(06-05-2016 03:47 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 03:41 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 03:36 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 01:53 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 01:44 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  The ACC should've targeted flagship public schools first, especially those that have no FBS competition. To that end, I would've taken Rutgers and West Virginia first but also Syracuse and Pitt to get to 16.

Rutgers has value to the B10 only because of the way the B10 Network is structured. Rutgers was added for TV sets - nothing else. They would have added nothing to the ACC given the way the ACC's contract was structured, just another mouth to feed. And I think calling West Virginia a flagship public school is a bit of an exaggeration. West Va is a tiny state, and WVa's geographic location was also covered by UVa, VT, and MD at the time WVa received their B12 offer. The addition of Pitt with those three meant WVa would add next to nothing for the ACC.

Maryland was never going to allow West Virginia into the ACC and they had Virginia's and Duke's support on that point. It is also doubtful GT and WF would ever have voted for WVa, over MD's objections. WVa is to MD what UConn is to BC - an existential threat that is perceived as too close for comfort and MD's administration hated WVa's fans.

Wait so Cuse and Pitt are worth more to the ACC than Rutgers who sits actually in the countries #1 media market? Really? Then why is the ACC the lowest paid P5 conference and locked out of the NYC TV market?

B1G and ACC used different methodologies in determining which schools would be the most valuable additions to their respective conferences.

Thats why the B1G is about to become the highest paid conference and the ACC is the lowest paid P5 conference.

Enjoy your money, we'll enjoy our championships.

Rutgers when was your last natty in anything?

Natty is what's it all about. In every sport! Thank you UNC!

Just waiting for the football and basketball men's teams are ALL that matter!

(06-05-2016 03:52 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 03:47 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 03:41 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 03:36 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 01:53 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Rutgers has value to the B10 only because of the way the B10 Network is structured. Rutgers was added for TV sets - nothing else. They would have added nothing to the ACC given the way the ACC's contract was structured, just another mouth to feed. And I think calling West Virginia a flagship public school is a bit of an exaggeration. West Va is a tiny state, and WVa's geographic location was also covered by UVa, VT, and MD at the time WVa received their B12 offer. The addition of Pitt with those three meant WVa would add next to nothing for the ACC.

Maryland was never going to allow West Virginia into the ACC and they had Virginia's and Duke's support on that point. It is also doubtful GT and WF would ever have voted for WVa, over MD's objections. WVa is to MD what UConn is to BC - an existential threat that is perceived as too close for comfort and MD's administration hated WVa's fans.

Wait so Cuse and Pitt are worth more to the ACC than Rutgers who sits actually in the countries #1 media market? Really? Then why is the ACC the lowest paid P5 conference and locked out of the NYC TV market?

B1G and ACC used different methodologies in determining which schools would be the most valuable additions to their respective conferences.

Thats why the B1G is about to become the highest paid conference and the ACC is the lowest paid P5 conference.

In 2003 the ACC voted to add Miami and VT. In 2004 they voted to add BC. In 2011 they voted to add Syracuse and Pitt. In 2012 they voted to add ND.

At what point was Rutgers EVER contacted by the ACC? Six expansion teams, no invite to Rutgers. No official visit to campus. Not even an unofficial visit by WF, the conferences skullduggery folks.

Adding Rutgers adds nothing for an ACC with schools that will easily be on television in NYC - Syracuse, BC, ND, Pitt, FSU in football and Duke, Syracuse, Louisville, and UNC in basketball. If adding you added something, you would have been contacted in 2011.

I heard Rutgers has a good soccer team. Also their debate team is good, too.

(06-05-2016 05:40 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 03:43 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 02:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 02:02 PM)Johnny Incognito Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 01:53 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Rutgers has value to the B10 only because of the way the B10 Network is structured. Rutgers was added for TV sets - nothing else. They would have added nothing to the ACC given the way the ACC's contract was structured, just another mouth to feed. And I think calling West Virginia a flagship public school is a bit of an exaggeration. West Va is a tiny state, and WVa's geographic location was also covered by UVa, VT, and MD at the time WVa received their B12 offer. The addition of Pitt with those three meant WVa would add next to nothing for the ACC.

Maryland was never going to allow West Virginia into the ACC and they had Virginia's and Duke's support on that point. It is also doubtful GT and WF would ever have voted for WVa, over MD's objections. WVa is to MD what UConn is to BC - an existential threat that is perceived as too close for comfort and MD's administration hated WVa's fans.

Sounds like you're saying that Rutgers wouldn't be beneficial to the ACC because geography not important to ACC's set up and WVU wouldn't be beneficial to the ACC because of geographic location. Which seems contradictory.

Rutgers does not add a substantial new geography that is not already hit by a combination of Syracuse, Duke, Notre Dame, and Pitt. New Jersey is essentially a suburb of Philadelphia and NYC as those media markets dominate the State. You don't have to have a physical presence if the boarder striding metropolitan area broadcasts into the state, as Charlotte does for Clemson into NC and UNC and NC State into SC. If the ACC received revenue based on cable tv boxes, things would be different regarding Rutgers. Also keep in mind that Rutgers sports are terrible and that FSU, Clemson, NC State, GT, and VT are not thrilled about playing them every year as NJ is not that great a recruiting hot bed.

UConn and Cincy have this same problem regarding the ACC.

All of this is best shown with the ESPN/ABC broadcast split maps. With rare exception what is on in Boston, is what is on in all of New England. What is on in NYC is on in the entire Tri-State area. What is on in Philly is on in NJ and PA.

What makes MD so lucrative for the B10 is that the geography of the area is such that MD is appealing in NOVA, the panhandle of WVa, Delmarva, DC, and MD to Wilmington, DE. While the ACC lost this property, Pitt, VT, and UVa remain acceptable broadcast choices in those areas.

For a conference how many teams do they need in a particular area for that conference to achieve the ratings necessary to make money for ESPN, the networks, and the school? At least one? Two is nice. At three do you reach diminishing returns?

It's this phenomena that makes NC State or WF more potentially valuable to the SEC, B10, or B12 than they can be for the ACC. Same way that Michigan State or Purdue would generate more value for the SEC, ACC, or B12 than they do for the B10. K-State and Oklahoma State are certainly of more value to the SEC, than they are to the B12.

Oddly enough, West Virginia is right where they should be generating the most value for the B12 as their value is much less in the ACC due to Pitt, VT, Louisville, and UVa, or in the B10 due to Ohio State, Penn State and MD. That's why if the B12 breaks up, they have the highest net value to the SEC, same as if look at an Iowa State, which has no value to the B10, but would have value to the SEC or ACC - not a huge value, but value over their worth in the B10.

What the heck are you talking about? Syracuse is 6 hours away from NYC by car and is not even close to carrying the market. ND has some band wagon fans but doesn't command the market, same with Duke and Pitt is pretty far from Philly and has little pull in that market as well. You are completely pulling these ideas from your rear end.

http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index....lphia.html

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...1SNuBQrKRs

Syracuse is at most 3.5 hours away from NYC, depending on traffic. No one school carries NYC, but SU does have quite a few fans there and alumni.

That just means New York state is giant sized. And there is no other school better representing New York State because SU is just in the center of the state.

Also there is no way it takes 3.5 driving hours realistically, unless you drive after midnight. Every time I drove from Syracuse to NYC, it took six hours, give or take. The last 30 miles is a killer. Most of time it took 1.5 or 2 hours just to get into the city thru the tunnels.

(06-05-2016 05:23 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 04:32 PM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 03:58 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  The reason the B10 makes so much money is that the alumni and fans of Michigan, Ohio State, Wisconsin, Penn State, Indiana, Purdue, and Michigan State heavily saturate the northeast and they have over twice as many alums as the ACC, and have had more alums for the past 100 years. The Big 10 gets more money not because of anything that happened this year, last year, or the decade before - the Big 10 gets more money due to socioeconomic factors that developed in hand with industrialization, and World Wars I and II. The reason they can support a 100K seat football stadium is because of the number of alumni and students in addition to the "quality" of their football.

Those same socio-economic factors (investment, business climate, migration, educated and skilled work force) that favored the Northeast and the Midwest 100 years ago should now favor the South. I imagine in 50 years the large public schools in the South (primarily the Southeast) will be on par with the Big Ten schools in terms of enrollment, endowment and academic status.

Most of the ACC schools already superior to B1G schools in academic status. But as far as enrollment, it just will never happen.
Just after WWII, Carolina had fewer than 6,000 students. When I graduated in 1971 just under 11,000. Now there are about 18,000 UG students. None of us will ever live to see the day when there are as many living Carolina alumni as there are alumni from Wisconsin, Michigan or Ohio State.
Carolina, UVa, Clemson, Georgia Tech which are small public Universities that operate like privates will never have the alumni base of any B1G school (except Northwestern).

I understand your point. Those smaller ACC public schools simply have different missions and mainly target higher caliber students. But the larger ACC schools (VT, State and FSU) and SEC schools (USCe, UGA and UFL) operate in a manner similar to Big Ten schools. Those are the schools that'll be on par with Big Ten schools in terms of enrollment, endowment and academic status in at least 50 years.

Rutgers, Maryland and Northwestern is bleeding money. Not sure if the Big 10 Network could save them with the GoRs and players unified, Northwestern is the one that could be the first casualty,

Wake Forest, Virginia and Boston College are also losing money. Since Boston College and Wake are privates like Northwestern, they could wind up losing just like Northwestern.

Washington State, Oregon State, Utah and Colorado is losing money as well. Washington State might wind up downgrading to help save money, and could go to the MWC if need be.

(06-05-2016 06:36 PM)ArQ Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 05:40 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 03:43 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 02:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 02:02 PM)Johnny Incognito Wrote:  Sounds like you're saying that Rutgers wouldn't be beneficial to the ACC because geography not important to ACC's set up and WVU wouldn't be beneficial to the ACC because of geographic location. Which seems contradictory.

Rutgers does not add a substantial new geography that is not already hit by a combination of Syracuse, Duke, Notre Dame, and Pitt. New Jersey is essentially a suburb of Philadelphia and NYC as those media markets dominate the State. You don't have to have a physical presence if the boarder striding metropolitan area broadcasts into the state, as Charlotte does for Clemson into NC and UNC and NC State into SC. If the ACC received revenue based on cable tv boxes, things would be different regarding Rutgers. Also keep in mind that Rutgers sports are terrible and that FSU, Clemson, NC State, GT, and VT are not thrilled about playing them every year as NJ is not that great a recruiting hot bed.

UConn and Cincy have this same problem regarding the ACC.

All of this is best shown with the ESPN/ABC broadcast split maps. With rare exception what is on in Boston, is what is on in all of New England. What is on in NYC is on in the entire Tri-State area. What is on in Philly is on in NJ and PA.

What makes MD so lucrative for the B10 is that the geography of the area is such that MD is appealing in NOVA, the panhandle of WVa, Delmarva, DC, and MD to Wilmington, DE. While the ACC lost this property, Pitt, VT, and UVa remain acceptable broadcast choices in those areas.

For a conference how many teams do they need in a particular area for that conference to achieve the ratings necessary to make money for ESPN, the networks, and the school? At least one? Two is nice. At three do you reach diminishing returns?

It's this phenomena that makes NC State or WF more potentially valuable to the SEC, B10, or B12 than they can be for the ACC. Same way that Michigan State or Purdue would generate more value for the SEC, ACC, or B12 than they do for the B10. K-State and Oklahoma State are certainly of more value to the SEC, than they are to the B12.

Oddly enough, West Virginia is right where they should be generating the most value for the B12 as their value is much less in the ACC due to Pitt, VT, Louisville, and UVa, or in the B10 due to Ohio State, Penn State and MD. That's why if the B12 breaks up, they have the highest net value to the SEC, same as if look at an Iowa State, which has no value to the B10, but would have value to the SEC or ACC - not a huge value, but value over their worth in the B10.

What the heck are you talking about? Syracuse is 6 hours away from NYC by car and is not even close to carrying the market. ND has some band wagon fans but doesn't command the market, same with Duke and Pitt is pretty far from Philly and has little pull in that market as well. You are completely pulling these ideas from your rear end.

http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index....lphia.html

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...1SNuBQrKRs

Syracuse is at most 3.5 hours away from NYC, depending on traffic. No one school carries NYC, but SU does have quite a few fans there and alumni.

That just means New York state is giant sized. And there is no other school better representing New York State because SU is just in the center of the state.

Also there is no way it takes 3.5 driving hours realistically, unless you drive after midnight. Every time I drove from Syracuse to NYC, it took six hours, give or take. The last 30 miles is a killer. Most of time it took 1.5 or 2 hours just to get into the city thru the tunnels.

You are WRONG about it taking 6 hours from Syracuse to NYC. You have no idea what you are talking about. I also was wrong about Syraucse to NYC. Its about 4 hours, although I have driven there way under 4 hours, while cruise control set at 70mph. I drive from Rochester to NYC in about 5 hours. Ive done it at least a hundred times. Its all expressway traveling 70 mph.Syracuse is 90 miles closer to NYC than Rochester. From now on, before you post on a thread like this, please use mapquest.


MAPQUEST

Syracuse, NY
New York, NY
via I-81 S
4hr 3min 246.6mi

Most Upstaters are smart enough not to travel to NYC during rush hour. And I never drive to NYC after midnight. Its always daytime.

(06-05-2016 06:50 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Rutgers, Maryland and Northwestern is bleeding money. Not sure if the Big 10 Network could save them with the GoRs and players unified, Northwestern is the one that could be the first casualty,

Wake Forest, Virginia and Boston College are also losing money. Since Boston College and Wake are privates like Northwestern, they could wind up losing just like Northwestern.

Washington State, Oregon State, Utah and Colorado is losing money as well. Washington State might wind up downgrading to help save money, and could go to the MWC if need be.

Virginia is not "losing money". They chose to field a full compliment of non-revenue sports for men and women that don't make money and they support those programs with donations instead of ticket sales. They can continue to "lose money" until Hell freezes over. They also charge nearly a $1000 a student for athletic fees because they can, that way if you get a scholarship or cost of attendance deal, you dodge the full freight, but the rich kids pay the freight. UVa wants to battle UNC, Michigan, Stanford, etc., for the Director's Cup - that's not cheap and football at UVa will not pay for that and why should it?

Schools like UVa, or Northwestern, or Duke with 11 digit endowments only lose money at something if they want to show it that way on the books. And yes it's true that the overall endowment and the athletic endowment is not the same thing, but guess what, past a billion dollars things get fungible.

(06-05-2016 08:14 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 06:50 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Rutgers, Maryland and Northwestern is bleeding money. Not sure if the Big 10 Network could save them with the GoRs and players unified, Northwestern is the one that could be the first casualty,

Wake Forest, Virginia and Boston College are also losing money. Since Boston College and Wake are privates like Northwestern, they could wind up losing just like Northwestern.

Washington State, Oregon State, Utah and Colorado is losing money as well. Washington State might wind up downgrading to help save money, and could go to the MWC if need be.

Virginia is not "losing money". They chose to field a full compliment of non-revenue sports for men and women that don't make money and they support those programs with donations instead of ticket sales. They can continue to "lose money" until Hell freezes over.

And continue to win national championships as well as conference championships. It really is about who you want to associate with. Virginia is in the driver seat. If they leave the ACC, it will be because of UofL. That is the narrative being created.

(06-05-2016 08:27 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 08:14 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 06:50 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Rutgers, Maryland and Northwestern is bleeding money. Not sure if the Big 10 Network could save them with the GoRs and players unified, Northwestern is the one that could be the first casualty,

Wake Forest, Virginia and Boston College are also losing money. Since Boston College and Wake are privates like Northwestern, they could wind up losing just like Northwestern.

Washington State, Oregon State, Utah and Colorado is losing money as well. Washington State might wind up downgrading to help save money, and could go to the MWC if need be.

Virginia is not "losing money". They chose to field a full compliment of non-revenue sports for men and women that don't make money and they support those programs with donations instead of ticket sales. They can continue to "lose money" until Hell freezes over.

And continue to win national championships as well as conference championships. It really is about who you want to associate with. Virginia is in the driver seat. If they leave the ACC, it will be because of UofL. That is the narrative being created.

Whoever told you that is full of ****.

Your academics are not on a par with theirs, but neither are you on a par with Duke, GT, or WF. Louisville will not drive UVa anywhere. UVa has put up with UNC for the better part of a century and only UNC and Duke together could do something to drive UVa away. Money does not motivate UVa, they have money, their father had money, their grandfather had money. They have REAL money. That creates different motivations for action.

(06-05-2016 05:40 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 03:43 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 02:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 02:02 PM)Johnny Incognito Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 01:53 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Rutgers has value to the B10 only because of the way the B10 Network is structured. Rutgers was added for TV sets - nothing else. They would have added nothing to the ACC given the way the ACC's contract was structured, just another mouth to feed. And I think calling West Virginia a flagship public school is a bit of an exaggeration. West Va is a tiny state, and WVa's geographic location was also covered by UVa, VT, and MD at the time WVa received their B12 offer. The addition of Pitt with those three meant WVa would add next to nothing for the ACC.

Maryland was never going to allow West Virginia into the ACC and they had Virginia's and Duke's support on that point. It is also doubtful GT and WF would ever have voted for WVa, over MD's objections. WVa is to MD what UConn is to BC - an existential threat that is perceived as too close for comfort and MD's administration hated WVa's fans.

Sounds like you're saying that Rutgers wouldn't be beneficial to the ACC because geography not important to ACC's set up and WVU wouldn't be beneficial to the ACC because of geographic location. Which seems contradictory.

Rutgers does not add a substantial new geography that is not already hit by a combination of Syracuse, Duke, Notre Dame, and Pitt. New Jersey is essentially a suburb of Philadelphia and NYC as those media markets dominate the State. You don't have to have a physical presence if the boarder striding metropolitan area broadcasts into the state, as Charlotte does for Clemson into NC and UNC and NC State into SC. If the ACC received revenue based on cable tv boxes, things would be different regarding Rutgers. Also keep in mind that Rutgers sports are terrible and that FSU, Clemson, NC State, GT, and VT are not thrilled about playing them every year as NJ is not that great a recruiting hot bed.

UConn and Cincy have this same problem regarding the ACC.

All of this is best shown with the ESPN/ABC broadcast split maps. With rare exception what is on in Boston, is what is on in all of New England. What is on in NYC is on in the entire Tri-State area. What is on in Philly is on in NJ and PA.

What makes MD so lucrative for the B10 is that the geography of the area is such that MD is appealing in NOVA, the panhandle of WVa, Delmarva, DC, and MD to Wilmington, DE. While the ACC lost this property, Pitt, VT, and UVa remain acceptable broadcast choices in those areas.

For a conference how many teams do they need in a particular area for that conference to achieve the ratings necessary to make money for ESPN, the networks, and the school? At least one? Two is nice. At three do you reach diminishing returns?

It's this phenomena that makes NC State or WF more potentially valuable to the SEC, B10, or B12 than they can be for the ACC. Same way that Michigan State or Purdue would generate more value for the SEC, ACC, or B12 than they do for the B10. K-State and Oklahoma State are certainly of more value to the SEC, than they are to the B12.

Oddly enough, West Virginia is right where they should be generating the most value for the B12 as their value is much less in the ACC due to Pitt, VT, Louisville, and UVa, or in the B10 due to Ohio State, Penn State and MD. That's why if the B12 breaks up, they have the highest net value to the SEC, same as if look at an Iowa State, which has no value to the B10, but would have value to the SEC or ACC - not a huge value, but value over their worth in the B10.

What the heck are you talking about? Syracuse is 6 hours away from NYC by car and is not even close to carrying the market. ND has some band wagon fans but doesn't command the market, same with Duke and Pitt is pretty far from Philly and has little pull in that market as well. You are completely pulling these ideas from your rear end.

http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index....lphia.html

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...1SNuBQrKRs

Syracuse is at most 3.5 hours away from NYC, depending on traffic. No one school carries NYC, but SU does have quite a few fans there and alumni.

......for one hundred years. That is a long "bandwagon".

(06-05-2016 03:43 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  ...ND has some band wagon fans but doesn't command the market...

(06-06-2016 07:12 AM)TerryD Wrote:  ......for one hundred years. That is a long "bandwagon".

Where's Green when you need him? Oh, well, I guess I'll do it...

#FLASH-IN-THE-PAN

(06-05-2016 10:26 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(06-04-2016 10:09 PM)nole Wrote:  

(06-04-2016 08:12 PM)Big Ron Buckeye Wrote:  http://allthingsfsu.blogspot.com/2016/06...r.html?m=1

Quote from the piece:

"For anyone who thought FSU "got something" in exchange for this deal, this Agreement does not bear that out. There are no special rights in there. Every school is treated the same (except ND). The integration clause makes it darn clear that no previous deals related to the GoR survive the execution of the Agreement. FSU would have a very hard time ever claiming it signed this thinking it was getting something more from the Conference."

Keep in mind....the GOR didn't give FSU anything.

But FSU's BOT members have CLEARLY stated, publicly, they were promised things that were not delivered to sign.

Swofford basically made promises verbally to get them to sign....didn't' put it in writing....and they signed the GOR.

It's irrelevant. Unless they are documented within the 4 corners of the document, any verbal assurances (to the extent that they even exist) are completely irrelevant here. As the FSU blogger noted, the GOR agreement has a boilerplate clause stating that all other prior agreements and statements are superseded and replaced by the terms of that GOR agreement, so a party cannot go back and do what you're saying (e.g. "They told me this verbally to get me to sign!"). It cannot be made clear enough: VERBAL ASSURANCES ARE WORTHLESS HERE.

Frank,
Nobody is disputing that.

What everybody is missing is.....How does this info impact the future?

The GOR isn't 100 years. It has 10 more years. ACC won't wait for 10 more years to get an extension. I bet they are strategizing now how to get it extended. You can bet ESPN wants a GOR extension if it adds an ACC Network.

So again, what EVERYBODY is missing is....what happens when ESPN/Swofford go to FSU and say 'we are getting $3 million a year per team for an internet ACC Network (ie a very weak conference network) and we expect you to sign a GOR extension until 2035". What does FSU's BOT do then?

(06-05-2016 05:40 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 03:43 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 02:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 02:02 PM)Johnny Incognito Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 01:53 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Rutgers has value to the B10 only because of the way the B10 Network is structured. Rutgers was added for TV sets - nothing else. They would have added nothing to the ACC given the way the ACC's contract was structured, just another mouth to feed. And I think calling West Virginia a flagship public school is a bit of an exaggeration. West Va is a tiny state, and WVa's geographic location was also covered by UVa, VT, and MD at the time WVa received their B12 offer. The addition of Pitt with those three meant WVa would add next to nothing for the ACC.

Maryland was never going to allow West Virginia into the ACC and they had Virginia's and Duke's support on that point. It is also doubtful GT and WF would ever have voted for WVa, over MD's objections. WVa is to MD what UConn is to BC - an existential threat that is perceived as too close for comfort and MD's administration hated WVa's fans.

Sounds like you're saying that Rutgers wouldn't be beneficial to the ACC because geography not important to ACC's set up and WVU wouldn't be beneficial to the ACC because of geographic location. Which seems contradictory.

Rutgers does not add a substantial new geography that is not already hit by a combination of Syracuse, Duke, Notre Dame, and Pitt. New Jersey is essentially a suburb of Philadelphia and NYC as those media markets dominate the State. You don't have to have a physical presence if the boarder striding metropolitan area broadcasts into the state, as Charlotte does for Clemson into NC and UNC and NC State into SC. If the ACC received revenue based on cable tv boxes, things would be different regarding Rutgers. Also keep in mind that Rutgers sports are terrible and that FSU, Clemson, NC State, GT, and VT are not thrilled about playing them every year as NJ is not that great a recruiting hot bed.

UConn and Cincy have this same problem regarding the ACC.

All of this is best shown with the ESPN/ABC broadcast split maps. With rare exception what is on in Boston, is what is on in all of New England. What is on in NYC is on in the entire Tri-State area. What is on in Philly is on in NJ and PA.

What makes MD so lucrative for the B10 is that the geography of the area is such that MD is appealing in NOVA, the panhandle of WVa, Delmarva, DC, and MD to Wilmington, DE. While the ACC lost this property, Pitt, VT, and UVa remain acceptable broadcast choices in those areas.

For a conference how many teams do they need in a particular area for that conference to achieve the ratings necessary to make money for ESPN, the networks, and the school? At least one? Two is nice. At three do you reach diminishing returns?

It's this phenomena that makes NC State or WF more potentially valuable to the SEC, B10, or B12 than they can be for the ACC. Same way that Michigan State or Purdue would generate more value for the SEC, ACC, or B12 than they do for the B10. K-State and Oklahoma State are certainly of more value to the SEC, than they are to the B12.

Oddly enough, West Virginia is right where they should be generating the most value for the B12 as their value is much less in the ACC due to Pitt, VT, Louisville, and UVa, or in the B10 due to Ohio State, Penn State and MD. That's why if the B12 breaks up, they have the highest net value to the SEC, same as if look at an Iowa State, which has no value to the B10, but would have value to the SEC or ACC - not a huge value, but value over their worth in the B10.

What the heck are you talking about? Syracuse is 6 hours away from NYC by car and is not even close to carrying the market. ND has some band wagon fans but doesn't command the market, same with Duke and Pitt is pretty far from Philly and has little pull in that market as well. You are completely pulling these ideas from your rear end.

http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index....lphia.html

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...1SNuBQrKRs

Syracuse is at most 3.5 hours away from NYC, depending on traffic. No one school carries NYC, but SU does have quite a few fans there and alumni.

Maryland and Penn State are closer to NYC than Syracuse is. Syracuse is two TV markets away from NYC. I'm sure the Ottawa market is big into the Orange, though.

(06-06-2016 08:38 AM)krup Wrote:  Maryland and Penn State are closer to NYC than Syracuse is. Syracuse is two TV markets away from NYC. I'm sure the Ottawa market is big into the Orange, though.

I do not claim to know who is most popular there, but there are many schools that are hours away from major metropolitan areas, that are said to be the most popular team in that city. Is that that different than the University of Tennessee in regards to Nashville or Memphis? the University of Texas with regards to Houston or Dallas? The University of Florida and the major south Florida cities? How about Penn State and Philadelphia or Pittsburgh for that matter? How is this any different? Just because the name is "Syracuse" and not "New York University?"

(06-06-2016 08:56 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(06-06-2016 08:38 AM)krup Wrote:  Maryland and Penn State are closer to NYC than Syracuse is. Syracuse is two TV markets away from NYC. I'm sure the Ottawa market is big into the Orange, though.

I do not claim to know who is most popular there, but there are many schools that are hours away from major metropolitan areas, that are said to be the most popular team in that city. Is that that different than the University of Tennessee in regards to Nashville or Memphis? the University of Texas with regards to Houston or Dallas? The University of Florida and the major south Florida cities? How about Penn State and Philadelphia or Pittsburgh for that matter? How is this any different? Just because the name is "Syracuse" and not "New York University?"

"there are many schools that are hours away from major metropolitan areas, that are said to be the most popular team in that city". Syracuse isn't one of them. If you think Syracuse's popularity in NYC is remotely close to Penn State's in Philadelphia, you are delusional.

(06-06-2016 08:38 AM)krup Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 05:40 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 03:43 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 02:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 02:02 PM)Johnny Incognito Wrote:  Sounds like you're saying that Rutgers wouldn't be beneficial to the ACC because geography not important to ACC's set up and WVU wouldn't be beneficial to the ACC because of geographic location. Which seems contradictory.

Rutgers does not add a substantial new geography that is not already hit by a combination of Syracuse, Duke, Notre Dame, and Pitt. New Jersey is essentially a suburb of Philadelphia and NYC as those media markets dominate the State. You don't have to have a physical presence if the boarder striding metropolitan area broadcasts into the state, as Charlotte does for Clemson into NC and UNC and NC State into SC. If the ACC received revenue based on cable tv boxes, things would be different regarding Rutgers. Also keep in mind that Rutgers sports are terrible and that FSU, Clemson, NC State, GT, and VT are not thrilled about playing them every year as NJ is not that great a recruiting hot bed.

UConn and Cincy have this same problem regarding the ACC.

All of this is best shown with the ESPN/ABC broadcast split maps. With rare exception what is on in Boston, is what is on in all of New England. What is on in NYC is on in the entire Tri-State area. What is on in Philly is on in NJ and PA.

What makes MD so lucrative for the B10 is that the geography of the area is such that MD is appealing in NOVA, the panhandle of WVa, Delmarva, DC, and MD to Wilmington, DE. While the ACC lost this property, Pitt, VT, and UVa remain acceptable broadcast choices in those areas.

For a conference how many teams do they need in a particular area for that conference to achieve the ratings necessary to make money for ESPN, the networks, and the school? At least one? Two is nice. At three do you reach diminishing returns?

It's this phenomena that makes NC State or WF more potentially valuable to the SEC, B10, or B12 than they can be for the ACC. Same way that Michigan State or Purdue would generate more value for the SEC, ACC, or B12 than they do for the B10. K-State and Oklahoma State are certainly of more value to the SEC, than they are to the B12.

Oddly enough, West Virginia is right where they should be generating the most value for the B12 as their value is much less in the ACC due to Pitt, VT, Louisville, and UVa, or in the B10 due to Ohio State, Penn State and MD. That's why if the B12 breaks up, they have the highest net value to the SEC, same as if look at an Iowa State, which has no value to the B10, but would have value to the SEC or ACC - not a huge value, but value over their worth in the B10.

What the heck are you talking about? Syracuse is 6 hours away from NYC by car and is not even close to carrying the market. ND has some band wagon fans but doesn't command the market, same with Duke and Pitt is pretty far from Philly and has little pull in that market as well. You are completely pulling these ideas from your rear end.

http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index....lphia.html

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...1SNuBQrKRs

Syracuse is at most 3.5 hours away from NYC, depending on traffic. No one school carries NYC, but SU does have quite a few fans there and alumni.

Maryland and Penn State are closer to NYC than Syracuse is. Syracuse is two TV markets away from NYC. I'm sure the Ottawa market is big into the Orange, though.

Krup, the fact that you would use a a discredited study that appeared in US News and the NY Times that was based on grossly flawed data indicates that you don't really understand. Whenever you cite data, it behooves you to check the source and the methodology. An opt-in, online poll of colleges as to who their favorite university is is not the same as a well constructed instrument designed to measure actual television pull. This is how you get the gross anomalies present in that poll. Some universities did not participate as they had no real access, while others spammed and spiked their results. Any "poll" that tells you that East Carolina is more popular than UNC or NC State east of Raleigh NC is deeply flawed. Moreover despite the poll asking the respondents to name three, the results were published with only the first choice.

If you really think Rutgers is more popular and turns on more tv sets in NYC than Notre Dame, then you must be a graduate of Trump University.

(06-06-2016 08:38 AM)krup Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 05:40 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 03:43 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 02:11 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(06-05-2016 02:02 PM)Johnny Incognito Wrote:  Sounds like you're saying that Rutgers wouldn't be beneficial to the ACC because geography not important to ACC's set up and WVU wouldn't be beneficial to the ACC because of geographic location. Which seems contradictory.

Rutgers does not add a substantial new geography that is not already hit by a combination of Syracuse, Duke, Notre Dame, and Pitt. New Jersey is essentially a suburb of Philadelphia and NYC as those media markets dominate the State. You don't have to have a physical presence if the boarder striding metropolitan area broadcasts into the state, as Charlotte does for Clemson into NC and UNC and NC State into SC. If the ACC received revenue based on cable tv boxes, things would be different regarding Rutgers. Also keep in mind that Rutgers sports are terrible and that FSU, Clemson, NC State, GT, and VT are not thrilled about playing them every year as NJ is not that great a recruiting hot bed.

UConn and Cincy have this same problem regarding the ACC.

All of this is best shown with the ESPN/ABC broadcast split maps. With rare exception what is on in Boston, is what is on in all of New England. What is on in NYC is on in the entire Tri-State area. What is on in Philly is on in NJ and PA.

What makes MD so lucrative for the B10 is that the geography of the area is such that MD is appealing in NOVA, the panhandle of WVa, Delmarva, DC, and MD to Wilmington, DE. While the ACC lost this property, Pitt, VT, and UVa remain acceptable broadcast choices in those areas.

For a conference how many teams do they need in a particular area for that conference to achieve the ratings necessary to make money for ESPN, the networks, and the school? At least one? Two is nice. At three do you reach diminishing returns?

It's this phenomena that makes NC State or WF more potentially valuable to the SEC, B10, or B12 than they can be for the ACC. Same way that Michigan State or Purdue would generate more value for the SEC, ACC, or B12 than they do for the B10. K-State and Oklahoma State are certainly of more value to the SEC, than they are to the B12.

Oddly enough, West Virginia is right where they should be generating the most value for the B12 as their value is much less in the ACC due to Pitt, VT, Louisville, and UVa, or in the B10 due to Ohio State, Penn State and MD. That's why if the B12 breaks up, they have the highest net value to the SEC, same as if look at an Iowa State, which has no value to the B10, but would have value to the SEC or ACC - not a huge value, but value over their worth in the B10.

What the heck are you talking about? Syracuse is 6 hours away from NYC by car and is not even close to carrying the market. ND has some band wagon fans but doesn't command the market, same with Duke and Pitt is pretty far from Philly and has little pull in that market as well. You are completely pulling these ideas from your rear end.

http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/index....lphia.html

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/...1SNuBQrKRs

Syracuse is at most 3.5 hours away from NYC, depending on traffic. No one school carries NYC, but SU does have quite a few fans there and alumni.

Maryland and Penn State are closer to NYC than Syracuse is. Syracuse is two TV markets away from NYC. I'm sure the Ottawa market is big into the Orange, though.

Were Maryland and Penn State involved in the two highest rated regular season bb games in NYC history? Syracuse was.
Heres one example:

The telecast also set records in Buffalo (6.7 local rating) and New York City (2.8 rating), ranking as ESPN’s highest-rated regular-season men’s college hoops game in both markets (records date back to 2002).


Cuse/Duke NYC Ratings

When a university is located in bum ****, the graduates leave bum **** and go to obtain employment. Happy Valley, Blacksburg, Clemson, Syracuse, Ithica, Bloomington, West Layfayette, Auburn, Tuscaloosa, etc., etc., all are located in their regional version of bum **** USA. Their graduates go the City, or to Boston, Raleigh, Atlanta, Nashville, Chicago, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, Philly, and DC to get a job and start their careers.

Atlanta for example is seems to have as many UNC grads in the metro as GT or Emory.

The reason is that large cities exert economic gravity just like stars or planets. This gravity sucks in mobile people and humans are infact a migratory species - we move to the money, the same as we used to move to follow food.

In the United States, NYC is the sun - with undisputed economic gravity. Boston, DC, LA, Dallas, Houston, Chicago, Seattle, SF, Atlanta, Miami - they are the equivalent of Jupiter's or Saturn's and around them are major moons. Then there are the small rocky Earth/Mars planets like Charlotte, Raleigh, New Orleans, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Austin, Portland, Indianapolis, Denver, - all metro areas that sustain their local economy and support their own satellites.

Damn few people graduate from Clemson, VT, Auburn, Syracuse, Dartmouth, Cornell, Purdue, Indiana, etc., and stay in that micropolitan area.

It's all about a connection - you may be connected by attendance, you may be connected by a family members connection, you may be connected by a region or a city, you may just like the color of the uniform or the general appearance of there schools cheerleaders, you may like the coach, conversely you may hate their guts and tranfer your frustrations to the team you love to hate. NC State and UNC are 2 and a half hours from Charlotte. South Carolina is 2 hours and Clemson is 2. Charlotte has not P-5 teams, yet every day, a school from NC or SC is on television - UNC, Clemson, NC State, SC, Duke, WF and that signal and cable reaches all the way to the Tri-Cities in TN/VA to the north and then all the way back down almost to Columbia and Spartanburg.

Syracuse is in NY State, that's connection enough for NYC. Notre Dame is the defacto Catholic university of the united states, that's connection enough for Irish Catholics in NYC. Duke is a private school that has been funded by southern expats in NY (when they didn't run for Hawaii) for a century. BC is in Boston and as much as NY win, New Yorkers love a Boston loss.

It's these undepinnings that drive the broadcast choices on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. And remember there are at least 30 broadcast hours to fill each weekend.