Notre Dame Eyeing Big Ten
- Thread starter mikemarc1
- Start date
-----
Which is my favorite thing!,.... I did not want to join the big 10 then start playing a modified ACC schedule.
Exactly. We should all hope for either status quo or westward expansion. Why trade annuals against Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State, and even Maryland... for UVA, UNC, and Georgia Tech?
Christ, I'd rather have the old Big East and I'm not kidding.
Nobody wants Notre Dame in their conference. They just want their money and are willing to put up with Notre Dame to get it.
Notre Dame is like the one guy in your circle of friends in high school who is really annoying and nobody would normally hang out with but his parents are loaded so people include him just because he has access to his parents vacation house most weekends where you all go drink and have girls over.
-----
Thank you...... So many fans are so anxious to deal a death blow to the ACC that they would settle for a watered down big 10.......
Let's get Michigan state good, even if it takes some time........ And bring on the best each year
I don't see how there could be a GOR for football b/c NBC has the home football games. The away games that are played at ACC stadiums are the ACC's property to televise anyway, just like the B1G has the rights to the game when ND plays at UM, MSU, Purdue, etc.
Now if the clause mentioned earlier claiming that if ND joins a conference it must be the ACC is in the contract, then that is what would govern. If they breached that clause of the contract, or didn't follow-through on the scheduling agreement until it expires, then they would be subject to damages for breaching the contract.
I don't see ND ever giving up independence unless they have no path to the national championship game without being in a conference.
Many high stakes donors (read old people with tons of money) have said they would cut them off if they joined a conference for football.
UND would have to cut their loses or wait for them to die before joining the Big Ten.
Right now this will NOT be happening.
They are joining for Ice Hockey but that will but all for at least the rest of the NBC and ACC contract.
UND would have to cut their loses or wait for them to die before joining the Big Ten.
Right now this will NOT be happening.
They are joining for Ice Hockey but that will but all for at least the rest of the NBC and ACC contract.
I was a but harsh on WF, but you captured my intent better than I did. Thanks. A Chris Ash Rutgers team will fare better than in the past. We will be thinking; how will we win this game. Not, when will we blow it.
I don't think ND is going to join any conference for football anytime soon.
I do think OU is chomping at the bit to become part of the B1G
I do think OU is chomping at the bit to become part of the B1G
Every Notre Dame Alum I've talked to who has big money in Southern Monmouth County has told me that No Notre Dame Alum wants to join a conference for football. Notre Dame loves playing a National Schedule and does not want to have to play 9 conference games.
With that said, I'd love the in the B1G.
With that said, I'd love the in the B1G.
your favorite thing is watching Rutgers getting its brains beaten in by OSU and Michigan?? I'd rather have two potential wins than two losses most years. Programs like UVA, UNC, PSU, and MD are our competitive peers.
We need significant infrastructure improvements to be competitive with OSU and Michigan, year in and out. And I'm not convinced our alumni are willing to fund them. After the last few years, I would prefer an easier schedule. Playing Michigan, Ohio State AND Michigan State is too much for us. Being in the B1G would always ensure a competitive schedule. Our program isn't good enough to thumb our noses down at anyone.
We don't have to beat OSU, MSU, and Michigan every year. We just have to beat Indiana, Maryland and Penn State and our 3 crossover games.
Rutgers can do that by out recruiting all of the West division teams. That is actually realistic.
I don't want or care about any school in the ACC.
Rutgers can do that by out recruiting all of the West division teams. That is actually realistic.
I don't want or care about any school in the ACC.
----
I prefer to grow our program and compete....to each his own..... I will once again refer you to Michigan state, a program not much better than RU at one point, that did not run away from the challenge.....
As far as getting killed by Michigan, each year, they did not do it two years ago, did they?.... And we were a 3rd and 9 defensive stop from beating Michigan state this past year.
Anyway, I have the satisfaction that things will probably be left the way they are, and each year we play a true big 10 schedule
Put your big boy pants on..... Mr Ash has, and has accepted the challenge
Last edited:
No you didn't read it right. He never said it would be the end of the Big Ten, quite the opposite actually.
You clearly didn't read the entire post. Particularly the part about I doubt that the GOR covers any football games for ND. That being said the clause about ND joining a conference we're in full agreement.
With no championship game for nd no matter how well they do the 4 spots will always push out nd with a conference championship game after a few years of losing out in the top 4 they will realize they must join a conference.
As for OU not a draw like ND and not AAU keeps them out (yes I know nd is not aau but they are the exception to the rule)
Wait, did you really just say OU isn't a draw like ND? I get that ND is the best draw there is in many parts of the country, especially when they're doing well. But, OU is definitely way up there, AAU is this odd strawman people like to trot out. AAU matters when you're Rutgers or Maryland. AAU does not matter when you have Oklahoma's athletic department, football tradition and yes national drawing power.
Mr. Ash's burden would be lightened, if he didn't have to face OSU and Michigan every year.
the biggest growth comes from winning big. winning inspires bigger donations. tough to win big with michigan, msu, and osu on your schedule. plus you figure we split with MD and PSU most years. its not like we'd be replacing those schools with chopped liver. some years we'd be playing perhaps a wisconsin and a purdue, among others.
while i understand the status quo remains for the forseeable future, i would welcome additional schools, which ultimately would facilitate success for the program. We went for playing nobody to playing too many somebodys.
Except for fans of those schools.
But nation wide ACC fb really doesn't have a strong TV following and most of their FB scheduled games probably would rate less interest than an Indiana vs Northwestern game .
That's why ND playing 5 ACC schools a year in FB is a must for the ACC.
North Carolina vs Duke in MBB is a must see, but in football is a mainly ignore .
Syracuse vs Pitt isn't the fb game it used to be and now the names draw some viewers but not like they did before.
Most ACC FB is not on the top of College FB fan's viewing list and when in doubt those fans will put on a B1G or SEC game , even if it's not a game between the better conference teams , but the ones considered middle of pack or worse .
Please we already have our "power house football team from the B12" Nebraska and that was a BTN fumble. RU has already paid it TV dues and made more then Nb did and more OU would do.
BTW you do know the President must approve additions and the presidents do not give a $hit about ..."athletic department, football tradition and yes national drawing".. they only care about Academics. (Nebraska came in on that mantra you can not dupe the Presidents again) Our addition to the CIC was a bigger draw to B10 Presidents then any TV eyeballs for BTN. Hell look at the advertising for the cancer consortium now that RU and Maryland and JH join the CIC.
ESPN only had 1/2 of the B1G games anyway.
I think they have a number for what 1/2 of the B1G is worth to ESPN to make money.
For example, if $150 million per year is what ESPN considers the value for 1/2 of the B1G and the B1G wants $250 million per year, then you walk away.
I think that is what they will offer and if not accepted then you walk away because of economics.
Then NBC or Fox or whoever will have to make an offer for the other 1/2 of B1G football games.
Interesting to see what that figure would be with ESPN out of the equation.
Business decision.
ESPN could ask the SEC and ACC Conferences to play more OOC against each other in football and basketball which would make a lot of interesting match ups.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
Last edited:
I can't see why ND would want to join the B1G.
They would add a lot of value for football though.
The last time ND played Pen St in football I saw a doozy of a fight that spilled out of a bar in Hoboken.
They would add a lot of value for football though.
The last time ND played Pen St in football I saw a doozy of a fight that spilled out of a bar in Hoboken.
I don't think it's so cut and dry. Actually, if you give Nebraska credit for being #12 and allowing the Big Ten to stage a championship game, they've brought in more TV money than Rutgers. Even if you don't give them credit, Nebraska is worth more to Fox or ESPN or NBC for tier 1 rights than Rutgers is because more people nationally watch Nebraska than they do Rutgers. That's not quantifiable though, not in real life. No one can tell you what the tier 1 contract would be with vs. without Nebraska and with vs. without Rutgers. I'm sure those in the know can guess, but that's all it would be, a guess.
Haha you can't dupe the presidents again? Nobody duped the presidents on Nebraska. They weren't under the impression that Nebraska was Harvard only to find out after the fact that they're in the bottom tier of the conference, academically. Nebraska was added because they're a blue chip football brand. The same way that Oklahoma is and the same reason Oklahoma would be invited.
Every B1G team makes significantly more TV money than Notre Dame. That means Notre Dame is 3rd in the state of Indiana in TV revenue. Now, take that already much larger piece of revenue and add Notre Dame to it and they could be making 2.5-3 times what they currently make.
ND does things based on money. If ND joins B1G East, and Texas B1G West; imagine the money. There will be so much of it that egos, and alumni wanting a flexible schedule will be held in check. There will be more than enough content to keep BTN, FOX and NBC happy. Sorry E$PN. RU/MD was the litmus test. We passed. As a side benefit, adding Texas to the CIC will be huge. They know it too. Probably not around the corner, but just too much money to pass up.
I've said before, ESPN likes to have its finger in all the pies, specifically the biggest ones and I'd be surprised if they don't put up a solid bid for part of the B10 rights. ACCN is an uncertain endeavor, the B10 is a known quantity. Quality content is its lifeblood and without it they die and I don't see them making a habit of losing quality content. I don't think they'd want to start now.
Now does that mean they would bid the same 250M as Fox. No. I've said I could see them get a discount for being the top brand in sports programming but I don't expect it to be so steep. If Fox is paying 250, I'd expect ESPN to pay in the vicinity of 200M.
Even if you think the absolute number is too high, who's to say the B10 couldn't chop up the package even further. When I first mentioned that I thought the T1 rights would be split between Fox/ESPN there weren't many here touting that opinion. Now we see it's likely to be split. So if you split it once why not again? Who's to say you couldn't split that last half into quarters. Fox's half was 25 football and 50 basketball games right, so why not two packages of 12-13 football games and 25 basketball games. The absolute figure to bid on a smaller package could be more tolerable for media companies wary of paying too much.
Just look at the NFL. You have Sunday football split between the AFC/NFC, Sunday night, Monday night and now Thursday night split into two packages. So if 250M is too big, maybe 125M from 2 competitors will work. Personally, I think ESPN will still get the other half with a possible discount but not a steep one. If not that then maybe we could see a further splitting of the package.
Last edited:
Agree, we will have to see how this plays out.
Happens in business all the time.
Toshiba paid $5.4 billion for Westinghouse Nuclear.
Recently, they admitted that they paid too much for the company and had to write down $2.3 billion.
Many decisions go into making an offer. ESPN may feel that they will not want to hurt/destabilize the SEC and ACC Conferences with too high bid. They may feel that they will have to compensate both Conferences with additional money and that comes into play in the decision making process.
No matter how you slice it, ESPN has a 100% stake in both the SEC and ACC and their Networks(ACC soon to be) which make them a valuable commodity for ESPN.
In the end, ESPN will make a decision that will financially be in ESPN's best interest.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
Last edited:
SEC is fine and will always likely be in the vicinity of the B10, maybe a little in front or behind but basically the same area. The ACC being destabilized isn't as big a deal or the B12 for that matter. Like I said ESPN likes to have its finger in all pies, specifically the biggest ones. Here's the benefit of that. Say a couple of the top tier names leave for another conference like the SEC or B10, does it matter to ESPN as long as they have their finger in that B10 or SEC pie? I'd say no because that means they'd still have access to those top names in conferences they already have an association with. Maybe they have to pay more for those conferences but you could see it offset by how much less they'd be paying the leftovers. So as long as they have a finger in every pie, specifically the biggest ones, I don't see movement of the top tier names being as big an issue.
Frankly, I've said the ACC is in a better position than the B12 because of its narrow geographic focus. The B12 had their chance when FSU/Clemson were shaky. At the time, I said they should have made a Larry Scott like play and tried to add a whole swath of ACC teams and make it feel like leaving without really leaving for ACC schools. It might not have worked but they never gave it an earnest attempt and now they're fighting about expansion with lower quality options. To me the B12 doesn't control its destiny because they have to rely on the SEC/B10 to destabilize the ACC and then possibly get some leftovers. They had a possible opportunity and they blew it. As long as Texas stays they will survive but I don't see them thriving.
Again, ESPN only gets 1/2 the content of the Big 12.
Big 12 less important for ESPN. Also if the Pac-12 felt they had to expand they will go EAST into Big 12 territory.
Remember the rumors about Texas and ND considering the ACC Conference. I realize they were just rumors but maybe there were some discussions.
When you are talking about the SEC and ACC Conferences for ESPN that includes 28 teams (partial ND) for football and basketball as opposed to 7 teams (1/2 B1G so to speak).
Lot of content.
Not saying B1G is not important or valued but to a point.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
Last edited:
You're making confusing statements. First you say they have 1/2 the B1G above now you say 1/2 the B12 here. Not sure what your point is. They share T1/T2 rights for the B12 with Fox and they own all the B10 T1 rights now except for some basketball on CBS. I don't get the point you're bringing up anyway.
28 teams? Does that matter. They still will own the SEC and the SEC still will be a premier conference alongside the B10. Hypothetically, if a team left the ACC for the B10/SEC have they lost content provided they still have a finger in those pies? Maryland left, was Maryland still seen on ESPN networks? Did they lose them? Same could be said for any top tier name that left. They still would have the leftovers and the access to those teams as well. So I don't get why you think they'd lose anything or that it matters all that much as long as they have access and they would as long as they have some exposure to all the major conferences which they do as of now.
Did it matter to them when the Big East logo was switched from a Syracuse/Louisville/Pitt to an ACC one? I don't think so. They still had access. I don't think it matters to them at all which logo is plastered on the court/field as long as they still have access to that school, specifically the "name" schools.
Why would you NOT want to play these schools every year and try to beat them? This isn't the "new big east" post Miami/VaTech. There's nowhere to hide in the big ten even if we go to pods. If we wanted to continue to beat pansy schools no one cares about and play in bowl games that didn't even exist 10 years ago we would have stayed in the AAC.
I don't know why people keep wanting to overlook the main issue. The Big 12 has a clause in its TV contract that limits expansion. They can't add teams and the renegotiate their contract. Their TV contract has a clause whereby if the Big 12 expands, they only get enough money so the per-school payouts stay the same. That's why they can't attract teams like Florida St, Clemson, etc. They can't offer more money, so for any of these teams, joining the Big 12 would just be a lateral move.
Was that the case a few years ago when FSU/Clemson were a little iffy? And if it was why should those 2 be shaky to begin with because by your estimation the B12 shouldn't have even been an option for them back then. The SEC certainly wouldn't have been so really they should have been stuck no matter what. On top of which who's to say that a contract couldn't be rewritten/renegotiated depending on the attractiveness of the teams added. Hypothetically, say ND joined the B12, you're telling me the B12 wouldn't be able to get a boost in their contract?
I said they should have tried to make a play for a whole swath of ACC teams, they had the room to accept them. I think it would have made the move more "comfortable" for the ACC teams in some ways by leaving without really leaving. Would it have been a lateral move if they could have pulled of such a feat? I think there would have been a renegotiation sooner or later regardless of what a contract might state at present time.
If ESPN low bids and fails to win the bid for the 1/2 B1G content, then yes Maryland will no longer be televised on the ESPN channels in the future(6 years) .
Content of SEC and ACC will be extremely valuable to ESPN.
HAIL TO PITT!!!!
That's exactly my point and why it's important for them to keep a finger in all pies, especially the biggest ones like the B10 and why a "potential" destabilization of the ACC is less of an issue than losing the B10 altogether IMO.
