Rights are effective at ensuring stability for the conference, and stability for the conference is generally perceived as "good" and "beneficial" to the member institutions -- that is the school's part of the quid pro quo. EDIT: Further, if the old conference conveyed the revenue to the school in their new conference, what exactly was the old conference's benefit(/quid pro quo)?

As has been discussed here previously, an additional "strength" of the Grant of Rights is that since four of the Power Five have them, those Four are probably going to be reluctant to try to legally challenge another's Grant of Rights.

Until it does become financially tenable... We'll see. To say that won't happen requires a belief in a constant condition whereby change only occurs in a linear manner. I don't think that has been the case in CR to date.

 

[BCINGYA]

Just like no court would excuse the Big East/AAC clause of 27 month notification?!? Yeah right... GOR are worthless in the sense that no court could ultimately enforce them. Schools would simply need to pay a huge amount of money to get out of GOR.

The worthless piece of paper would most certainly be enforced, esp since your not only dealing with the conference but with T.V. networks as well. Huge amount? thats putting it lightly, the school loses its ownership of T.V. rights, the conference owns them for the life of the contract. This is not like an exit fee, and you bargain your way out.

Power & Purpose. There is definitely a power and purpose to the GOR. The fact that the conference was able to go out to bid (or even renegotiate as was the case with the ACC) with a set stable of inventory allowed them to negotiate a higher price which benefited all parties: ESPN knows exactly what the bought; and the ACC presumably got a better deal by assuring FSU/GT/CU content through 2022 or whatever year. If the GOR was an end-all-be-all please explain why the ACC retained a $50M exit fee?

Additional Strength. I think that is largely a fair point. But, there are two factors that could complicate that calculation. First, if Fox thinks they are in a stronger position than ESPN then they might not be worried about challenging it (e.g. Clemson would leave the ACC but there is no risk of OSU leaving the B1G). Second (which assumes the first), it may make sense for Fox to move inventory within their universe. There may be a case to be made that Fox, on the whole, could make more money with OK/TX in the B1G than in the B12.

Back to the Big12. There are four factors (in my mind) that make those teams the most likely to be poached. First, they have no exit fee. Second, their GOR expires first. Third, its members own their own T3 rights so they can pledge these into the BTN. And fourth, the demographics in that league are terrible so to the extent a University wants to market itself beyond TX/OK/KS/IO/WV they are going to be looking elsewhere.

#1. Why remove the exit fee?...........Maryland wont pay 50 mil but they will pay. If its reduced to half that still means around 25 million for the conference, certainly not going to be in the 5-10mil area. What if Maryland does lose? (i admit unlikely) Hell the A.C.C. collects 50mil to be split 14 ways. Leaving the exit fee in place suggest nothing other than a good business strategy, more than any perceived fear.

#2 The A.C.C. GOR is in effect til July 2027.

#3 U Conn to the big 10 long before, perhaps with Mizzou (no SEC GOR) . The the big 12's GOR ends long before the A.C.C.'s. U Conn with Kansas perhaps? to BIG. N.D. gets pressured (new playoffs/division) into being a full time A.C.C. football member so U Conn becomes #16.