Confirmed: ND to make a deal with ACC. 5 FB games/year, full member in others

etc79 said:
The only thing I agree with here is the football side....ND is just using the ACC like they did the Big East to get their other sports into a competitive playing field....in no way do they want to join the ACC in football....it's just not going to happen...

It is good for the ACC....but only while it lasts
Click to expand...

It's going to last for a long time. The $50 mil buyout applies to ND too.
 
With a four team playoff scenario, the winners of the SEC, PAC 12, BIG 12, B1G and ACC and may be even the Big East are each going to argue their champion belongs in the final four. No team in those conferences will want to risk losing a non-conference game especially late in the season and thereby be knocked out of the final four. They could win their conference championship game but because of a non-conference loss be excluded.

The USC's, Michigan's, etc. will start questioning why they would want to take that risk. In that argument, tradition and TV ratings for a regular season game have no bearing. And ND's traditional games with aspiring national championship teams may evaporate.
 
THWUGA said:
In basketball only.

The NYC college football market is dominated in the following order:

1. Notre Dame
2. Penn State
3. Rutgers
4. Michigan
5. ACC and SEC teams
6. Other B1G teams
7. Everyone else, including UConn
Click to expand...

They don't need to have a single fan in NYC if they have a physical presence in the NYC media market, its about TV money for the conference, which hs nothing to do with how many people are watching and everthing to do with how many ESPN can bill. The way TV packages work, those are not at all related. You probably don't watch any daytime TV at all, but you pay for every show on every channel. Your provider wont itemize it for you on your bill, but th 30-50 dollar basic cable package ain't just trying to recuperate bandwidth.


Either UConn or Rutgers brings us NYC in every way that matters.
 
Spurrier: One of my buddies said he couldn’t wait to see ND vs. Clem. in women’s softball. Going to be a heck of a game
 
Legal Jacket said:
It's going to last for a long time. The $50 mil buyout applies to ND too.
Click to expand...

I don't wasnt to disagree with you, but I would like to make a point.

For a 14 team conference like the SEC, they would only have to pony up <4 million each to cover the buyout.

Suppose Alabama sent us a note asking for an ACC invite but they had a $50 million buyout they could not pay (for whatever reason, say state law for argument's sake). Do you think GT would be willing to chip in $4 million to get Alabama?

If it came down to it, the SEC would invest 100 million to buy two ACC schools if they thought that was critical for their league to remain the best.
 
ThisIsAtlanta said:
They don't need to have a single fan in NYC if they have a physical presence in the NYC media market, its about TV money for the conference, which hs nothing to do with how many people are watching and everthing to do with how many ESPN can bill. The way TV packages work, those are not at all related. You probably don't watch any daytime TV at all, but you pay for every show on every channel. Your provider wont itemize it for you on your bill, but th 30-50 dollar basic cable package ain't just trying to recuperate bandwidth.


Either UConn or Rutgers brings us NYC in every way that matters.
Click to expand...

I admittedly don't know how TV package values are calculated. But RU and UConn are equidistant to NYC but RU kills them in enrollment and alumni presence. I can't imagine they're on equal footing.

Driving home today, Francesa was talking about UConn's unsuccessful attempt to be NYC's team, even in basketball (as its more of a St John's town in that respect). He's right. UConn doesn't deliver the NYC market at all. If that's the goal, RU is the no brainer (PSU aint dropping the B1G).
 
THWUGA said:
I admittedly don't know how TV package values are calculated. But RU and UConn are equidistant to NYC but RU kills them in enrollment and alumni presence. I can't imagine they're on equal footing.

Driving home today, Francesa was talking about UConn's unsuccessful attempt to be NYC's team, even in basketball (as its more of a St John's town in that respect). He's right. UConn doesn't deliver the NYC market at all. If that's the goal, RU is the no brainer (PSU aint dropping the B1G).
Click to expand...

Gaining access to a media market is almost like buying a square in Monopoly. The rules of the game are everybody who lands there has to pay you.

They're not on equal footing as schools or fanbases, to be sure, but right now 'Cuse is probably our closest school to the NYC media market. Rutgers, IMO, is the clear best choice, but UConn would do in a pinch, simply because it puts the ACC television deal in the same physical place as the most concentrated area of TV's and internets in the US. The networks have deals worked out with providers that determine the fair price of the programming, and they contain clauses that do things like define the fair price per subscriber at 30 cents each for households that aren't in the footprint of the conference, and 80 cents each for households that are. As soon as we nabbed either school, that's a million billion 50 cent upgrades for ESPN (all figures are just made up, dunno the actual values), which makes the ACC contract more valuable to them during the renegotiation. Either team would improve the value of the contract by a bit. The money they pull in from increasing the value of the contract is going to far outstrip the money they pull in from any other sources, so the other comparisons between them are relatively moot on a macro scale.
 
bball1979 said:
With a four team playoff scenario, the winners of the SEC, PAC 12, BIG 12, B1G and ACC and may be even the Big East are each going to argue their champion belongs in the final four. No team in those conferences will want to risk losing a non-conference game especially late in the season and thereby be knocked out of the final four. They could win their conference championship game but because of a non-conference loss be excluded.

The USC's, Michigan's, etc. will start questioning why they would want to take that risk. In that argument, tradition and TV ratings for a regular season game have no bearing. And ND's traditional games with aspiring national championship teams may evaporate.
Click to expand...

I see your point but there is no "arguing for it". The BCS formula is being used and it's controlled by computer rankings, sportswriters, and coaches. And none of those coaches' votes counts more than anothers' vote does.
 
TechSBP said:
You also claimed we were going to the Big 12. You were part of the internet mind fart that wanted to FSU and Clemson to go the Big 12. Which simply proves the power of stupidity on the internet.

You have no credibility on conference expansion.

Your 20-team conference idea may surpass the stupidity of your GT to the Big 12 idea.

Although your thoughts are not as stupid as the people who keep repeating North/South split with Miami in the "South."
Click to expand...


Um, No. I NEVER claimed we WERE going to the BIG12, nor did I ever WANT FSU & Clemson to go to the BIG12.

Why would I want FSU & Clemson to leave and DESTABILIZE the ACC?

However, I DID SAY, that...IF...the BIG12 (with only 9 teams) went on an ACC "raid" to get 5-6 teams (like the PAC12 did to try and get CO, OK, OKST. TX, TXTECH, and aTm) and we got an invite that GT SHOULD go. IMO, being in a STRONG & LUCRATIVE BIG12 was MUCH MORE desireable than staying in a , diminished and hollowed out ACC. Kind of like what the BigEast looks like now.

I submitted the idea of a 20 team conference because it "fits" with the ideas of giving ND the scheduling flexibility they want, and gives NBC a compelling inventory of games to broadcast and help NBC solidify their stand as a major college sports network.
And, 20 teams offers a lot of combined market share that would keep the ACC on revenue par with other conferences. Maybe more.

So, whatever ax you want to grind is OK with me.
Just use FACTS.
 
3GT said:
Um, No. I NEVER claimed we WERE going to the BIG12, nor did I ever WANT FSU & Clemson to go to the BIG12.

Why would I want FSU & Clemson to leave and DESTABILIZE the ACC?

However, I DID SAY, that...IF...the BIG12 (with only 9 teams) went on an ACC "raid" to get 5-6 teams (like the PAC12 did to try and get CO, OK, OKST. TX, TXTECH, and aTm) and we got an invite that GT SHOULD go. IMO, being in a STRONG & LUCRATIVE BIG12 was MUCH MORE desireable than staying in a , diminished and hollowed out ACC. Kind of like what the BigEast looks like now.

I submitted the idea of a 20 team conference because it "fits" with the ideas of giving ND the scheduling flexibility they want, and gives NBC a compelling inventory of games to broadcast and help NBC solidify their stand as a major college sports network.
And, 20 teams offers a lot of combined market share that would keep the ACC on revenue par with other conferences. Maybe more.

So, whatever ax you want to grind is OK with me.
Just use FACTS.
Click to expand...

The 20 team idea is dead in the water for the near term future. Come up with 20 teams that the ACC can get that enhance tv deals. To do so, we would have to raid the Big Ten, Big Twelve, or SEC and I just don't see that happening. The Big 12 is a possibility after the PAC 12 raids them, but do we really want the remnants of the Big 12?
 
I agree 20 teams seems unlikely.
However it does offer what might be advantages
with scheduling flexibility which ND wants.

Which 20? Hypothetically, maybe a combo
of some of these:

Rutgers
Louisville
SMU(Texas recruiting)
Purdue (only b/c ND might want this tradition rival).
Purdue would certainly be a very long shot.

PennSt(another long shot with LOTS of problems)

Vandy(I know. But, Vandy's prospects are much better
In an expanded ACC than they will EVER be getting
blasted every weekend by SEC football factories.

Other ideas?
 
3GT said:
I agree 20 teams seems unlikely.
However it does offer what might be advantages
with scheduling flexibility which ND wants.

Which 20? Hypothetically, maybe a combo
of some of these:

Rutgers
Louisville
SMU(Texas recruiting)
Purdue (only b/c ND might want this tradition rival).
Purdue would certainly be a very long shot.

PennSt(another long shot with LOTS of problems)

Vandy(I know. But, Vandy's prospects are much better
In an expanded ACC than they will EVER be getting
blasted every weekend by SEC football factories.

Other ideas?
Click to expand...


That list suck balls.
 
3GT said:
I agree 20 teams seems unlikely.
However it does offer what might be advantages
with scheduling flexibility which ND wants.

Which 20? Hypothetically, maybe a combo
of some of these:

Rutgers
Louisville
SMU(Texas recruiting)
Purdue (only b/c ND might want this tradition rival).
Purdue would certainly be a very long shot.

PennSt(another long shot with LOTS of problems)

Vandy(I know. But, Vandy's prospects are much better
In an expanded ACC than they will EVER be getting
blasted every weekend by SEC football factories.

Other ideas?
Click to expand...

No other ideas because the options, other than Pedophile State and Rutgers are ludicrous and very few of the other far fetched ideas bring much for TV money. Do you really think a Vandy will choose to take less money to join the ACC? At best, they bring the Nashville market, which is dominated by UT. SMU is a joke and doesn't bring much cache in recruiting Texas, something that we would fail in anyways. Purdue simply isn't going to happen for the same reason as Vandy.

I see the ACC standing pat and waiting for the other dominos to fall. It all starts with the PAC 12 and when their next TV contract comes up. In the meantime, ND has signaled their preference. A few months ago they were rumoured to be going to the Big 12 (other than football) and this is really a shot at the bow. IF super conferences are in the future, the Big 12 is toast. All you have to do is look at their Big 8/SWC history and know they have problems. Anytime the PAC 12 or Big Ten/Twelve comes calling, they will implode as evidenced by the last few year's losses of NB, TAM, Mizzou, and Colorado.

They are weak and if the ACC really wanted to solidify theirselves, they would have offered OK and OSU. What the ND deal does is kick the ball down the road. BE, B12, ACC, and PAC12 all signed new TV contracts within the last two years. That's the important point along with ND's ending in 2015. That's when we'll find out what's going to happen.
 
Perhaps 16 teams with 4 4-team divisions
with a 3-2-1-1 schedule, again giving ND
schedule flexibility that they'll want.
 
3GT said:
Perhaps 16 teams with 4 4-team divisions
with a 3-2-1-1 schedule, again giving ND
schedule flexibility that they'll want.
Click to expand...

Instead, do 3-4, rotating the cross-divisional games every year. It's a six year rotation to play all teams, as it is now.
 
TechPreacher said:
Instead, do 3-4, rotating the cross-divisional games every year. It's a six year rotation to play all teams, as it is now.
Click to expand...

You would want a home-and-home, so the change would be every two years. A similar plan that does the same thing and still has a simple championship structure:

4 pods: A, B, C, D. Two pods are combined (AB and CD) to make two 8 team conferences. You play the 7 teams in your conference then 1-2 cross conferences games as "rivalries". Every two years you switch the pod combinations (so AC and BD next). The longest you could go between games is 4 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top