Discouraging, But you Never Can Tell...

[noeynox]

[quote="ConnHuskBask, post: 858243, member: 632"]While I agree everyday in the AAC drags our value down, I .[/quote]

For the people that post that, I'd really like tho know what they propose as an alternative. Should we bring back "Beg Harder". I mean at least Nelson proposed independence as an option. I love people posting how the league brings our value down but don't offer any type of reasonable solution.

I gotta believe that at this point, UConn's brass has offered themselves to P5 Leagues at a reduced rate, for like 10 years. That last ACC spot, Warde should have flown in to see Swofford, and persuaded him like Suge Knight once persuaded Vanilla Ice to sign a contract.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

Lol yeah I have no vision because I don't think UConn will be in the Big 10.

UConn certainly deserves a home in a legitmate league, but until you can show the Big 10 you can deliver their schools incremental revenue it's a non-starter.

You have no vision because you have no vision. Starting with the premise that everything can't be done is the very definition of no vision. Giving up before you start is the epitome of no vision. Worse, you urge others to give up because you have no vision. At the moment, the play is for the northeast. That's a l--o--o--o--n--g term play. Rutgers being respectable long, that's how long. Yet that's the B1G's play. Still, unless UConn can demonstrate incremental revenues in the next fifteen minutes, the ship, in the unlikely circumstance it hasn't done so already, will sail without us. That's the sort of defeatism we can build a vision around.

 

[whaler11]

You have no vision because you have no vision. Starting with the premise that everything can't be done is the very definition of no vision. Giving up before you start is the epitome of no vision. Worse, you urge others to give up because you have no vision. At the moment, the play is for the northeast. That's a l--o--o--o--n--g term play. Rutgers being respectable long, that's how long. Yet that's the B1G's play. Still, unless UConn can demonstrate incremental revenues in the next fifteen minutes, the ship, in the unlikely circumstance it hasn't done so already, will sail without us. That's the sort of defeatism we can build a vision around.

LOL your definition of vision is just grasping at fantasies that a handful of people have created without any evidence to support them. Vision is worthless if you can't actually deliver. You talk eloquently with grand ideas, consistently ignoring reality. Delany offered the roadmap with his statements; I'm still waiting for your vision on how UConn improves the television money enough for the Big 10 so that schools like Iowa and Minnesota want to see less of Michigan and Wisconsin in order to include UConn.

I'm neither urging anyone to give up or agree with me. If someone wants to pine over another league they can knock themselves out. I've made the decision to get over conference realignment and just worry about winning the games they play. While I may lack vision I spend a lot of time and money on the football and basketball programs. Really what your vision needs to be is how to do create tens of thousands more of people like me.

Save everything except for what matters - what's your vision for generating enough revenue to make an invitation viable.

 

[whaler11]

[quote="ConnHuskBask, post: 858243, member: 632"]While I agree everyday in the AAC drags our value down, I .

For the people that post that, I'd really like tho know what they propose as an alternative. Should we bring back "Beg Harder". I mean at least Nelson proposed independence as an option. I love people posting how the league brings our value down but don't offer any type of reasonable solution.

I gotta believe that at this point, UConn's brass has offered themselves to P5 Leagues at a reduced rate, for like 10 years. That last ACC spot, Warde should have flown in to see Swofford, and persuaded him like Suge Knight once persuaded Vanilla Ice to sign a contract.[/quote]

There is no alternative. That doesn't mean it doesn't harm the programs.

Why can't someone point that out while discussing UConn's future value as it relates to a potential future invitation?

 

[noeynox]

You can discuss it, but that point was made, reinforced, and driven home when we lost out the spot to Louisville for the ACC. Nothing that has happened since that day wasn't predictable that day. I've gotten over it but I will always feel Warde and Sue didn't do enough for that spot. I know others disagree, but WVU pulled out the swords when UL threatened their place in the Big 12, we monitored from the USVI for a spot in the ACC where the major news outlets were basically saying we were next in line. Like I said I"m over it, because I have no choice, but to watch the games we play in the league were in. The AAC. Since I can't live in my dream house, I'm learning to appreciate the house I do have.

 

[buckaineer]

B.C. blocked UConns invitation to the ACC and that is why UConn isn't in that conference today. Louisville just happened to be having a good season at that moment and the ACC was desperate to improve football so made an abrupt choice to throw out previously alleged expansion candidate considerations and add UL instead.

Going forward for UConn getting placement into a P5 conference is a difficult proposal. No one is just going to grow because its all about money, and if any league adds anyone they will have to disburse some of their bowl and ncaa and playoff money to the new member. Also there is obviously some "political maneuvering" going on between conferences and UConn doesn't necessarily fit into any of that.

The ACC isn't likely to expand unless for some reason Notre Dame joins as a member. Then its a matter really of who the domers want that will come (not sure who that would be, certainly no Big Ten schools would move backward). If the ACC loses teams they'll have to add someone and UConn would have to be a consideration.

For the Big Ten it might make sense to look at UConn and maybe Syracuse if they think there is a benefit there as far as the BTN in the NYC region. If Rutgers and UMD get them decent penetration there at a lower subscriber rate though, then there wouldn't be much of a need to move in that direction and the Big Ten likely has designs on more southeastern targets from all news reports so far.

 

[noeynox]

Forget the Big Ten adding ACC teams as long as their GOR is in place. Not happening, because none of those schools can afford to leave their TV revenue lingering in Limbo while the valildity of it is sorted out.

 

[buckaineer]

The ACC continues to sue Maryland, and they stand to lose far more there than they could ever gain in that. That brings into question why? The obvious reason is the ACC doesn't believe other teams will be scared into not leaving the conference unless they somehow win that case or drag it out for an extended period of time.

 

[pj]

Lol yeah I have no vision because I don't think UConn will be in the Big 10.

UConn certainly deserves a home in a legitmate league, but until you can show the Big 10 you can deliver their schools incremental revenue it's a non-starter.

I don't think that is the criterion. No school is likely to add incremental revenue from day 1, except perhaps Texas or North Carolina, but Texas would have to surrender the Longhorn network. These additions all need time to build revenue because it takes time for the B1G brand to build a local following. Yet transient losses of per-school revenue can be made up by giving a reduced payout to the new school for a period of time, as they've done for Nebraska, Rutgers, and Maryland.

If immediate revenue isn't the criterion, what are the criteria for B1G expansion? You would like to show that the TV revenue is not significantly reduced by adding the school as suggested by some combination of national brand and local market potential, and you have to believe that it adds strategic value in the long run. Strategic value is an amorphous thing but we know the B1G has identified two keys: (1) they see academic-athletic ties and want AAU research universities, and (2) the northeast megaplex is their key growth market and they want to strengthen their presence there. UConn is the best available property for #2 and if they believe we will be successful in Herbst's move toward #1 and if their TV networks tell them UConn provides enough value to maintain per-school revenues once its athletic program builds up stature, and if the lack-of-partner issue can be resolved (perhaps by the Swofford initiative to allow odd-numbered conferences to hold championships), then UConn has a chance.

The growth of the B1G to 14 schools raises the importance of strategic objectives and diminishes the significance of immediate revenue. Suppose UConn brings in $14 million less than the average B1G school in a new contract. This only costs each school $1 million a year. If they believe there is strategic value to giving their universities an athletic presence in New England/New York City, they may still push for UConn. That may be worth more than the $1 million per year. Whereas when the league was small, the $14 million gets divided fewer ways and is more salient to each school.

It would help to have a successful football team and a Final Four appearance.

 

[pj]

I gotta believe that at this point, UConn's brass has offered themselves to P5 Leagues at a reduced rate, for like 10 years. That last ACC spot, Warde should have flown in to see Swofford, and persuaded him like Suge Knight once persuaded Vanilla Ice to sign a contract.

I hope they haven't done that. No point in bargaining against yourself. Money flows need to be the last thing discussed. We know that all the recent B1G entrants have received a reduced rate for a period of time. You first have to persuade them that they want you, before you start taking price.

 

[B1GALUM]

If Maryland wins the lawsuit and just pays around $20 million to exit the ACC, how does that lead to further universities leaving the ACC for the Big Ten? The Big Ten had and may still have interest in southeastern expansion; however, it does not appear that the ACC universities commonly discussed (UNC, VA, Duke, GT) have any interest in joining the Big Ten. These universities voted for the increase in the exit fee to around $52 million and signed the ACC GOR because they want to remain together as part of the ACC.

If the ACC universities are not an option, then who are expansion targets? The Big Ten had and may still have interest in western expansion; however, it does not appear that the Big 12 universities commonly discussed (Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas) have any interest in joining the Big Ten and are bound by the Big 12 GOR. The Big Ten could pursue Missouri and Vanderbilt as part of a southern expansion since the SEC does not have a GOR. However, there is no financial or competitive incentive for either university to defect, Missouri was previously rejected by the Big Ten and Vanderbilt is entrenched in the SEC by history and culture.

Big Ten expansion may not happen; however, it is difficult to dismiss it and the possibility of UConn being a part of it altogether with Big Ten ADs such as Fred Glass dropping comments like "I think 16 (members) might be a bit of a sweet spot" and Dennis Dodds dropping the gem "It isn't done. That's about all I can say. Hint: The conference will begin negotiating on a new TV deal next year. The current contract expires in 2016. Definitely stay tuned." after the ACC and Big 12 signed their GOR. If the Big Ten wants to expand, then I agree that UConn certainly appears to be the best available property and at least has a chance for a B1G invitation.

 

[BC1978]

The ACC continues to sue Maryland, and they stand to lose far more there than they could ever gain in that. That brings into question why? The obvious reason is the ACC doesn't believe other teams will be scared into not leaving the conference unless they somehow win that case or drag it out for an extended period of time.

"Obvious reason?" Gee....speculate much? The truth is that you don't have any idea as to the ACC's strategy. This is your own speculation. Nothing more, nothing less. Just as is your contention that the ACC "stands to lose far more than they could ever gain...." Again, just your speculation...and it should not be confused with fact.

just my two cents.

 

[billybud]

LOL....You have just been exposed to Kook Talk...

Common to several posters like MHVER and the Dude and Bucky.

 

[billybud]

Hey Bucky...

You really don't think that FSU receives money from IMG?

I know that you are no accountant and jump to conclusions...but have you yet found the millions ($8.3 for football staff) spent on athletic coaching salaries in the budget? No? It's because FSU runs a system somewhat different from some institutions

Florida has a state law that limits such salary, from state institution budgets, to a maximum of $200,000.

FSU, like the U of Florida, uses private non profits as direct support organizations and has some portions of salaries paid directly from contractors.

Jimbo's millions come from Nike and IMG.

From 2011

"Fisher’s new contract will pay him $2.75 million per year for five years. The additional compensation in his extended contract will come from FSU’s athletics contract with IMG and Nike, and no public or private donations will be used. "

http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/20892/jimbo-fisher-gets-contract-extension

 

[Fishy]

You guys are kinda insane - you do know that, don't you?

 

[buckaineer]

If Maryland wins the lawsuit and just pays around $20 million to exit the ACC, how does that lead to further universities leaving the ACC for the Big Ten? The Big Ten had and may still have interest in southeastern expansion; however, it does not appear that the ACC universities commonly discussed (UNC, VA, Duke, GT) have any interest in joining the Big Ten. These universities voted for the increase in the exit fee to around $52 million and signed the ACC GOR because they want to remain together as part of the ACC.

If the ACC universities are not an option, then who are expansion targets? The Big Ten had and may still have interest in western expansion; however, it does not appear that the Big 12 universities commonly discussed (Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas) have any interest in joining the Big Ten and are bound by the Big 12 GOR. The Big Ten could pursue Missouri and Vanderbilt as part of a southern expansion since the SEC does not have a GOR. However, there is no financial or competitive incentive for either university to defect, Missouri was previously rejected by the Big Ten and Vanderbilt is entrenched in the SEC by history and culture.

Big Ten expansion may not happen; however, it is difficult to dismiss it and the possibility of UConn being a part of it altogether with Big Ten ADs such as Fred Glass dropping comments like "I think 16 (members) might be a bit of a sweet spot" and Dennis Dodds dropping the gem "It isn't done. That's about all I can say. Hint: The conference will begin negotiating on a new TV deal next year. The current contract expires in 2016. Definitely stay tuned." after the ACC and Big 12 signed their GOR. If the Big Ten wants to expand, then I agree that UConn certainly appears to be the best available property and at least has a chance for a B1G invitation.

There isn't a chance of BIG 12 schools moving to the Big Ten. Revenues are on par with the Big Ten and the league is better on the field. Texas makes more as a member of the BIG 12 than every single school in the nation by a wide margin. Overall all of the schools of the BIG 12 are doing quite well financially, start the Sugar Bowl ownership and competition with the SEC next year and have great increasing revenues from both the conference and from their lucrative tier 3 deals.

The ACC on the other hand is at the opposite end of the spectrum. We see them, right now, taking numerous steps. You don't do these things if you feel "secure". You don't sue a member that is leaving for exhorbitant amounts of revenues that you enact against your conferences bylaws. You don't continue the lawsuit when clearly it puts your member schools in great financial and "political" jeopardy -as presidents and school leaders are forced to reveal conference and network secrets under law. You don't add partial members. You don't add members that fall below your alleged criteria. There have been leaders from schools like FSU and UNC discussing their concern over others greater revenues and FSU's president just bolted for PSU after a year and a half of talking up the ACC and doing whatever he could to slow down the desires of other leaders there from switching to another conference.

The Big Ten does have a new contract coming up and it brings significant new revenues into the league and boosts its revenues by 2020 to over $100 million more than the ACC will be getting. That type of revenue could indeed be a game changer. Of course if the league decided to expand further and can't get any movement then for certain they will look at other areas which could still fit what they need like UConn.

Just going from what they've told us is that the academic element is very important i.e. AAU status. Recruiting and growing territories are very important--primarily the southeast as they've told us many times (Gee of Ohio State envisioned a "sort of a t" being formed--but then again a T could certainly mean UConn as well as other southeastern schools. We will just have to wait and see if the Big Ten sees value in growing at the time they get their new tv contract.

 

[Fishy]

If the Big Ten offers a Big 12 school a spot and they are able to navigate the GOR...they have to go.

Texas will eventually blow the league up and the parts that don't land in the PAC 12 will have to dial 1-800-Call-AAC for their own survival.

 

[buckaineer]

"Obvious reason?" Gee....speculate much? The truth is that you don't have any idea as to the ACC's strategy. This is your own speculation. Nothing more, nothing less. Just as is your contention that the ACC "stands to lose far more than they could ever gain...." Again, just your speculation...and it should not be confused with fact.

just my two cents.

Everybody speculates. ACC types speculate all the time that its case closed in terms of Maryland. No one knows what the courts will rule at this time. We do know though that the ACC continues to sue Maryland despite the fact that Maryland isn't staying. So then that leaves money? Except for the fact that Maryland is suing them with terms that include treble damages. Triple the $52 million--a lawsuit that is proceeding in court in NC, and can be continued in Maryland regardless of what happens in the NC case (on hold now) is serious financial risk to all ACC members--every bit the risk they think they are putting UMD under. There is also discovery happening right now. At least Pittsburgh and probably others are being subpoenaed for information that is sure to be of the damaging nature to the ACC.

And what can ACC schools gain from it? They've already withheld around $16 million from accounts--and Maryland is going to be out of the league by the end of June in just four or so months time. That means at best the ACC can withhold about the amount of the original increased buyout that was pushed through before UMD actually leaves. The chances they would be able to have the state of Maryland fork over anymore than that are pretty slim at best after July 1 2014. So why put all your schools in danger of losing huge sums and having to divulge conference and tv partners secrets in court?

Because you are concerned if you don't do it someone else is going to leave.

 

[buckaineer]

If the Big Ten offers a Big 12 school a spot and they are able to navigate the GOR...they have to go.

Texas will eventually blow the league up and the parts that don't land in the PAC 12 will have to dial 1-800-Call-AAC for their own survival.

Why would a BIG 12 school "have to go"? This makes no sense.

The only reason schools in the P5 are going anywhere is because of money. The Big Ten can't offer more payouts of any significant amount than the BIG 12 will be paying out. In fact with their tier 3 deals on top of their conference payouts per school BIG 12 schools will be right up at with top earning leagues looking down going forward.

The Texas angle is pretty hilarious--they aren't going anywhere and have no reason to--they make far more than anyone in the nation and will continue to throughout the BIG 12's contracts. Besides you can make the same argument anywhere. If Ohio State left the Big Ten, if Oregon or USC left the Pac 12, If Alabama and LSU left the SEC, if FSU left the ACC, all those leagues would be in some serious trouble.

The BIG 12 is stable as any league.

 

[buckaineer]

Hey Bucky...

You really don't think that FSU receives money from IMG?

I know that you are no accountant and jump to conclusions...but have you yet found the millions ($8.3 for football staff) spent on athletic coaching salaries in the budget? No? It's because FSU runs a system somewhat different from some institutions

Florida has a state law that limits such salary, from state institution budgets, to a maximum of $200,000.

FSU, like the U of Florida, uses private non profits as direct support organizations and has some portions of salaries paid directly from contractors.

Jimbo's millions come from Nike and IMG.

From 2011

"Fisher’s new contract will pay him $2.75 million per year for five years. The additional compensation in his extended contract will come from FSU’s athletics contract with IMG and Nike, and no public or private donations will be used. "

http://espn.go.com/blog/acc/post/_/id/20892/jimbo-fisher-gets-contract-extension

BeeBee, FSU recieves money and I never claimed they didn't. Every school in the nation receives money. The discussion isn't about that. It is about the lunatic ACC rant that BIG 12 tier 3 television deals included in some schools overall tier 3 packages doesn't bring in more revenues than tier 3 deals of radio and internet rights and such of schools in other leagues.

Not sure why anyone would try and argue such a thing--it is a ridiculous argument.

The ACC doesn't earn the same money for tier 3 as the BIG 12 does because they can't sell tv rights that are worthwhile and as a result FSU, the top earner in the ACC made $355,000 for non conference broadcast/internet/radio rights while the University of Texas has a $15 million per year deal just for its television rights.

It is why with a combination of tier one and two rights from network partners and their tier 3 media rights Iowa State was able to bring in more media rights revenue than Ohio State last fiscal year.

You attempting to spin something different doesn't change the facts. No one ever claimed FSU doesn't get monies from other sources than their tv contract--again everyone in the country does including every BIG 12 school.

 

[buckaineer]

LOL....You have just been exposed to Kook Talk...

Common to several posters like ER and the Dude and Bucky.

Billybud is the master of Kook Talk--you have seen it recently as he claimed he doesn't have any care about conferences, yet is here talking trash for just that. Bee Bee works the internet 24-7 for the ACC.

 

[Pat125]

If Maryland wins the lawsuit and just pays around $20 million to exit the ACC, how does that lead to further universities leaving the ACC for the Big Ten? The Big Ten had and may still have interest in southeastern expansion; however, it does not appear that the ACC universities commonly discussed (UNC, VA, Duke, GT) have any interest in joining the Big Ten. These universities voted for the increase in the exit fee to around $52 million and signed the ACC GOR because they want to remain together as part of the ACC.

If the ACC universities are not an option, then who are expansion targets? The Big Ten had and may still have interest in western expansion; however, it does not appear that the Big 12 universities commonly discussed (Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas) have any interest in joining the Big Ten and are bound by the Big 12 GOR. The Big Ten could pursue Missouri and Vanderbilt as part of a southern expansion since the SEC does not have a GOR. However, there is no financial or competitive incentive for either university to defect, Missouri was previously rejected by the Big Ten and Vanderbilt is entrenched in the SEC by history and culture.

Big Ten expansion may not happen; however, it is difficult to dismiss it and the possibility of UConn being a part of it altogether with Big Ten ADs such as Fred Glass dropping comments like "I think 16 (members) might be a bit of a sweet spot" and Dennis Dodds dropping the gem "It isn't done. That's about all I can say. Hint: The conference will begin negotiating on a new TV deal next year. The current contract expires in 2016. Definitely stay tuned." after the ACC and Big 12 signed their GOR. If the Big Ten wants to expand, then I agree that UConn certainly appears to be the best available property and at least has a chance for a B1G invitation.

I agree that the teams in the ACC are content with the current membership. But the fact that they had to increase the exit fee and scramble to sign a Grant of Rights suggests there was a certain degree of distrust amongst each other. In other words, some of the schools would consider leaving for the Big Ten or SEC if they thought others would. Should Maryland win the lawsuit, and the belief becomes that it will not be too expensive to leave the ACC, the mutual distrust could begin again.

 

[NickyNewark]

Fishy...

For you...if U need a pair. They seem to be marketed...don't know how ell they are doing.

http://www.kohls.com/product/prd-10...7588969&cpncode=26-305490624-2&CID=shopping15

Billy chop you're own wood and it'll warm you twice!!....where did I see that? in Re: to you're words of wisdom beneath you're comments.

 

[NickyNewark]

Billybud is the master of Kook Talk--you have seen it recently as he claimed he doesn't have any care about conferences, yet is here talking trash for just that. Bee Bee works the internet 24-7 for the ACC.

I've been quite suspicious of some of our southern friends but have been having my doubt's lately?But lot's of us semi-retired sports nuts work the sports circle to get us from FB season to FB season after the new yrs bowl games. I've seen you on frankthetanks blog on CR frequently but I've yet to participate myself.

 

[Fishy]

We're f---ed because we're in the AAC, but at least we're sober and sane.

Our new friends make me feel better about us.