Swofford speaks on B12, Notre Dame

[JeepCSC]

Anyway you do the math, it doesn't help. Those are 4 cuts at $35m each, or $140m. Sorry--there is no scheming here to get ND for the privilege of splitting $140m.

I'm not sure what the words and numbers are doing here, but I'll hazard a guess you are implying Notre Dame is not worth paying BC/Pitt/Syracuse any money. One of the more obvious flaws with this is that you seem to be looking merely at the accounting ledger. If ESPN views Notre Dame as essential to a network and FSU views a network as essential to staying in the ACC, and UNC views FSU as essential to staying in the same league as UVA and State, then getting Notre Dame becomes essential. So paying Syracuse more than it's worth on the open market is okay if the end goal of keeping the ACC together is kept. And I think that is pretty much what happened.

 

[The Funster]

The only problem of course is seeing your team's away games. That might necessitate conference deals for streaming.

A good point but what if streaming becomes more of a free market function? Instead of the networks saying, "these are the games you get to see", the subscribers say, "these are the games we want to watch". Or imagine the day when individual schools can produce and stream all of their own content. The UConn channel with FB, MBB, WBB, soccer, baseball, field hockey, etc.

 

[Chin Diesel]

??

Heh?

Someone was arguing the B12 is ahead of the ACC?

If I ran a 100 yard dash against my neighbor, and I finished in a fast 33 seconds, while my neighbor collapsed and passed out at the 33 yard line, I'm not sure I deserve praise for my race.

If you had money on it, or anything else of value, you deserve praise.

 

[billybud]

A conference is somewhat akin to a group of chain stores....some stores with strong sales and markets mixed with some stores with weaker sales and markets.

A retail chain may alter local pricing to suit the markets (micro marketing) or maintain a chain wide uniform pricing policy.

There is some body of research that maintains that a uniform pricing policy is beneficial compared to customizing local pricing based on local demand and contested vs uncontested market. And thus many chains maintain a uniform pricing policy. This could be seen as analogous to teams in a conference receiving the same payout regardless of actual demand.

With non uniform pricing there can be one group of consumers being made worse off than they would otherwise be under uniform pricing, and some better off...so you do have some net winners within conferences due to uniform pricing.

ESPN seems to operate its business with each conference as a separate chain..some wholly owned, some not.

If you took the whole of FBS as the "chain" rather than the individual conference, the model of non uniform pricing making some consumers (read conferences here) worse off holds.

 

[TerryD]

You're digging yourself in to hole that's only going to get deeper. Some of what the ACC did was proactive and some was reactive.

Getting Miami, BC and VT was very proactive. It established a foothold in the northeast, solidified the mid-atlantic and took Miami off the market. It permanently weakened the Big East, added a football power, added a new market and strengthened another.

Pitt and 'Cuse wasn't great but it took those two properties off the table from the B12 and limited the B12's options.

Louisville was reactive towards losing Maryland but L'ville has done what they were supposed to do- solidify football.

While all the CR stuff was going on, some of the moves looked more suspicious than others. Now that there is a lull and everyone can look backwards, it's obvious that every move the ACC made, stabilized or increased its value. And ESPN rewarded the conference for that.

Five years ago no one would have been able to say the ACC is a stronger and more solid conference than the B12. Now it's a given. In the race to the P4, the ACC is miles ahead of the B12.

The ACC also got ND for everything except football and hockey. It got 5 ND football games a year. Swofford said that getting ND was critical to obtaining an ACC Network from ESPN.

 

[TerryD]

??

Heh?

Someone was arguing the B12 is ahead of the ACC?

If I ran a 100 yard dash against my neighbor, and I finished in a fast 33 seconds, while my neighbor collapsed and passed out at the 33 yard line, I'm not sure I deserve praise for my race.

You don't have to outrun the bear.......

 

[upstater]

You don't have to outrun the bear..

Don't miss the point here. It takes nothing to add anyone.

 

[upstater]

A conference is somewhat akin to a group of chain stores....some stores with strong sales and markets mixed with some stores with weaker sales and markets.

A retail chain may alter local pricing to suit the markets (micro marketing) or maintain a chain wide uniform pricing policy.

There is some body of research that maintains that a uniform pricing policy is beneficial compared to customizing local pricing based on local demand and contested vs uncontested market. And thus many chains maintain a uniform pricing policy. This could be seen as analogous to teams in a conference receiving the same payout regardless of actual demand.

With non uniform pricing there can be one group of consumers being made worse off than they would otherwise be under uniform pricing, and some better off...so you do have some net winners within conferences due to uniform pricing.

ESPN seems to operate its business with each conference as a separate chain..some wholly owned, some not.

If you took the whole of FBS as the "chain" rather than the individual conference, the model of non uniform pricing making some consumers (read conferences here) worse off holds.

Bad analogy.

 

[upstater]

A good point but what if streaming becomes more of a free market function? Instead of the networks saying, "these are the games you get to see", the subscribers say, "these are the games we want to watch". Or imagine the day when individual schools can produce and stream all of their own content. The UConn channel with FB, MBB, WBB, soccer, baseball, field hockey, etc.

The customers have to pay for it up front. Who are they going to pay?

 

[upstater]

I'm not sure what the words and numbers are doing here, but I'll hazard a guess you are implying Notre Dame is not worth paying BC/Pitt/Syracuse any money. One of the more obvious flaws with this is that you seem to be looking merely at the accounting ledger. If ESPN views Notre Dame as essential to a network and FSU views a network as essential to staying in the ACC, and UNC views FSU as essential to staying in the same league as UVA and State, then getting Notre Dame becomes essential. So paying Syracuse more than it's worth on the open market is okay if the end goal of keeping the ACC together is kept. And I think that is pretty much what happened.

You made gargantuan leaps in logic here. Getting Syracuse keeps the ACC together? You think Swofford's goal was to grab Cuse and Pitt to shake Notre Dame? Really? Because I think the whole thing kicked off when Maryland left. If Maryland doesn't leave, then what?

 

[TerryD]

You made gargantuan leaps in logic here. Getting Syracuse keeps the ACC together? You think Swofford's goal was to grab Cuse and Pitt to shake Notre Dame? Really? Because I think the whole thing kicked off when Maryland left. If Maryland doesn't leave, then what?

I am likely missing the point again (it happens a lot), but didn't the Maryland defection happen after the announcement of Pitt, Syracuse and ND to the ACC ??

Maryland leaves ACC for more money

 

[upstater]

I am likely missing the point again (it happens a lot), but didn't the Maryland defection happen after the announcement of Pitt, Syracuse and ND to the ACC ??

Maryland leaves ACC for more money

I thought they happened at the same time. Now it seems Maryland left a month or two later. But, was the word already out before the article you linked to?

Again, the idea that the selection of Pitt in particular was made to lure ND?? Do you believe that?

 

[TerryD]

I thought they happened at the same time. Now it seems Maryland left a month or two later. But, was the word already out before the article you linked to?

Again, the idea that the selection of Pitt in particular was made to lure ND?? Do you believe that?

I think that the ACC thought it was a good lure. As for ND? A small amount, if any.

ND has played Pitt almost every year, something like 89 times. A relationship is there and if Pitt counted for one of the required ACC games, so much the better.

Other than that? Not much.

 

[upstater]

I think that the ACC thought it was a good lure. As for ND? A small amount, if any.

If they thought it was a lure, UConn wouldn't have been their first choice. This narrative that's building here makes absolutely no sense.

 

[TerryD]

If they thought it was a lure, UConn wouldn't have been their first choice. This narrative that's building here makes absolutely no sense.

It is not my narrative. I just answered your question. Pitt would be a bit more of a carrot for ND to the ACC (history, annual games, recruiting territory) than UConn (since you interjected UConn here).

ND, if asked (not sure that they were) would have preferred Pitt over UConn. ND doesn't really have a relationship with UConn.

(If ND football ever joins, and it is asked, it may prefer Navy/Georgetown --history/relationship for the former, fellow private, Catholic school for the latter---- over UConn to the ACC, who knows?)

Did the criteria change when the ACC thought that it had a shot at ND and Pitt would be of some benefit to luring ND? Hell if I know, I wasn't there.

 

[upstater]

It is not my narrative. I just answered your question. Pitt would be a bit more of a carrot for ND to the ACC (history, annual games, recruiting territory) than UConn (since you interjected UConn here).

ND, if asked (not sure that they were) would have preferred Pitt over UConn. ND doesn't really have a relationship with UConn.

(If ND football ever joins, and it is asked, it may prefer Navy/Georgetown --history/relationship for the former, fellow private, Catholic school for the latter---- over UConn to the ACC, who knows?)

Did the criteria change when the ACC thought that it had a shot at ND and Pitt would be of some benefit to luring ND? Hell if I know, I wasn't there.

You totally changed the subject.

Ridiculous.

We're talking about the ACC using Pitt as a lure.

Come'on!

 

[TerryD]

You totally changed the subject.

Ridiculous.

We're talking about the ACC using Pitt as a lure.

Come'on!

I may have expanded, but not changed it.

I answered what I thought, that the ACC may have thought that Pitt was a lure. For ND, a bit but not much.

The only real "lure" for the ACC was the ability to have a partial membership and keep football indy with the ACC.

Nothing else (Southern recruiting access, East Coast presence or Pitt/Syracuse vs. someone else) came close to keeping football indy as the main reason to join the ACC.

 

[upstater]

I may have expanded, but not changed it.

I answered what I thought, that the ACC may have thought that Pitt was a lure. For ND, a bit but not much.

The only real "lure" for the ACC was the ability to have a partial membership and keep football indy with the ACC.

Nothing else (Southern recruiting access, East Coast presence or Pitt/Syracuse vs. someone else) came close to keeping football indy as the main reason to join the ACC.

I already pointed it out but you make no sense.

If ACC thought Pitt was a lure for ND, then why was UConn the first choice over Pitt?

 

[TerryD]

I already pointed it out but you make no sense.

If ACC thought Pitt was a lure for ND, then why was UConn the first choice over Pitt?

I told you that I have no idea. It isn't even my narrative.

I opined that maybe when the ACC found out that it had a shot at ND but may have had to fight the Big 12, it decided that Pitt was a "sweetener".

In any event, my main position is that perhaps the ACC thought so, but the ND folks would not have given it that much weight. What exactly are we debating here?

 

[upstater]

I told you that I have no idea. It isn't even my narrative.

I opined that maybe when the ACC found out that it had a shot at ND but may have had to fight the Big 12, it decided that Pitt was a "sweetener".

In any event, my main position is that perhaps the ACC thought so, but the ND folks would not have given it that much weight. What exactly are we debating here?

It didn't happen that way, and you know it.

 

[TerryD]

It didn't happen that way, and you know it.

Ok......

 

[JeepCSC]

You made gargantuan leaps in logic here. Getting Syracuse keeps the ACC together? You think Swofford's goal was to grab Cuse and Pitt to shake Notre Dame? Really? Because I think the whole thing kicked off when Maryland left. If Maryland doesn't leave, then what?

Access to bowls was the main thing Notre Dame got out of its deal with BE football (it clearly wasn't scheduling). Once Big East football basically implodes in 2011, they needed a new home. It isn't a coincidence that Notre Dame announces they are leaving the Big East within a year of Pitt/Syracuse (and West Virginia) announcing they are leaving. It didn't take Nostradamus to see that either. I don't think Pitt was used specifically (UConn would have served the same purpose as it would have forced the Big East to go raiding for ECU or whomever), though it probably was a nice bonus for Notre Dame.

 

[JeepCSC]

I may have expanded, but not changed it.

I answered what I thought, that the ACC may have thought that Pitt was a lure. For ND, a bit but not much.

The only real "lure" for the ACC was the ability to have a partial membership and keep football indy with the ACC.

Nothing else (Southern recruiting access, East Coast presence or Pitt/Syracuse vs. someone else) came close to keeping football indy as the main reason to join the ACC.

This makes no sense to me. The ACC couldn't offer partial membership and football independence as a lure because ND already had that with the BE. What the ACC could offer was bowl tie-ins and stability(-ish) for the other sports.

 

[JeepCSC]

I guess it should be noted that I do think Syracuse and Pitt (or UConn as the case could have been) were likely also brought in with an eye on a network and helping to bridge a gap with Boston. But I think trying to force Notre Dame's hand was a real goal with the move.

 

[billybud]

ALL layed out in 2010....

How the Big Ten Can Get Notre Dame: Target Pittsburgh, Fold the Big East

It is proposed as a possible way for the Big Ten to lure in Notre Dame, and, coincidentally or not, is almost exactly what the ACC did.

What is pretty much the best way to get Notre Dame to join, in my honest opinion?

Find a way to get rid of the Big East (at least in terms of football).

 

[billybud]

The fact that Notre Dame has played Pitt 67 games since 1930 and considered them to be a schedule mainstay, could not hurt in the ACC's quest to get the Irish to sign on the line to play football games in the ACC and move the other sports over.

 

[upstater]

ALL layed out in 2010....

How the Big Ten Can Get Notre Dame: Target Pittsburgh, Fold the Big East

It is proposed as a possible way for the Big Ten to lure in Notre Dame, and, coincidentally or not, is almost exactly what the ACC did.

What is pretty much the best way to get Notre Dame to join, in my honest opinion?

Find a way to get rid of the Big East (at least in terms of football).

So, if this was the plan, why did they try to expand at first WITHOUT inviting Pittsburgh?

In other words, this is complete BS, and you guys know it.

 

[ramses 2.0]

The Pitt/Syracuse expansion came down to Syracuse having enough votes & Pitt/UConn with some support. Pitt's history, solid recruiting territory ,etc appealed to the FSU/CLE/GT/VT/UM's of the conference,along with strong academics & research. Now getting ND on board also likely played some factor but how much we may never know

 

[kingdobbs]

So, if this was the plan, why did they try to expand at first WITHOUT inviting Pittsburgh?

In other words, this is complete BS, and you guys know it.

Do you think the Big East would have survived or remained a valid future partner for Notre Dame had we been invited instead of Pitt? Honestly?

 

[JeepCSC]

So, if this was the plan, why did they try to expand at first WITHOUT inviting Pittsburgh?

In other words, this is complete BS, and you guys know it.

If you read it, his actual plan is to dismantle BE by taking one of four schools (Rutgers, UConn, Syracuse, Pitt) and thereby forcing Notre Dame to move. He then says in his opinion he'd take Pitt if he could only take one, and then lists his reasons. But he says the basic premise remains the same whomever is taken and specifically says taking BE basketball teams might do more damage to the league in the eyes of Notre Dame than anything. I think the Tobacco Road schools have an affinity with UConn for good reasons, and it's likely Swofford's first instinct was that. But when push came to shove, Pitt had more support so Pitt it became. Notre Dame was shaken loose soon after, to the surprise of no one. Except maybe you.