+1Originally posted by restartRU:
When Swofford and the ACC were vetting RU, they determined that RU wasn't cheating at anything and thus passed.
+1Originally posted by restartRU:
When Swofford and the ACC were vetting RU, they determined that RU wasn't cheating at anything and thus passed.
Duh.Originally posted by Ty Webb:
RU never had an invite from the ACC. There had been discussions but nothing major. ACC wasn't exactly sure what they were going to do as they had ND floating out there, etc. so they were shaking all the branches. RU definitely had support from some programs for sure but the ACC wasn't totally sure what they wanted to do.Originally posted by imbazza:
JPHoboken:
I do not know this for a fact, but I truly believe Pernetti had an ACC invite in his pocket before the BIG invitation came.
Yes this was what I thought, when the gun was pulled for the B10 it was a fast draw as if the ACC was about to move.
That comes from someone working in a ACC athletic department. He also stated that in hindsight, they should have taken Rutgers and probably left Pitt or Cuse to go die on a vine somewhere.
In theory, that would be a good idea for the ACC. But they also knew that if they extended a formal invitation to Rutgers, the B10 would have responded with its own invitation to Rutgers within a day. And there was no way that Rutgers would have gone to the ACC with a B10 invitation in hand.Originally posted by Ridge 22:
What they should have done was taken RU and UConn both as well. They would have locked down the entire East Coast, keeping the B1G out in the process.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
I agree that Pernetti probably didn't have a verbal invite or written one.Originally posted by Ty Webb:
RU never had an invite from the ACC. There had been discussions but nothing major. ACC wasn't exactly sure what they were going to do as they had ND floating out there, etc. so they were shaking all the branches. RU definitely had support from some programs for sure but the ACC wasn't totally sure what they wanted to do.Originally posted by imbazza:
JPHoboken:
I do not know this for a fact, but I truly believe Pernetti had an ACC invite in his pocket before the BIG invitation came.
Yes this was what I thought, when the gun was pulled for the B10 it was a fast draw as if the ACC was about to move.
That comes from someone working in a ACC athletic department. He also stated that in hindsight, they should have taken Rutgers and probably left Pitt or Cuse to go die on a vine somewhere.
Originally posted by krup:
A household anywhere in the New York market is important when you are making carriage fees off of them, so the "New York" half holds no extra significance to us.
You completely misunderstand the post. Maybe if you would look at things objective, instead of emotionally, you would get it. The point I was making to the other poster is that the ACC didn't have to sacrifice coverage in the New York market by taking Boston College. The ACC is currently broadcasted in New York, so they didn't lose out on that market.
Congratulations on the YES network coverage. The Big East was carried for years on a NY network comparable to YES (SNY), and we all know how well that worked out for them.
Stupid comment. The point I was making was that the ACC still got coverage in New York without Rutgers. You guys are really insecure about your team. You keep having to talk this up all the time about how you were a shoe-in to this or that conference.
Originally posted by topdecktiger:
Originally posted by MADHAT1:
Or they both agreed, for their own reasons, that UConn shouldn't be invited.
So it can be both ways , if two parties want something , but for different reasons.
ESPN could have told the ACC to raid the BE and BC fought UConn being one of the BE schools raided.
No, because that's not what was said in the article, and that's not the argument that's been made here. You take the article literally when it suits you, but then extrapolate when it doesn't suit you. If ESPN didn't want UConn, then Boston College's objection is irrelevant. UConn wasn't getting in anyway if ESPN didn't want them. Boston College' objection would only be effective if ESPN agreed, and again, there is no evidence of this in the article. Conversely, if ESPN wanted UConn, and Boston College blocked them, then Boston College has more power than ESPN. Explain how that works. On the one hand, we have posters talking about how Boston College has zero market share, and zero influence. Ok, if that's the case, then how is it that Boston College all of a sudden has this power to convince ESPN to choose a different team? On top of that, Boston College can't block a team by themselves. Two other ACC schools have to go along for a block to be successful. If the vote is 11-1 for UConn, then Boston College's block is overruled. That's another problem with this whole ESPN conspiracy theory. The conference schools still have to have a vote, no matter what.
Were they patently wrong. In the context of the ACC - what would RU have brought. Basically a deal with one of the local sports nets, similar to what Cuse, UConn, and RU had in the Big East, as well as better ratings for network games. But given that neither RU nor Cuse has been very good in a while, its not like you are getting a ton of RU games on nationally.Originally posted by RuRoman:
Anyone writing that RU officials knew, expected or held an invite from either the ACC or the Big Ten as late as September 2012 is flat out writing fiction.
ACC never invited or promised to invite RU despite several veiled attempts by RU officials (mostly from Mulcahey) to engage them...and when Pernetti heard the news that Cuse and Pitt had agreed to bolt to the ACC he was not only surprised but also enraged at these two former league members for he felt betrayed, he also became highly concerned about the future of RU athletics. But ACC officials never remotely discussed with Pernetti a possible invite to RU during Pernetti's tenure.
Pernetti was so despised by ESPN executives that ACC folks knew it would have been a waste of time to even consider RU...ACC folks also believed that Cuse was enough in order to reach the NYC market (they were patently wrong) and that RU neither had the wherewithal or resources to do any better in football or b-ball-and most importantly, ACC folks never expected for the Big Ten to make a move on RU. ACC folks truly thought that like UConn, RU would be available later when expansions to 16 teams was an inevitable action so there was no need to take them then....
Anyone asserting that RU knew or expected an impending invite to either the ACC or the Big Ten when rumors started circulating that Cuse and Pitt were bolting the Big East simply has no clue. Pernetti held a meeting with McCormick when the Cuse/Pitt to the ACC was announced and the prospects were ten hgrim and next to nothing. Whether removing Pernetti to improve an invite from the ACC was ever discussed by RU officials is not known to me. As late the first week of October 2012, RU had no idea where it future lied other than the bottom feeder CUSA Big East aberration of a conference.
In fact, it was not until four to six weeks prior to the official RU-Big Ten announcement that RU received a direct communication from Big Ten officials that Big Ten Officials were interested in discussing RU's membership in the Big Ten. Up to that point, RU had made several pitches to Big Ten folks, even Delaney, but it had fallen in deaf ears. To further prove this point, even when the Big Ten finally made some overt moves to seriously consider RU, no more than four to six weeks prior to announcement, such discussions were predicated on the fact that there were other contenders and that a decision was far from made. RU folks finally realized (were not necessarily told) that RU was in fact about to be invited about two to three weeks before rumors started circulating and a final decision was conveyed as late as last week of October 2012....
So you understand, there was a strategic rationale for the Big Ten to keep his interests in expanding rather secret...and possibly there is a good possibility that the choices for such expansion were unclear even to the Big Ten officials weeks prior to deciding on RU...
Originally posted by topdecktiger:
"Just" the NJ portion of the NY Metro market is a huge demographic.I say that to set up this point. You mentioned that Rutgers is the New York/New Jersey market. Well, the important part of that market is the "New York" half.
NJ is also a huge part of the Philly market
The New Jersey Media MarketAnd it is very affluent."If separated from the New York and Philadelphia markets, New Jersey alone would constitute the fourth largest television market in the nation. New York would fall from number one to number two (behind Los Angeles). Philadelphia would fall from number four to number twelve."
Forbes
The Richest And Poorest States In 2014"Washington, D.C. and New Jersey top the list of the richest states, tying for first place."How many cable networks added the YES Network when the Syracuse/ACC programming was added to YES?Originally posted by topdecktiger:
Specifically, the ACC is on the YES network. That's due to having Syracuse.
Rutgersguy, good post, and let me assure you that had RU received even a faint sense of an invite at anytime during 2012 prior to the Big Ten invite, RU would have happily, willingly and without hesitation accepted it.....RU had no basis to even speculate that a Big Ten invite was forthcoming....and when Big Ten officials finally started their approach, it took everyone at RU by surprise.Originally posted by rutgersguy1:
Did we have an ACC invite in the pocket? I tend to think not and if the ACC had come first I think we might be there instead. But I would give credence to the theory that we may have approached the B10 for quick counteroffer to swoop in but that's about as far as I'd go.
This post was edited on 3/11 11:07 AM by rutgersguy1
Only if you believe that RU wouldn't have jumped immediately to the Big Ten when invited, or that RU jumping to the ACC would have stopped the Big Ten from asking RU anyway. I dont. RU would have jumped, at least until la GOR was signed and no GOR was being discussed at the time.Originally posted by RuRoman:
Der, it is not what RU would have delivered to the ACC (considering that the ACC does not have its own network), but rather what it would have precluded....it would have made much harder for the Big Ten to strengthen its footprint and exposure in the NYC DMA thus possibly (and I stress possibly) denying the Big Ten to sign the COMCAST and other distribution deals it got in the NYC area-at a minimum at the same value....
Yes RU may have had less tangible value to the ACC in terms of immediate revenue (again because the ACC does not have a subscription network), but it was hugely valuable in precluding others (such as the Big Ten) in establishing a pervasive and strong presence in this huge market. Lack of strategic foresight by the ACC I think...sometimes it is not what you gain, but what you preclude others from gaining....
The Big Ten Presidents and Commissioner understand this. You lock up New Jersey you lock up NYC and Philly. BTN and Joint Research grants basically made it so that adding Rutgers would make all of the B1G even MORE rich. Big Ten's main points was MORE MONEY, new HUGE TV Markets, easier access to recruits. Add to that both Rutgers and Maryland are powerhouses in research and that research money makes the BTN and TV contract money look like spare change, it was a slam dunk! Research money is billions a year, btw. So remember that when sports guys dismiss the CIC and joint research projects between B1G schools.Originally posted by srru86:
Originally posted by topdecktiger:
"Just" the NJ portion of the NY Metro market is a huge demographic.I say that to set up this point. You mentioned that Rutgers is the New York/New Jersey market. Well, the important part of that market is the "New York" half.
NJ is also a huge part of the Philly market
The New Jersey Media MarketAnd it is very affluent."If separated from the New York and Philadelphia markets, New Jersey alone would constitute the fourth largest television market in the nation. New York would fall from number one to number two (behind Los Angeles). Philadelphia would fall from number four to number twelve."
Forbes
The Richest And Poorest States In 2014"Washington, D.C. and New Jersey top the list of the richest states, tying for first place."How many cable networks added the YES Network when the Syracuse/ACC programming was added to YES?Originally posted by topdecktiger:
Specifically, the ACC is on the YES network. That's due to having Syracuse.
Originally posted by RuRoman:
Anyone writing that RU officials knew, expected or held an invite from either the ACC or the Big Ten as late as September 2012 is flat out writing fiction.
ACC never invited or promised to invite RU despite several veiled attempts by RU officials (mostly from Mulcahey) to engage them...and when Pernetti heard the news that Cuse and Pitt had agreed to bolt to the ACC he was not only surprised but also enraged at these two former league members for he felt betrayed, he also became highly concerned about the future of RU athletics. But ACC officials never remotely discussed with Pernetti a possible invite to RU during Pernetti's tenure.
Pernetti was so despised by ESPN executives that ACC folks knew it would have been a waste of time to even consider RU...ACC folks also believed that Cuse was enough in order to reach the NYC market (they were patently wrong) and that RU neither had the wherewithal or resources to do any better in football or b-ball-and most importantly, ACC folks never expected for the Big Ten to make a move on RU. ACC folks truly thought that like UConn, RU would be available later when expansions to 16 teams was an inevitable action so there was no need to take them then....
Anyone asserting that RU knew or expected an impending invite to either the ACC or the Big Ten when rumors started circulating that Cuse and Pitt were bolting the Big East simply has no clue. Pernetti held a meeting with McCormick when the Cuse/Pitt to the ACC was announced and the prospects were ten hgrim and next to nothing. Whether removing Pernetti to improve an invite from the ACC was ever discussed by RU officials is not known to me. As late the first week of October 2012, RU had no idea where it future lied other than the bottom feeder CUSA Big East aberration of a conference.
In fact, it was not until four to six weeks prior to the official RU-Big Ten announcement that RU received a direct communication from Big Ten officials that Big Ten Officials were interested in discussing RU's membership in the Big Ten. Up to that point, RU had made several pitches to Big Ten folks, even Delaney, but it had fallen in deaf ears. To further prove this point, even when the Big Ten finally made some overt moves to seriously consider RU, no more than four to six weeks prior to announcement, such discussions were predicated on the fact that there were other contenders and that a decision was far from made. RU folks finally realized (were not necessarily told) that RU was in fact about to be invited about two to three weeks before rumors started circulating and a final decision was conveyed as late as last week of October 2012....
So you understand, there was a strategic rationale for the Big Ten to keep his interests in expanding rather secret...and possibly there is a good possibility that the choices for such expansion were unclear even to the Big Ten officials weeks prior to deciding on RU...
Roman, Rutgers definitely expected an invite from the B10. That is why Pernetti was able to say with confidence that Rutgers would end up in a good place. That is why Pernetti and Delaney were in continual communications.
Rutgers did not have an invite in hand, and Rutgers did not have a guarantee that an invite would come, nor did Rutgers know when the invite would come. But Rutgers knew that the B10 wanted to expand eastward and that Rutgers was a strategic target for the B10 in the next round of expansion, which would likely happen prior to the next TV deal.
It wasn't until Sept 2012 that Rutgers knew that the invitation was pending. But it is absurd to suggest that up to Sept 2012, no one at Rutgers knew that the B10 was interested in Rutgers, that Rutgers' overtures to the B10 fell on "deaf ears", and that the Sept 2012 formal negotiations came out of the blue and were a complete surprise to Rutgers.