Interview With Gerry DiNardo

[upstater]

A couple of points:

1.

NJ is "growing faster than the national average"

Just saw an article that said New Jersey is dead last, losing more residents per capita than every other state. But here's the thing--the losses are really not big compared to the population. Which means the population shift to the south is moving so gradually that we'll be dead by the time sports entities are cashing in because of it.

2.

So, you have to realize that demographically, New England *isn't* a big growth area and when it comes to football recruiting, it's literally the worst region on a per capita basis (and even bad on an absolute basis compared to places with much smaller populations like Hawaii) in the country.

While I totally buy the argument that the B1G wanted the New Jersey and Maryland recruiting grounds, you can't lump in all of New England in such a fashion. Connecticut, for instance, had several kids drafted into the NFL one year (Spievey, Hernandez, Campbell, etc.). I've seen measures where Conn. comes out around 35-40 in the ranking. It produced an amount that was relatively similar to NJ.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id...in-big-ten-expanding-include-maryland-rutgers

In this link, for instance, it's there with Wisconsin and West Virginia and in the same middling category as New Jersey.

Penn State and Iowa, in particular, have been recruiting Conn. for ages taking multiple players yearly (Iowa not so much anymore). So, lumping all of New England together when there are 4 sparsely populated states with hardly any football (though every once in a while a Kendall Reyes comes out of New Hampshire) is like saying there is no football talent in the Mountain West (Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, Nevada) but that neglects Utah which does produce talent.

3. About ala carte TV...

It will work for me because I will buy ESPN, SNY and one other person in the house watches SCI-FI. That's it. That's all we watch, nothing else other than the networks. I am highly confident I will be charged less than $20 for these. But Frank is probably right that it might not work for those who watch 50 channels. I don't know who those people are but I can't imagine watching 50 channels.

4. Is the BTN model so powerful that it charges a decent amount in its footprint? Probably, but then how can you explain Eastern PA. There are a lot of rabid PSU fans there. Is BTN encountering Comcast resistance? What explains the low monthly fees in that region?

 

[RegisteredUconn]

A couple of points:
Just saw an article that said New Jersey is dead last, losing more residents per capita than every other state. But here's the thing--the losses are really not big compared to the population. Which means the population shift to the south is moving so gradually that we'll be dead by the time sports entities are cashing in because of it.

It is this entire line of reasoning that a conference will make moves into new territory because of growth that I find the most specious. Future market size is what's important. Too often growth is equated with or used as a substitute for future size. If growth were the key, businesses would be ignoring China (pop. 1.3 billion, growth rate .5%) and focusing on places like Qatar (pop. 2 million, growth rate 5%) and the Turks and Cacos Islands(pop. 31,000, growth rate 3.2%).

60 million. That's the number to use in discussions. That's the estimated size of the northeast region in 2025. And it's all growth for the B1G because they don't have a presence there now. Anybody know when North Carolina is projected to sextuple its size?

 

[huskypantz]

It is this entire line of reasoning that a conference will make moves into new territory because of growth that I find the most specious. Future market size is what's important. Too often growth is equated with or used as a substitute for future size. If growth were the key, businesses would be ignoring China (pop. 1.3 billion, growth rate .5%) and focusing on places like Qatar (pop. 2 million, growth rate 5%) and the Turks and Cacos Islands(pop. 31,000, growth rate 3.2%).

60 million. That's the number to use in discussions. That's the estimated size of the northeast region in 2025. And it's all growth for the B1G because they don't have a presence there now. Anybody know when North Carolina is projected to sextuple its size?

For many of these states, the growth is largely immigrant hispanic population. Call me crazy, but I'm guessing that they're watching La Liga or EPL, not CFB. There's no connection to State U. I can understand the interest in UVA, UNC and FSU. But UConn is the brand in CT and if you have UConn, you have CT and inroads in NY, MA and RI. You have a top 30 market, a top 20 public institution and a top athletic institution.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

100% disagree. I've been following Big Ten expansion for years and years at this point. There is ZERO doubt that the Big Ten would take UNC within 2 seconds if the Tar Heels were willing. ZERO doubt. Can I repeat that again? ZERO DOUBT. I can't emphasize that enough. Outside of Texas and Notre Dame, UNC is next on the desired list for the Big Ten. Now, the issue is whether UNC is willing to move (which is MUCH easier said than done, as they're not as swayed by TV money). That's an entirely different matter. However, the Big Ten 100% *wants* UNC. Period. It's not even a debate. The logic that you're trying to use to twist it into the Big Ten somehow not looking at UNC or even being less desirable than other Northeastern options simply doesn't apply. The items that you noted about pro sports in North Carolina is *exactly* why UNC is so desirable - it's a massive and growing state where UNC is the single most popular team, whether college or pro, without question. This is compared to the Northeast, where college sports teams rank far below the corresponding pro options.

You also believe that the Big Ten is focused on getting further into the Northeast. I have very heavy doubts about that. Sure, it's an option in the event that Notre Dame changes its mind and joins the Big Ten. Then, you can viably double down on NYC and Boston. However, barring a decision by ND in that manner, Maryland and Rutgers provided three things: (1) very large public research institutions *directly* located in the DC and NYC metro areas, (2) states that are growing faster than the national average and (3) places that actually produce a critical mass of football recruits. (Delany doesn't like saying too much publicly about #3, but don't be so naive to think that this is just an exercise about collecting TV markets and research institutions. This money train that's coming in will only last long-term if the conference is positioned to continue to play football at the highest level. When he says "demographics", that's a code word for "places where we can get great athletes, particularly football players".) The thing that so much of the East Coast-based media neglects to mention when talking about Census figures is that much of the Northeast outside of NYC and DC specifically is facing the exact same demographic challenges as the Midwest. Sure, it's not as bad as Detroit (nothing is), but it's pretty much in line with places like Ohio, Illinois and Wisconsin (and actually worse than places like Indiana and Minnesota that are growing at a decent clip). So, you have to realize that demographically, New England *isn't* a big growth area and when it comes to football recruiting, it's literally the worst region on a per capita basis (and even bad on an absolute basis compared to places with much smaller populations like Hawaii) in the country.

Beyond football, there are a decent number of Big Ten grads that move to New England simply because Boston has a large metro area, but you have to realize that it's also one of the weakest destinations for Big Ten alums to move to on a per capita basis, as well. So, the network effects are very low for the Big Ten in Boston compared to NYC and DC and *especially* compared to North Carolina, Georgia and Florida. Those 3 states plus Texas are where Big Ten grads (and Midwesterners in general) are moving to the most right now. Hmmm... who is being rumored to be the Big Ten's top targets again? Do you see how it makes sense?

There are many reasons why the Big Ten can't pull off adding UVA, UNC and Georgia Tech. In fact, I'm an on-the-record skeptic of that occurring. However, it is *definitely* not because the Big Ten isn't targeting them for some reason. They definitely are doing so and they are at the top of the list. Make no mistake about that. This is what Jim Delany is specifically talking about when talking about demographics. It also isn't recent, as I can tell you with complete certainty that when Delany spoke with his ADs back in 2010 about expansion (before they added Nebraska), the rumors that you're hearing now were what they were talking about for long-term plans for the conference. It's been in the works for a loooong time. Whether those schools will actually bite is a different story.

I approach this topic (rationale for the B1G to include UConn) from a perspective where I think I can add some value. You have far greater insight into important topics like Big Ten history and intent, alumni dispersion and trends, recruiting territories and trends, and other stuff. I read your posts to learn about those and see where my logic may be flawed. For example, I appreciate your point about the (relative) lack of professional sports interest North Carolina being a positive for the Tar Heels. It isn't that I hadn't thought of (or more accurately, read other who expressed it earlier) the rationale (nor is it something I wouldn't, in general, consider because it is something I do routinely in my own work product) but it wasn't something I was thinking about that when I commented. However, just as it is a current positive for UNC, it is also a potential vulnerability should the pros make move vigorous moves in the region.

You've done a nice job summarizing much of the relevant information around market population growth, shifts, and trends, however, I think you are missing something more important: future size. It doesn't matter much what the growth is if the starting base is small. What does it matter if North Carolina's market of 9 million is growing at an annual rate that exceeds the northeast's by 5%? In 20 years it will still be only 40% as large.

In your opening paragraph, you appear to be under the misunderstanding that I doubt any Big Ten interest in UNC and the South Atlantic coast. That isn't my position. I can see many reasons why they would have a strong interest. In fact, as late as November, I was in the camp that UNC was the next target and UVA would also be added. After looking more closely, I came to the conclusion that, if it were my decision, I would make a move before (or at the same time as) a UNC addition. It's more a matter of timing than ultimate objective in my opinion. A savvy boxer doesn't look for the first punch knockout. He needs to soften up an opponent. Whether the Big Ten would accept UNC in two seconds or not is moot. What happened was they invited Maryland and Rutgers, body blows designed to lower North Carolina's (if that is indeed the target) guard, to make them easier to take out (of the ACC). You seem skeptical that that move was sufficient. The logical response, to me, is another move: UConn and UVA.

What I don't have any real insight into (and you seem to avoid) is what further destabilizing the ACC in order to force North Carolina to reconsider its affiliation might prompt the SEC to do. From a previous reply you made to me you seemed to imply that Delany wouldn't be deterred by whatever the SEC undertook (I may be mischacterizing what you said or your position), a position I find disingenious.

Again, I find your posts to add light without heat.

 

[Fishy]

While I think Frank overweights the importance of a Florida State, he's spot-on with most everything else.

I can appreciate that our current situation sucks so freaking hard that some confirmation bias is good to keep us off the ledge, but the Big Ten is heading south, not north.

I wish that were not the case and if the Big Ten every really expanded past 18 or so, or if they truly cannot split teams off of the ACC, maybe there's a light. But there's nothing now.

 

[ZooCougar]

B1G has major brand issues. UConn would not do anything to improve that.

Looking at the sparsely attendance of the Villanova game right now. Hard to not wonder if this is one of the last rounds of drinks before the bar closes.

 

[ScottBonz]

@DCSportsDept: Good amount of fans at XL today, I'd say around 15,000.

It's pretty sparse up this place right now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Fishy]

I'm not sure what branding issues the Big Ten has - everyone should be so lucky as to have the Big Ten's problems.

I think our fan base is just worn out right now. We've taken a steady stream of body shots and I think the conference stuff has been a much bigger drag than we might think.

It might take a couple of years to overcome that.

 

[ZooCougar]

I'm not sure what branding issues the Big Ten has - everyone should be so lucky as to have the Big Ten's problems.

I think our fan base is just worn out right now. We've taken a steady stream of body shots and I think the conference stuff has been a much bigger drag than we might think.

It might take a couple of years to overcome that.

They have major issues with their football brand. The center of gravity in college football has shifted to the south and the west. That's why they need to expand southward and not into an area where people don't particularly care for college football.

 

[ZooCougar]

@DCSportsDept: Good amount of fans at XL today, I'd say around 15,000.

It's pretty sparse up this place right now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

On TV it doesn't look that big. But that may have to do with a UConn fandom's allergy to punctuality.

 

[Fishy]

They have major issues with their football brand. The center of gravity in college football has shifted to the south and the west. That's why they need to expand southward and not into an area where people don't particularly care for college football.

Gotcha - agree.

 

[auggie22]

Connecticut appears to be a hotbed of pretty much nothing except Insurance and History and yet we have, arguably, if not the #1 basketball brand over the past 2 decades, then top 5, we have been invited to the best hockey conference, we have great ratings on SNY and are flying up the charts academically, and still rising. So how the heck were all those things pulled off as worthless as our state and market is? If Jim Delaney has completely dismissed UConn as some here want to believe, he is not as smart as everyone says he is.

Ct is a hotbed for hockey, soccer and lacrosse, and isn't bad for basketball - good even, when you factor in prep schools. And NYC basketball speaks for itself.

 

[auggie22]

What are the odds that the sec takes a bunch of ACC schools (va tech, unc, flu, ga tech) to keep the b1g out of their region? Surely Ufla would prefer FSU in the sec vs inviting the b1g into their back yard.

 

[mcs333]

B1G has major brand issues. UConn would not do anything to improve that.

Looking at the sparsely attendance of the Villanova game right now. Hard to not wonder if this is one of the last rounds of drinks before the bar closes.

What the hell you talking about. Sparsely attended. Uconn had by far their largest attendance game of the year. 15, 185. You just like to make negative comments. At least tell the truth!!!

 

[ZooCougar]

What the hell you talking about. Sparsely attended. Uconn had by far their largest attendance game of the year. 15, 185. You just like to make negative comments. At least tell the truth!!!

I said that at the very beginning of the game so I spoke too soon. It looked pretty sparse, sort of like the Rent in the first quarter.

 

[The Funster]

The housing bubble eventually burst. The college football/conference realignment bubble will burst too. I haven't thought through the implications of that, but, there you go.

 

[ZooCougar]

The housing bubble eventually burst. The college football/conference realignment bubble will burst too. I haven't thought through the implications of that, but, there you go.

Once they figure out that schools that are worth 3 million in one conference, aren't worth 30 million in another because the Cable/satellite TV dynamic inevitably changed, they will all sit around, look at eachother and wonder WTF they were thinking.

 

[pj]

Once they figure out that schools that are worth 3 million in one conference, aren't worth 30 million in another because the Cable/satellite TV dynamic inevitably changed, they will all sit around, look at eachother and wonder WTF they were thinking.

Yet some schools will still have 15-year $30 mn/yr contracts, and others $3 mn/year contracts.

 

[ZooCougar]

Yet some schools will still have 15-year $30 mn/yr contracts, and others $3 mn/year contracts.

Hey now, Wake Forest and WSU are worth every GD penny.

 

[The Funster]

If Rutgers were still in the BE instead of being on it's way to the B1G does anyone believe that NBC's offer would be much higher than it is? I mean, think about it, the B1G product can leverage the NJ demographic better than the BE. That means that Rutgers, the institution, really has little value in and of itself. As we know, they hit the lotto just by being in the right place at the right time.

So when we talk about a program being worth x million to conference we can't judge the value of the institution by where it is now, we have to judge it by what we'd estimate the value it would be in the other conference. That's why we can't say UConn won't go to conference C because the market says they're only worth 2M. Maybe in the ACC, Uconn would be worth 17-20M. Maybe in the B1G we'd be worth 25M. In that case we'd be judged by whether we can grow into delivering the full value of the $ we'd receive. We cold easily do that in the ACC.

As many have said, we have to win football games. We have to dominate our new, little league. Forget about the dollars and just dominate and we'llbe called up by one of the big conferences.

 

[noeynox]

we are in a tough spot. it is not going to be easy to dominate a league with teams from Texas and Florida. I hate to sound like I'm panicking, buy it is going to be tough to compete against teams from the ACC and Big Ten in our immediate region.

if P doesn't win this year, they have to look at make a splashy hire. can UCONN in this conference attract that type of candidate?

if ever we need a dream season football this year is it!

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk 2

 

[ZooCougar]

Cincy landed Tuberville somehow. Warde needs be as opportunistic as a thief with this next hire.

we are in a tough spot. it is not going to be easy to dominate a league with teams from Texas and Florida. I hate to sound like I'm panicking, buy it is going to be tough to compete against teams from the ACC and Big Ten in our immediate region.

if P doesn't win this year, they have to look at make a splashy hire. can UCONN in this conference attract that type of candidate?

if ever we need a dream season football this year is it!

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk 2

 

[RegisteredUconn]

While I think Frank overweights the importance of a Florida State, he's spot-on with most everything else.

I can appreciate that our current situation sucks so freaking hard that some confirmation bias is good to keep us off the ledge, but the Big Ten is heading south, not north.

I wish that were not the case and if the Big Ten every really expanded past 18 or so, or if they truly cannot split teams off of the ACC, maybe there's a light. But there's nothing now.

"Keep us off the ledge..."? I'm just hoping to get both feet back on the ledge.

I don't consider UConn to be a foray north for the B1G. It's strengthening the foothold in a region where it's recently staked a claim. If my target is New England and I have locations in CT, MA, and RI, NH isn't a move north. It's a fortifying move in existing territory.

Coveting is not the same as a solid plan to acquire. I can understand the B1G's desire for North Carolina and the southeast coast. What I can't see is any immediate path to get there that has a likely chance for success. If North Carolina is such a prize for the B1G, then surely it's pretty highly valued by the SEC as well. If the B1G worries that it can't market itself strongly in NYC and the northeast because of competition from pro sports, what makes them think they can accomplish it in North Carolina against the SEC and acc? Why does anybody think the SEC will simply cede the University of North Carolina to its biggest competitor? If the B1G sees the South Atlantic coast as its salvation from a slow, lingering starvation from minimal or negative growth, why won't the boys in Chapel Hill smell the same sense of concern and opt for the more certain viability of the SEC? What are the B1G's plans then?

If the B1G is determined to contest the South Atlantic, why wouldn't the SEC make a play for the North Atlantic? Who in a position of strenght fights all the battles on its own turf? Maybe its time to revisit HFD's SEC overtures. We're already playing in Florida and Kentucky. Soon we'll be visiting Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas on a regular basis. How big a leap is it for us to embrace SEC land? I can't think of anything more likely to expose any B1G interest in us than a few credible headlines saying "SEC in Talks with UConn."

 

[upstater]

The vast majority of university presidents are far out of their depths when it comes to athletics. They don't watch them, have no real sense of the fanbases, nor how recruiting and region relates to wins and losses. The athletic budget is tiny compared to the budget they oversee, and the political pressures on sports are huge (i.e. politicians, boards of trustees, boosters, alumni). What is the path of least resistance? Going along with the groups that wield some power over you. There is no real consideration of the future here. Presidents are short-termers (5-10 years) guided by ADs whose job is to paint an optimistic (UNREALISTIC) picture of their own prowess in moving the school to the "next level."

The conference commissioners may indeed have some vision, but a lot of them think like CEOs who are ever interested in increasing the margins and profitability, until the natural lifecycle peters out, and they jump with their golden parachutes. It happened with Dave Gavitt. It may happen with Delany and Slive. Swofford and the BE guys presided over ill thought decisions already.

In other words, no one involved in making decisions really has the incentive to make the proper well-considered ones, and certainly not the university presidents, who would be truly shocked to learn their MAC team doesn't stand a chance in hell of ever being invited to the B1G. No one tells them this, and they don't know it, because they don't watch, and even if they did, they would hardly buck their bosses and risk their power over 95% of university operations to make a stand or a point about the folly of pumping up the 5%.

In short, bad decisions WILL be made.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

Syracuse's vendetta? For what?

For being better than them in football. And better over the last twenty years in basketball. Its that simple.

 

[buggsy]

Let me clarify since Rutgers fan wants to play semantics. CT absolutely has a solid NY draw, as SNY ratings show. In basketball- it's unquestionable. In football - at worst UConn is on par with Rutgers. BC is outright laughable and Syracuse is still good for a chuckle.

Now in NJ- yes, obviously Rutgers will draw more. Happy? I mean, that should be obvious. But lots of kids from NJ go to UConn. It's a fact. Again, not as many as go to Rutgers, for obvious reasons, but it's a fact. SNY airs UConn games in NJ. There's a reason. Anecdotally, my whole family is in Northern Jersey and there is ZERO interest in Rutgers. Straight up apathy.

You say at worst, UCONN is as popular in NY as Rutgers. Yet you have nothing to back that up. Have you been asked by the Yankees to play a regular season game at Yankee Stadium? Has the Empire State Building been lit up for you after a big win?

If you have family in North Jersey, then you know your football gets NO local news coverage...unless it happens to be in a week they are playing Rutgers.

And lots of kids DON't go to UCONN. a few do each year...but that's it. Just a handful each year. That is not LOTS. NJ probably sends 20 times more kids to Pennsylvania, which is the number one destination ste for outgoing NJ students(Penn State, Pitt, Villanova, Lehigh, Lafayette, West Chester, etc all have significant NJ alumni bases) then it does to Connecticut. Maybe even more than 20 times.

Rutgers ALWAYS leads college football coverage on the local NYC channels. ALWAYS. If Syracuse plays in a big game, they're usually next...followed by the local teams like Army and Columbia. UCONN football is simply not covered.

If you had fans in NY than you would be able to move the meter when UCONN plays in ESPN, yet you don't. Not even one bit. RU not only has great ratings when it plays on SNY...and has tons of programming, like pre-game and post game shows...etc....but we have also played in 9 out of the 10 top rated football games on ESPN and ESPN 2 in the NYC DMA.

UCONN has appeared in ZERO of the top 10 games in the NYC DMA.

In NJ, you have a few kids go to UCONN. SO what? The state of Connecticut is like the number 3 feeder state to Rutgers (after NY and PA) for students....but that doesn't mean that the state of Connecticut cares a lick about Rutgers, despite being home to a Rutgers alumni base. It doesn't. Likewise, the State of NJ doesn't care a lick about UCONN either, despite there being a tiny UCONN alumni base in the state.

To say NJ cares about Connecticut because UCONN appears on SNY which airs in NJ is laughably weak.
I guess the state of Connectict cares about Rutgers than...since you're also watching Rutgers on SNY.

Just flawed logic.

 

[Fishy]

Having had the chance to have been walked through real, live numbers, I'm going to poke some holes in the Rutgers' kid.

Rutgers ratings in New York City have little to do with New York and much to do with the fact that for the purposes of that rating, most of the state of New Jersey is included. Only a Rutgers' fan would celebrate the fact that they receive ratings in their own market.

You know who else gets ratings in their home market? Everyone everywhere. It also bears mention that the NYC DMA isn't even in ESPN's top 30 markets for college football - so, you know, yay, Rutgers.

Rutgers never "leads" New York news coverage - never. I can't roll that enough - never, ever, never.

Somewhere out on the net, there is a common census map that will back this up...New York City, to the extent it cares, is broken up. Rutgers does relatively well, UConn does relatively well, Notre Dame doesn't do as well as you'd think, Penn State and Syracuse draw their alums and no one else.

Lesson here for you, buggs, is first, don't talk out of your ass. Second, you probably just shouldn't talk - you seem kinda dim.

 

[zls44]

For what its worth, the Empire State Building has been lit blue NUMEROUS times for UConn basketball.

The difference is, this fanbase knows real success and that, while a lovely gesture, it truly, truly means JACK .

 

[auggie22]

You say at worst, UCONN is as popular in NY as Rutgers. Yet you have nothing to back that up. Have you been asked by the Yankees to play a regular season game at Yankee Stadium? Has the Empire State Building been lit up for you after a big win?

If you have family in North Jersey, then you know your football gets NO local news coverage...unless it happens to be in a week they are playing Rutgers.

And lots of kids DON't go to UCONN. a few do each year...but that's it. Just a handful each year. That is not LOTS. NJ probably sends 20 times more kids to Pennsylvania, which is the number one destination ste for outgoing NJ students(Penn State, Pitt, Villanova, Lehigh, Lafayette, West Chester, etc all have significant NJ alumni bases) then it does to Connecticut. Maybe even more than 20 times.

Rutgers ALWAYS leads college football coverage on the local NYC channels. ALWAYS. If Syracuse plays in a big game, they're usually next...followed by the local teams like Army and Columbia. UCONN football is simply not covered.

If you had fans in NY than you would be able to move the meter when UCONN plays in ESPN, yet you don't. Not even one bit. RU not only has great ratings when it plays on SNY...and has tons of programming, like pre-game and post game shows...etc....but we have also played in 9 out of the 10 top rated football games on ESPN and ESPN 2 in the NYC DMA.

UCONN has appeared in ZERO of the top 10 games in the NYC DMA.

In NJ, you have a few kids go to UCONN. SO what? The state of Connecticut is like the number 3 feeder state to Rutgers (after NY and PA) for students....but that doesn't mean that the state of Connecticut cares a lick about Rutgers, despite being home to a Rutgers alumni base. It doesn't. Likewise, the State of NJ doesn't care a lick about UCONN either, despite there being a tiny UCONN alumni base in the state.

To say NJ cares about Connecticut because UCONN appears on SNY which airs in NJ is laughably weak.
I guess the state of Connectict cares about Rutgers than...since you're also watching Rutgers on SNY.

Just flawed logic.

True or false - uconn basketball is more covered and followed in NY and NYC than Rutgers football? Maybe we can have a reasonable discourse depending upon your answer to this question.

 

[CL82]

I'm not sure what branding issues the Big Ten has - everyone should be so lucky as to have the Big Ten's problems.

I think our fan base is just worn out right now. We've taken a steady stream of body shots and I think the conference stuff has been a much bigger drag than we might think.

It might take a couple of years to overcome that.

Or one great season.