ND meeting with ACC presidents | Page 2 | The Boneyard

ND meeting with ACC presidents

Status
Not open for further replies.
sportsart said:
Bizlaw

You have to admit ND got everything they could from the BE and if they kick us to the curb for the ACC it is sad.

Regardless of self interest it is sad.

They have the ability to help the BE survive and do quite well for themselves right where they are. If they don't I hope karma shows up soon.
Expand ...

Of course they have. Their deal with the Big East served their purposes, so they took it. Just like ours did.

We have publicly announced that we would leave the Big East if we could. How is that serving the interests of USF or Seton Hall? I am a strong believer in that universities should condut their businesses morally and with respect for their parters, but they are still businesses. For us, as well as Notre Dame. Or did I miss all of us saying how awful it was that we were willing to help the Big East throw Temple out by taking its place?
 
Those conversations are simple. ND and the BE need a payoff to keep them from appearing at Yankee Stadium on New Years day either against each other or an opponent.

The speculative question is if the ACC is trying to simply sever ND from the BE and pay them directly rather than have the BE guarantee ND bowl payments each year as is done now. Essentially that means the ACC absorbed Pitt, SU and the ND Bowl Contract in their BE raid.

Waiting to see how NBC counters.......
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj
For those unaware of the current ND/BE/BCS bowl deal they guarantee ND money every year ($1.7 mil for participating in the BCS agreement and not going rogue) and the Gator Bowl gets to choose ND once every 4 years (another $2.2 mil), Should the Irish make a BCS bowl (of any kind) they get the same as a BCS at-large pick ($6.5 mil last year to at-large teams) as a bonus.

It reads to me that in the absence of the BCS that it has fallen on to the ACC to neutralize ND and get them to play nice and not do that dirty Yankee Stadium thing every New Years at 1:00 PM EST :)
 
businesslawyer said:
Could someone please try explaining to me one more time why it would be "sad" for Notre Dame to be acting in its best interests as opposed to ours? Can anyone give me an example of when UConn did something opposed to its best interests to help Notre Dame, or, if not, why it's "sad" that we didn't?
Expand ...

Um, I'll give it a shot. It would be "sad" for Notre Dame to be acting in its best interests as opposed to Connecticut's because I am a Connecticut fan. Good things for Notre Dame don't matter to me very much, but good things for the University of Connecticut, make me happy. If Notre Dame abandoned their independance in order to stabilize the conference just after we were voted in as a football member, that would have made me happy since it would have been good for UConn. If they then scheduled a home and away series with us that would also have made me happy. They didn't so I was a little sad, since it was bad for us.

To sum up: good for UConn = happy, bad for UConn = sad.

I hope that helped.
 
CL82 said:
Um, I'll give it a shot. It would be "sad" for Notre Dame to be acting in its best interests as opposed to Connecticut's because I am a Connecticut fan. Good things for Notre Dame don't matter to me very much, but good things for the University of Connecticut, make me happy. If Notre Dame abandoned their independance in order to stabilize the conference just after we were voted in as a football member, that would have made me happy since it would have been good for UConn. If they then scheduled a home and away series with us that would also have made me happy. They didn't so I was a little sad, since it was bad for us.

Yes. I understand that perfectly. It's written with the maturity of a grade schooler, but I understand it perfectly.m up: good for UConn = happy, bad for UConn = sad.

I hope that helped.
Expand ...

Yes, thank you, I understand that pefectly. It's written with the self-centered maturity of a ten year old because grown-ups don't epect third parties to act against their own self interest just to please them, but I understand it perfectly.
 
businesslawyer said:
Yes, thank you, I understand that pefectly. It's written with the self-centered maturity of a ten year old because grown-ups don't epect third parties to act against their own self interest just to please them, but I understand it perfectly.
Expand ...

Or maybe because expecting third parties to act in an ethical manner is not a sign of immaturity, but recognition of appropriate behavior in a complex society. Killing someone over a candy bar could be, in absolute terms, considered to be acting in my self interest if I really wanted a candy bar. It doesn't mean that kind of behavior should be condoned or rationalized by condescending, cynical, know-it-alls.

I would think a lawyer who is further up the evolutionary scale than ambulance chaser would understand concepts like good faith and fiduciary duty.
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
Or maybe because expecting third parties to act in an ethical manner is not a sign of immaturity, but recognition of appropriate behavior in a complex society. Killing someone over a candy bar could be, in absolute terms, considered to be acting in my self interest if I really wanted a candy bar. It doesn't mean that kind of behavior should be condoned or rationalized by condescending, cynical, know-it-alls.

I would think a lawyer who is further up the evolutionary scale than ambulance chaser would understand concepts like good faith and fiduciary duty.
Expand ...

What had ND done that is unethical with respect to their conference affiliation? It hasn't been unethical enough in the eyes of the other Big East schools to cause them to make any attempt to remove them from the conference. It hasn't been enough for the individual football schools to not schedule them.

But nice job throwing in ethical since the post you quoted had no mention of ethics. I know that you think you have insight to what goes on in these negotiations - you don't. You have no idea if Notre Dame has acted in good faith - if they haven't why has no one in the Big East mentioned it?
 
businesslawyer said:
Could someone please try explaining to me one more time why it would be "sad" for Notre Dame to be acting in its best interests as opposed to ours? Can anyone give me an example of when UConn did something opposed to its best interests to help Notre Dame, or, if not, why it's "sad" that we didn't?
Expand ...

Obviously it is a good thing for Notre Dame. The sad part is that the BE would see Notre Dame doing this and do nothing about it. It is one thing for the BE to have Notre Dame be a part of the BE for all non-football sports but not in the sport that ND adds the most value (football). That is fine if it is because Notre Dame wants to remain independent and doesn't want to affiliate with a conference in football. But have a loose affiliation with the BE (bowl tie-ins, BCS money, etc). But for the BE to allow Notre Dame to be affiliated with its biggest competition and help the ACC by enterering a bowl affiliation--that is a sad state of affairs for the BE.

So it is not sad that ND would do this in terms of ND's best interests. It is a sad state of affiars that the BE would watch one of their members enter an alliance and agreement with their biggest competition and someone who has been working on destroying their very existance in football--and the BE stand by and do absolutely nothing about it.

That is why it is sad....get it now?!:rolleyes:
 
We haven't received and good news since we Beat USF for the BE Championship. It has been one hit after another since then. We are due.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Or maybe because expecting third parties to act in an ethical manner is not a sign of immaturity, but recognition of appropriate behavior in a complex society. Killing someone over a candy bar could be, in absolute terms, considered to be acting in my self interest if I really wanted a candy bar. It doesn't mean that kind of behavior should be condoned or rationalized by condescending, cynical, know-it-alls.

I would think a lawyer who is further up the evolutionary scale than ambulance chaser would understand concepts like good faith and fiduciary duty.
Expand ...

Speaking of the self-centered intellectually of a ten year old ....

Note to Nelson -- acting in one's self interest is not the same as acting unethically. People act in ethical manners that are in their own self interests all the time. As UConn would be doing if it accepted an invitation to another conference if it came.
 
UConnSportsGuy said:
Obviously it is a good thing for Notre Dame. The sad part is that the BE would see Notre Dame doing this and do nothing about it. It is one thing for the BE to have Notre Dame be a part of the BE for all non-football sports but not in the sport that ND adds the most value (football). That is fine if it is because Notre Dame wants to remain independent and doesn't want to affiliate with a conference in football. But have a loose affiliation with the BE (bowl tie-ins, BCS money, etc). But for the BE to allow Notre Dame to be affiliated with its biggest competition and help the ACC by enterering a bowl affiliation--that is a sad state of affairs for the BE.

So it is not sad that ND would do this in terms of ND's best interests. It is a sad state of affiars that the BE would watch one of their members enter an alliance and agreement with their biggest competition and someone who has been working on destroying their very existance in football--and the BE stand by and do absolutely nothing about it.

That is why it is sad....get it now?!:rolleyes:
Expand ...

Notre Dame is a full member of the Big East. They are not Temple. Their presence in the Big East is supported by at least the basketball onlies, and very well may be supported by the football schools as well (but even if it isn't they can't be thrown out just by the football schools) The Big East has this arrangement with ND because the Big East member Presidents, and the office in Providence, all thought that the Big East was stronger with ND as a non-football member than without it. No one has said anything that makes me think this isn't still the case. The only thing I've been convinced of is that many would gladly cut off their own nose to spite their face.
 
businesslawyer said:
Yes, thank you, I understand that pefectly. It's written with the self-centered maturity of a ten year old because grown-ups don't epect third parties to act against their own self interest just to please them, but I understand it perfectly.
Expand ...

Gee, I guess I missed on the tone. I was shooting for an adult level of good natured sarcasm aimed at good poster who occasionally is subject to bouts of self aggrandizing sanctimony. My bad. I'll try to be less subtle.
;)
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
It doesn't mean that kind of behavior should be condoned or rationalized by condescending, cynical, know-it-alls.

I would think a lawyer who is further up the evolutionary scale than ambulance chaser would understand concepts like good faith and fiduciary duty.
Expand ...
Perhaps you should look in the mirror before accusing someone of attempting to be a condescending, cynical know-it-all.

More importantly (although when I pose questions such as these you always ignore them) please explain to the rest of the board what fiduciary duty is and how it applies to this case (ND's fiduciary responsibility to the BE).
 
UConnSportsGuy said:
Sad as it is, I wouldn't be surprised to see Notre Dame enter a football bowl alliance with the ACC...and the Big East would do absolutely nothing and carry on with the rest of their olympic sports in the BE as if nothing else happened. That would sum up the ND-BE relationship in a nutshell.
Expand ...
Just so that I can be sure that I am keeping score correctly:

When was ND looming in the background with the possibility of having a good enough season to take a bowl game from one of the agreements the BE was locked into it was a bad thing.

If ND ends up in a situation with the ACC instead of with the BE, this would be a bad thing.

How is it that boths sides of this coin are detrimental to the BE?

(for the record I have blasted ND more than nearly every other poster on this board)
 
CL82 said:
Gee, I guess I missed on the tone. I was shooting for an adult level of good natured sarcasm aimed at good poster who occasionally is subject to bouts of self aggrandizing sanctimony. My bad. I'll try to be less subtle.
;)
Expand ...

If I misinterpreted I'm sorry. In fairness, I did read it during a bout of insomnia at 1:20 in the morning.
 
.-.
businesslawyer said:
Notre Dame is a full member of the Big East. They are not Temple. Their presence in the Big East is supported by at least the basketball onlies, and very well may be supported by the football schools as well (but even if it isn't they can't be thrown out just by the football schools) The Big East has this arrangement with ND because the Big East member Presidents, and the office in Providence, all thought that the Big East was stronger with ND as a non-football member than without it. No one has said anything that makes me think this isn't still the case. The only thing I've been convinced of is that many would gladly cut off their own nose to spite their face.
Expand ...
I'm not sure how asking a team that is at best a middle of the road program in the Conference's most well known sport, and not at all involved in the one where there is a great need for them to leave is cutting off our noses. And even if it is, it might be better than having them cut a bowl sharing deal with the ACC. That is in effect rubbing our noses in it. As we all know, the world has changed quite a lot since Notre Dame joined the Big Eastin the mid-90s. The fact that ND is a full member, doesn't mean they can't be asked to leave. There has been talk over time that certain members have been told to either up their game or leave so I would guess that there is at least some mechanism to eject members, though I don't know that for sure. In any case, one can always negotiate terms which would push them out. The reality is that they are of some rather modest value to the Big East. If they negotiate a bowl deal with the ACC which costs the Big East access to some better bowls, they really offset that value. And while one doesn't assume one's business partner on Deal A will be a partner in Deal B, one usually assumes that he won't undermine you in A to get B.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,285
Messages
4,561,341
Members
10,455
Latest member
UConnGabby


Top Bottom