ACC

[nelsonmuntz]

I will just respectfully disagree with these points, Nelson : the fact that a school exists in a location does not deliver that market. Period. Depaul is Depaul. They aren't delivering anything, especially not in the way of value, to the conference. They are just another mouth to feed. Maybe... maybe... they don't hurt the conference. Maybe they are a net wash. But there is no way that they add value just because of their location. Zero eyeballs is zero eyballs.

Second... and, well, there's definitely no way to convince you otherwise (so I won't), but you are way in to conspiracy theory with ESPN and the logic for Pitt and Cuse over UConn. Look out for the black helicopters, they are following you.

I liked your question about why not ESPN just outbidding NBC for ND. Why go through all these conference shenanigans when they could just negotiate directly with ND. (I don't know how long the NBC contract runs for). ESPN must feel that ND would make their ACC investment more valuable to them... though I'd be curious what the incremental difference to ESPN would be. Is it because a deal with independent ND wouldn't necessarily be for all three tiers?

It was just good business on ESPN's part. They saw they would lose a conference, so they killed the conference. Oh, and Defillippo said as much. But CTMike doesn't think so, so it must be some wild conspiracy. As a reminder, I said ESPN was doing this to destroy the Big East before Defillippo opened his mouth to the Globe writer.

You hate the hoops schools. I get it. The football schools still disagree with you.

I do not know why Pitt and Syracuse were picked over UConn and Rutgers, other than what Defillippo told us. But again, you know better.

The irony of your post above is you agree that the "this is all for Notre Dame" argument's logic is tortured, and then you try to explain it again. Our new friend is the only one that has made this case, and the case makes no sense. BTW, NBC just renewed with Notre Dame within the last 2 years. It is likely that ESPN bid and lost on Notre Dame. Yet another indication that ESPN didn't think ND was worth it.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I think this idea that some sort of merger between the ACC and BE was ever thought of is only in your head. Do you really think this was an option or a consideration by the ACC? The ACC, even if you hate them, has been proactive in this stuff and has picked off the teams they wanted. Not once was a team added to fill in holes caused by departures. They know they can add ANY BE team at any time with a phone call. They have 5 teams that prove that. And I still don't get your insistence that NBC is going to throw a ton of money at college sports. Not with so many resources tied up with the main network, the Olympics, NFL, NHL and ND. ABC/ESPN has only college sports and the NBA. They have the national and on-line outlets in place. The infrastructure and tradition is in place. This NBC dream of yours is just another fantasy. And a move of the BE games in both FB and BB to NBC/NBCSports will be a huge loss of visibility of the conference nationwide. As for the other networks, CBS is the SEC in the fall. They don't need anything else. TNT/TBS is Pac12 for FB. And if all they want is content, there are other conferences they can pick off for cheaper money than the BE without a huge drop off in quality.

And, finally, how has the ACC suffered? They did not lose anything and no one knows what there actual 2013/2014 gain will be when the expansion takes place. The TV dollars have not been officially announced by anyone. And even if it is a trivial increase per team as you are projecting is still way more than the BE is looking at post expansion. You can only hope that Uconn suffers that good.

BCU troll.

 

[CTMike]

It was just good business on ESPN's part. They saw they would lose a conference, so they killed the conference. Oh, and Defillippo said as much. But CTMike doesn't think so, so it must be some wild conspiracy. As a reminder, I said ESPN was doing this to destroy the Big East before Defillippo opened his mouth to the Globe writer.

You hate the hoops schools. I get it. The football schools still disagree with you.

I do not know why Pitt and Syracuse were picked over UConn and Rutgers, other than what Defillippo told us. But again, you know better.

The irony of your post above is you agree that the "this is all for Notre Dame" argument's logic is tortured, and then you try to explain it again. Our new friend is the only one that has made this case, and the case makes no sense. BTW, NBC just renewed with Notre Dame within the last 2 years. It is likely that ESPN bid and lost on Notre Dame. Yet another indication that ESPN didn't think ND was worth it.

ESPN didn't say they were trying to kill the Big East. Flipper didn't say ESPN was trying to kill the Big East. He said that ESPN was "telling them what to do" which could mean quite a lot of things short of "kill the Big East". Maybe ESPN said "let's maximize future revenue by adding this team instead of that one" but you heard it as "kill the Big East", because that's what you choose to believe. That's fine. Neither of us liked Flippers comments at the end of the day we just interperet them differently.

I've never made any statements regarding hate for the basketball schools. I do believe a strong all sports conference, with common interests and regional rivalries, is better than a mixed affiliation conference with divided interests. And, I believe that the Big East has too many mouths to feed, simply because I think UConn could make more money if the DePauls of the world weren't sucking at the teet. That's not basketball school hate.

Finally, ND is still a very valuable property. ND in the ACC (or any league) would "rise all boats", in terms of the ACCs (and ESPN's) interests. More eyeballs, more money. Additionally, as many have noted, ND is east-coast centric. IF ND were to ever join a league, the choices would include the ACC or the Big East, because they cover the regions ND wants to associate with. It is not strange at all to me that the ACC would want to make themselves more attractive to ND. I was more curious what prevented ESPN from elimating the ACC middleman and negotiating directly for NDs rights, like you asked. Or if they did, where talks would have broken down. Hence why I was curious if it was a matter of tiers. I'm sure money was an issue as well.

 

[noeynox]

CTMIKE, what Flipper did say was that he lobbied to keep UConn out. Insider say s he is one voice, but I think that one voice only has to convince three others into dissenting votes. Flippers comments definitely poke a hole in his ACC didn't pick UConn because of a failure to schedule a series with ND theory. The fact that a few regular posters are quick to jump in and scream "i told you so", doesn't change that.

 

[UConnDan97]

Nelson Muntz and CTMike are making similar points in my view. Whether you want to call it "Killing off the Big East" or just going after schools of high value that you have the ability to acquire, it still amounts to the same thing. It is akin to us taking Conference USA / Mountain West / MAC schools of high value because we have the ability to poach them. If we had the ability to poach a Clemson or a Florida State, we would.

I agree with CTMike from the standpoint that the non-regional marriage of schools is one of convenience and is going to always be on shaky ground. However, in the world of constant conference realignment, regional schools being together offers only slightly more stability (for more on that, see Pitt, Syracuse, BC, etc.). It's all about the money, money, money...

...which brings me to the final point; Notre Dame. You both agree (as do I) that if ESPN wanted Notre Dame, it would just be easier to outbid the NBC package, rather than to beat around the bush with the realignment scenarios that only "might" bring them to the ACC. I know that everyone thinks ND will be part of an eastern conference, and I agree that they have many east coast ties, but when push comes to shove, I don't see them going anywhere other than the Big10....if at all....just my two cents.

 

[Marty Jackson]

reading these posts over the past couple days, you can get a sense about how people feel regarding the NBE.
I don't know if 'Insider' is or isn't an industry insider, but the logic behind the posts seem legit. If nothing else, he's provided some good insight into the expansion craze.
Personally, I'd love to see the NBE become successful because I think we can become a dominant program here on the football side. Eventually, I do think we'll wind up in the ACC, but after reading these posts I am not so certain that this is a great goal.
Since 2003, what's really hurt this conference is that we haven't had a truly dominant team or two. Yes WVU was clearly the flag bearer, but they weren't dominant. The fact that Uconn has won 2 BE titles says a lot... I think the year that WVU lost to Pitt and could have been bound for the NC was huge for the perception of the league. Just when a team was about to break-through, they tripped up. That seems to be the story-line. Even when we perform better than the ACC and pac 12 and finish higher in the BCS rankings (which has happened several times), the perception is that we are still weaker.
We have some solid teams with potential. we need 3-4 to start finishing in the top 25 (and 1 in the Top 10), to gain some credibility. I think that can happen, which makes me excited for this league. Boise, Louisville, Cincy, and Houston have that potential along with USF. In a year or two, add Uconn to that Top 25 list.

 

[UConnDan97]

We have some solid teams with potential. we need 3-4 to start finishing in the top 25 (and 1 in the Top 10), to gain some credibility. I think that can happen, which makes me excited for this league. Boise, Louisville, Cincy, and Houston have that potential along with USF. In a year or two, add Uconn to that Top 25 list.

This is a great point, and I agree with the potential. If the NNBE sticks together for long enough, I think it will be a very solid league, and I'm excited about the possibilities too. Of course, that is all predicated on the NNBE not getting shut out of things by the "new non-BCS" format.

 

[CTMike]

CTMIKE, what Flipper did say was that he lobbied to keep UConn out. Insider say s he is one voice, but I think that one voice only has to convince three others into dissenting votes. Flippers comments definitely poke a hole in his ACC didn't pick UConn because of a failure to schedule a series with ND theory. The fact that a few regular posters are quick to jump in and scream "i told you so", doesn't change that.

Completely agree and I hope Flipper burns in hell for his pettiness. Though, I don't think that means the failure to schedule ND theory is totally bunk - just one in a large number of factors.

 

[SAMCRO]

The next 2 realignment dominoes will be:
- As everyone has predicted, UL to the B12 over the summer;
- and one or both of UConn/Rutgers in the fall, just prior to the date when the BE can open up their TV contract for negotiations.

This is just my opinion, but based on the facts that every time the the BE seemed to be pulling itself up by the boot straps and getting on their feet, another dominoe has fallen. This will be no different as we get closer to the dates the league can open up the negotiating. ESPN does not want NBC in their kitchen, and make no mistake about it, ESPN's kitchen is college sports (FB and BB specifically).

 

[CTMike]

We all agree more than disagree I think. We all want the best for UConn at the end of the day. It's just the first commandment of interent message boards to dissent. If I met Nelson I'd be happy to buy him a beer.

 

[AJC88]

I think that ND would turn down a comparable offer from ESPN compared to NBC because they are the only show on NBC, as opposed to one of many teams in a conference affiliated with ESPN.
Nelson- you assertion that ESPN should just throw 50 million at them is STOOPID. Why overpay when you can weaken the Big East to the point where you have a chance to lure them into the conference you hold the keys to?
Notre Dame is concerned with its independence and its profile. Why be one of many when you can be on a network as the ONLY show?

 

[Carl Spackler]

It was just good business on ESPN's part. They saw they would lose a conference, so they killed the conference. Oh, and Defillippo said as much. But CTMike doesn't think so, so it must be some wild conspiracy. As a reminder, I said ESPN was doing this to destroy the Big East before Defillippo opened his mouth to the Globe writer.

You hate the hoops schools. I get it. The football schools still disagree with you.

I do not know why Pitt and Syracuse were picked over UConn and Rutgers, other than what Defillippo told us. But again, you know better.

The irony of your post above is you agree that the "this is all for Notre Dame" argument's logic is tortured, and then you try to explain it again. Our new friend is the only one that has made this case, and the case makes no sense. BTW, NBC just renewed with Notre Dame within the last 2 years. It is likely that ESPN bid and lost on Notre Dame. Yet another indication that ESPN didn't think ND was worth it.

I think you nailed it with Syracuse and Pitt leadership. Easy targets. UConn, I believe, would only have been willing if they were approached by Syracuse first.

I think it's pretty clear that the ACC was doing two things with expansion. It was building a reinforcement, in case some of it's own members defected, and at the same time, specifically trying to weaken the Big East conference as much as possible. For the ACC, their own interests in becoming a stronger basketball league, and for ESPN - to get in the backdoor to negotiating with Notre Dame.

That's how I believe Syracuse and UConn were arrived at by the ACC expansion committee, and the lobbying by a certain member of the committee from Boston College, is what changed UConn to Pitt.

They accomplished one task successfully. I don't foresee any other conference besides the Big East, being concerned about adding 2012 Pitt or Syracuse to their coffers. So the ACC is safe there in case some other members defect, and who knows, maybe a new big east, is more desireable to Syracuse and Pitt in the future.......

But although Syracuse and Pitt leaving the Big East, has caused a significant change and weakening in the big east basketball conference for the negative, the movement has caused a monumental shift in the Big East conference mode of operation and priorities, and Big East conference, that puts highest piority on football, is goig t be even more difficult for the ACC to handle than te Big East in the past.

Look at he revenue streams - it's all you need to do. The ACC is not a desireable place to be.

 

[UConnDan97]

We all agree more than disagree I think. We all want the best for UConn at the end of the day. It's just the first commandment of interent message boards to dissent. If I met Nelson I'd be happy to buy him a beer.

Amen! +1 to this ^

 

[SubbaBub]

The one thing I haven't read here yet is the fact that Uconn was always more loyal to the BE than any of the departing schools ever were. As a former BB only, we still preferred a stronger BE to a split or escape. That of course has changed, but I think our stance was well known that the university would have had some reservations about abandoning ship back then.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I think that ND would turn down a comparable offer from ESPN compared to NBC because they are the only show on NBC, as opposed to one of many teams in a conference affiliated with ESPN.
Nelson- you assertion that ESPN should just throw 50 million at them is STOOPID. Why overpay when you can weaken the Big East to the point where you have a chance to lure them into the conference you hold the keys to?
Notre Dame is concerned with its independence and its profile. Why be one of many when you can be on a network as the ONLY show?

So in your world Notre Dame simply will not sign with ESPN. That sounds a little silly, but fine, let's run with it for now. I would assume that ESPN knows this and has probably been told as much by Notre Dame, if your assertion is true. So, if that is the case, why would ESPN pay the ACC $50 million more and the Big 12 another $30-40 million just to try and shake ND loose from the Big East if ND is never going to sign with ESPN anyway? The assertion that all of this was driven by ESPN's desire to get Notre Dame into a league it controlled makes no sense.

 

[Carl Spackler]

So in your world Notre Dame simply will not sign with ESPN. That sounds a little silly, but fine, let's run with it for now. I would assume that ESPN knows this and has probably been told as much by Notre Dame, if your assertion is true. So, if that is the case, why would ESPN pay the ACC $50 million more and the Big 12 another $30-40 million just to try and shake ND loose from the Big East if ND is never going to sign with ESPN anyway? The assertion that all of this was driven by ESPN's desire to get Notre Dame into a league it controlled makes no sense.

Money always talks, but I don't think ESPN offers what Notre Dame wants for it's college football saturdays. There's a difference between CBS, NBC, ABC, and Rupert Murdoch's baby and what ESPN offers. IN a bidding war, my opinion is that Notre Dame is going to stick with the traditional networks. Is that true? maybe, maybe not....but let's run with that assumption.

But before I continue. It was not my assertion that all of this was ESPN's desire to get Notre Dame into a conference. That's the newbies' thing. My assertion is that ESPN wants Notre Dame as a asset, conference affiliation irrelevant. I agree with you, ESPN is investing all that money in the ACC and the Big 12, and elsewhere, because those are their assets, and they're not interested at all in seeing a major competitor raise up in the form of the Big East. That's their primary motivation in weakening the Big East. They also have a huge conflict of interest that will eventually be have to seriously be dealth with. A major traditional network, is not of the same mold as ESPN, in that they don't have the internal diametric problem in that ESPN reports news and publicisizes the very same material that they are invested in for profit. There is a conflict of interest there, that I don't see how it stays out of the courts for ever. The traditional networks don't have that, they have plenty of other stuff going on besides reporting on sports, and broadcasting sports. But I digress......

The same way that ESPN was able to acquire both Texas and BYU, and their market following, they want Notre Dame football. That's what I'm talking about.

It becomes much easier, in my opinion, to shake Notre Dame football loose from the traditional major network format of broadcasting that they (my opinion) favor, and go to a "cable" provider, if they are forced to go entirely independant with their entire athletic department. With the ability to farm out the athletic department to a conference, and in this case, the most profitable, by far, non-football revenue conference in the country.....ESPN doesn't have a chance to land Notre Dame football unless they go to auction and simply don't stop raising until they outbid the major networks.

But how much money does ESPN really have left to spend? A big east conference that is no longer viable for Notre Dame scheduling wise, to maintain 1-A status.....it is my assertion.....in addition to reducing the potential competition in general for ESPN, is also a situation that would make an exclusive deal with ESPN, much more palatable to ND.

Make sense?

 

[AJC88]

So in your world Notre Dame simply will not sign with ESPN. That sounds a little silly, but fine, let's run with it for now. I would assume that ESPN knows this and has probably been told as much by Notre Dame, if your assertion is true. So, if that is the case, why would ESPN pay the ACC $50 million more and the Big 12 another $30-40 million just to try and shake ND loose from the Big East if ND is never going to sign with ESPN anyway? The assertion that all of this was driven by ESPN's desire to get Notre Dame into a league it controlled makes no sense.

No, not what I was getting at. In the long run they may be forced into a conference. Forced being the key word. If they have their way, which they have up until this time, they will remain independant and remain as the only attraction on NBC. If however, ESPN can destabilize their situation to such a point that they need to choose a conference, the ACC is a likely beneficiary of such a move. ESPN is the ultimate beneficiary as they control all of the ACC's rights for the next 14 years or so
That more clear on what I was trying to get across?

 

[Marty Jackson]

I think you nailed it with Syracuse and Pitt leadership. Easy targets. UConn, I believe, would only have been willing if they were approached by Syracuse first.

I think it's pretty clear that the ACC was doing two things with expansion. It was building a reinforcement, in case some of it's own members defected, and at the same time, specifically trying to weaken the Big East conference as much as possible. For the ACC, their own interests in becoming a stronger basketball league, and for ESPN - to get in the backdoor to negotiating with Notre Dame.

That's how I believe Syracuse and UConn were arrived at by the ACC expansion committee, and the lobbying by a certain member of the committee from Boston College, is what changed UConn to Pitt.

They accomplished one task successfully. I don't foresee any other conference besides the Big East, being concerned about adding 2012 Pitt or Syracuse to their coffers. So the ACC is safe there in case some other members defect, and who knows, maybe a new big east, is more desireable to Syracuse and Pitt in the future.......

But although Syracuse and Pitt leaving the Big East, has caused a significant change and weakening in the big east basketball conference for the negative, the movement has caused a monumental shift in the Big East conference mode of operation and priorities, and Big East conference, that puts highest piority on football, is goig t be even more difficult for the ACC to handle than te Big East in the past.

Look at he revenue streams - it's all you need to do. The ACC is not a desireable place to be.

I don't think that the ACC had a motive to specifically weaken the BE. I think they were acting in the best interest of the ACC. If that aligned with weakening the BE then it was by coincidence. At the same time, who's the ACC going to poach? Their TV contract is only favorable to teams from the BE and geographically the East coast makes sense. If killing the BE was the #1 goal, they would have taken us and Rutgers already. That would have left cincy, uofl and usf which would have been the final death blow to BE FB (before all the expansion).
I do believe that they have an eye on getting ND, and that was part of the incentive for taking Syr and Pitt. There is a plan that Swofford is following and it is focused on improving the ACC's money grab. I don't think 'the insider' is far off in his commentary regarding their plans and strategy in doing so. They are essentially taking the value that exists out of the BE and dropping the dead weight. At some point, ND may have to join and why not create a bridge to do so.
5 years ago, if you said that ND would join anywhere but the big10 you'd be considered crazy (assumng ND decides to give up their independence). Now, the ACC is arguably in the game and considered a good fit for ND over the Big10.

 

[junglehusky]

Well... there are different opinions and views here on the Boneyard, based on differing information. And that's probably not that different than what's going on with the power players in the athletics departments and provosts / presidents' offices, who have access to better information and are talking to the TV people. We know for example, that Nova is having an internal debate with some of the people being pro-upgrade and others (not just the faculty) wanting to stay away. We've heard about FSU being unhappy about the basketball-centric direction of the ACC, but they haven't bolted yet. We saw Pitt exploring the B12 before the ACC, at the same time they were involved in the BE decision to renew or not with ESPN. There are probably some people at UConn who were against our communications with the ACC. And on the media side they are also doing their due diligence and making forecasts and whatnot, so it stands to reason there are different opinions about the future of school X's vs. school Y's market potential in the ESPN and NBC offices as well.

I guess my point is that there are different agendas, for sure Flipper played some part, but the pattern that emerges is a dynamic one as opposed to some grand conspiracy. It's easier to understand a conspiracy so that's why people on the internet think in those terms... but that's usually an over-simplification.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

No, not what I was getting at. In the long run they may be forced into a conference. Forced being the key word. If they have their way, which they have up until this time, they will remain independant and remain as the only attraction on NBC. If however, ESPN can destabilize their situation to such a point that they need to choose a conference, the ACC is a likely beneficiary of such a move. ESPN is the ultimate beneficiary as they control all of the ACC's rights for the next 14 years or so
That more clear on what I was trying to get across?

No, it is not clear. You are saying ESPN would pay the ACC and Big 12 an extra $80-90 million to destabilize the Big East so that ND may join one of their leagues, right after ESPN didn't bid more than $14 million to get ND outright. Your argument makes no sense.

 

[UConnJim]

The ND/ACC scenarios make sense. Clearly, ND adds the most value to any league. There appears to be two conferences that could make sense for ND: ACC or Big 1G. (ND is not going to Big 12.). Checking the future ND schedules and I see that with the recent additions of Syracuse and Pitt, ND will play 4 ACC schools in 2015 and in 2016, so they are already playing half of an ACC schedule. If UConn had a LT deal with ND instead of Syracuse, that would have changed the math in UConn favor.

There have been rumors that if ND had to join a conference, they would prefer the ACC over Big 1G, but nobody knows for sure. Here is how a potential ACC schedule could work out for ND:

8 ACC games
USC
Navy
Rotate Michigan and Michigan St every other year
1 other game against either Stanford, Air Force, or another team.

One last point. Don't you find it interesting that the ACC has targeted Big East schools that have traditionally played ND? (VT was not originally targeted, but was let in due to political pressure.)

 

[AJC88]

No, it is not clear. You are saying ESPN would pay the ACC and Big 12 an extra $80-90 million to destabilize the Big East so that ND may join one of their leagues, right after ESPN didn't bid more than $14 million to get ND outright. Your argument makes no sense.

What do you not get about ND wanting to be the only show on a major network? I've put it in both posts. Either your reading comprehension is low (which I doubt as you do SEEM to have a high level of intelligence), or you just choose to read a piece of a post and ignore the rest. If it is the latter, which I suspect, then shame on you, as my posts are no where near the length of someone like Carl.

 

[Carl Spackler]

The one thing I haven't read here yet is the fact that Uconn was always more loyal to the BE than any of the departing schools ever were. As a former BB only, we still preferred a stronger BE to a split or escape. That of course has changed, but I think our stance was well known that the university would have had some reservations about abandoning ship back then.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk

I've said this before, I'll say again now. Since the moment that we (UConn) made the decision to go 1-A in 1997. I wanted out of the Big East. I can tell you, that of all the millions that follow UConn sports.....maybe me and a number of people that I can count on my fingers and toes felt the same way. When we were breaking through with national championships left in right in women's and men's basketball, and the school was reveling in the glow of the basketball successes. I firmly wanted out of the Big East. I was pissed off with my alma mater in 2003 for solidarity with the Big East, and don't even get me started on Blumenthal. Talk about #begharder.....in the wrong direction......

Anyway.... UConn, has overwhelmingly majority been in favor of loyalty to the Big EAst from 1979-2011. I could yell all I want about college football, and no one would listen. It wasn't until Susan Herbst showed up from Georgia, and got hit with the situation and laid it out clear to the Big East, that UConn has in any way since day 1, shown any kind of non-solidarity with the Big EAst. I'm proud of the way she did it. She didn't go behind anybody's back, and clearly voiced our interests.

I still remember exactly where I was, and what I was doing when I found out Cuse and Pitt were gone to the ACC in September 2011. I was as shocked as anyone. At that time, I favored an immediate split of the remaining football schools, or going independant over continuing with the big east, and wrote all about it.

But the tipping point, clearly had been reached in the rest of the Big East conference. Even though Marinatto had been trying since taking over from Tranghese in July 2009, he didn't have full support yet around football from the traditional Catholic backbone of this conference. The loss of Syracuse and Pitt, followed by the mess with WVU, and the Big XII and Chuck Neinas stabilizing itself, UConn clearly voicing that we have to do what's best for our institution.......the Big East has changed. In a way I never thought possible.

I find it more than ironic, that I am now 100% behind the Big East conference, and the tables have turned, and it seems that there is me, and maybe a number of people that I can count on my fingers and toes, out of the millions that follow UConn sports, that are now behind the Big East, while the rest want out. (Exaggeration for effect)

With the football interests of this conference set as top priority, as the understanding by the basketball conference....that a stable and powerful football conference is what will keep the basketball conference tops in the country....I firmly believe the Big East is going to more than fine in the future.

 

[junglehusky]

Carl... I couldn't make it through your latest previous book chapter, so maybe you mentioned it and I missed it, but you are aware ESPN and ABC are under the Disney umbrella together? Every media conglomerate has a mishmash of entertainment, sports, and news reporting. Disney/ABC, Murdoch/Fox, NBC/Comcast/Universal, Viacom/CBS, Time-Warner, etc.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

What do you not get about ND wanting to be the only show on a major network? I've put it in both posts. Either your reading comprehension is low (which I doubt as you do SEEM to have a high level of intelligence), or you just choose to read a piece of a post and ignore the rest. If it is the latter, which I suspect, then shame on you, as my posts are no where near the length of someone like Carl.

Oh, now I get it. Notre Dame WANTS to be on NBC. How about this question: If ESPN is willing to pay $70-80 million per year for the next 10 years for the chance that they might shake ND loose from the Big East and destroy a conference in the process, then Notre Dame must be worth millions more than that to ESPN. $100MM/year? $150MM/year? It would have to be a big number, because the $70-80MM/year that ESPN has already added to their bill doesn't even include the tens of millions they would have to pay Notre Dame in your scenario.

If all that is true, how come NBC is only paying ND about $2MM a home game? Are you saying Notre Dame turned down $100MM+/year from ESPN to make $14MM/year on NBC? That is what you would have to believe for your theory to work. That is what you would have to believe to go along with our new friend's theory that all of this was an elaborate plot to get Notre Dame.

 

[Marty Jackson]

For whatever the reasons, ND has put a significant value on their FB independance. that value, plus the money they get from their deals with NBC and the BE has ND in a position where they 'feel' they can compete on a level playing field with the other major players. When any of those variables change such that ND deems it can't compete you'll see a change in their position.
It's that simple.

 

[Carl Spackler]

You want to really see me go out to left field, start talking about how Catholicism in the United States is under siege and how it relates to Notre Dame and the Big East conference and television broadcasting...... want to see me get the Pope involved in a college football discussion? LOL

Oh, now I get it. Notre Dame WANTS to be on NBC. How about this question: If ESPN is willing to pay $70-80 million per year for the next 10 years for the chance that they might shake ND loose from the Big East and destroy a conference in the process, then Notre Dame must be worth millions more than that to ESPN. $100MM/year? $150MM/year? It would have to be a big number, because the $70-80MM/year that ESPN has already added to their bill doesn't even include the tens of millions they would have to pay Notre Dame in your scenario.

If all that is true, how come NBC is only paying ND about $2MM a home game? Are you saying Notre Dame turned down $100MM+/year from ESPN to make $14MM/year on NBC? That is what you would have to believe for your theory to work. That is what you would have to believe to go along with our new friend's theory that all of this was an elaborate plot to get Notre Dame.

I think that ESPN is investing strongly to strengthen the assets it already owns, and I think they are working hard to make sure that any competition in the sports broadcasting world has a hard time establishing themselves in the market, and I think they are always interested in acquiring new sports product at minimal cost, and Notre Dame is a prime commodity that they don't own. That's all. The rest is all internet message board fodder. The exact terms of the NBC/Notre Dame deal are not known to many people, and it's well guarded info.

I think that in the absence of a true playoff system to determine a national champ among all 1-A programs in the country, that the Big East is constantly going to be playing second fiddle to the other AQ conferences, because we're 20 years behind in the game, and nearly fell off the gravy train entirely in 2011 because of the failure to commit to football for so long.

That, does not mean that the Big East won't continue to be successful.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Carl... I couldn't make it through your latest previous book chapter, so maybe you mentioned it and I missed it, but you are aware ESPN and ABC are under the Disney umbrella together? Every media conglomerate has a mishmash of entertainment, sports, and news reporting. Disney/ABC, Murdoch/Fox, NBC/Comcast/Universal, Viacom/CBS, Time-Warner, etc.

Yes.

 

[businesslawyer]

Oh, now I get it. Notre Dame WANTS to be on NBC. How about this question: If ESPN is willing to pay $70-80 million per year for the next 10 years for the chance that they might shake ND loose from the Big East and destroy a conference in the process, then Notre Dame must be worth millions more than that to ESPN. $100MM/year? $150MM/year? It would have to be a big number, because the $70-80MM/year that ESPN has already added to their bill doesn't even include the tens of millions they would have to pay Notre Dame in your scenario.

If all that is true, how come NBC is only paying ND about $2MM a home game? Are you saying Notre Dame turned down $100MM+/year from ESPN to make $14MM/year on NBC? That is what you would have to believe for your theory to work. That is what you would have to believe to go along with our new friend's theory that all of this was an elaborate plot to get Notre Dame.

I understand you point, and agree with some of the logic, but if the ACC is unwilling to pay NDU a bigger share than anyone else than a lot of what you said goes out the window.

 

[FromTheInside]

This thread is turning into every other "I hate the basketball schools" thread that this board has ever had. I will respectfully disagree on your characterization of Depaul at the least, and likely Providence too. Chicago is a huge market that actually follows Depaul if Depaul is even remotely competitive, and Depaul's commitment to basketball should not be questioned since they took Clemson's coach to the tune of about $1.6 million per year. Providence is a decent sized market with no competition and also does well if they are remotely competitive. I agree that Seton Hall is almost completely redundant. That said, the football schools could walk away any time they wanted, and they didn't. Unless you know something they don't, I will assume they have hired consultants to measure the league's value with and without the hoops schools, and they came back as a net positive. And the cost of the hoops schools was going to go up with any new TV deal based on the ESPN offer from May 2011, and the football schools still kept them.

The right move in September 2011 was not for everyone to grab a lifeboat, but to go to NBC with a Big East/ACC merger proposal for the whole league, splitting off from the hoops schools. Instead, the ACC got a trivial per team increase on their TV deal and the Big East got hammered. Both leagues suffered.

I’m going to answer these two questions together, b/c they both have a similar answer.

I agree & understand that DePaul is a popular in Chicago when they’re good. However, for any school, their value TO THE CONFERENCE is three-fold: TV revenue, post-season revenue, and cross-marketing (which is indirect TV revenue).

TV draw, as with all teams, ebbs & flows w/ the quality & performance of the teams. This is where DePaul, Providence, and Seton Hall seriously lag. DePaul has had 2 NCAA tourney appearances in the last TWENTY YEARS! They have had ZERO top 25 finishes. Providence has had 4 NCAA tourney appearances & 1 ranked team in the last 20 years, with only 1 appearance in the last decade. And, Seton Hall has had 5 NCAA tourney appearances, and 1 ranked team in the last 20 years, with that ranked team coming 20 years ago. So, their post season revenue has been abysmal. And, b/c they have sucked for almost the entirety of the past 2 decades, their TV #s have been abysmal as well. At present, their only value is through cross-marketing, which is simply opening up teams to TV markets they wouldn’t otherwise have. Cross marketing is why a team like GA Tech is so valuable, b/c despite the fact that their TV numbers are far less than UGA, teams like FSU & Clemson draw really, really well in Atlanta b/c of the market access through GA Tech being in the conference.

All that said, if you were to breakdown the revenue streams generated per team for the conference, these 3 teams would most likely be dead last. And that is why I referred to them as dead weight.

As for the ACC & BE merging, the answer lies in the answer above. From a financial standpoint, it would actually cause the per team payout to drop, not increase. First, although USF has put together a good football program, and is even growing their basketball now, they don’t draw well in their home market (though I do believe that will change over the next decade if they continue to play well). Further, the ACC already has 2 of the 3 most popular Florida teams locked up in FSU & Miami. USF has no TV value for the ACC, and no cross-marketing value. Their only revenue value would be post-season play. But, as with all teams, you have to ask yourself how a team like USF would fare in the ACC. If they’re going to be middle of the road (7-8 wins a year), then all they’re really doing is taking the place of one of the other middle of the road ACC teams that would get pushed down by USF’s arrival. So, their revenue value is minimal.

Cincy is very similar. They’ve been a very successful in both football, and to a lesser extent, basketball. And, I could see them continuing to perform well in the ACC. Their problem is they have very weak TV #s, and amongst the worst fan support in the BE. They’re fans don’t come to the games, and they don’t donate $$$ to the program. B/c of Cincy’s weak TV #s, there’s minimal cross-marketing of teams. It’s a market that nobody from the BE draws well in. And, there’s no reason to think that wouldn’t continue in the ACC. So, you’d be taking Cincy based on their post season payouts, and hoping that never changes. That’s a big risk. Granted, there’s the opportunity to help grow their grand by being in a better conference, but most conferences don’t like taking those kinds of risks.

Rutgers has similar issues, but they have one asset that would/could make them attractive………they’re in a strong TV market, though their own TV #s haven’t been great. Revenue wise, Rutgers has brought in minimal post-season revenue. They draw well when they’re rarely good….VERY well. But, the issue is, they rarely have a quality team in any sport. They’re more of a wildcard for a conference, b/c they could be a huge asset if they get their programs to perform well, but otherwise, they’re middling, with only the appeal of cross-marketing.

More than anything though, the ACC is an academically focused league. They would never entertain the idea of adding teams like Cincy, USF, etc unless it was a life or death (of the conference) type scenario.