(06-07-2010 11:50 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Guys - ND isn't sticking its neck out for anyone. ND is an independent because it wants to operate by itself. While ND could supposedly ask for a package deal in theory, I don't think that's its end game at all. Texas has to answer to state politicians, which is the reason why schools like A&M, Texas Tech and Baylor are coming along. That's why Texas is a package deal with certain schools. In contrast, ND has to answer to its alumni base, who simply don't care if the Big Ten expands to 12, 14, 16 or 96 teams - in their minds, independence in and of itself is the reason for existence and it doesn't matter if the Big Ten could get USC and Navy (the ONLY 2 schools that ND has any real emotional attachment to).

As a result, IF ND determines that it has to join a conference (whether its alumni base likes it or not), then I think it's really a calculation as to whether it's best to be a part of 12, 14 or 16-school Big Ten... meaning what's going to make the most money for ND. In that sense, what's best for the Big Ten overall is what's best for ND at that point - ND is NOT diluting its revenue share by insisting on another school coming along (whereas Texas might have to insist upon Texas Tech and others because greater dollars from the Texas state legislature are at stake).

Understand the point that ND will be acting in its own interests, but this idea that $$$ alone is what is in ND's best interest is mistaken.

The greater dollar figure has been there from the very beginning, but that isn't what got the Irish to the table. It was the idea of playing Texas and the vision that the Big Ten was going outside of its midwestern roots that piqued ND's curiosity.

I'm not entirely convinced the Irish are back at the table, but if they are, and Texas is off the table, then something other than $$$ got them there. And it isn't to save college athletics so they can be #12 and the Big Ten stops.

And this notion of the Big East collapsing is merely "cover". It's the original stalking horse strategy reincarnated. Again, IF true, something else is going on here.

Cheers,
Neil

Given the splash the PAC-10,12,14... is making, for the Big 11,12,13... to scrounge together a lineup like RU, SU, and Mizzou to go along with Nebraska, ND would be jumping the shark (I know that metaphor has been overused, so I won't go there again). Better off staying at 14 with one of the first three listed, IMO.

(06-07-2010 12:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-07-2010 11:55 AM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(06-07-2010 11:44 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-07-2010 11:20 AM)bluesox Wrote:  This is why i think the big 10 should leave neb on the table for the big 12...invite mo,cuse, pitt, and rutgers. Than under this theory nD would than jump but the big 10 would be the dominant league since the big 12 most likely would stick together losing only mo + i think its hard to break the big 10 into divisions with taking 2 big 12 school's and 3 eastern school's. Not sure what the pac 10 would do, goes back to what colorado feels like, staying in the big 12 might work for them and that could leave the pac 10 at 10 school's with the big 10 clearly the best league. I guess the sec might bslap the acc but that doesn't matter to the big 10.

Why would the Big Ten do the Big XII a favor? Nebraska is way more valuable than Missouri - the Big XII has said as much as its life is dependent upon the Huskers and they flat out don't care if Mizzou leaves. That tells you what the pecking order is in the college sports world. If the Big Ten is aiming for the cream of the crop, then they absolutely aren't leaving Nebraska on the table. Money talks and bulls**t walks. If the Big Ten has to choose between Nebraska and Missouri, it will choose Nebraska. The Big Ten likes markets, but it isn't sports stupid - it got into this position because it has a product that people want to watch and it isn't going to just add a bunch of markets without regard to national cache. The more likely choice is if there are 3 spots available, only 2 of Missouri, Syracuse and Pitt will get an invite (and I agree with others that's bad news for Pitt). Rutgers is the most likely school from the Big East to get a Big Ten invite by a fairly good margin.

If this report is true, I think the Big Ten now knows ND's asking price.

The questions are -

Does ND really want its demands to be met, or are they secretly hoping the Big Ten will say no?

Is Delany willing to give ND the asking price?

Will a compromise be brought forth that surprisingly costs another team a spot?

Cheers,
Neil

It will be interesting to see. The thing is that IF ND thinks that it needs to join the Big Ten, I don't think ND's interests at that point are really diametrically opposed to the Big Ten's interests. They both have a common goal in that scenario: make the most revenue as possible. Whether that means a simple 1-team expansion or adding on some combo of Syracuse, Rutgers, Nebraska, Missouri and/or Pitt remains to be seem. It's a bit different than trying to add a school like Texas, where Texas Tech has proven to be political baggage (which doesn't surprise me) and Baylor might be, too (which surprises me a little more). Texas has political interests that, on the face of it, are diametrically opposed to what the Big Ten wants to do.

The hard part is convincing ND to join in the first place. If that happens, though, then I believe that ND is going to want what the rest of the Big Ten wants: the highest revenue scenario, whether it's 12, 14 or 16 schools.

While acknowledging that it is a possibility, I disagree strongly. ND could make lots more $$$ than they do now with jumbotrons, paid advertisements at sporting events on campus, etc. They choose not to.

Making $$$ while important, isn't the be-all and end-all for ND. I think this is the mistake many make in regard to the Irish.

I think one area that is underestimated in terms of importance for them is the need to ensure that they won't be on the wrong end of too many 11-1, 10-2 votes on a variety of issues ranging from scheduling, divisional make-up, location of championship games, protected rivalry games, etc. once they are in the Big Ten.

There are other issues as well - such as geographical spread, but with Texas off the table, not too sure how far the Big Ten can go, especially since Nebraska (another midwestern institution) appears to be a lock for one of the 5 open slots.

Cheers,
Neil

(06-07-2010 11:44 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-07-2010 11:20 AM)bluesox Wrote:  This is why i think the big 10 should leave neb on the table for the big 12...invite mo,cuse, pitt, and rutgers. Than under this theory nD would than jump but the big 10 would be the dominant league since the big 12 most likely would stick together losing only mo + i think its hard to break the big 10 into divisions with taking 2 big 12 school's and 3 eastern school's. Not sure what the pac 10 would do, goes back to what colorado feels like, staying in the big 12 might work for them and that could leave the pac 10 at 10 school's with the big 10 clearly the best league. I guess the sec might bslap the acc but that doesn't matter to the big 10.

Why would the Big Ten do the Big XII a favor? Nebraska is way more valuable than Missouri - the Big XII has said as much as its life is dependent upon the Huskers and they flat out don't care if Mizzou leaves. That tells you what the pecking order is in the college sports world. If the Big Ten is aiming for the cream of the crop, then they absolutely aren't leaving Nebraska on the table. Money talks and bulls**t walks. If the Big Ten has to choose between Nebraska and Missouri, it will choose Nebraska. The Big Ten likes markets, but it isn't sports stupid - it got into this position because it has a product that people want to watch and it isn't going to just add a bunch of markets without regard to national cache. The more likely choice is if there are 3 spots available, only 2 of Missouri, Syracuse and Pitt will get an invite (and I agree with others that's bad news for Pitt). Rutgers is the most likely school from the Big East to get a Big Ten invite by a fairly good margin.

The only way the Big Ten "leaves Nebraska on the table" is if Notre Dame tells the Big Ten, "We'll join, but only if you invite no one else."

If Nebraska is left on the table for whatever reason, IMO the Big 12 is still dead. The Pac-10 is thisclose to the megabucks and the only thing that will stop them is a Texas-to-the-SEC deal. And even if that happens, the Pac-10 is not going to stay at 10.

(06-07-2010 12:10 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Given the splash the PAC-10,12,14... is making, for the Big 11,12,13... to scrounge together a lineup like RU, SU, and Mizzou to go along with Nebraska, ND would be jumping the shark (I know that metaphor has been overused, so I won't go there again). Better off staying at 14 with one of the first three listed, IMO.

Adding ND and Nebraska to a league that already has Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Wisconsin, and Iowa is hardly a failure. So no matter who the other three programs are is hardly jumping the shark.

Now if they are unable to get ND, then I think they should add Nebraska and simply stop at 12. No need to add Mizzou and RU.

Cheers,
Neil

(06-07-2010 11:44 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Rutgers is the most likely school from the Big East to get a Big Ten invite by a fairly good margin.

If ND and Nebraska are in the mix, I don't believe this statement holds true. In a three team or a five team expansion without ND, yes, Rutgers is solid. With ND and Nebraska, however, you gain flexibility. The tip-off blog (assuming you choose to give it weight) referenced this concept and essentially called them a plan B.

nm

(06-07-2010 12:24 PM)Orangemen Wrote:  

(06-07-2010 11:44 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Rutgers is the most likely school from the Big East to get a Big Ten invite by a fairly good margin.

If ND and Nebraska are in the mix, I don't believe this statement holds true. In a three team or a five team expansion without ND, yes, Rutgers is solid. With ND and Nebraska, however, you gain flexibility. The tip-off blog (assuming you choose to give it weight) referenced this concept and essentially called them a plan B.

Remember footprint (population) and alumni base expansions is the real key for the Big Ten here, they've admitted it more than once. ND and Nebraska bring value added, national cache that the other candidates don't quite bring. Mizzou, Rutgers and Syracuse bring populous states that are growing. And don't count out darkhorse Maryland. If Texas is off the table the northeast corridor is very important to go after and capture. Maryland has fans/alumni up and down the East Coast and will get the BTN on in Maryland and DC at the in-market rate. Syracuse and Rutgers with the backup provided by Maryland, Michigan, Nebraska, ND and Penn State will get the BTN on in NY and NJ at the in-market rate (or damn close to it.) All of the above will help get the BTN on in Delaware at a rate above the out-of-market rate and will finally force Comcast's hand at giving up the in-market rate in Philadelphia. Plus those holdout cable systems in PA will be even more hard pressed to continue not carrying the BTN with more national programs and regional programs of interest in the conference.

The BTN is already on DC basic cable.

(06-07-2010 02:20 PM)MichaelSavage Wrote:  The BTN is already on DC basic cable.

But at the out-of-market rate. Hard to argue that Maryland as an in-market program with the depth provided by Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State (which got the network on there in the first place) now bolstered by Notre Dame and Nebraska and other regional programs in Syracuse and Rutgers doesn't get the full in-market rate. And that's what I'm getting at. Big difference between getting $0.10 to $0.15 per subscriber per month and getting $0.75 to $1 per subscriber per month.

Bottom line - no one knows anything about what really is going on. Saying Orange is key to ND to the B11 is ridiculous. We just have to wait and see.

(06-07-2010 12:23 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(06-07-2010 12:10 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Given the splash the PAC-10,12,14... is making, for the Big 11,12,13... to scrounge together a lineup like RU, SU, and Mizzou to go along with Nebraska, ND would be jumping the shark (I know that metaphor has been overused, so I won't go there again). Better off staying at 14 with one of the first three listed, IMO.

Adding ND and Nebraska to a league that already has Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Wisconsin, and Iowa is hardly a failure. So no matter who the other three programs are is hardly jumping the shark.

Now if they are unable to get ND, then I think they should add Nebraska and simply stop at 12. No need to add Mizzou and RU.

Cheers,
Neil

I guess not, but why add the other three (unless you want one just to even up the numbers). Adding all those just to get to the magic number of 16 would be just silly. Regardless, the Big's expansion pales in comparison to the PAC's.

(06-07-2010 03:11 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(06-07-2010 12:23 PM)omnicarrier Wrote:  

(06-07-2010 12:10 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Given the splash the PAC-10,12,14... is making, for the Big 11,12,13... to scrounge together a lineup like RU, SU, and Mizzou to go along with Nebraska, ND would be jumping the shark (I know that metaphor has been overused, so I won't go there again). Better off staying at 14 with one of the first three listed, IMO.

Adding ND and Nebraska to a league that already has Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Wisconsin, and Iowa is hardly a failure. So no matter who the other three programs are is hardly jumping the shark.

Now if they are unable to get ND, then I think they should add Nebraska and simply stop at 12. No need to add Mizzou and RU.

Cheers,
Neil

I guess not, but why add the other three (unless you want one just to even up the numbers). Adding all those just to get to the magic number of 16 would be just silly. Regardless, the Big's expansion pales in comparison to the PAC's.

Again remember their major concern perhaps even more than national cache is the size of their alumni base and the size of their footprint's population. Right now they're the largest of any non-hybrid conference in population (2nd behind the BE.) In 40 years the SEC or Pac-16 (should it happen) or both will be ahead of it. They need to add other populous and/or growing states to shore things up. Which means their strategy is going to be two-pronged. Prong 1 is ND and Nebraska for national appeal and value. Prong 2 will be adding new states to their footprint. Mizzou, Syracuse, Rutgers, Maryland are all reasonable bets to deliver enough of their respective states to make it worthwhile. If the latter 3 are added together its a solid bet that the southern half of the northeast corridor is truly Big Ten territory thanks to the 4 local programs (PSU, SU, RU, UMD) and the other 4 national programs adding depth (ND, UM, tOSU, UNL.) Going for a truly southern strategy sounds amazing on paper and great for headlines but the results will be very mixed at best and Jim Delany knows this. A strategy blending national firepower and eastern states to expand the footprint IMHO has a very low risk attached despite a seeming high rate of return.

Why would the departure of Syracuse, force ND to find a home for its minor sports? I agree without SU the BE would probably split, and def. not exist as a FB conf, but couldnt ND remain indy and leave its minor sports with the catholic BE schools?

(06-07-2010 03:26 PM)brista21 Wrote:  Which means their strategy is going to be two-pronged. Prong 1 is ND and Nebraska for national appeal and value. Prong 2 will be adding new states to their footprint. Mizzou, Syracuse, Rutgers, Maryland are all reasonable bets to deliver enough of their respective states to make it worthwhile. If the latter 3 are added together its a solid bet that the southern half of the northeast corridor is truly Big Ten territory thanks to the 4 local programs (PSU, SU, RU, UMD) and the other 4 national programs adding depth (ND, UM, tOSU, UNL.) Going for a truly southern strategy sounds amazing on paper and great for headlines but the results will be very mixed at best and Jim Delany knows this. A strategy blending national firepower and eastern states to expand the footprint IMHO has a very low risk attached despite a seeming high rate of return.

I don't quite agree because you're underestimating the pushback from current Big Ten schools about changing the character of the conference so much.

IMO at 16 teams with any mix of schools, or at 14 with more than one new eastern or southern school, they lose too much of the "feel" of the Big Ten. So with ND only or Nebraska only, the Big Ten traditionalists will be ok. With both ND and Nebraska and only one BE school (or maybe ND/Nebr/Mizzou), the traditionalists could grudgingly live with that. If they go to 16 and/or add 3-5 schools in the east, a lot of alums and major donors at current B10 schools will be ticked off.

The Pac-10 is different. The Pac-10 is so far behind in the money race that they have to make radical changes just to be in the same ballpark with the SEC and Big Ten. The Big Ten can be a top earner even with minimal or no expansion.

(06-07-2010 05:47 PM)gosports1 Wrote:  Why would the departure of Syracuse, force ND to find a home for its minor sports? I agree without SU the BE would probably split, and def. not exist as a FB conf, but couldnt ND remain indy and leave its minor sports with the catholic BE schools?

I think the problem for Notre Dame is it doesn't want to have its basketball and non-rev sports in what would be seen as the A-10 on steroids. It wants its other sports in a BCS conference that has exposure in all different sports from August through June not just November through June (which would be further diminished by not having the larger more national names that play football.)

Additionally, if the landscape is shifting towards 16 team conferences that will play 9 and 10 conference games and control even more of the purse strings out there it will be harder to schedule even its traditional opponents (Pitt, USC, Stanford, Navy, Michigan State, UM, Purdue) look at how infrequent its games have become against Georgia Tech and Miami both traditional rivals of Notre Dame. I don't mention BC because that rivalry is a much bigger deal for BC than it is for ND its probably behind all 9 of those listed games. If they're going to be able to play their traditional Big Ten rivals plus USC and Navy every year (and perhaps even Pitt as a conference game too) then they can probably stomach a conference since there's no guarantee they maintain their stature without one in the new paradigm.

(06-07-2010 10:50 AM)Orangemen Wrote:  Dodd:Orange Key to ND

Latest from Expansion Central. Syracuse?
Posted on: June 7, 2010 11:24 am
Edited on: June 7, 2010 11:34 am
Score: 135Log-in to rate:
Log-in to rate:
The latest scuttlebutt Monday morning has to do with Syracuse being the key to prying Notre Dame loose for the Big Ten.

If Missouri and Nebraska say yes to the Big Ten, I'm hearing that then either Pittsburgh or Rutgers would be paired with Syracuse to form an expanded eastern boundary of the new league. The key, apparently, is taking The 'Cuse into the Big Ten. The fit already looks good. Syracuse chancellor Nancy Cantor is a former chancellor at Illinois and provost at Michigan.

In this scenario, the addition of Syracuse collapses the Big East and potentially forces Notre Dame to find a conference home for its minor sports. Not to mention a conference home for football.

In other words, Notre Dame needs a compelling reason to join a league in football. I reported yesterday that if Notre Dame came to the Big Ten, that league's expansion might be capped at 12. That might not be the case now. The two biggest words to remember in this entire process is that it is always a "fluid situation."

Adding to the intrigue is that Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said Sunday that expansion could happen in stages.

Underplayed in this whole thing is that the Associated Press reported Sunday that Notre Dame AD Jack Swarbrick spent 4 1/2 hours with Big Ten CEOs during their spring meeting. Notre Dame is definitely not out of this.

If all of the above comes to pass, we'd be looking at two 16-team leagues (Pac-10, Big Ten), the collapse of the Big 12 and Big East and a whole lot of chaos. Does the SEC react?

The Big East will not collapse if Rutgers/Pitt and Syracuse bolt. They're being a little over-dramatic. Losing WVU would cause a collapse. USF, Cinci, UL, and WVU are more than able to carry the torch.

(06-07-2010 02:17 PM)brista21 Wrote:  Maryland has fans/alumni up and down the East Coast and will get the BTN on in Maryland and DC at the in-market rate.

Not sure about that. Maryland's following is not that strong, at least not in Baltimore. But mainly, I am not sure Peter Angelos (Orioles owner) would allow a Big Ten Network to come in and get what he couldn't. If they got on basic cable at that price, he'd tie cable operators up in litigation until he got even more.

Then again, if Rutgers can command the entire state of New Jersey....

(06-07-2010 03:26 PM)brista21 Wrote:  Which means their strategy is going to be two-pronged. Prong 1 is ND and Nebraska for national appeal and value. Prong 2 will be adding new states to their footprint. A strategy blending national firepower and eastern states to expand the footprint IMHO has a very low risk attached despite a seeming high rate of return.

On the other hand, this is accurate, and is the best aproach. Add markets and brand appeal. Looking purely at athletic revenue, if I were the Big Ten I would go for UVA (Tech is a better option athletically, but I cannot see passing up a top five public University), ND, Nebraska, and Rutgers. If I were assured Maryland got me B10N clearances I would add them next.

Dodd makes up different things every day and reverses course on a dime.....

(06-07-2010 07:10 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(06-07-2010 02:17 PM)brista21 Wrote:  Maryland has fans/alumni up and down the East Coast and will get the BTN on in Maryland and DC at the in-market rate.

Not sure about that. Maryland's following is not that strong, at least not in Baltimore. But mainly, I am not sure Peter Angelos (Orioles owner) would allow a Big Ten Network to come in and get what he couldn't. If they got on basic cable at that price, he'd tie cable operators up in litigation until he got even more.

Then again, if Rutgers can command the entire state of New Jersey....

(06-07-2010 03:26 PM)brista21 Wrote:  Which means their strategy is going to be two-pronged. Prong 1 is ND and Nebraska for national appeal and value. Prong 2 will be adding new states to their footprint. A strategy blending national firepower and eastern states to expand the footprint IMHO has a very low risk attached despite a seeming high rate of return.

On the other hand, this is accurate, and is the best aproach. Add markets and brand appeal. Looking purely at athletic revenue, if I were the Big Ten I would go for UVA (Tech is a better option athletically, but I cannot see passing up a top five public University), ND, Nebraska, and Rutgers. If I were assured Maryland got me B10N clearances I would add them next.

Not quite a response to the overall post which are all valid points some of which I agree on and some of which I don't. However maybe if that moron Peter Angelos cared one bit about putting a legitimate product on the field things would be different. As a Mets fan I can and do complain about the Wilpons but I'd keep them over Angelos any day of the week and twice on Sundays.