I've been seeing references to a C7+3 setup with Xavier/Butler/Creighton. Is there any chance of the C7 stopping there, or will the networks force it to 12?

I would then wonder what happens to the rejects. I'm the eternal pessimist (see the team I root for), and I don't like any of the alternatives, because I don't see any.

(02-13-2013 03:09 PM)LouPower Wrote:  I've been seeing references to a C7+3 setup with Xavier/Butler/Creighton. Is there any chance of the C7 stopping there, or will the networks force it to 12?

I would then wonder what happens to the rejects. I'm the eternal pessimist (see the team I root for), and I don't like any of the alternatives, because I don't see any.

I see no way that happens. We get more money per team with more teams. Also, if you expand in the middle of a TV contract you get a small bump but multiple years added to the contract.

Networks will force it to 12. I would prefer 10 (arguably the perfect number for a basketball conference). As far as the future goes: who knows? Maybe teams become "must adds" and the conference grows to 14 or 16 teams. More likely, it will stay put at 12 for a long time, but you never know what will happen in the future.

(02-13-2013 03:13 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 03:09 PM)LouPower Wrote:  I've been seeing references to a C7+3 setup with Xavier/Butler/Creighton. Is there any chance of the C7 stopping there, or will the networks force it to 12?

I would then wonder what happens to the rejects. I'm the eternal pessimist (see the team I root for), and I don't like any of the alternatives, because I don't see any.

I see no way that happens. We get more money per team with more teams. Also, if you expand in the middle of a TV contract you get a small bump but multiple years added to the contract.

The difference would seem to be only 333k between 10 (30 million/10 teams=3 million per school) and 12 (40 million/12=3.33 mil per school). With that differential, it's not a lock at all to expand. Might wind up making more when you take into account NCAA units etc. with 10 vs 12.

(02-13-2013 04:14 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 03:13 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 03:09 PM)LouPower Wrote:  I've been seeing references to a C7+3 setup with Xavier/Butler/Creighton. Is there any chance of the C7 stopping there, or will the networks force it to 12?

I would then wonder what happens to the rejects. I'm the eternal pessimist (see the team I root for), and I don't like any of the alternatives, because I don't see any.

I see no way that happens. We get more money per team with more teams. Also, if you expand in the middle of a TV contract you get a small bump but multiple years added to the contract.

The difference would seem to be only 333k between 10 (30 million/10 teams=3 million per school) and 12 (40 million/12=3.33 mil per school). With that differential, it's not a lock at all to expand. Might wind up making more when you take into account NCAA units etc. with 10 vs 12.

Explain to me how having ten teams is better than 12?

(02-13-2013 04:20 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:14 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 03:13 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 03:09 PM)LouPower Wrote:  I've been seeing references to a C7+3 setup with Xavier/Butler/Creighton. Is there any chance of the C7 stopping there, or will the networks force it to 12?

I would then wonder what happens to the rejects. I'm the eternal pessimist (see the team I root for), and I don't like any of the alternatives, because I don't see any.

I see no way that happens. We get more money per team with more teams. Also, if you expand in the middle of a TV contract you get a small bump but multiple years added to the contract.

The difference would seem to be only 333k between 10 (30 million/10 teams=3 million per school) and 12 (40 million/12=3.33 mil per school). With that differential, it's not a lock at all to expand. Might wind up making more when you take into account NCAA units etc. with 10 vs 12.

Explain to me how having ten teams is better than 12?

I'm assuming the thought process is that the 11/12 teams will be weaker and a money pit.

(02-13-2013 04:20 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:14 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 03:13 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 03:09 PM)LouPower Wrote:  I've been seeing references to a C7+3 setup with Xavier/Butler/Creighton. Is there any chance of the C7 stopping there, or will the networks force it to 12?

I would then wonder what happens to the rejects. I'm the eternal pessimist (see the team I root for), and I don't like any of the alternatives, because I don't see any.

I see no way that happens. We get more money per team with more teams. Also, if you expand in the middle of a TV contract you get a small bump but multiple years added to the contract.

The difference would seem to be only 333k between 10 (30 million/10 teams=3 million per school) and 12 (40 million/12=3.33 mil per school). With that differential, it's not a lock at all to expand. Might wind up making more when you take into account NCAA units etc. with 10 vs 12.

Explain to me how having ten teams is better than 12?

well biggest one would be true round robin. 10 teams is just about perfect for a basketball conference.

(02-13-2013 04:24 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:20 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:14 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 03:13 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 03:09 PM)LouPower Wrote:  I've been seeing references to a C7+3 setup with Xavier/Butler/Creighton. Is there any chance of the C7 stopping there, or will the networks force it to 12?

I would then wonder what happens to the rejects. I'm the eternal pessimist (see the team I root for), and I don't like any of the alternatives, because I don't see any.

I see no way that happens. We get more money per team with more teams. Also, if you expand in the middle of a TV contract you get a small bump but multiple years added to the contract.

The difference would seem to be only 333k between 10 (30 million/10 teams=3 million per school) and 12 (40 million/12=3.33 mil per school). With that differential, it's not a lock at all to expand. Might wind up making more when you take into account NCAA units etc. with 10 vs 12.

Explain to me how having ten teams is better than 12?

well biggest one would be true round robin. 10 teams is just about perfect for a basketball conference.

Well if we go to ten you can garuntee that your precious VCU does NOT make the cut.

I prefer 10 if they are all elite, but there isn't anything guaranteed in the elite category out there except Gonzaga who everyone except JTIII has dismissed. So 12 gives us room when SLU/Creighton/Butler/Xavier/whoever will inevitably be up and down.

Also, let's be honest, we're moving closer toward A-10 territory than ACC territory with this move and decimating the A-10 helps us keep a clear distance between us and the riff raff.

(02-13-2013 04:39 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:24 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:20 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:14 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 03:13 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  I see no way that happens. We get more money per team with more teams. Also, if you expand in the middle of a TV contract you get a small bump but multiple years added to the contract.

The difference would seem to be only 333k between 10 (30 million/10 teams=3 million per school) and 12 (40 million/12=3.33 mil per school). With that differential, it's not a lock at all to expand. Might wind up making more when you take into account NCAA units etc. with 10 vs 12.

Explain to me how having ten teams is better than 12?

well biggest one would be true round robin. 10 teams is just about perfect for a basketball conference.

Well if we go to ten you can garuntee that your precious VCU does NOT make the cut.

I agree. I'm just saying on paper, doesn't seem like there's enough of a difference between 10 to 12 to force us to go to 12 if we don't want to. I mean if it was like 3 mil for 10 and 4 mil for 12- it's a no brainer, but for only 333k not sure if that's enough of a difference...

The decimating the A10 angle may be the biggest argument for going to 12 quite frankly....

(02-13-2013 05:15 PM)monroedoctrine Wrote:  I prefer 10 if they are all elite, but there isn't anything guaranteed in the elite category out there except Gonzaga who everyone except JTIII has dismissed. So 12 gives us room when SLU/Creighton/Butler/Xavier/whoever will inevitably be up and down.

Also, let's be honest, we're moving closer toward A-10 territory than ACC territory with this move and decimating the A-10 helps us keep a clear distance between us and the riff raff.

I disagree, until they prove that they will be a power I'm not buying it. Remember when they added Miami, vt and BC and were going to challenge the sec as tea southern FB power? I feel pretty comfortable with the additions we are looking to add.

(02-13-2013 05:19 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:39 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:24 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:20 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:14 PM)stever20 Wrote:  The difference would seem to be only 333k between 10 (30 million/10 teams=3 million per school) and 12 (40 million/12=3.33 mil per school). With that differential, it's not a lock at all to expand. Might wind up making more when you take into account NCAA units etc. with 10 vs 12.

Explain to me how having ten teams is better than 12?

well biggest one would be true round robin. 10 teams is just about perfect for a basketball conference.

Well if we go to ten you can garuntee that your precious VCU does NOT make the cut.

I agree. I'm just saying on paper, doesn't seem like there's enough of a difference between 10 to 12 to force us to go to 12 if we don't want to. I mean if it was like 3 mil for 10 and 4 mil for 12- it's a no brainer, but for only 333k not sure if that's enough of a difference...

The decimating the A10 angle may be the biggest argument for going to 12 quite frankly....

I actually agree with you! Yay! Especially on decimating the A-10.

Wish we could actually go to 10 and sit and wait for ND or Gonzaga to pop free.

(02-13-2013 04:20 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Explain to me how having ten teams is better than 12?

Assuming only $333k per school difference:

1) Double round robin helps to build rivalries that may not be there on day 1.

2) Unless 11 & 12 are true NCAA-type teams that add units, splitting the same units 10 ways is better than 12 ways.

3) There is no universal agreement on 10, 11 and 12. Going to 10 gives 11 & 12 a chance to make themselves obvious.

4) Gives the rest of realignment a chance to happen so we can see end result and who is available (Do UConn/UC call as an option, which could secure the name? Will ACC be killed off and ND be homeless?). Its not likely that there will be an impact, but you can keep your options open.

5) Stops talk of divisions (ok, this is a personal preference).

(02-13-2013 06:11 PM)aughnanure Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 05:19 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:39 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:24 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:20 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Explain to me how having ten teams is better than 12?

well biggest one would be true round robin. 10 teams is just about perfect for a basketball conference.

Well if we go to ten you can garuntee that your precious VCU does NOT make the cut.

I agree. I'm just saying on paper, doesn't seem like there's enough of a difference between 10 to 12 to force us to go to 12 if we don't want to. I mean if it was like 3 mil for 10 and 4 mil for 12- it's a no brainer, but for only 333k not sure if that's enough of a difference...

The decimating the A10 angle may be the biggest argument for going to 12 quite frankly....

I actually agree with you! Yay! Especially on decimating the A-10.

Wish we could actually go to 10 and sit and wait for ND or Gonzaga to pop free.

Well if a team like ND becomes available we can expand to 13 with no issue. The ACC went to 15 for them.

(02-13-2013 06:27 PM)MUAvalanche Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:20 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Explain to me how having ten teams is better than 12?

Assuming only $333k per school difference:

1) Double round robin helps to build rivalries that may not be there on day 1.

2) Unless 11 & 12 are true NCAA-type teams that add units, splitting the same units 10 ways is better than 12 ways.

3) There is no universal agreement on 10, 11 and 12. Going to 10 gives 11 & 12 a chance to make themselves obvious.

4) Gives the rest of realignment a chance to happen so we can see end result and who is available (Do UConn/UC call as an option, which could secure the name? Will ACC be killed off and ND be homeless?). Its not likely that there will be an impact, but you can keep your options open.

5) Stops talk of divisions (ok, this is a personal preference).

The thing is if we expand after we sign a TV deal we get a small bump per team and more years added to the deal. That's what happened to the ACC.

(02-13-2013 06:11 PM)aughnanure Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 05:19 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:39 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:24 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:20 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Explain to me how having ten teams is better than 12?

well biggest one would be true round robin. 10 teams is just about perfect for a basketball conference.

Well if we go to ten you can garuntee that your precious VCU does NOT make the cut.

I agree. I'm just saying on paper, doesn't seem like there's enough of a difference between 10 to 12 to force us to go to 12 if we don't want to. I mean if it was like 3 mil for 10 and 4 mil for 12- it's a no brainer, but for only 333k not sure if that's enough of a difference...

The decimating the A10 angle may be the biggest argument for going to 12 quite frankly....

I actually agree with you! Yay! Especially on decimating the A-10.

Wish we could actually go to 10 and sit and wait for ND or Gonzaga to pop free.

Hold on, stop the presses, we agreed on something? What is this world coming to?

(02-13-2013 06:35 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  The thing is if we expand after we sign a TV deal we get a small bump per team and more years added to the deal. That's what happened to the ACC.

Depends on how the contract is written and the television partner. ESPN? Probably true. Fox? Who knows.

(02-13-2013 06:35 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 06:27 PM)MUAvalanche Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 04:20 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Explain to me how having ten teams is better than 12?

Assuming only $333k per school difference:

1) Double round robin helps to build rivalries that may not be there on day 1.

2) Unless 11 & 12 are true NCAA-type teams that add units, splitting the same units 10 ways is better than 12 ways.

3) There is no universal agreement on 10, 11 and 12. Going to 10 gives 11 & 12 a chance to make themselves obvious.

4) Gives the rest of realignment a chance to happen so we can see end result and who is available (Do UConn/UC call as an option, which could secure the name? Will ACC be killed off and ND be homeless?). Its not likely that there will be an impact, but you can keep your options open.

5) Stops talk of divisions (ok, this is a personal preference).

The thing is if we expand after we sign a TV deal we get a small bump per team and more years added to the deal. That's what happened to the ACC.

well right now we'd be getting only a small bump for 2 more teams- it won't be any less of an increase if we add 2 teams later, and very well could be bigger.

(02-14-2013 09:47 AM)MUAvalanche Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 06:35 PM)NJRedMan Wrote:  The thing is if we expand after we sign a TV deal we get a small bump per team and more years added to the deal. That's what happened to the ACC.

Depends on how the contract is written and the television partner. ESPN? Probably true. Fox? Who knows.

Come on, don't be naive. You don't think Fox would like to lock us up for just a few bucks more?

(02-14-2013 09:54 AM)NJRedMan Wrote:  Come on, don't be naive. You don't think Fox would like to lock us up for just a few bucks more?

It's not naive and of course Fox would love that clause in the contract. But you don't have to sign a contract that is so restrictive. Remember, they came to us, so we can try to act more as partners with Fox than ESPN allows us to. You can start with 10 schools and negotiate the impact of expansion up front so your nightmare scenario of a $10 increase per school and 10 years added to the contract doesn't happen.

Besides, the schools the conference would consider for 11 & 12 just wouldn't be that valuable if all they bring is minimal $$$ and a locked in extension, would they? This isn't football, where we are in fear of being raided and are grabbing any school so we can get to a championship game. You have a 10 team offer that, if reports are correct, only provide a $333k bump by going to 12. That means for 20% more games (108 vs 90), the bump is 10-11%. The additional 18 games are less valuable than the original 90. Let's wait and see if we can make those extra games more valuable before we give them away.