I like that we are being patient. Make the correct choice, not the quickest choice.

My guess is UCF is the school sandiss is talking about. Taps Central Florida for us.

(08-12-2010 08:16 AM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  "cash cow" is defined as a business or product that generates a steady, dependable flow of cash.

Regular season football games generate more revenue then regular season basketball games. Because more people watch football. It doesnt matter if its Louisville versus UConn...there are more people watching the football then the basketball. Therefore the revenue is higher.

That shouldnt be a surprise, just look at the difference in the size of the stadiums.

The reason basketball can make more money is because you have more events...and TV is saying they want more football events, because they make more money.

You're mixing apples & oranges. Home attendance has no direct relationship to TV viewing. So, I'll take them separately.

If a school averages 20,000 fans for 15 home basketball games, that's 300,000 fane. If the average 40,000 fans for 7 home basketball games, that's 280,000 fans. In that example, more people are watching basketball. It all depends on the situation. Even 13,000 fans for basketball for a school that averages 30,000 in football means that basketball has brought in more fans. The number of schools averaging over 50,000 fans in football is really not that great.

As far as TV ratings, they can be deceptive. Ratings are reported in 2 numbers - percent of households & number of TV sets. It's much easier to get a high number in percent of households on a Saturday afternoon when most people aren't watching TV than it is on a weekday night when a lot of people are watching.

Smokin'....you are wasting your time and energy re-hashing these same old arguments with these same old people......

Fact is that none of them know what is going on behind closed doors - and none will.....and you will never be able to convince any of them of anything you are trying to.

You just need to trust that the "right" people know the "right" things, and that if/when expansion happens, it will happen for the "right" reasons.....I cannot vouch at all for most of what Sandiss is presenting here, but I can tell you with 100% certainty that portions of it are indeed true, and that work is ongoing on many fronts to align certain conferences and schools in their possible positions.....

I applaud your defenses of ECU, but I'm just trying to save you some time and frustration.....trust in the process...and the folks leading your University.....

(08-12-2010 07:10 AM)Smokin Pirate Wrote:  

(08-12-2010 05:11 AM)Tampa Bearcat Wrote:  Check please. I'm about ready to grab a cold one, pop open the emergency hatch, and take the plunge down the exit slide.

I wonder what the network estimates would be for a conference consisting of UC, UL, USF, WVU, Pitt, Rutgers, Cuse, UConn, TCU, Houston, Memphis, UCF, G-Town, ND, Nova, and Marquette. The amazing thing is that the deadweight that would be dropped is all in redundant markets. We lose nothing. (That said, I bet ECU is the program that would deliver their market surprisingly well so I should probably have included them.)

Bear Cat,
I have to agree with you on your last statement. I would bet that ECU is the program that would deliver a larger market than many would want to believe possible.

I agree with your list of teams but have to ask why you included Marquette, G-Town (when Sandis indicated has no interest in moving up) and Houston. Yes, TCU is very attractive and one of two (other being Boise St) western schools that I consider ready for BCS but isn't in one, but distance is the main distraction there.

Houston is attractive but their market attractiveness and attendance numbers needs to be determined. Another problem with Houston is that you have Rice located in the same city and fighting for attendance numbers as well.

As for the Philly market, in my humble opinion, I would think that Temple would be more attractive than Nova solely because they are currently playing at the D1 level and have shown an improvement in attendance over the past couple years. 25,000 -30,000 shold be the low numbers for regular attendance for a BCS program. Just my opinion.

Please Buck, Cat or Orange label this as an attack on another program. Just my thoughts.

Marquette and G-Town would be basketball only (with ND and Nova.) I know, I know - we're trying to get away from that. That said, it may be worthwhile to keep not only those markets, but programs of their stature. Some of our more hesitant football schools might jump at the opportunity if the basketball side of things still resembled the current BEast.

Wow. Thanks for the post.

If the Big East currently lists its best / most realistic options as Villanova upgrading and Notre Dame joining for all sports... then this conference is screwed. Because neither or those things will ever happen. They had better get a whole lot more realistic very soon or this whole expansion thing is going to roll over this conference like a tsunami.

As for the comments regarding my alma-mater, any success Temple has at drawing fans this year (assuming we do have any, because so far we really haven't) is not going to mean much for Villanova in terms of their ability to draw. You would be surprised at how little cross-over there is between the schools' fanbases in the city of Philadelphia. Of course, if the most people you can possibly draw anyway is only 12,500 (their current capacity), then they could very well sell out every game as a member of the Big East... although even that is far from guaranteed since, presently, no one at Villanova is even quite sure what college football is. Franklin Field didn't work for Temple or the Big East when we were there; why would anyone think that it's going to work for Villanova? And why would Penn do this anyway? They certainly wouldn't do it based on financial motivations. Again, the bottom line is that the school DOES NOT WANT to upgrade; so any talk otherwise is really just academic.

This just makes me believe that much more that a split between the football schools and the basketball schools is inevitable. It's become apparent that the basketball schools are becoming more and more desperate by the moment and this desperation has now led to delirium. I have to imagine that the decision-makers at, for example, Georgetown are smart enough (unlike our friend Buckaineer and masquerading Villanova fan OrangeCrush) to know that Villanova upgrading and Notre Dame joining for all sports are not actually realistic options. I suppose they are just trying to delay the inevitable by even talking about these options seriously. Unfortunately (I say unfortunately because I grew up watching the Johnnies and have always LOVED Big East basketball), the basketball schools are all going to be screwed in the long run no matter which route the conference decides to go in the near future. As long as none of them have FBS football programs - and all signs point to that remaining the status quo - they are destined to end up in a conference with other non-FBS schools. It's really not even a matter of "if" but rather "when". Very sad for those schools, many of which I am very fond of... including Villanova.

(08-12-2010 08:37 AM)Capital Pirate Wrote:  Smokin'....you are wasting your time and energy re-hashing these same old arguments with these same old people......

Fact is that none of them know what is going on behind closed doors - and none will.....and you will never be able to convince any of them of anything you are trying to.

You just need to trust that the "right" people know the "right" things, and that if/when expansion happens, it will happen for the "right" reasons.....I cannot vouch at all for most of what Sandiss is presenting here, but I can tell you with 100% certainty that portions of it are indeed true, and that work is ongoing on many fronts to align certain conferences and schools in their possible positions.....

I applaud your defenses of ECU, but I'm just trying to save you some time and frustration.....trust in the process...and the folks leading your University.....

Capital you are absolutely correct. No arguments from me on that. However, since I do a lot of fishing I can make the correlation between trying to get them to look at other institutions in a different persepective as it is to catching a tri-fecta (Redfish, Spotted Sea Trout and Flounder). Not easily done on a daily baises.

I learned a long time ago, not to get mad with others as they post, just make your points, valid points, and don't attack other institutions.

But to change some minds on here. Some will never change. Even if one of ECU, Memphis, UCF were admitted and won a BCS game, they still wouldn't admit they were a good addition.

nm

A fair amount of what Sandiss posted seems plausible. In fact, a fair amount of it has been reported in the media at various points in time. It's a minor point, but I'll comment anyway, is the stadium issue. If what you mean by other members pledging their assistance with working out off-campus stadium deals is that they are willing to be extraordinarily flexible in putting together a leage schedule, that makes sense. It's not even really a concession, they won't have another choice. If the implication is that they can somehow facilitate getting use of a stadium, that's preposterous. It's up to Villanova alone to do that.

Regarding Franklin Field specifically, Penn has rented it in the past and I have to assume they will in the future, provided it's convenient for them to do so. They aren't going to make any scheduling concessions. The limitations of Franklin Field from Villanova's perspective are largely known. It's an antiquated facility on another university's campus. Scheduling is the other obvious issue. Penn plays 5 home games over 10 weeks during the heart of the CFB season every year. That makes scheduling games there a challenge. As far as weeknight games go, I don't think Temple ever played any weeknight games there once the fall semester started. Unless things have changed, FF gets used heavily on weeknights by the AD and for intramurals. So, I don't know whether Penn would or wouldn't be willing to rent FF for weeknight games during the fall semester. There isn't a precedent that I know of.

IMO:

-ECU is that team to grab statewide attention
-UL/UC/USF are the 3 schools still looking at the 10/18 or 12/20 format
-UL/UC and others are the ones in opposition of funding Nova and the non producing bball schools but realize it is what it is
-Rutgers/Pitt/Cuse or UL/UC are the 2 or 3 schools in doubt of the 8/8 format staying as is....for obvious reasons
-Nova is the 1 out 8 bball school with change of heart
-UL (new guard) and Pitt or UConn (old guard) working together for next 9-14 months on the 10/18 or 12/20 concept in partnership with Tags findings. UL because we seem to have had the most successful ramp up from a non BCS status and either Pitt or UConn, because they have been here for awhile and not sure if they are moving in the first raid
-The Network models showing 8 teams doesn't work all that great creates both good and bad situations. Good in that expansion is necessary to bring the BEN on board and will stabilize the conference, bad in that not all members from 8 all sports or 8 bball will be able to get their arms around a format to work together for this. Only option is to split but still be under the same umbrella on the network, scheduling, and some sports.

Why is ECU the team to grab the statewide attention. I see 4 other teams in their state that are already far more established athletic programs. That's why I think it is UCF, as they are in Orlando which doesn't have much overlap with the other BCS schools.

(08-12-2010 09:42 AM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  Why is ECU the team to grab the statewide attention. I see 4 other teams in their state that are already far more established athletic programs. That's why I think it is UCF, as they are in Orlando which doesn't have much overlap with the other BCS schools.

I don't think Wake overall is as developed as ECU athletically and due to their status as a small, private school with scores of out of state students/alumni that's not changing. Duke a midsized, private school has similar issues but because of its truly national brand in basketball and its location in the Triangle its able to somewhat overcome those obstacles. In football which is clearly what's being discussed I don't doubt that ECU is only behind UNC and NC State in fan following. Knowing that and factoring in NC is the 10th most populous state in the Union and ECU's known number of alumni/fans in the Tidewater region and really all along the East Coast, it'd shock me that if they weren't the ones implicated.

(08-12-2010 08:28 AM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  I like that we are being patient.

There is a difference between being patient and being paralyzed by the Catholic non-football coalition which puts its interests above those of the overall conference.

(08-12-2010 08:33 AM)Bill Marsh Wrote:  

(08-12-2010 08:16 AM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  "cash cow" is defined as a business or product that generates a steady, dependable flow of cash.

Regular season football games generate more revenue then regular season basketball games. Because more people watch football. It doesnt matter if its Louisville versus UConn...there are more people watching the football then the basketball. Therefore the revenue is higher.

That shouldnt be a surprise, just look at the difference in the size of the stadiums.

The reason basketball can make more money is because you have more events...and TV is saying they want more football events, because they make more money.

You're mixing apples & oranges. Home attendance has no direct relationship to TV viewing. So, I'll take them separately.

If a school averages 20,000 fans for 15 home basketball games, that's 300,000 fane. If the average 40,000 fans for 7 home basketball games, that's 280,000 fans. In that example, more people are watching basketball. It all depends on the situation. Even 13,000 fans for basketball for a school that averages 30,000 in football means that basketball has brought in more fans. The number of schools averaging over 50,000 fans in football is really not that great.

As far as TV ratings, they can be deceptive. Ratings are reported in 2 numbers - percent of households & number of TV sets. It's much easier to get a high number in percent of households on a Saturday afternoon when most people aren't watching TV than it is on a weekday night when a lot of people are watching.

Actually thats incorrect...in terms of ACTUAL number of FANS...you cant count the 20,000 in basketball again and again, and again and say there are more FANS then there are at a football game.

There are more fans at a football game then there are at a basketball game....period. 40,000 actual people to 20,000 actual people. So for that one event the generate more revenue. If you assume that there are more people watching on TV just as there are more actual people in the stands for that one event, then you can see that the TV revenue would be more as well.

Football > Basketball. Maybe not at a few schools, but overall. West Virginia had a Final Four basketball program, but your never going to convince me that more people are involved in the West Virginia basketball program then in the football program...they put 60,000 plus in the stands.

Finally, consider the national audience outside of the local school's audience. If more people watch college football that have no interest in the particular teams then those that watch college basketball with no interest, wouldnt that mean more revenue for football for TV?

Maybe someone has some numbers, I don't. But what is the share for a Primetime ESPN BE basketball game as compared to the share for a Primetime ESPN BE football game...I dont care the teams, I'd just like to see the numbers. If BBall gets a 2.1 and football gets a 3.2, then football generates more revenue. You can total all of the viewers and see who has more, football and bball, and you can figure out the averages of each event.

Buck threw up some numbers previously of times on TV. In my opinion, he was just getting there...unless you show the actual viewership of that game, you dont have the true perspective of what that game means. He tried to imply that because it was on this channel or that channel this or that. But the channel doesnt really matter, the number of ACTUAL viewers on that channel does. And lets not start going down the Potential road...

BTW, UCF may be the team he is talking about.

(08-12-2010 09:42 AM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  Why is ECU the team to grab the statewide attention. I see 4 other teams in their state that are already far more established athletic programs. That's why I think it is UCF

There are 4 other established athletic programs in Florida also.

OC,

It is what it is.

As of right now, UNC, NC State, Duke and Wake Forest are all Basketball schools. UNC is desperately trying to move up in FB status but having a few difficulties,(NCAA investigation). NC State has won nothing in the last decade and TOB is on the hot seat if they don't produce this year. Wake Forest won the ACC a couple years ago, but before that they were middle to low ACC and Duke, well enough said.

These are all BB schools fisrt and carry the torch for BB across the state, however, ECU is the only FB first school and generates a lot of interest across the state and lower VA because it's base is scattered throughout the state in the larger metro cities. This is one of the reasons ECU played VT, NC State and will play South Carolina in Charlotte as a designated home game. There's a ton of interest there for ECU.

(08-12-2010 09:54 AM)brista21 Wrote:  

(08-12-2010 09:42 AM)OrangeCrush Wrote:  Why is ECU the team to grab the statewide attention. I see 4 other teams in their state that are already far more established athletic programs. That's why I think it is UCF, as they are in Orlando which doesn't have much overlap with the other BCS schools.

I don't think Wake overall is as developed as ECU athletically and due to their status as a small, private school with scores of out of state students/alumni that's not changing. Duke a midsized, private school has similar issues but because of its truly national brand in basketball and its location in the Triangle its able to somewhat overcome those obstacles. In football which is clearly what's being discussed I don't doubt that ECU is only behind UNC and NC State in fan following. Knowing that and factoring in NC is the 10th most populous state in the Union and ECU's known number of alumni/fans in the Tidewater region and really all along the East Coast, it'd shock me that if they weren't the ones implicated.

I think you can look at the size of the stadiums, the number of season tickets sold and the revenue generated from football....remember this is in a football only scenario to see that East Carolina is well ahead of Duke and Wake Forest in terms of interest in football.

Haha...both of them are located in larger markets too...I wonder why the BCS inclusion along with larger markets hasnt equaled more fans and bigger stadiums?? There is so much Potential there!!

At times, on the field Duke and Wake Forest beat East Carolina, but not in the stands or in the revenue department. In fact, it was recently reported that East Carolina was 2nd in the State of NC in merchandise sales...ahead of NC State. We know that UNC is a national brand because of its basketball, but East Carolina sold more stuff then NC State, Duke, or Wake Forest.

Keep in mind that East Carolina was an independent for many years and still keeps that mindset. It joined a CUSA conference that included Louisville, Cincy, and at one time included TCU and USF and Army. It was much different then what it is today. Labelling programs as CUSA this or ACC that doesnt mean anything, you have to look at the individual program and what numbers they bring.

Labelling is a big problem here, it skews your mind. "SEC" football is a label that means excellence. Right? But should you label Vanderbilt football with excellence? Vandy plays in the SEC, but your not equating them with the "SEC" football label. They are the exception.

Maybe East Carolina...or Central Florida, whoever it is...are the exception to what many AQ conferences refer to as "CUSA" football.

(08-11-2010 10:54 PM)KnightTower Wrote:  Thanks for the info, Sandiss. Its nice to have a credible source.

Help my memory here please Knight. What has Sandiss been right on that is significant?

Don't TV ratings and the number of people that watch college football trump college basketball numbers? There are so many college basketball games on during weeknights and on weekends but the football games are mainly on weekends (Thursday - Saturday) and have a larger following than basketball. I am interpreting the cash cow statement to be as such, football generates more revenue than basketball though we have a great basketball conference because more people will tune in on a Saturday afternoon than a Tuesday night for a basketball game.

Villanova only averaged 4,000 per game last year for football, I think Temple has more football potential than the wildcats simply because Temple is within Philadelphia and Villanova is on the outskirts and they have agreements already in place to play in a NFL stadium.

Why are still pulling all the weight for the likes of DePaul, Providence, and Seton Hall?

(08-12-2010 10:02 AM)Smokin Pirate Wrote:  OC,

It is what it is.

As of right now, UNC, NC State, Duke and Wake Forest are all Basketball schools. UNC is desperately trying to move up in FB status but having a few difficulties,(NCAA investigation). NC State has won nothing in the last decade and TOB is on the hot seat if they don't produce this year. Wake Forest won the ACC a couple years ago, but before that they were middle to low ACC and Duke, well enough said.

These are all BB schools fisrt and carry the torch for BB across the state, however, ECU is the only FB first school and generates a lot of interest across the state and lower VA because it's base is scattered throughout the state in the larger metro cities. This is one of the reasons ECU played VT, NC State and will play South Carolina in Charlotte as a designated home game. There's a ton of interest there for ECU.

I love the Charlotte examples...you dont think the BE recognizes that East Carolina can put 30,000 people in the seats in Charlotte, a 4 hour drive from campus, and call it a home game. This is the #24 TV market. We do it every three years on average and most of them against teams from outside of the State of NC.

I am not sure of this answer, but would Central Florida put 30,000 fans in the stands in Jacksonville every three years if they were playing South Carolina, Georgia Tech or South Florida?

And I wouldnt call NC State a bball school, its really a football school that is a bit conflicted. It has history in both...certainly the other three really dont have any football history, a few flashes in the pan.

MiamiBull, you obviously weren't around for the first 10 years of the conference when we realized Temple's "potential" and it was a disaster.