(10-30-2015 10:20 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(10-29-2015 11:05 PM)rednblackattack Wrote:  

(10-29-2015 11:03 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  

(10-29-2015 09:25 PM)bluesox Wrote:  Atlantic Central Conference

full merger of the big 12 and ACC + uconn and cincy for 27 teams and 3 pods of 9 ++ convert the LHN into an ACCN.

Why not add Memphis for a fourth pod of seven to make it an even 28 teams?

Never on Memphis

why not Memphis??? The ACC taking Louisville was universally accepted as a sign the ACC is less strident about academics. Louisville sticks out like a sore thumb academically in the ACC. Might as well have 2 sore thumbs. Cheers!

Why not Memphis? Simple: They don't have a Jurich. Somebody who is bringing in money but the dump truck load to make programs punch way above and beyond their weight. Also, Louisville is making a 9-figure investment in improving academics. And yes, I am still bitter about their academic standing while being an ACC member. But it should be mentioned FSU was no academic superstar when they entered the ACC. But they have steadily improved with conference guidance. Nobody will mistake them for Ivy League. But they're a long way from their original history.

(10-30-2015 07:24 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-30-2015 10:11 AM)pirates4lyfe Wrote:  If you are defining "bankrupt" as needing to use student fees then you are gonna have a really short list of schools that aren't bankrupt.

A small student fee is one thing. But dinging students A GRAND a semester? And that's over, above, and on top of a 7 figure transfer from the academic side. That, my friend, is functionally bankrupt. Which is the state GT is in. It requires a 7-figure transfer out of academics. There are student fees but they are low three figures.

And I would agree -- MOST of FBS is functionally bankrupt. But at the clip the SEC and B1G are taking in TV dollars, they and almost only they will be able to avoid these problems.

The LouisianA and Mississippi schools took a hard hit in 2005 after Hurricane Kathrina. New Orleans was the hardest hit.

(10-29-2015 09:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  But the SEC Network launch last year was when ESPN renewed and sold the SEC Network bundled with their own channels. So I gotta ask ... just how long is that deal? Which expires first ... the ACC GOR in 2022(?) or the ESPN bundle? My guess is the former.

ACC GOR expires 2026-27.

Cite

GTS - would GT leave for the Big 10 if offered?

(10-29-2015 07:32 PM)BE4evah Wrote:  I don't believe this newspaper's spin on things. Yellow journalism masquerading as news.

I know that the Duke AD said something much different. Who will you believe? Duke is one of the foremost academic institutions in the world, peopled by the principled elite.

From 2013:
"Duke athletic director Kevin White is unabashedly bullish on the oft-discussed potential of a cable television channel dedicated to ACC sports..."

"While Swofford has offered a vague “several years” timetable for the conference and media partner ESPN to explore and perhaps create an ACC channel, White was more specific.

“Should we realize the objective in 2016, should we realize the channel objective, we’re going to be in an incredibly strong position..."

http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-bl...-post.html

That article was written by David Teal, one of the sport's world foremost scribes. He is thoughtful, objective and passionate about bringing the truth to his readers at the Daily Press.

One article was 2 years ago. The other was this week.

(10-30-2015 02:53 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  

(10-30-2015 12:31 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-30-2015 09:55 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Well, Tulane had issues with developing their OCS. We had downsize the stadium to a meager 30k max capacity (23k chair-backs) due to city restrictions and NIMBY-types screaming about new development. Mind you, Tulane can pull around a city like New Orleans - Atlanta is too big and diverse for GT to do the same.

(OT: Our school also has some small budgeting issues that the new president is dealing with as well. Cowen didn't allocate money properly and was bad at his job.)

As for GT, I was not aware that it is THAT expensive to do anything in Atlanta. Sounds like a nightmare of a place to work if that's the case. Perhaps I am underestimating the maintenance costs of an expanded P5 athletics department. This is actually an aftershock of the arms race that started at a few places and is now forcing ADs that are NOT in positions to expand to do just that. It's a dangerous game.

As for the AAC examples, let's see how the money pans out for all of those. They could turn into white elephant projects for a few of those schools.

Atlanta is a nightmare to work with. A few years back the paper reported a business license that took 5 weeks in neighboring Cobb County (where the Braves are moving) took 42 weeks in the city of Atlanta.

I remember reading a saying that goes like this: "Modern day Atlanta is what 250,000 Confederates died to try to prevent."

I doubt the business license case is still true.

(10-30-2015 11:12 AM)BIgCatonProwl Wrote:  ESPN is going to screw the ACC eventually soon as it makes business sense to do so. 4 conferences is a lot more tidy than 5 to deal with and pay. Consolidate reduce the mouths at the table to feed. ACC fed on the old Big East, destroyed it. Reincarnated at as the "American". Karma is a beach you wash up on.

There is the possibility that they are broke

(10-31-2015 02:32 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(10-29-2015 09:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  But the SEC Network launch last year was when ESPN renewed and sold the SEC Network bundled with their own channels. So I gotta ask ... just how long is that deal? Which expires first ... the ACC GOR in 2022(?) or the ESPN bundle? My guess is the former.

ACC GOR expires 2026-27.

Cite

GTS - would GT leave for the Big 10 if offered?

Alone? No. It would NOT go over well trading out our football schedule for Minnesota, Indiana, and scores of other people far away our fans have no interest in playing. It would have to be ACC doomsday to go alone. It would take the SEC or somebody else taking Clemson and FSU for that to happen.

Where ever we go, assuming not forced by ACC collapse, we strongly want Clemson to come with us. Also UNC, Duke, and probably FSU. And at that point you have to bring along UVA, VT, and NCST too minimum due to politics and preferences among that group. In other words, it is far FAR FARRRRRRRRRRRRR easier to take the entire original ACC 9 (-UMD +VT) than it is to start extracting parts of that ACC 9, other than maybe FSU/CU. And while FSU and Clemson fans would loudly cheer a big fat B1G payday, you'd hear just as much vocal complaining about opponents. If you think FSU fans get pissy about having a home game against BC or Cuse, just wait until you have road games in Minnesota and Iowa. That ... won't ... fly.

(10-31-2015 06:58 AM)panama Wrote:  

(10-29-2015 07:32 PM)BE4evah Wrote:  I don't believe this newspaper's spin on things. Yellow journalism masquerading as news.

I know that the Duke AD said something much different. Who will you believe? Duke is one of the foremost academic institutions in the world, peopled by the principled elite.

From 2013:
"Duke athletic director Kevin White is unabashedly bullish on the oft-discussed potential of a cable television channel dedicated to ACC sports..."

"While Swofford has offered a vague “several years” timetable for the conference and media partner ESPN to explore and perhaps create an ACC channel, White was more specific.

“Should we realize the objective in 2016, should we realize the channel objective, we’re going to be in an incredibly strong position..."

http://www.dailypress.com/sports/teel-bl...-post.html

That article was written by David Teal, one of the sport's world foremost scribes. He is thoughtful, objective and passionate about bringing the truth to his readers at the Daily Press.

One article was 2 years ago. The other was this week.

Was that comment about Teal written by his mom????

(10-31-2015 07:00 AM)panama Wrote:  

(10-30-2015 02:53 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  

(10-30-2015 12:31 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-30-2015 09:55 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Well, Tulane had issues with developing their OCS. We had downsize the stadium to a meager 30k max capacity (23k chair-backs) due to city restrictions and NIMBY-types screaming about new development. Mind you, Tulane can pull around a city like New Orleans - Atlanta is too big and diverse for GT to do the same.

(OT: Our school also has some small budgeting issues that the new president is dealing with as well. Cowen didn't allocate money properly and was bad at his job.)

As for GT, I was not aware that it is THAT expensive to do anything in Atlanta. Sounds like a nightmare of a place to work if that's the case. Perhaps I am underestimating the maintenance costs of an expanded P5 athletics department. This is actually an aftershock of the arms race that started at a few places and is now forcing ADs that are NOT in positions to expand to do just that. It's a dangerous game.

As for the AAC examples, let's see how the money pans out for all of those. They could turn into white elephant projects for a few of those schools.

Atlanta is a nightmare to work with. A few years back the paper reported a business license that took 5 weeks in neighboring Cobb County (where the Braves are moving) took 42 weeks in the city of Atlanta.

I remember reading a saying that goes like this: "Modern day Atlanta is what 250,000 Confederates died to try to prevent."

I doubt the business license case is still true.

The current mayor was trying to improve it, but its still pretty slow. Sometimes you have to go through the Neighborhood Protection Units. I know a school took a year to get approved and about $15,000 in consultants when there had been a school there before with the only difference the previous one was "owned" by the church where it was located. And all but ONE person in the neighborhood wanted the school.

(10-31-2015 09:14 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-31-2015 07:00 AM)panama Wrote:  

(10-30-2015 02:53 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  

(10-30-2015 12:31 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-30-2015 09:55 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Well, Tulane had issues with developing their OCS. We had downsize the stadium to a meager 30k max capacity (23k chair-backs) due to city restrictions and NIMBY-types screaming about new development. Mind you, Tulane can pull around a city like New Orleans - Atlanta is too big and diverse for GT to do the same.

(OT: Our school also has some small budgeting issues that the new president is dealing with as well. Cowen didn't allocate money properly and was bad at his job.)

As for GT, I was not aware that it is THAT expensive to do anything in Atlanta. Sounds like a nightmare of a place to work if that's the case. Perhaps I am underestimating the maintenance costs of an expanded P5 athletics department. This is actually an aftershock of the arms race that started at a few places and is now forcing ADs that are NOT in positions to expand to do just that. It's a dangerous game.

As for the AAC examples, let's see how the money pans out for all of those. They could turn into white elephant projects for a few of those schools.

Atlanta is a nightmare to work with. A few years back the paper reported a business license that took 5 weeks in neighboring Cobb County (where the Braves are moving) took 42 weeks in the city of Atlanta.

I remember reading a saying that goes like this: "Modern day Atlanta is what 250,000 Confederates died to try to prevent."

I doubt the business license case is still true.

The current mayor was trying to improve it, but its still pretty slow. Sometimes you have to go through the Neighborhood Protection Units. I know a school took a year to get approved and about $15,000 in consultants when there had been a school there before with the only difference the previous one was "owned" by the church where it was located. And all but ONE person in the neighborhood wanted the school.

Guy I went to high school with lives in Atlanta and owns a commercial construction business. He's constantly working in Augusta or Chattanooga or even Columbia or Jacksonville because it's easier to drive a few hours and put the crews up in an extended stay than it is to deal with getting approval through Atlanta city government.

(10-30-2015 07:27 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  But they have steadily improved with conference guidance.

If you need Swofford or anyone at the ACC to give you advice about academics, you may just be a fly by night school like Barbizon.

(10-30-2015 07:24 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(10-30-2015 10:11 AM)pirates4lyfe Wrote:  If you are defining "bankrupt" as needing to use student fees then you are gonna have a really short list of schools that aren't bankrupt.

A small student fee is one thing. But dinging students A GRAND a semester? And that's over, above, and on top of a 7 figure transfer from the academic side. That, my friend, is functionally bankrupt. Which is the state GT is in. It requires a 7-figure transfer out of academics. There are student fees but they are low three figures.

And I would agree -- MOST of FBS is functionally bankrupt. But at the clip the SEC and B1G are taking in TV dollars, they and almost only they will be able to avoid these problems.

Errnt.

First of all, UC doesn't charge a 'student fee'. So no subsidy is on top of any help from the university. Don't try and spin this as worse than is the case. But you could say that's just a definition of budgeting thanks to governmental accounting. And that would be fair.

Second, that article got drilled full of holes by some reporters with actual degrees in journalism. UC doesn't 'hide' any subsidy to the athletic department, as they reported these numbers both to the Equity in Athletics study as well as the USA Today collection of revenue and expenses on athletics. These students saying they 'uncovered' anything would imply that it was in any way hidden, or had ever been hidden.

And third, the Enquirer noted that the math used by that study was misleading at best, and genuinely flawed at worst. The article quoted 'undergraduate enrollement' as the basis for its study, which was 31,983 in 2012. The subsidy quoted was $22M. That's $688 per year, and $344 per semester. If you are going to quote a bad article, try at least getting the math correct yourself.

In reality, that subsidy comes out of the school, which includes every student there. UC's enrollment is 43,691, which works out to $500 per YEAR. Not $1,000 per semester. For reference, since you brought it up, Georgia Tech had a subsidy of $7.1M for the 2012-2013 school year, where their undergraduate enrollment was 14,558 (UG as used in the article you quoted). Comes out to $488 per year. Not exactly a glaring difference there.

UC is by no means perfect, and the athletic department is spending money right now to position Cincinnati as a premier school, but it also has the financial capability to do so. Pretty far from bankrupt. Take a look around college athletics, GTS. There was a lot of hoopla about that so called 'study', and it was uncovered to be an attack piece by a couple of students with an agenda who misled readers. Hardly 'investigative journalism'.

Try not quoting terrible information next time if you are going to try and make a point. Sound good?

P.S. You can source all this here: http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/
here: http://factbook.gatech.edu/admissions-an...able-4-16/
and here: http://www.uc.edu/news/NR.aspx?id=22070

(10-31-2015 02:32 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(10-29-2015 09:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  But the SEC Network launch last year was when ESPN renewed and sold the SEC Network bundled with their own channels. So I gotta ask ... just how long is that deal? Which expires first ... the ACC GOR in 2022(?) or the ESPN bundle? My guess is the former.

ACC GOR expires 2026-27.

Cite

GTS - would GT leave for the Big 10 if offered?

(10-31-2015 02:32 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(10-29-2015 09:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  But the SEC Network launch last year was when ESPN renewed and sold the SEC Network bundled with their own channels. So I gotta ask ... just how long is that deal? Which expires first ... the ACC GOR in 2022(?) or the ESPN bundle? My guess is the former.

ACC GOR expires 2026-27.

Cite

GTS - would GT leave for the Big 10 if offered?

(11-03-2015 06:48 AM)FloridaState1990 Wrote:  GTS - would GT leave for the Big 10 if offered?

Yes. GOR is ripe for a legal challenge and ESPN would't risk losing a fight with the Big 10 in court, since, as a practical matter, ESPN runs the ACC these days.

(11-04-2015 07:07 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(11-03-2015 06:48 AM)FloridaState1990 Wrote:  GTS - would GT leave for the Big 10 if offered?

Yes. GOR is ripe for a legal challenge and ESPN would't risk losing a fight with the Big 10 in court, since, as a practical matter, ESPN runs the ACC these days.

If that's the case, the ACC schools should vote to dissolve the GOR. The threat of UVA, UNC, and GT being back in play to give the Big Ten another opportunity at expansion prior to the start of the negotiation of its media rights should cause ESPN to think twice about treating the ACC like a chump.

I don't think the GoR is the major issue. They signed a GoR but I think they signed it for future appropriations as well as the new contract they got with ESPN. Without full consideration given, that GoR probably isn't all that solid.

The major issue is that ridiculous Exit Fee that was agreed upon that showed us just how worried certain parties were.

Is GT alone worth helping them pay off that Exit Fee? No.

(11-04-2015 10:20 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(11-04-2015 07:07 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(11-03-2015 06:48 AM)FloridaState1990 Wrote:  GTS - would GT leave for the Big 10 if offered?

Yes. GOR is ripe for a legal challenge and ESPN would't risk losing a fight with the Big 10 in court, since, as a practical matter, ESPN runs the ACC these days.

If that's the case, the ACC schools should vote to dissolve the GOR. The threat of UVA, UNC, and GT being back in play to give the Big Ten another opportunity at expansion prior to the start of the negotiation of its media rights should cause ESPN to think twice about treating the ACC like a chump.

That seems like a last resort kind of move. The ACC has no reason to get desperate yet. They are definitely behind monetarily, but there are plenty of strategies they can use before they play chicken with ESPN.

I think the ACC has a lot more going for it than most give them credit for.

(11-04-2015 10:20 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(11-04-2015 07:07 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(11-03-2015 06:48 AM)FloridaState1990 Wrote:  GTS - would GT leave for the Big 10 if offered?

Yes. GOR is ripe for a legal challenge and ESPN would't risk losing a fight with the Big 10 in court, since, as a practical matter, ESPN runs the ACC these days.

If that's the case, the ACC schools should vote to dissolve the GOR. The threat of UVA, UNC, and GT being back in play to give the Big Ten another opportunity at expansion prior to the start of the negotiation of its media rights should cause ESPN to think twice about treating the ACC like a chump.

They already do.

(11-04-2015 11:12 AM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(11-04-2015 10:20 AM)NJ2MDTerp Wrote:  

(11-04-2015 07:07 AM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  

(11-03-2015 06:48 AM)FloridaState1990 Wrote:  GTS - would GT leave for the Big 10 if offered?

Yes. GOR is ripe for a legal challenge and ESPN would't risk losing a fight with the Big 10 in court, since, as a practical matter, ESPN runs the ACC these days.

If that's the case, the ACC schools should vote to dissolve the GOR. The threat of UVA, UNC, and GT being back in play to give the Big Ten another opportunity at expansion prior to the start of the negotiation of its media rights should cause ESPN to think twice about treating the ACC like a chump.

That seems like a last resort kind of move. The ACC has no reason to get desperate yet. They are definitely behind monetarily, but there are plenty of strategies they can use before they play chicken with ESPN.

I think the ACC has a lot more going for it than most give them credit for.

The ACC is built on hoping the same 2 teams make it to the playoff every year....and must go undefeated to do that. Statistically, not good....even great programs have fairly long stretches of falling off. And they are asking those 2 teams to compete with major football programs with huge coming revenue gaps.

As the Big East shows....you better be solid in football to make it as a Power conference. Still not sure ACC got that message....