BiG CR articles | Page 7 | The Boneyard

BiG CR articles

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,143
Reaction Score
45,560
The ACC schools that have instate rivals in the SEC like Louisville because they do as well. There was a debate in the conference between playing 8 conference games per season or playing 9. We were at 9, and they complained about their ability to schedule with 9 due to their SEC rivals. The other schools didn't have this issue. It's similar in the SEC where Alabama/Auburn and the Mississippi schools want 9 games. They don't have an instate ACC rival. This was a factor for the votes of Miami, FSU, GT, and Clemson. The vote was taken before the Sugar Bowl, but Louisville's spanking of the Florida Gators has added to their popularity in that part of the ACC.

Additionally, Louisville has recently wrapped up home and home series against NC State, UNC, Miami, and FSU over the past decade. They have a history of ticket sales in these ACC stadiums for football that impressed these schools. The same went for bowl games against Wake Forest, NC State, and Virginia Tech.

I personally would like to see UConn invited, and I've explained that here. Virginia sits in the mid-Atlantic and has a long history of playing northeastern schools dating all the way back to when the Ivy League Schools dominated college football. We owe Yale, Princeton, and Penn a few lossses even though we obviously don't play them anymore. I also like the academic resume of UConn.

I happen to think all of this is wildly overblown. And the ACC will soon find that out. It's kind of laughable actually.

Swofford is not nearly the strategist that Delany is. Swofford is always a day late and a dollar short.
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2013
Messages
268
Reaction Score
134
Read Nicky's post about Maryland getting the same deal in the end that Rutgers did.
I did. It is not the same deal. It may work out to be pretty even in the end, but they clearly worked with Maryland to front load the deal to allow them to move financially. So if they can work with Maryland, why can't they work with Vandy or Mizzou?

And, I did say that the B1G would have to pony up to get Missouri. It was in my very first post on this matter.
I agree with you.

Lastly, consider that RU could have gone to the B1G this year as well, but it's in the AAC. Why? Because B1G schedules, with 9 games in conference, will be very hard to rearrange at that short notice. It will take two years for any team to join the B1G. So the $60m loss from the SEC is automatic. Next, the question is, will the B1G hold a school like Missouri to the same deal it gave Maryland and Rutgers? I would do research on Nebraska but I suspect they got the same deal as the other schools. Penn State too had to buy in and be vested. This is pretty common across all conferences. You actually GIVE the new conference money. Virgina Tech and UConn did it in the BE.
The reason Rutgers is not in the B1G this year is because Maryland has not left the ACC. If Maryland had left, Rutgers would be in the B1G and Ville in the ACC. It would cost a whole lot less than $60 million dollars to create a new schedule. The Big East did it last year after WVU left and it took only a couple weeks.

I still say the monetary loss to Missouri would be so huge that there would be absolutely no reason for them to do it. If you're in a flailing conference like the BE or in the future the B12, then it's a helluva lot easier to move. The other conferences are locked in. If the B1G wants a 15th, UConn is a prime candidate.
The B1G only wants a 15th if they can have a 16th. That is why we are talking about this.
 
Joined
Jun 17, 2013
Messages
1,537
Reaction Score
4,094
The ACC schools that have instate rivals in the SEC like Louisville because they do as well. There was a debate in the conference between playing 8 conference games per season or playing 9. We were at 9, and they complained about their ability to schedule with 9 due to their SEC rivals. The other schools didn't have this issue. It's similar in the SEC where Alabama/Auburn and the Mississippi schools want 9 games. They don't have an instate ACC rival. This was a factor for the votes of Miami, FSU, GT, and Clemson. The vote was taken before the Sugar Bowl, but Louisville's spanking of the Florida Gators has added to their popularity in that part of the ACC.

Additionally, Louisville has recently wrapped up home and home series against NC State, UNC, Miami, and FSU over the past decade. They have a history of ticket sales in these ACC stadiums for football that impressed these schools. The same went for bowl games against Wake Forest, NC State, and Virginia Tech.

I personally would like to see UConn invited, and I've explained that here. Virginia sits in the mid-Atlantic and has a long history of playing northeastern schools dating all the way back to when the Ivy League Schools dominated college football. We owe Yale, Princeton, and Penn a few lossses even though we obviously don't play them anymore. I also like the academic resume of UConn.

I get what drove the Louisville decision, although I do think Jurich out worked Manuel during that critical Thanksgiving week last year and it made a difference. Long term, the academic gulf between some of the ACC schools is going to be a problem. There is no greater difference in a D-1 sports conference (P-5 conference) then the academic disparity between Duke, UVA, UNC, Mia, BC on the one hand and Louisville on the other. The ACC was known as strong academic conference before the Louisville add and now it has been cheapened. You can't blend a school that accepts 72% of its applicants and only graduates 51% after 6 years with a Duke, UVA, UNC, Mia, BC. It may work short term for football, but this disparity will catch up to you. The ACC went from ahead of the B1G in my mind to behind it quickly on the academic front. I have said that I would love to see UConn in a conference with the likes of UVA and UNC because those are the types of public universities we strive to be. Louisville? That changes the complexion of the ACC. We would still jump at an offer, but I hope it is the B1G that calls.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,143
Reaction Score
45,560

Nebraska took 2 years to leave. The B1G is locked in schedule wise. That conference, more than any other, has huge stadiums. They like their home games. They love playing those gimme games in front of 100,000 fans. You're not going to move those schools off those games. This means it's a lot more difficult to rearrange a 9 game conference schedule.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,143
Reaction Score
45,560
I get what drove the Louisville decision, although I do think Jurich out worked Manuel during that critical Thanksgiving week last year and it made a difference. Long term, the academic gulf between some of the ACC schools is going to be a problem. There is no greater difference in a D-1 sports conference (P-5 conference) then the academic disparity between Duke, UVA, UNC, Mia, BC on the one hand and Louisville on the other. The ACC was known as strong academic conference before the Louisville add and now it has been cheapened. You can't blend a school that accepts 72% of its applicants and only graduates 51% after 6 years with a Duke, UVA, UNC, Mia, BC. It may work short term for football, but this disparity will catch up to you. The ACC went from ahead of the B1G in my mind to behind it quickly on the academic front. I have said that I would love to see UConn in a conference with the likes of UVA and UNC because those are the types of public universities we strive to be. Louisville? That changes the complexion of the ACC. We would still jump at an offer, but I hope it is the B1G that calls.

UNC clearly has no problem with the way Louisville takes kids. U Virginia on the other hand lives in a talent rich football and basketball state, and underperforms in relation to the available talent. I don't know why but from the outside it looks like Virginia has higher standards. Maybe I'm wrong, don't know.
 
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
2,444
Reaction Score
1,020
No
No doubt this is fantastic for Rutgers. But we're talking about an SEC team. That's a $15 million loss per year for an SEC team to move. Assuming your niece is right (I actually read worse numbers than that, with RU starting at 25%, so I figured an average of 50%), the lost is more like $15m per year - $1.5m every year. So, $15m, $13.5m, $12m, $10.5m, $9m, 7.5m, $6m, or a total of $73.5 + $60m less in the last 2 years of the SEC deal.
The B1G isn't that ridiculous too shamefully offer even Buffalo or Lax only JHU maybe 25%....how stupid and cheezy would that make the B1G look in a conference were everyones an equal?I think even Neb got the same as RU as they only received a half share in yr 1!!@But that sounds about right for an affiliate member like Lax only JHU or even less but not much less!15%?Just a guess on that!
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
538
Reaction Score
182
For future schools that join the Big Ten the biggest thing that will hold them back from full shares will be the amount of money it takes to vest into BTN - as the value of the network goes up, newer members will need to pay more in order to fully vest into the channel.

They negotiate the exact terms on a school by school basis though - Maryland's basically going to setting aside future payout increases to pay into the channel but getting a "full share" immediately when they join - it just won't escalate up as quickly as the other members.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,143
Reaction Score
45,560
For future schools that join the Big Ten the biggest thing that will hold them back from full shares will be the amount of money it takes to vest into BTN - as the value of the network goes up, newer members will need to pay more in order to fully vest into the channel.

They negotiate the exact terms on a school by school basis though - Maryland's basically going to setting aside future payout increases to pay into the channel but getting a "full share" immediately when they join - it just won't escalate up as quickly as the other members.

Were it not for the GOR, I would say that's much easier for an ACC school making $17 million to move to the B1G than an SEC school making $30 million.
 
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
2,444
Reaction Score
1,020

I get what drove the Louisville decision, although I do think Jurich out worked Manuel during that critical Thanksgiving week last year and it made a difference. Long term, the academic gulf between some of the ACC schools is going to be a problem. There is no greater difference in a D-1 sports conference (P-5 conference) then the academic disparity between Duke, UVA, UNC, Mia, BC on the one hand and Louisville on the other. The ACC was known as strong academic conference before the Louisville add and now it has been cheapened. You can't blend a school that accepts 72% of its applicants and only graduates 51% after 6 years with a Duke, UVA, UNC, Mia, BC. It may work short term for football, but this disparity will catch up to you. The ACC went from ahead of the B1G in my mind to behind it quickly on the academic front. I have said that I would love to see UConn in a conference with the likes of UVA and UNC because those are the types of public universities we strive to be. Louisville? That changes the complexion of the ACC. We would still jump at an offer, but I hope it is the B1G that calls.
Is it worth there schools academic reputation?How much is a schools reputation worth?Mizzou academicians all wanted into the B1G!Do they still after being nixed?
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,143
Reaction Score
45,560
Is it worth there schools academic reputation?How much is a schools reputation worth?Mizzou academicians all wanted into the B1G!Do they still after being nixed?

Conference affiliation has nothing to do with academic rep. Absolutely no one holds the SEC against Vanderbilt. This is why BC's claims about the ACC's academic prowess are absolutely ludicrous. The only difference that academics makes is that schools with lower standards will have an advantage on the playing fields, but as for reputation, it doesn't make a bit of difference what conference you're in.
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
538
Reaction Score
182
Were it not for the GOR, I would say that's much easier for an ACC school making $17 million to move to the B1G than an SEC school making $30 million.

No argument there.

That said, the only two SEC schools that the Big Ten would seriously pursue (Georgia / Florida ) have such large population bases that the math might work out. It'll never happen though.
 
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
2,444
Reaction Score
1,020
The 7 years without being paid??? I was quoting the upstarter post above and using it to represent a hypothetical situation. I understood the deal with Rutgers to be similar to what you stated. I was not sure about the Maryland deal, but my understanding was they would be getting more than Rutgers now. I did not know that Maryland would lose money later.

As for the ACC vs B1G, I prefer Pitt in the ACC. I feel we better fit in with more smaller private and semi-public universities. 10 years ago I would have felt different, but I have seen the gap grow between large land grant universities and the privates over the past 10 years. If it continues to grow Pitt would have been out of place in the B1G.
Im glad you clarified yourself or you would have lost all credibility here and now your assertions are making sense!Most of your posting is reasonable and rings pretty honest!
 
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
2,444
Reaction Score
1,020
Conference affiliation has nothing to do with academic rep. Absolutely no one holds the SEC against Vanderbilt. This is why BC's claims about the ACC's academic prowess are absolutely ludicrous. The only difference that academics makes is that schools with lower standards will have an advantage on the playing fields, but as for reputation, it doesn't make a bit of difference what conference you're in.
Let me absorb that for awhile but your financial claims about RU in the B1G were ludicrous so why should I take anything you say at face value?
 
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
2,444
Reaction Score
1,020
Conference affiliation has nothing to do with academic rep. Absolutely no one holds the SEC against Vanderbilt. This is why BC's claims about the ACC's academic prowess are absolutely ludicrous. The only difference that academics makes is that schools with lower standards will have an advantage on the playing fields, but as for reputation, it doesn't make a bit of difference what conference you're in.
Tell that to the Marines er Princeton or Harvard!lol..
 
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
1,228
Reaction Score
368
I get what drove the Louisville decision, although I do think Jurich out worked Manuel during that critical Thanksgiving week last year and it made a difference. Long term, the academic gulf between some of the ACC schools is going to be a problem. There is no greater difference in a D-1 sports conference (P-5 conference) then the academic disparity between Duke, UVA, UNC, Mia, BC on the one hand and Louisville on the other. The ACC was known as strong academic conference before the Louisville add and now it has been cheapened. You can't blend a school that accepts 72% of its applicants and only graduates 51% after 6 years with a Duke, UVA, UNC, Mia, BC. It may work short term for football, but this disparity will catch up to you. The ACC went from ahead of the B1G in my mind to behind it quickly on the academic front. I have said that I would love to see UConn in a conference with the likes of UVA and UNC because those are the types of public universities we strive to be. Louisville? That changes the complexion of the ACC. We would still jump at an offer, but I hope it is the B1G that calls.

I don't know if Jurich out worked Manuel or not. I do know that Jurich called everyone he knew in the ACC that week. Cincinnati was apparently trying hard too. If Manuel is interested in the ACC, he might want to spend some time courting our southern schools like FSU, Clemson, and GT a bit by trying to schedule football games. I know UVA and UConn have a home and home coming up in a few years, and we've played before. But I don't know how much history UConn has with the southern ACC schools. Just a thought.

I too have concerns about Louisville academically as I would West Virginia if it were them, but I view them as in about the same place as FSU was when FSU joined. FSU has made improvement since they joined.

I don't have any idea whether the Big Ten is looking at UConn. I do know that they typically require AAU status.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,143
Reaction Score
45,560
Let me absorb that for awhile but your financial claims about RU in the B1G were ludicrous so why should I take anything you say at face value?

You reinforced those claims with tales of your niece. If anything, I UNDERSTATED it.

Missouri would lose MORE than I stated if it had Rutgers' deal.

And, you can continue in any deluded belief that conference affiliation hurts a school like, let's say, Vanderbilt. No one cares. At all. But if you want to continue in that delusion, it's no skin off my back.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,143
Reaction Score
45,560
I don't know if Jurich out worked Manuel or not. I do know that Jurich called everyone he knew in the ACC that week. Cincinnati was apparently trying hard too. If Manuel is interested in the ACC, he might want to spend some time courting our southern schools like FSU, Clemson, and GT a bit by trying to schedule football games. I know UVA and UConn have a home and home coming up in a few years, and we've played before. But I don't know how much history UConn has with the southern ACC schools. Just a thought.

I too have concerns about Louisville academically as I would West Virginia if it were them, but I view them as in about the same place as FSU was when FSU joined. FSU has made improvement since they joined.

I don't have any idea whether the Big Ten is looking at UConn. I do know that they typically require AAU status.

UConn has had home and homes against Georgia Tech, Wake Forest, UNC, NC State, Duke, Virginia, Maryland. It has played AT Miami and Virginia Tech in one offs. The only schools it has not played are Clemson and Florida State. The fact is, we don't know anything about what happened behind the scenes. We do know three things that were reported in the media:

1. FSU's Chairman of the Board was furious that UNC and Tobacco Road allowed tier 3 basketball rights to stay with the schools while selling off tier 3 football rights to Raycom (an assumption that was probably erroneous), and he blasted Tobacco Road publicly for it.

2. BC's new AD blocked UConn in committee and again UNC and Duke's Presidents were incredulous.

3. FSU threatened to leave and quickly showed the ACC whose boss as the majority of the conference followed FSU's lead.

4. The UNC President made that weird statement in the media that the addition of Louisville had absolutely nothing to do with academics.

When you add it all up, FSU was angry at Tobacco Road before Maryland announced plans to leave, and the Louisville candidacy was the perfect leverage to show Tobacco Road who is boss. It helped that BC and Miami don't want UConn.

Last I read, FSU is still a tad upset that the Raycom deal prevents the ACC from developing a more lucrative network.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
29,143
Reaction Score
45,560
Let me absorb that for awhile but your financial claims about RU in the B1G were ludicrous so why should I take anything you say at face value?

Oh, and if you believe UPitt's post that I said Rutgers is going 7 years without being paid, you have fallen for a distortion. Never said anything of the like, so before calling something ludicrous, go read the source. Never said Rutgers was not being paid. My estimate that Missouri would lose about $70 million if saddled with a Rutgers type deal was right on.
 
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
2,444
Reaction Score
1,020
Oh, and if you believe UPitt's post that I said Rutgers is going 7 years without being paid, you have fallen for a distortion. Never said anything of the like, so before calling something ludicrous, go read the source. Never said Rutgers was not being paid. My estimate that Missouri would lose about $70 million if saddled with a Rutgers type deal was right on.
I might have been hasty Im going to keep an eye on him...he's good at mixing half truths with lies then passing the buck!Sorry if that wasn't your post.
 
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
2,444
Reaction Score
1,020
I might have been hasty Im going to keep an eye on him...he's good at mixing half truths with lies then passing the buck!Sorry if that wasn't your post.
I didn't doubt the rest of it w/RU/Mizzou!Mizzou losing money!
 
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
2,444
Reaction Score
1,020
You reinforced those claims with tales of your niece. If anything, I UNDERSTATED it.

Missouri would lose MORE than I stated if it had Rutgers' deal.

And, you can continue in any deluded belief that conference affiliation hurts a school like, let's say, Vanderbilt. No one cares. At all. But if you want to continue iin that delusion, it's no skin off my back.
Didnt doubt Mizzou losing money only RU not getting there's!
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2013
Messages
268
Reaction Score
134
I might have been hasty Im going to keep an eye on him...he's good at mixing half truths with lies then passing the buck!Sorry if that wasn't your post.

I referenced the 7 years to get paid plan in my post to use as a hypothetical situation.


Here is the upstarter post:
You left out the most important parts of the post. First of all, I can't even fathom how you get 10 or 15 million when it's taken teams 2 and 3 years to get out. Your own school Pitt announced in 2011 and is finally in the conference for 2013-2014. 2 years without SEC pay = $60 million. Then you look at Rutgers that is taking 7 years to get paid by the B1G. If Rutgers were leaving the SEC, it would have made $70 million less in those 7 years than it otherwise would have by staying put. Total bill for leaving: $130 million.​

That is the exact verbage of the quote and not taken out of context.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
326
Guests online
2,812
Total visitors
3,138

Forum statistics

Threads
155,756
Messages
4,030,495
Members
9,864
Latest member
leepaul


Top Bottom