Discouraging, But you Never Can Tell...

[Pat125]

Well Swiped is just an expression. Notre Dame football won't be joining any conference other than the ACC until at least 2027. And look at this 2015 Notre Dame football schedule to help me find the Big Ten teams on it.

2015
Sept. 5 TEXAS
Sept. 12 at Virginia
Sept. 19 GEORGIA TECH
Sept. 26 MASSACHUSETTS
Oct. 3 at Clemson
Oct. 10 NAVY
Oct. 17 USC
Oct. 31 at Temple (Lincoln Financial Services Field)
Nov. 7 at Pittsburgh
Nov. 14 WAKE FOREST
Nov. 21 Boston College at Fenway Park, Boston, Mass. (night)
Nov. 28 at Stanford


Swiped might be too strong, but I wonder if Delaney recognizes a change in the air? Same as what Mike Trangese did?

I'll help you find the Big 10 team in the ND schedule if you can help me find the 8 ACC teams in their schedule as the other ACC teams.

Actually, it appears that ND and the ACC are satisfied with the arrangement. Just as I'm sure the various Big 10 teams who have played ND will get by.

 

[btstimpy]

I'll help you find the Big 10 team in the ND schedule if you can help me find the 8 ACC teams in their schedule as the other ACC teams.

Actually, it appears that ND and the ACC are satisfied with the arrangement. Just as I'm sure the various Big 10 teams who have played ND will get by.

The ACC is currently happy with the arrangement. And you need to tell Brady Hoke he'll get by. He's the one whose been complaining. We might see some others complaining soon, but like you said they'll get by. They now have Rutgers and Maryland to play.

 

[Pat125]

If it was that bad, perhaps Hoke could have convinced his AD, President, and the rest of the Big 10 Presidents to invite ND for a partial invite. In any case, it looks like both conferences are currently happy with their arrangements, and no reason for any involved to be or act bitter.

 

[btstimpy]

If it was that bad, perhaps Hoke could have convinced his AD, President, and the rest of the Big 10 Presidents to invite ND for a partial invite. In any case, it looks like both conferences are currently happy with their arrangements, and no reason for any involved to be or act bitter.

True. But this particular Notre Dame Athletic Director wasn't interested in a Big Ten membership either fully or partial. Notre Dame views itself as an eastern oriented school wanting to play athletic competition as often as possible in eastern markets. The last thing they want to be is the midwestern catholic school in the midwestern conference. He wants the football team to play in markets all over the country and especially outside of the Midwest. Would one of the former ND athletic directors been interested in partial Big Ten membership? Possibly. They've considered it before. But not this one. They like the current arrangement, and so far so does the ACC. Down the road we'll have to see.

 

[HawkHusky]

True. But this particular Notre Dame Athletic Director wasn't interested in a Big Ten membership either fully or partial. Notre Dame views itself as an eastern oriented school wanting to play athletic competition as often as possible in eastern markets. The last thing they want to be is the midwestern catholic school in the midwestern conference. He wants the football team to play in markets all over the country and especially outside of the Midwest. Would one of the former ND athletic directors been interested in partial Big Ten membership? Possibly. They've considered it before. But not this one. They like the current arrangement, and so far so does the ACC. Down the road we'll have to see.

...And the B1G didn't want ND unless it was for full membership so no real love lost on the B1G's part...

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/58312/delany-statement-on-notre-dameacc-move

 

[whaler11]

This is a post I saw by a Minnesota fan that mimics my thoughts. This is also why I think UCONN is still on the B1G radar:

"I don't believe the Big 10 is done expanding. I say they add 2 more schools by 2017 or 18, having it built into their new Tier 1 TV contract for 2017.

And this is my reason why: BTN

I watch the BTN every night. Last night I watched a Hockey doubleheader. The Production Value of the BTN is light years advanced over where it was 5 years ago. The BTN keeps adding content. The BTN keeps adding subscribers. Fox Century 21 just bought YES. This will enable the BTN to move into New Jersey with little push back, although there will be some, because there is always some battle for higher carrier fees. I don't see the BTN stopping its progress. I don't see the BTN owned by FOX and the Big Ten slowing down, for I see the whole thing trying to expand in other big markets.

Big 10 schools are just beginning to get close to a full share of the money form the BTN. Even after last year the schools did not receive full share as its has been reported some of the money has been shifted to help Rutgers and Maryland with their transition into the conference, be it with travel cost and other items. Which goes to my assessment that the league is not done expanding. There seems to be no internal political faction in the Big 10 that wants to slow down expansion. Not Alvarez, not Delany, not PSU, not Ohio St.

Delany is not done in the East. Do I know who is going to be 15 or 16 in the Big 10?... no, I don't. But I don't think it has to be some high grade Football school. I think it has to be a research school who has a decent bandwidth of collegiate sports and has some backing from it's state. But the schools may not even have to fit those requirements in the short term. Just need schools that the BTN can invade the landscape for a higher carriage fee....to expand the brand of the Big 10.

Many of you believe there is a bubble out there and the big money is about to dry up. I don't think this is correct. I believe the Conference Network of the Big 10 has been an incredible success, so much to the point that the SEC will have their own network after watching the BTN grow in the last 5 years. But even if you guys are correct, and I'm wrong about the long term success of the BTN, it can't be argued what Delany believes. The Big 10-FOX are all-in on the BTN. For all of these reasons I believe the Big 10 is not done expanding and will again shortly. Even as we speak the 2 divisions of the Big 10 (East-West) are getting their own separate marketing package done. Will see a BTN-2 down the road, which will be of need of more content."

He also points to UCONN being the best candidate. Can't say I disagree...

FOX getting control of YES is a very bad thing for UConn. Anything that gets the BTN leverage in the NYC cable market is bad for UConn.

 

[billybud]

Whaler...that could be true.

Just like the SEC doesn't "need" Clemson to bring in South Carolina for the SECN, the Big Ten wouldn't need UConn to deliver the goods in NY if they have already secured the BGN in that area.

 

[ZooCougar]

ESPN is the narrative.

 

[HawkHusky]

Whaler...that could be true.

Just like the SEC doesn't "need" Clemson to bring in South Carolina for the SECN, the Big Ten wouldn't need UConn to deliver the goods in NY if they have already secured the BGN in that area.

You're also forgetting that Connecticut has its own #30 DMA. Since you brought up South Carolina - no, the SEC wouldn't want/need Clemson for the SECN because there are only mediocre DMAs within the state (Hartford/New Haven beats the combined total of South Carolina's 2 highest DMAs). Let's also not forget that due to the close geography of New England, it wouldn't be all that surprising if Connecticut could bring the BTN into parts of Rhode Island and Massachusetts too (UCONN's campus is closer to Boston than it is New York). Delany seems like the kind of guy who would love to have BTN available throughout the Northeast. Rutgers' reach ends in NYC. Connecticut is a bridge from there on out.

In addition, it's also not all about markets. It's also about adding quality content to the BTN. UCONN athletics would give the BTN a sizable boost in that department as well.

 

[WestCoastHusky]

Whaler...that could be true.

Just like the SEC doesn't "need" Clemson to bring in South Carolina for the SECN, the Big Ten wouldn't need UConn to deliver the goods in NY if they have already secured the BGN in that area.

They might need UCONN for CT though. 3.5M people that are willing to pay super high fee for BTN is worth something to someone. Also, UCONN will help BTN get into the New England market in addition to part of the NYC TV market. Fairfield County of CT with its 1 M people is actually part of the NYC DMA. I am sure BTN is interested in the 1M people that's part of the NYC if they want control the NYC TV market.

 

[btstimpy]

...And the B1G didn't want ND unless it was for full membership so no real love lost on the B1G's part...

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/58312/delany-statement-on-notre-dameacc-move

Correct. There isn't any love loss between Notre Dame and the Big Ten. The two can go their separate ways.

That reporter now can report with certainty on the impact of the ACC move on those three Notre Dame vs Big Ten series (Michigan, Michigan State, and Purdue). i.e. the last part of the article. There will be some more scattered games with Michigan State and Purdue because of existing contracts, but these series are being phased out. The Michigan one is already phased out after the 2014 game.

 

[huskypantz]

CL82 - good questions...and I can only speculate as what I have read in the public space re: these deals does not to get into that kind of granularity. With that in mind, here is my speculation:

The GORs, IMO, remove the financial incentive for a team to switch conferences in the first place as opposed to physically stopping a team from moving.

Let's use your example: Team X moves from Conference A to Conference B - and network 1 covers both Conferences. I don't believe either Conference A or Conference B have "sold" "ownership" of their media rights to the network; rather, they have signed media deals with the network in which they place their "owned rights" to the network in exchange for certain performance considerations (fees). I believe, actual ownership, however, stays with the Conferences. In this scenario, if Team X moves to Conference B and network 1 increases the media deal for Conference B; as the "owners" of the media rights for Team X, Conference A would be entitled to whatever revenues are generated by Team X in the new Conference. How Conference A divides those revenues would presumably be in accord with its bylaws, which could mean that each team in Conference A gets a bump as Team X is bringing in more revenues under the new media rights deal for Conference B. The question I have is what is the obligation to Team X from Conference A? On this, I just don't know; but I would presume/speculate that Team X would continue to get paid under the Conference A formula - which, as I speculated earlier, removes the financial incentive to leave in the first place.

Again, let me stress that this is just my opinion/speculation. However, it seems to make sense as these GORs obviously have some "bite"; or they would not have been created in the first place. I am sure there is more info out there - especially as to how they work in the Entertainment industry - where I have heard they are more prevalent.

Just my 2 cents.

If your speculation is correct, then I would speculate that there are other associated issues for conference A. If they own Team X's media rights, they are obliged to continue to pay team X while they maintain those rights. Now we have the media company - who decides hey, I am going to broadcast a couple of team X's games in conference B - which in turn bumps teams from conference A off broadcast TV or prime time slots. This is why I think the conferences will settle.

 

[whaler11]

You're also forgetting that Connecticut has its own #30 DMA. Since you brought up South Carolina - no, the SEC wouldn't want/need Clemson for the SECN because there are only mediocre DMAs within the state (Hartford/New Haven beats the combined total of South Carolina's 2 highest DMAs). Let's also not forget that due to the close geography of New England, it wouldn't be all that surprising if Connecticut could bring the BTN into parts of Rhode Island and Massachusetts too (UCONN's campus is closer to Boston than it is New York). Delany seems like the kind of guy who would love to have BTN available throughout the Northeast. Rutgers' reach ends in NYC. Connecticut is a bridge from there on out.

In addition, it's also not all about markets. It's also about adding quality content to the BTN. UCONN athletics would give the BTN a sizable boost in that department as well.

You think it's about adding quality content? Are you familiar with Rutgers at all?

If the Big Ten wanted UConn it's one phone call. The idea they are sitting around debating or considering UConn is silly.

BTW. the BTN is available in New England, I watched Nebraska and Michigan State today on that very network.

Go figure out how UConn adds $75 million to the Big Ten conference revenue a year - literally nothing rlse matters.

 

[whaler11]

They might need UCONN for CT though. 3.5M people that are willing to pay super high fee for BTN is worth something to someone. Also, UCONN will help BTN get into the New England market in addition to part of the NYC TV market. Fairfield County of CT with its 1 M people is actually part of the NYC DMA. I am sure BTN is interested in the 1M people that's part of the NYC if they want control the NYC TV market.

There aren't 3.5 million dollar cable homes in CT though. There are less than a million in Hartford/NH.

They think tbey have Fairfield County without UConn. Until they are proven wrong, they are counting them with NYC.

 

[jdb50]

To sell the league networks big games and rivalries matter. UConn has more history with teams in the ACC in mens and womens basketball. We have also had more history with the ACC members in football. Heck we have plenty of history with Notre Dame in hoops and could have it with them in football as well. When Delany made his move to the sea taking NJ and Maryland he isolated Cuse, Pitt and BC. If travel costs are to have any effect on the next expansion then the ACC will add UConn to help with travel for these 3 schools. We will strengthen either conference but the ACC really locks down NYC with UConn.

 

[RioDog]

Peace in our time!!!

I hope and pray the irony is as rich for Swoffy as it was for Chamberlain...

 

[AZHuskiePop]

Whaler...that could be true.

Just like the SEC doesn't "need" Clemson to bring in South Carolina for the SECN, the Big Ten wouldn't need UConn to deliver the goods in NY if they have already secured the BGN in that area.

Except no currently available school offers the quantum leap in non- football programming that UConn offers. These networks and sports in General should never forget they are entertainment.
The eyeballs are just one piece.UConn is strategically located to add the live experience for their thousands of NYC based fans.

 

[HawkHusky]

You think it's about adding quality content? Are you familiar with Rutgers at all?

If the Big Ten wanted UConn it's one phone call. The idea they are sitting around debating or considering UConn is silly.

BTW. the BTN is available in New England, I watched Nebraska and Michigan State today on that very network.

Go figure out how UConn adds $75 million to the Big Ten conference revenue a year - literally nothing rlse matters.

Are you familiar with Nebraska? They don't really shout "Amazing Market!" to me either... They are a brand with a following and a good set of Olympic sports to add to the BTN.

They're not sitting around debating UCONN nor did I say that. What it comes down to is whether it makes sense for them to add one or two teams when they have to renegotiate the contract in 2016...

But hey, way to be condescending...

 

[NEforceUConn]

All this talk about the ACC and ND being so happy together, everything is beautiful, makes me sick.

ND did not do a THING to help the BE and it will not do a THING to help the ACC. Just wait. Those stripes are permanent, they don't wash off. The two things that i know to be true are: 1. if ND wants to join any other conference tomorrow it will - they will not be bound by this so called ACC 2027 call option (I'm sure ND has some contract protection up their sleeve most likely called the 4 leaf clover provision, and 2. I hope FSU wins two or three more National Championships in a row - lets see how happy they will be realizing FSU is by far the fb power in the ACC, yet all schools have an equal $ take, save the sweetheart deal ND has ala NBC.

 

[whaler11]

Are you familiar with Nebraska? They don't really shout "Amazing Market!" to me either... They are a brand with a following and a good set of Olympic sports to add to the BTN.

They're not sitting around debating UCONN nor did I say that. What it comes down to is whether it makes sense for them to add one or two teams when they have to renegotiate the contract in 2016...

But hey, way to be condescending...

I'm not being condesending. You said they are trying to add quality content. I am just pointing out Rutgers is not quality content.

Conference realignment has nothing to do with Olympic sports. It has to do with one thing: money.

To Delany's word: The Big 10 is not about what the conference does for you. It's about what you do for the conference. Specifically can you increase their rake. Can you make everyone a few million more? To do that you probably need to generate an additional 75 million a year - when UConn can show the math they can do that they are a candidate. Even if they can they still need another school who can generate 75 million to be willing to join.

That is the only way it makes sense to add two for the next negotiation.

 

[whaler11]

All this talk about the ACC and ND being so happy together, everything is beautiful, makes me sick.

ND did not do a THING to help the BE and it will not do a THING to help the ACC. Just wait. Those stripes are permanent, they don't wash off. The two things that i know to be true are: 1. if ND wants to join any other conference tomorrow it will - they will not be bound by this so called ACC 2027 call option (I'm sure ND has some contract protection up their sleeve most likely called the 4 leaf clover provision, and 2. I hope FSU wins two or three more National Championships in a row - lets see how happy they will be realizing FSU is by far the fb power in the ACC, yet all schools have an equal $ take, save the sweetheart deal ND has ala NBC.

Notre Dame did do something for the Big East. They improved the bowl lineup for the league by being available to choose.

The ACC relationship is completely different. For one, they can't band together with the basketball catholics to damage the football league. Secondly, the ACC schools are getting paid, and they don't increase the instability because there is no instability.

 

[whaler11]

Except no currently available school offers the quantum leap in non- football programming that UConn offers. These networks and sports in General should never forget they are entertainment.
The eyeballs are just one piece.UConn is strategically located to add the live experience for their thousands of NYC based fans.

UConn games are already on television in NYC. So it isn't about adding anything new - it's about the potential incremental value of the BTN. If Rutgers plus YES generates the cable revenue there is no incremental revenue to generate.

What UConn needs is for Fox to fail to get the cable deals they need in NYC which includes FF Cty thanks to Cablevision. They need to be the potential piece that gets a deal over the hump.

 

[NEforceUConn]

Whaler - Where do you come up with $75 mio? You think the B1G will only accept a school which produces $75 mio a year for them annually?

 

[SubbaBub]

The number is $25M, what they are making this year. Projections that include a renegotiated TV deal or other escalations aren't comparing apples to apples. UConn, today, can generate $25 in rights fees with a $2/mo cable surcharge. It could be through the BTN or as a direct cable fee. Right or wrong, if it is needed for the B1G, the state will pass it and cable subscribers will pay it.

 

[whaler11]

Whaler - Where do you come up with $75 mio? You think the B1G will only accept a school which produces $75 mio a year for them annually?

The 75 million comes from what you get paid by the league plus another 3 million for the 14 teams in the league. They are looking at a 40 million gross in the medium term so if you can't make the individual schools more why would they want you? Every time you are on one of their football schedules that means Ohio State or Michigan or Wisconsin or Nebraska isn't. Every team they invite decreases how much of the network each school owns.

So yes I'd estimate you'd need to generate about $75 million in TV revenue to get an invite.

I don't see how they go to 16 without one of North Carolina or Texas joining. Florida State could work but the Big 10 isn't interested. They had no interest in Missouri, so why would they want Kansas for example?