(08-08-2017 07:59 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  

(08-08-2017 11:43 AM)YNot Wrote:  I'd see WVU as more valuable than Oklahoma St. They bring a new market and another SEC-ACC rivalry game (Pitt). [Or Iowa St. (new market, similar attendance, AAU status, and B1G rival).]

Not really. The population of West Virginia (state) is 1/3 that of Houston (city) and is declining.

WVU has fans all over due to diaspora. Their apparel sales are suggesting they have a huge, dedicated fan base despite the state being rather small in population.

Nebraska, Iowa, Arkansas, and Mississippi are small states too. The flagship universities in each of those states bring pretty big college football "markets." Definitely more than any university in Houston ever has....

(08-14-2017 12:34 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(08-08-2017 07:59 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  

(08-08-2017 11:43 AM)YNot Wrote:  I'd see WVU as more valuable than Oklahoma St. They bring a new market and another SEC-ACC rivalry game (Pitt). [Or Iowa St. (new market, similar attendance, AAU status, and B1G rival).]

Not really. The population of West Virginia (state) is 1/3 that of Houston (city) and is declining.

WVU has fans all over due to diaspora. Their apparel sales are suggesting they have a huge, dedicated fan base despite the state being rather small in population.

In my professional career I've worked in 3 different cities in 3 different states, none of which were even in states boardering West Virginia and i've had at least one WVU alum in my office in each city.

They definitely have a spread out fan base due to many alums leaving the state.

(08-14-2017 01:22 PM)YNot Wrote:  Nebraska, Iowa, Arkansas, and Mississippi are small states too. The flagship universities in each of those states bring pretty big college football "markets." Definitely more than any university in Houston ever has....

This is very true.

It is better to be a big fish in a small pond than it is to be a very tiny fish in a big pond.

(08-14-2017 10:08 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  Why not, right? The ACC long ago chose to sell its traditional/cultural/geographic soul in order to better compete head to head with the SEC.

That's harsh. The ACC was very wise to pick off as many quality Big East schools as it could. The only thing one could seriously criticize them for is maybe sacrificing their academic standards somewhat with Louisville, even though they were clearly a good add from an athletics standpoint.

(08-14-2017 12:34 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(08-08-2017 07:59 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  

(08-08-2017 11:43 AM)YNot Wrote:  I'd see WVU as more valuable than Oklahoma St. They bring a new market and another SEC-ACC rivalry game (Pitt). [Or Iowa St. (new market, similar attendance, AAU status, and B1G rival).]

Not really. The population of West Virginia (state) is 1/3 that of Houston (city) and is declining.

WVU has fans all over due to diaspora. Their apparel sales are suggesting they have a huge, dedicated fan base despite the state being rather small in population.

That's fair but doesn't qualify as "a new market."

(08-14-2017 03:21 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  That's harsh. The ACC was very wise to pick off as many quality Big East schools as it could. The only thing one could seriously criticize them for is maybe sacrificing their academic standards somewhat with Louisville, even though they were clearly a good add from an athletics standpoint.

The ACC can do whatever the heck it wants.

Was simply saying that: the original membership made a lot of sense, Georgia Tech and Florida St fit well with that membership and made sense, and Miami and Virginia Tech fit well with that membership and made sense.


No conf would turn down Notre Dame. That is what it is. Louisville was a bit of a stretch, both geographically and academically ... but has turned out to be great for the conf athletically.


But Boston College? Syracuse and Pitt? And the thread is talking about TCU, Baylor, and Tech (not Univ of Texas). Those schools should not be in the ACC, in my inconsequential opinion.

Pitt, Notre Dame, BC, Syracuse, and UConn should be in the new Big East, with their football programs independent and scheduling each other and other P5 teams.

(08-15-2017 09:23 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-14-2017 03:21 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  That's harsh. The ACC was very wise to pick off as many quality Big East schools as it could. The only thing one could seriously criticize them for is maybe sacrificing their academic standards somewhat with Louisville, even though they were clearly a good add from an athletics standpoint.

The ACC can do whatever the heck it wants.

Was simply saying that: the original membership made a lot of sense, Georgia Tech and Florida St fit well with that membership and made sense, and Miami and Virginia Tech fit well with that membership and made sense.


No conf would turn down Notre Dame. That is what it is. Louisville was a bit of a stretch, both geographically and academically ... but has turned out to be great for the conf athletically.


But Boston College? Syracuse and Pitt? And the thread is talking about TCU, Baylor, and Tech (not Univ of Texas). Those schools should not be in the ACC, in my inconsequential opinion.

Pitt, Notre Dame, BC, Syracuse, and UConn should be in the new Big East, with their football programs independent and scheduling each other and other P5 teams.

Sorry, but that is not better (for ND, that is, I don't really care about anything else in the college football world) than ND being in the ACC for everything but hockey and football (for several reasons).

Heck, I don't think that any school west of Iowa or east of Ohio State should be in the traditionally Midwest based Big Ten, but I doubt Jim Delaney would give a damn about my opinion, either.

(08-14-2017 10:33 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  

(08-14-2017 12:34 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  

(08-08-2017 07:59 PM)Wolfman Wrote:  

(08-08-2017 11:43 AM)YNot Wrote:  I'd see WVU as more valuable than Oklahoma St. They bring a new market and another SEC-ACC rivalry game (Pitt). [Or Iowa St. (new market, similar attendance, AAU status, and B1G rival).]

Not really. The population of West Virginia (state) is 1/3 that of Houston (city) and is declining.

WVU has fans all over due to diaspora. Their apparel sales are suggesting they have a huge, dedicated fan base despite the state being rather small in population.

That's fair but doesn't qualify as "a new market."

Markets, as they're reference on sports forums, are a stupid concept perpetuated by those who don't understand basic economics and/or math.

As with everything, you just have to be able to analyze it and see it for what it is. Rutgers doesn't carry NYC by any stretch yet being in its TV market is what got it in the B1G.

(08-16-2017 10:13 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  As with everything, you just have to be able to analyze it and see it for what it is. Rutgers doesn't carry NYC by any stretch yet being in its TV market is what got it in the B1G.

Look at where PSU alumni live:
http://www.alumni.psu.edu/s/1218/images/...&pgid=3346

Look at where PSU students and prospective students live:
https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/...diversity/

Look at where the football team recruits:
http://www.gopsusports.com/sports/m-foot...l-mtt.html

Then look at this map and guess where their donors live:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Un...ita_income

Then look at a list of PSU's most played football opponents prior to joining the B1G (back when they had 100% control over their schedule):
-I can't find a link, but you might have more luck

Then read this:
http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...tany-lions

Then look at PSU's ratings and fan support:
http://www.ncaa.org/championships/statis...attendance
-I'll let someone else find PSU ratings data. It's more scattered, but I don't think it's controversial to say that PSU gets good ratings.

RU and UMD are in the B1G because PSU wants them in the B1G, not because of their TV market. If the TV market was a driving concern, the B1G could have easily subbed UMD and added a school like Houston for a lot cheaper.

And the B1G bent to PSU because Penn State is extremely valuable, and they had/have viable alternatives.

(08-15-2017 02:34 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Sorry, but that is not better (for ND, that is, I don't really care about anything else in the college football world) than ND being in the ACC for everything but hockey and football (for several reasons).

Because ... you get to play a bunch of southern teams in basketball that you have no historical basis for playing? Don't think so.

ND was in the Big East from 1995 - 2013. It only went to the ACC because that's where several former Big East teams went, and because it wanted to tee up joining the ACC in all-sports if the CFP ever comes down to conf champs only, plus needed guaranteed access to major bowl.

(08-17-2017 07:40 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  If the TV market was a driving concern, the B1G could have easily subbed UMD and added a school like Houston for a lot cheaper.

Your argument fails because adding Rutgers and Maryland allowed the BTN to put on the basic tier (the level that includes ESPN/2) on every cable network in New Jersey and Maryland, as they are the major state flagship university in each state. The same wouldn't be true with Houston.

Now you're free to say that was just a nice side benefit, and that the main driver was appeasing PSU. I won't argue against that, but you can't dismiss the cable TV part of it. That would be false.

(08-17-2017 09:49 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-15-2017 02:34 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Sorry, but that is not better (for ND, that is, I don't really care about anything else in the college football world) than ND being in the ACC for everything but hockey and football (for several reasons).

Because ... you get to play a bunch of southern teams in basketball that you have no historical basis for playing? Don't think so.

ND was in the Big East from 1995 - 2013. It only went to the ACC because that's where several former Big East teams went, and because it wanted to tee up joining the ACC in all-sports if the CFP ever comes down to conf champs only, plus needed guaranteed access to major bowl.

(08-17-2017 07:40 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  If the TV market was a driving concern, the B1G could have easily subbed UMD and added a school like Houston for a lot cheaper.

Your argument fails because adding Rutgers and Maryland allowed the BTN to put on the basic tier (the level that includes ESPN/2) on every cable network in New Jersey and Maryland, as they are the major state flagship university in each state. The same wouldn't be true with Houston.

Now you're free to say that was just a nice side benefit, and that the main driver was appeasing PSU. I won't argue against that, but you can't dismiss the cable TV part of it. That would be false.

ND joined the ACC because it wanted to keep its football indy but gain from everything else the ACC had to offer.

Where are the minor bowls bids coming from? Where are the late season opponents coming from?

Big East basketball, baseball, soccer, lacrosse, etc..are also inferior to the ACC.

ND likes the association with schools like Duke, Virginia, Georgia Tech and Wake Forest as well.

It is not even a close call.

(08-17-2017 09:59 AM)TerryD Wrote:  ND joined the ACC because it wanted to keep its football indy but gain from everything else the ACC had to offer.

Where are the minor bowls bids coming from? Where are the late season opponents coming from?

This is 99.9999% of the reason

(08-17-2017 09:59 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Big East basketball, baseball, soccer, lacrosse, etc..are also inferior to the ACC.

ND likes the association with schools like Duke, Virginia, Georgia Tech and Wake Forest as well.

And this is the excuse that leadership tried to sell fans on why they'd no longer be playing Gtown, Providence, St John's, Seton Hall, and Villanova in basketball.

Yep ... you'll like playing Duke, Virginia, GTech, season bball ticket holders ...... because that's who we tell you to like ... and also because it benefits football significantly in the near team, and possibly life-or-death in the long term.

(08-17-2017 09:49 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-15-2017 02:34 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Sorry, but that is not better (for ND, that is, I don't really care about anything else in the college football world) than ND being in the ACC for everything but hockey and football (for several reasons).

Because ... you get to play a bunch of southern teams in basketball that you have no historical basis for playing? Don't think so.

ND was in the Big East from 1995 - 2013. It only went to the ACC because that's where several former Big East teams went, and because it wanted to tee up joining the ACC in all-sports if the CFP ever comes down to conf champs only, plus needed guaranteed access to major bowl.

(08-17-2017 07:40 AM)nzmorange Wrote:  If the TV market was a driving concern, the B1G could have easily subbed UMD and added a school like Houston for a lot cheaper.

Your argument fails because adding Rutgers and Maryland allowed the BTN to put on the basic tier (the level that includes ESPN/2) on every cable network in New Jersey and Maryland, as they are the major state flagship university in each state. The same wouldn't be true with Houston.

Now you're free to say that was just a nice side benefit, and that the main driver was appeasing PSU. I won't argue against that, but you can't dismiss the cable TV part of it. That would be false.

Supply + demand & weighted averages make your theory irrelevant. Their media value is a product of supply and demand. W/o fan interest, there is no demand, and fan interest doesn't correlate to the size of random cities that are nearby. And the singular number that you're going to cite to try to prove me wrong is a weighted average. You're ignoring the alternative of membership staying the same and masking a generally hotter market + inflation as value attributable to RU and UMD.

The move was to protect PSU money, student, and athletic pipelines. UMD athletics + other B1G pipelines (being able to play near fans/donors and high quality NJ students and arhletes) also sweetened the deal. I'm sure RU's vague sense of football history (arguably invinfing the game) didn't move needles too much, but it probably didn't hurt, given how much the B1G sells history.

(08-17-2017 09:59 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Where are the minor bowls bids coming from?

Almighty Notre Dame, the end all be all of college football, shouldn't need anybody to secure them bowl bids.

(08-17-2017 10:15 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-17-2017 09:59 AM)TerryD Wrote:  ND joined the ACC because it wanted to keep its football indy but gain from everything else the ACC had to offer.

Where are the minor bowls bids coming from? Where are the late season opponents coming from?

This is 99.9999% of the reason

(08-17-2017 09:59 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Big East basketball, baseball, soccer, lacrosse, etc..are also inferior to the ACC.

ND likes the association with schools like Duke, Virginia, Georgia Tech and Wake Forest as well.

And this is the excuse that leadership tried to sell fans on why they'd no longer be playing Gtown, Providence, St John's, Seton Hall, and Villanova in basketball.

Yep ... you'll like playing Duke, Virginia, GTech, season bball ticket holders ...... because that's who we tell you to like ... and also because it benefits football significantly in the near team, and possibly life-or-death in the long term.

See, here you go again pontificating about subjects you apparently know very little about.

Your bolded statements are nonsensical. "Excuse"??? "that's who we tell you to like". What the hell, man, what the hell.

For ND, keeping its football program independent was and is the prime motivation in conference realignment. Prime. Paramount. Not something like .000001%.

After that, factor in Southeastern recruiting access to counter "ND is too far away, your parents won't be able to go to your games", late November games, bowl bids and then basketball, baseball, soccer, lacrosse,etc...

The Big East could not help ND at all in football recruiting, November football games and bowl bids. Those facts alone eliminated the Big East unless ND could not reach a deal with the ACC or Big 12 on partial membership.

There was zero chance that ND was going to join any conference for all sports.

ND played off interest from both the ACC and Big 12 to cut a better deal with the ACC (their destination of choice because of location, large number of private schools, great other sports, etc..).

The Big East was not really an option unless Jack Swarbrick whiffed on partial membership in a P5 conference.

Nobody at ND lost much sleep over losing certain basketball opponents it played for 17-18 years in the Big East. Fans of other schools had more attachment to the Big East than ND fans did, by a long shot.

ND fans, by and large, didn't care if the Big East survived or collapsed. There was no big ND attachment to the Big East. Find any Big East fans who would disagree with that statement.

ND folks don't much subscribe to the notion of "conference pride", no matter in what conference its sports are housed.

Hell, until about three years ago, ND basketball had little to modest fan interest and support. Keeping Big East basketball opponents did not factor at all in ND's decisions regarding CR.

Hell, it took years and years and an alumni donation specifically tied to the project before Mike Brey just got an indoor practice facility. Basketball is a secondary consideration at ND.

So, the premise of your argument is fatally flawed once again.

(08-17-2017 01:11 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-17-2017 09:59 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Where are the minor bowls bids coming from?

Almighty Notre Dame, the end all be all of college football, shouldn't need anybody to secure them bowl bids.

Nobody ever said that. Try again.

(08-04-2017 04:53 PM)JRsec Wrote:  I think Baylor is toxic. But, T.C.U. as an entry into the DFW market should be considered, but only if Texas is headed to the ACC as a partial. Those two schools put the ACC on the map in the state of Texas even though Texas remains a football independent.

Outside of that contingency the only Big 12 school that might find itself a home in the ACC is West Virginia. The Eers would give them a solid sports program like Louisville, with what proved to be a competitive hoops and baseball program last year to go along with football. They are a good geographic fit for the ACC would love to reignite rivalries with Pitt and Va Tech, and they add content value.

But if Texas doesn't head to the ACC as a partial then I don't see T.C.U. being anything but a geographical outlier.


EDIT: BTW, logistically and financially Texas to the ACC as a partial is much more complicated to pull off than many might think.
1. The partial would be for all other Longhorn sports outside of football. That's a lot of travel money for Title IX and non revenue sports.
2. Texas made a touch over 50 million in TV revenue last year counting the LHN. I'm sure the ACCN will pay nicely someday but not initially. I just don't see how the LHN can ever be rolled into the ACCN in any kind of short term period of time. And if Texas keeps the LHN and gets a partial payment for the 5 ACC games they schedule, will ESPN want to make up 24 million plus that Texas would need to make on the rest of it's T1 & T2 football games to keep making a little over 50 million? It would be a tough arrangement for a network already losing money on the LHN.
3. Would not the better solution be for Texas to join the ACC fully in Football but not for minor sports. That way they could keep the LHN's 15 million and if the ACC with Texas full in merited 35 million base pay per school then it might be more reasonably workable. They would be the inverse of Notre Dame so that W.V.U. could join fully with them and football and all other sports would now have 16 full time members. Just a thought.

I don't think that the ACC should add TCU, and I think that there's even less of a reason to add them if Texas is a partial.

(08-17-2017 10:15 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-17-2017 09:59 AM)TerryD Wrote:  ND joined the ACC because it wanted to keep its football indy but gain from everything else the ACC had to offer.

Where are the minor bowls bids coming from? Where are the late season opponents coming from?

This is 99.9999% of the reason

(08-17-2017 09:59 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Big East basketball, baseball, soccer, lacrosse, etc..are also inferior to the ACC.

ND likes the association with schools like Duke, Virginia, Georgia Tech and Wake Forest as well.

And this is the excuse that leadership tried to sell fans on why they'd no longer be playing Gtown, Providence, St John's, Seton Hall, and Villanova in basketball.


Yep ... you'll like playing Duke, Virginia, GTech, season bball ticket holders ...... because that's who we tell you to like ... and also because it benefits football significantly in the near team, and possibly life-or-death in the long term.

Just got back from a long weekend vacation and catching up on all the threads.

I think it might add to the perspective of this particular offshoot of the thread to know who ND plays in terms of basketball. The following figures are from the 2014-15 ND Media Guide so it only includes one year in the ACC at this time (I am only using teams currently P5 or in Big East):

Marquette - 118
DePaul - 104
Butler - 102
Michigan State - 94
Northwestern - 86


Notice the top three while currently in the Big East are not the ones mentioned in the highlighted part of the post I am responding about. Also aren't these current Big East teams the same opponents the Irish technically "left behind" when they first joined the Big East back in the mid-90s?

On to the next grouping:

Indiana - 70
Kentucky - 61
Pitt - 59
UCLA - 48
Syracuse - 45
Purdue - 41
St. John's - 40
WVU - 39
Nova - 35
Louisville - 32
Georgetown - 29
UConn - 28
Creighton - 27
Seton Hall - 27
Providence - 26
Boston College - 23
Duke - 22
Michigan - 22
Minnesota - 22
North Carolina - 22

Seems to me that Pitt, SU, BC, Duke, and UNC are basically on equal footing in terms of times played and no doubt have more appeal to Irish bb fans than St. John's, Georgetown, Nova, Seton Hall, and Providence. But I will let actual Irish bb fans tell me if that is correct or not.

For years Irish fans like TerryD tried to convince many Big East fans like myself that if the Big East football league fell apart (or later if the 8-8 BE split happened) the Irish would just join the Catholic League before giving up independence. It turned out they were correct (at least in terms of football independence), but in a bizarre and rather haphazard winding path sort of way.

Cheers,
Neil