Dennis Dodd: Big Ten expansion not done...stay tuned | Page 6 | The Boneyard

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

Status
Not open for further replies.

ctchamps

We are UConn!! 4>1 But 5>>>>1 is even better!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
17,084
Reaction Score
42,309
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.

The vehicle driving things is dollars. Everything else stated is about saving face. pj has done a great job with his demographics. Last I knew human males are the same throughout the US. The northeast has a huge population relatively untapped with regards to college football both as fans and recruits. Most thinkers are retrospective such as FranktheTank. A proactive thinker such as Delaney knows there is a huge profit to be made in the northeast corridor because this population is the last huge bastion of potential college football fans.


The funny thing is the southeast is relatively saturated. It is the region with the greatest population growth, but their allegiance is already divided amongst two conferences. Really only one by a very large margin, with the distant second going to the ACC. If Virginia goes to the BIG a plausible argument can be made that they, like Maryland, will be ostracized culturally by people in the southeast. But you don't hear Frank emphasizing this in his metrics about the BIGs master plan for recruiting. He, and others, point to the cultural factors preventing the northeast from being a player. That's fair. But he and others are overemphasizing what a Virginia or GT would bring to the B!G and underemphasizing the cultural influence that exists in the southeast.

If Virginia goes to the B!G I would predict that a lot of Virginia fans would stop watching this school similarly to the way a lot of BC fans lost interest in BC. The loyal fans will stay committed but the middle of the pact fans will gravitate to some other southeastern school. And so would the potential recruits. There is relavancy about retirees going to the Southeast influencing viewership, but these people, for the most part have nothing to do with hs players. Their involvement with the community is not with high schoolers. In fact they are a net negative in the communities because they are perceived as outsiders in a negative way. Certainly a booster can influence some kids with perks, but for the most part the peers will be the greater influence. And retirees are not the demographic driving the revenue in advertisement.

The northeast doesn't have the cultural influence when it comes to college football. Any conference that sets up the groundwork to capture the northeast market, imo, will be the conference to make the greatest gains mid and long term. To capture that market they have to be willing to invest time and money in generating excitement in that market with their product.

It could be argued it's a toss up between the B!G and the ACC as to who leads in the northeast. My personal belief is the B!G is in the lead. The loss of MD was a huge blow for the ACC. What they gained with Pitt, Ville, Cuse and ND did not negate what the loss of MD did in terms of value to the southeast. The ACC is a conference that is only held together by an influx of outsiders and the need to severely punish its membership if one tries to make moves. In other words they lost a lot of credibility in their real market, the Southeast, a market as I already stated they are already poorly followed.

Delaney's coup of getting Maryland was all that was necessary to marginalize the ACC's influence in the southeast. The B!G will never make inroads into the southeast relative to the SEC but they have a great chance to secure the northeast.

My take is that Delaney would have invited Uconn and one other already if he didn't have to overcome inertia and conceit that exits within the B!G. In other words if he had absolute control Uconn would already be a member because Delaney is thinking in terms of business models and not arrogance. UConn is the university to NE the way the Red Sox are NE's baseball team. And UConn, with Cuse, Rutgers and ND is strong in NY. IMO with the right marketing a Rutgers - UConn could get the upper hand in NYC easily. They could offer various associations/hs free tickets to games with success because of their proximity to NYC. The buzz could be gained in just a few years.

There has never been a strong football conference in the northeast representing the best of the northeast schools. A conference with Penn State and WV would have anchored the region and if one or two other programs improved to that level the interest in NY, NE and NJ could have rivaled the midwest with viewership anchored by Illinois, Michigan and Ohio. The problem is CT, Mass, NJ and NY never invested in getting any school into position to join WV and Penn State in the upper echelon of college football ranks and when Rutgers and CT finally did make the commitment they ran into the buzz saw of CR.

Delaney, imo, had a lot of resistance to getting approval in taking MD and even more in taking Rutgers. Elitism is prevalent everywhere. But money usually trumps elitism. The B!G should be proud of its collective academic standing and it's roots. But the monies are now reaching a level where it becomes more difficult for groups to stand pat on past traditions.

I expect that UConn and Missouri will end up in the B!G sooner rather than later if the transition of MD and Rutgers proceeds in a manner that Delaney had predicted to the university presidents in his conference.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
2,500
Reaction Score
9,589
ALL it means......lol....thats millions and millions of dollars...and the exit fee was imposed long before the GOR not the other way around. NO school will leave their T.V. rights on the table they get zero and the departed conference collects every red cent of it. They become useless to any conference they join. Their T.V. rights become property of the conference. In this day and age of tough economic times that amounts to suicide.

If the B1G expands as Dodd thinks it will then I hope you are right. The GORs in ACC and Big12 leave Uconn in a GREAT position.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
161
Reaction Score
80
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.)
IF Clemson leaves the ACC they leave behind their T.V. rights for the next 14 years and they DO NOT CONTINUE TO RECV ANY COMPENSATION. The rights belong to the former conference. The new conference has no claim on the new members T.V rights. Its simple sign up and you sign away your T.V. rights to the A.C.C for the next 14 years and any money that would be made from them with it. In the era of money, t.v. exposure, ,markets and eyeballs you become worthless to any suitors. Not sure why you think a school still gets compensated by your former league even though your a member in a new conference. That does not exist.
 

Fishy

Elite Premium Poster
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
18,106
Reaction Score
131,788
Notre Dame would be an interesting case.

First, I don't think they want to be in the Big Ten - if they did, they would be in the Big Ten. (Of course, they don't want to be in the ACC, either.)

But say that Notre Dame did leave for the Big Ten. Which rights would the ACC hold?

Certainly not the rights to Notre Dame football and if they're just retaining the rights to Notre Dame basketball, that ain't a huge deal.
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
538
Reaction Score
182
The only wrench is that the wording on the ND & ACC deal is that ND is contractually obligated to only consider ACC as a potential full-time member until the deal expires in 2026. No idea what kind of penalty ND agreed to if they broke that though.
 
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
172
Reaction Score
136
IF Clemson leaves the ACC they leave behind their T.V. rights for the next 14 years and they DO NOT CONTINUE TO RECV ANY COMPENSATION. The rights belong to the former conference. The new conference has no claim on the new members T.V rights. Its simple sign up and you sign away your T.V. rights to the A.C.C for the next 14 years and any money that would be made from them with it. In the era of money, t.v. exposure, ,markets and eyeballs you become worthless to any suitors. Not sure why you think a school still gets compensated by your former league even though your a member in a new conference. That does not exist.

Umm, that's the point I was arguing. I presented the opposite perspective (as devil's advocate) and saying that did not make sense. You and I agree. WestHartHusk (and pj, if I recall correctly) have argued that schools still get paid (by old conference) when they move to new conference; I do not believe this to be true.
 
Joined
Jun 17, 2013
Messages
1,555
Reaction Score
4,179
The only wrench is that the wording on the ND & ACC deal is that ND is contractually obligated to only consider ACC as a potential full-time member until the deal expires in 2026. No idea what kind of penalty ND agreed to if they broke that though.

Important point here, woomba - ND has to have a different deal on the GOR then any other ACC member (and a different exit fee for that matter). Me thinks that Gee was at least half right on his observations re: ND. Me also thinks ND can leave ACC with a special deal just like they got in to the ACC with a special deal. Does not make sense that ND would agree to pay a full exit fee or agree to a full GOR (by definition could not give a GOR for football) given that they are only a partial member. Still don't know why the ACC jumped at chance to bring them in on such terms. Reeks of desperation.
 

ctchamps

We are UConn!! 4>1 But 5>>>>1 is even better!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
17,084
Reaction Score
42,309
In the post I made 8/2/13 at 4:01pm I concluded that Delaney only is waiting to demonstrate to the B!G presidents his vision isn't crazy before inviting UConn and Missouri to the B!G. And I'm sure some people in this forum will laugh at my rational of UConn and Missouri. However I just had the thought that a really bold move to get the Northeast once and for all would be to take UConn and Temple. With the right marketing and development the northeast would be college football oriented towards the B!G and no one can argue that the northeast is without passionate sports fans. There is a reason for franchise success in pro sports in the northeast. I don't believe pro sports success is the reason for the lack of success in college football in the northeast. I believe there has been a lack of a good northeast college football product. That could change and my money is on Delaney and not Swofferd.
 

pj

Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
8,621
Reaction Score
25,058
IF Clemson leaves the ACC they leave behind their T.V. rights for the next 14 years and they DO NOT CONTINUE TO RECV ANY COMPENSATION. The rights belong to the former conference. The new conference has no claim on the new members T.V rights. Its simple sign up and you sign away your T.V. rights to the A.C.C for the next 14 years and any money that would be made from them with it. In the era of money, t.v. exposure, ,markets and eyeballs you become worthless to any suitors. Not sure why you think a school still gets compensated by your former league even though your a member in a new conference. That does not exist.

You keep saying this, but your only evidence is one ESPN article by Brett Mcmurphy, who is an idiot. The contract is secret and we don't know the terms relating to a departure from the conference.

What is likely? There are two agreements, a conference affiliation agreement with an exit fee and some money aspects (eg sharing of bowl/playoff/NCAA tourney revenue), and a GoR with an assignment of media rights and a financial return for the media rights. If you leave the conference you have terminated the first agreement and will lose your share of bowl money, but the GoR persists (that is the key to the thing, the grant of media rights to the ACC is independent of what conference you are playing in and persists after any change of conference affiliation). If the GoR persists, then any financial obligations the conference has under the GoR must also persist.

You are assuming that the schools intentionally negotiated a special provision altering the GoR in the event that they leave the conference, with the purpose of destroying themselves financially in that scenario -- rather like Cortez sinking his ships. But why would they do this?

Contrary to Internet beliefs, the point of the GoR was not to make the conference impregnable. It was to protect the TV network paying the conference that it would retain media rights to all the schools in the conference, no matter what happened. It protects the network against realignment, because Virginia or UNC are just as valuable to ESPN in the B1G or SEC as they would be in the ACC, and they won't be leaving for the MAC.

Realignment had proven its ability to greatly diminish the value of a conference, and so ESPN wanted protection from the ACC, and was willing to pay up for it. The schools signed the GoR for the extra money, because there is hardly any downside for the school (assuming you are wrong).

In the unlikely event that ACC schools were stupid enough to donate their media rights without compensation to the ACC in the event they leave, that still doesn't prove that the Big XII schools were equally stupid, and it is a Big XII breakup that we were discussing.
 

WestHartHusk

$3M a Year With March Off
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
4,567
Reaction Score
13,712
Umm, that's the point I was arguing. I presented the opposite perspective (as devil's advocate) and saying that did not make sense. You and I agree. WestHartHusk (and pj, if I recall correctly) have argued that schools still get paid (by old conference) when they move to new conference; I do not believe this to be true.


They have to still get paid, otherwise the contract is unenforceable as the GOR becomes a punitive penalty. Damages for breaching a contract have to be in proportion to the damage (as estimated at the time the contract is signed) and the ACC (or whomever else) has an obligation to mitigate the damages to the extent possible. Essentially, the ACC would have to argue that the loss of Clemson in 2014 will costs the league $310M net (13*20M + 50M) inclusive of any attempts to mitigate the damage. In other words, 5x the penalty that they are currently struggling to defend. That is unenforceable.
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
538
Reaction Score
182
Important point here, woomba - ND has to have a different deal on the GOR then any other ACC member (and a different exit fee for that matter). Me thinks that Gee was at least half right on his observations re: ND. Me also thinks ND can leave ACC with a special deal just like they got in to the ACC with a special deal. Does not make sense that ND would agree to pay a full exit fee or agree to a full GOR (by definition could not give a GOR for football) given that they are only a partial member. Still don't know why the ACC jumped at chance to bring them in on such terms. Reeks of desperation.


All the public comments have been to the effect that ND is bound by the same exit fees and all the other by-laws of the ACC. It's entirely that the reality of the situation is quite different (heck, depending on who you talk to the GoR hasn't even been signed yet) but there's been no evidence to lead people otherwise so until then it's going to be complete speculation.
 

OkaForPrez

Really Popular Poster
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
5,204
Reaction Score
26,697
In the post I made 8/2/13 at 4:01pm I concluded that Delaney only is waiting to demonstrate to the B!G presidents his vision isn't crazy before inviting UConn and Missouri to the B!G. And I'm sure some people in this forum will laugh at my rational of UConn and Missouri. However I just had the thought that a really bold move to get the Northeast once and for all would be to take UConn and Temple. With the right marketing and development the northeast would be college football oriented towards the B!G and no one can argue that the northeast is without passionate sports fans. There is a reason for franchise success in pro sports in the northeast. I don't believe pro sports success is the reason for the lack of success in college football in the northeast. I believe there has been a lack of a good northeast college football product. That could change and my money is on Delaney and not Swofferd.
Well of course you know what's going to happen. You are from the future.
 
U

UConn9604

IF Clemson leaves the ACC they leave behind their T.V. rights for the next 14 years and they DO NOT CONTINUE TO RECV ANY COMPENSATION. The rights belong to the former conference. The new conference has no claim on the new members T.V rights. Its simple sign up and you sign away your T.V. rights to the A.C.C for the next 14 years and any money that would be made from them with it. In the era of money, t.v. exposure, ,markets and eyeballs you become worthless to any suitors. Not sure why you think a school still gets compensated by your former league even though your a member in a new conference. That does not exist.


Serious question: have you seen the Grant of Rights document? Or are you relying on some description of it in the media?

As a rule, I would not rely on anyone else's account of the strength of the rights and obligations in a contract that I had never read. You seem to have a lot of faith in this document, and I'm wondering if your faith is blind.
 

ctchamps

We are UConn!! 4>1 But 5>>>>1 is even better!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
17,084
Reaction Score
42,309
Well of course you know what's going to happen. You are from the future.
I didn't think anyone saw me come out of the blue police call box.
 
Joined
Jul 17, 2013
Messages
591
Reaction Score
378
The Big XII breakup could be the next move. At least 9 and possibly all 10 teams could find logical homes in the other four conferences.

PAC: Texas, TT, Oklahoma, Ok. St.
B1G: Kansas, either Iowa St. or UConn (if the politicians allow it)
SEC: West Virginia and Kansas St.
ACC: TCU and Baylor

It's too logical, which means it won't happen...

JMHO on your list...

Your Pac scenario is quite plausible. IIRC, it almost happened, before Texas refused to give up the LHN.

I do not see the B1G taking ISU, since they already have Iowa. KU and UConn would for sure be a possibility.

WVU could possibly get into the SEC, but, I doubt KSU could.

No way TCU or Baylor get an ACC invite. The only Texas schools they'd even talk to is UT.
 
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
63
Reaction Score
203
Without seeing the exact language of the B12 or ACC GORs, we can only speculate as to its payment provisions.

But we can know these two things with fairly reasonable certainty: (1) Either a school subject to a GOR forfeits its revenue it if joins another conference; or (2) the school joins a new conference, but its revenue goes to the old conference, which then pays the school its GOR share each year as scheduled.

I have a hard time believing option 1 to be legal. Where's the quid pro quo? If I leave, then you keep all my as-of-yet unearned income into the future until the GOR expires? Sounds like a forfeiture to me, not a "something for something". Maybe a Court would rule that the consideration was "stability", but many of these schools are governmental entities, not some recording star. I have problems with option 1 because it seems like it's very close to an unconscionable forfeiture against a governmental unit. I'm not sure this dog will hunt. Maybe it will.

OTOH, if option 2 is the effect of the GOR, then I could see a school leaving its GOR conference for another conference, paying over the old conference's GOR share to the new conference each year, in exchange for the school's take from the new conference.

A conference like the B1G, with major draws like OSU and UM, would get short-changed by this procedure, but if the new school was attractive enough to the B1G, the B1G might want to take "one step backwards to take two steps forward". For example, if the B1G wanted to pair UConn with, say, FSU or Texas, then I don't think the GOR would hold back the B1G in order to snare those kinds of GOR schools.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,170
Reaction Score
33,028
Let me try this again. NO FULL LEAGUE MEMBER IS BREAKING A GOR. It will never never never never never never never happen. The ACC schools have sold their rights for the next 15 years. The schools can not sell them again to someone else. It is not like the Big 12 broke any new legal ground here either with the GOR. There is a lot of case law around selling media rights, and almost all of it favors the buyer.

Watch about 2/3's of the old VH1 "Behind the Music" shows if you want to learn more, because most up and coming musicians sell off their rights for peanuts early in their career and then the successful ones try to break their contract.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,170
Reaction Score
33,028
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.

If an ACC school tries to default on a contract in order to get out of it, two things will happen:

1) They will likely be liable for any damages such as forfeited games or costs of scheduled opponents to find other games, plus likely stipulated penalties within the ACC bylaws; and

2) They will still be bound under the GOR.

Do you really think that you can sign a contract, deliberately fail to perform your side of the contract, and then walk away when the other party gets mad? That isn't how contracts work.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,170
Reaction Score
33,028
I wish every President of every ACC school would get chlamydia, but wishing it to be so doesn't mean it will happen. Just like wishing the GOR could be broken doesn't mean it will happen.
 
U

UConn9604

If an ACC school tries to default on a contract in order to get out of it, two things will happen:

1) They will likely be liable for any damages such as forfeited games or costs of scheduled opponents to find other games, plus likely stipulated penalties within the ACC bylaws; and

2) They will still be bound under the GOR.

Do you really think that you can sign a contract, deliberately fail to perform your side of the contract, and then walk away when the other party gets mad? That isn't how contracts work.


I asked this same question of BCINGYA on another Board. Have you read the GOR, or are you just relying on what you've read about it in the media? Any link to the actual document would be helpful to determine whether it's iron clad or paper-thin. Without it, each of us is just speculating.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
19,228
Reaction Score
14,061
Here's something to chew on.

"If the ACCN doesn't see the light of day, I don't see how the ACC survives. A GOR was signed based on the promise of a conference network and the future revenue it would generate. The GOR would then dissolve and a feeding frenzy would begin."
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,170
Reaction Score
33,028
As for Dodd's rumor, I think he knows slightly more than HFD and is only a marginally better writer.

But since we are living in fantasy land, this is what I think may happen if Dodd's rumor is true:

The Big 10 adds UConn and Missouri. Vanderbilt is the only other theoretical option, and I think UConn would carry the day against Vandy. UConn is a fit otherwise and boxes Syracuse and the ACC out of NYC and puts pressure on the ACC in New England. I think Missouri will do it even though they would make more money in the SEC. I suspect that while both UConn and Missouri would get "full shares", in reality there would be a steep buy in just like Rutgers and Maryland, with UConn's buy in being very, very steep.

The SEC has no exit fee, and frankly I don't think they would much care about losing Missouri other than for scheduling. I think the SEC would probably take Cincinnati to replace Missouri. The SEC doesn't need big markets, they just want quality programs, and in the SEC, Cincinnati would be very, very good.

I think this would put a lot of pressure on the Big 12 to expand. I could see them just do it for football with Boise and BYU.

Whatever. I think Dodd made up the rumor to drive page views.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,170
Reaction Score
33,028
I asked this same question of BCINGYA on another Board. Have you read the GOR, or are you just relying on what you've read about it in the media? Any link to the actual document would be helpful to determine whether it's iron clad or paper-thin. Without it, each of us is just speculating.

Have you ever read a contract in your entire life?
 
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
6,093
Reaction Score
11,118
I went to an average-slightly above average (Class L) CT high school with about 1200 kids (Rockville) and we had busing from Hartford so there were plenty of athletes for football and hoops. None of said athletes stayed eligible long enough to make an impact. I think in my 4 years one kid got a D1 scholarship and it was to play baseball at Sacred Heart. He stopped going to class soon after an lost it. Just saying.
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
5,006
Reaction Score
19,687
Something also to chew on. My understanding is that the GORs only apply to home games and not to away games. So, it is possible for half of a school's games to not be included in a GORs.

So, if FSU and Clemson decided to leave the ACC, only their home games would be included under the GORs. Do you think ESPN would keep paying the same amount to the ACC if they lost half of FSU and Clemson's games? The same analysis can be applied to Texas and the Big 12.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
382
Guests online
4,142
Total visitors
4,524

Forum statistics

Threads
157,132
Messages
4,084,735
Members
9,980
Latest member
Texasfan01


Top Bottom