at least 20% of the time. Has presented a powerful promotional plan to MSG.

As the title says, "Good luck with that".

https://www.app.com/story/sports/college...602483002/

Cheers,
Neil

(10-12-2018 01:20 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  at least 20% of the time. Has presented a powerful promotional plan to MSG.

As the title says, "Good luck with that".

https://www.app.com/story/sports/college...602483002/

Cheers,
Neil

I more or less already posted the following response on the AAC board earlier today, but that 20% number isn't MSG exclusively, it's all "out" locations that aren't Chicago or Indiana (so including DC, Philly, potentially KC/OKC/Dallas depending on what happens with the Big 12....). I think they're gonna have a hard time securing a once-a-decade agreement with MSG unless the Big East decides it wants to send the tournament out to Chicago once every five years to throw the Midwestern contingent a bone (and, I'm sure, get a big 'ol paycheck from the B1G).

(10-12-2018 01:27 PM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-12-2018 01:20 PM)OrangeDude Wrote:  at least 20% of the time. Has presented a powerful promotional plan to MSG.

As the title says, "Good luck with that".

https://www.app.com/story/sports/college...602483002/

Cheers,
Neil

I more or less already posted the following response on the AAC board earlier today, but that 20% number isn't MSG exclusively, it's all "out" locations that aren't Chicago or Indiana (so including DC, Philly, potentially KC/OKC/Dallas depending on what happens with the Big 12....). I think they're gonna have a hard time securing a once-a-decade agreement with MSG unless the Big East decides it wants to send the tournament out to Chicago once every five years to throw the Midwestern contingent a bone (and, I'm sure, get a big 'ol paycheck from the B1G).

Without knowing what they have already scheduled, I'd be very surprised the Big Ten goes to DC again in subsequent schedules. It was a huge flop and they didn't have the excuse of it being a week before traditional championship week like they had with MSG. Only session that got more than 14K in attendance was the quarterfinal round that featured Maryland in the evening session with 15,624.

The ACC the year previously had both 2nd round sessions and the morning session of the quarterfinal round with 18,561 average and the remaining three sessions above capacity attendance at 20,719 average.

Cheers,
Neil

Don't really see much possibility here. To the Big Ten, this is a chance to highlight the conference out east every half decade in their 2nd biggest sport. To the Big East, it is their crown jewel event and location has a lot to do it with it (even with so much of conference on the Midwest). Asking them to voluntarily switch out would be like asking the Big Ten to take the Orange Bowl for a year and letting the ACC play in the Rose (not as a semi-final). Sure the Orange might be closer but so what.

(10-12-2018 02:09 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Don't really see much possibility here. To the Big Ten, this is a chance to highlight the conference out east every half decade in their 2nd biggest sport. To the Big East, it is their crown jewel event and location has a lot to do it with it (even with so much of conference on the Midwest). Asking them to voluntarily switch out would be like asking the Big Ten to take the Orange Bowl for a year and letting the ACC play in the Rose (not as a semi-final). Sure the Orange might be closer but so what.

Yea. It just seems infinitely easier to pay the A10 off with some cash and non-conference games to give up the Barclays (which is a tremendous basketball arena, btw) for a year or two whenever the B1G wants it. You could even play in the Prudential Center for a year if you really wanted to keep the tournament in a state with a B1G school (acknowledging that it's the least attractive option of the three).

^ That could work. Or they could go to Meadowlands Arena.

(10-12-2018 02:15 PM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-12-2018 02:09 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Don't really see much possibility here. To the Big Ten, this is a chance to highlight the conference out east every half decade in their 2nd biggest sport. To the Big East, it is their crown jewel event and location has a lot to do it with it (even with so much of conference on the Midwest). Asking them to voluntarily switch out would be like asking the Big Ten to take the Orange Bowl for a year and letting the ACC play in the Rose (not as a semi-final). Sure the Orange might be closer but so what.

Yea. It just seems infinitely easier to pay the A10 off with some cash and non-conference games to give up the Barclays (which is a tremendous basketball arena, btw) for a year or two whenever the B1G wants it. You could even play in the Prudential Center for a year if you really wanted to keep the tournament in a state with a B1G school (acknowledging that it's the least attractive option of the three).

Brooklyn’s arena is nice (albeit very small) but it’s not located in the middle of manhattan.

(10-12-2018 05:02 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(10-12-2018 02:15 PM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-12-2018 02:09 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Don't really see much possibility here. To the Big Ten, this is a chance to highlight the conference out east every half decade in their 2nd biggest sport. To the Big East, it is their crown jewel event and location has a lot to do it with it (even with so much of conference on the Midwest). Asking them to voluntarily switch out would be like asking the Big Ten to take the Orange Bowl for a year and letting the ACC play in the Rose (not as a semi-final). Sure the Orange might be closer but so what.

Yea. It just seems infinitely easier to pay the A10 off with some cash and non-conference games to give up the Barclays (which is a tremendous basketball arena, btw) for a year or two whenever the B1G wants it. You could even play in the Prudential Center for a year if you really wanted to keep the tournament in a state with a B1G school (acknowledging that it's the least attractive option of the three).

Brooklyn’s arena is nice (albeit very small) but it’s not located in the middle of manhattan.

It's not "very" small. Barclays could have sat 6 of the B1G's 7 MSG sessions last year with room to spare. It's functionally the same size as the Indianapolis venue the B1G uses as a primary location.

(10-12-2018 05:14 PM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-12-2018 05:02 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(10-12-2018 02:15 PM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-12-2018 02:09 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Don't really see much possibility here. To the Big Ten, this is a chance to highlight the conference out east every half decade in their 2nd biggest sport. To the Big East, it is their crown jewel event and location has a lot to do it with it (even with so much of conference on the Midwest). Asking them to voluntarily switch out would be like asking the Big Ten to take the Orange Bowl for a year and letting the ACC play in the Rose (not as a semi-final). Sure the Orange might be closer but so what.

Yea. It just seems infinitely easier to pay the A10 off with some cash and non-conference games to give up the Barclays (which is a tremendous basketball arena, btw) for a year or two whenever the B1G wants it. You could even play in the Prudential Center for a year if you really wanted to keep the tournament in a state with a B1G school (acknowledging that it's the least attractive option of the three).

Brooklyn’s arena is nice (albeit very small) but it’s not located in the middle of manhattan.

It's not "very" small. Barclays could have sat 6 of the B1G's 7 MSG sessions last year with room to spare. It's functionally the same size as the Indianapolis venue the B1G uses as a primary location.

Yes, Barclays is a barely 6 years old NBA arena for crissakes, it has all the modern amenities and seats 19,000. And unlike many arenas that are general purpose, it was designed specifically for the Nets so has excellent hoops sightlines.

But, it doesn't have the mystique of MSG, and despite the boom in that part of Brooklyn, it's not Manhattan either (no place else is).

Delany is very image conscious. No use "showcasing" your conference if you are playing second-fiddle to another conference, as they were last year at MSG as the opening act for the Big East. If the B1G can oust the Big East from MSG, it will be because they make MSG an offer it can't refuse (mucho money).

To heck with the BIG. I do not keep up with the MBB too much but do remember that the BE has full crowds at MSG. It would be a shame to change that.

For BIG fans attending the conference Tourney, Chicago or Indy is a much better location.

(10-13-2018 08:44 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  For BIG fans attending the conference Tourney, Chicago or Indy is a much better location.

Sure, but from Delany's POV, that's not the only consideration.

(10-13-2018 08:52 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 08:44 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  For BIG fans attending the conference Tourney, Chicago or Indy is a much better location.

Sure, but from Delany's POV, that's not the only consideration.

Had he invited Syracuse to join with Penn State I think this would have been a moot point. In fact had he invited Boston College as well then the whole dynamic of college football might have been changed. The ACC might never have gotten into the Northeast and we would probably be standing right now as a P4 which was much more geographically aligned.

(10-13-2018 09:01 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 08:52 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 08:44 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  For BIG fans attending the conference Tourney, Chicago or Indy is a much better location.

Sure, but from Delany's POV, that's not the only consideration.

Had he invited Syracuse to join with Penn State I think this would have been a moot point. In fact had he invited Boston College as well then the whole dynamic of college football might have been changed. The ACC might never have gotten into the Northeast and we would probably be standing right now as a P4 which was much more geographically aligned.

I agree. And I think Delany is just being a neanderthal. This is about his legacy and getting to plant his flag in the holy land of hoops. The thought that asking a lifetime project school like Rutgers means the conference has geographical claim was arrogant enough; the Big Ten isn't "NYC," no matter how many Big Ten alums are in the bridge and tunnel population.

The Big Ten blew it on this one more than once bypassing Pitt and Syracuse in that last major round. Schools known to hold a major stake in the northeast (and, hey, that includes NJ-NY metro as much as Rutgers).

Personally, I think the ACC still looks awkward in the northeast, and it's because of who they don't have in it...Penn State or ANY Philly presence, the loss of UMD (and with it, Baltimore-DC metro), Rutgers, and UConn. Heck, maybe even Army and Navy? And WVU, for that matter, since it neglects how WVU fit with the likes of the other former Big East members in the northeast football scene.

The B1G alumni from Wisconsin to Ohio deserve better than the fleecing this conference is pulling on them to go after what may be a mythical population.

(10-13-2018 09:22 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 09:01 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 08:52 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 08:44 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  For BIG fans attending the conference Tourney, Chicago or Indy is a much better location.

Sure, but from Delany's POV, that's not the only consideration.

Had he invited Syracuse to join with Penn State I think this would have been a moot point. In fact had he invited Boston College as well then the whole dynamic of college football might have been changed. The ACC might never have gotten into the Northeast and we would probably be standing right now as a P4 which was much more geographically aligned.

I agree. And I think Delany is just being a neanderthal. This is about his legacy and getting to plant his flag in the holy land of hoops. The thought that asking a lifetime project school like Rutgers means the conference has geographical claim was arrogant enough; the Big Ten isn't "NYC," no matter how many Big Ten alums are in the bridge and tunnel population.

The Big Ten blew it on this one more than once bypassing Pitt and Syracuse in that last major round. Schools known to hold a major stake in the northeast (and, hey, that includes NJ-NY metro as much as Rutgers).

The B1G tournament did draw very good crowds to MSG last year despite the awkward dates it was played, and B1G schools are making money hand over fist thanks to Delany's moves the past 10+ years.

So I'm not sure in what sense the B1G has 'blown' anything when things are going gangbusters for them?

Another thing: there may be lots of B1G alumni who are New Yorkers, but that doesn't necessarily mean many New Yorkers are B1G alums.

(10-13-2018 09:39 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 09:22 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 09:01 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 08:52 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 08:44 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  For BIG fans attending the conference Tourney, Chicago or Indy is a much better location.

Sure, but from Delany's POV, that's not the only consideration.

Had he invited Syracuse to join with Penn State I think this would have been a moot point. In fact had he invited Boston College as well then the whole dynamic of college football might have been changed. The ACC might never have gotten into the Northeast and we would probably be standing right now as a P4 which was much more geographically aligned.

I agree. And I think Delany is just being a neanderthal. This is about his legacy and getting to plant his flag in the holy land of hoops. The thought that asking a lifetime project school like Rutgers means the conference has geographical claim was arrogant enough; the Big Ten isn't "NYC," no matter how many Big Ten alums are in the bridge and tunnel population.

The Big Ten blew it on this one more than once bypassing Pitt and Syracuse in that last major round. Schools known to hold a major stake in the northeast (and, hey, that includes NJ-NY metro as much as Rutgers).

The B1G tournament did draw very good crowds to MSG last year despite the awkward dates it was played, and B1G schools are making money hand over fist thanks to Delany's moves the past 10+ years.

So I'm not sure in what sense the B1G has 'blown' anything when things are going gangbusters for them?

Well Quo, when Delany became the Commissioner of the Big 10 they not only earned more TV revenue than the SEC, but more revenue in general.

Now there have been years when the SEC made more TV revenue, and might again after 2023. But the Big 10 hasn't been within sniffing distance of total revenue in almost a decade.

So considering where the Big 10 was and now is, there are more than a few significant questions to be answered as to whether Delaney just had a great position, or whether he has been a stellar leader. I think the truth lies somewhere in between.

And then there is that BTN net value going down 70 million a year ago, with no public reports for this past year being available, that still raise some interesting questions of their own. I'd say the jury was definitely still out!

(10-13-2018 09:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 09:39 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 09:22 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 09:01 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 08:52 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Sure, but from Delany's POV, that's not the only consideration.

Had he invited Syracuse to join with Penn State I think this would have been a moot point. In fact had he invited Boston College as well then the whole dynamic of college football might have been changed. The ACC might never have gotten into the Northeast and we would probably be standing right now as a P4 which was much more geographically aligned.

I agree. And I think Delany is just being a neanderthal. This is about his legacy and getting to plant his flag in the holy land of hoops. The thought that asking a lifetime project school like Rutgers means the conference has geographical claim was arrogant enough; the Big Ten isn't "NYC," no matter how many Big Ten alums are in the bridge and tunnel population.

The Big Ten blew it on this one more than once bypassing Pitt and Syracuse in that last major round. Schools known to hold a major stake in the northeast (and, hey, that includes NJ-NY metro as much as Rutgers).

The B1G tournament did draw very good crowds to MSG last year despite the awkward dates it was played, and B1G schools are making money hand over fist thanks to Delany's moves the past 10+ years.

So I'm not sure in what sense the B1G has 'blown' anything when things are going gangbusters for them?

Well Quo, when Delany became the Commissioner of the Big 10 they not only earned more TV revenue than the SEC, but more revenue in general.

Now there have been years when the SEC made more TV revenue, and might again after 2023. But the Big 10 hasn't been within sniffing distance of total revenue in almost a decade.

So considering where the Big 10 was and now is, there are more than a few significant questions to be answered as to whether Delaney just had a great position, or whether he has been a stellar leader. I think the truth lies somewhere in between.

And then there is that BTN net value going down 70 million a year ago, with no public reports for this past year being available, that still raise some interesting questions of their own. I'd say the jury was definitely still out!

It's an interesting question as to whether a conference commissioner should get some credit for "local" monetary gains. E.g., if while Slive was commissioner, Ole Miss total athletic revenue rose by $40 million, with half of that being the TV deal Slive negotiated and the other half being "local" stuff like increased ticket sales, more luxury box and suite sales, more corporate and elite alumni donations, etc., should Slive get credit for the latter and not just the former?

I tend to say "no", but I guess you could make a case that if a commish makes a conference stronger and thus the games become more appealing, then that will resonate down to increased local revenues. Just not sure how to capture that.

As for Delany and the BTN, I agree that the new cable-cutting phenomenon adds a wrinkle and calls in to question my declaration of victory for Delany and the B1G with regards to their 2007 decision to create the BTN. It's working like crazy now, but that could change.

As of now, though, the B1G does seem to be making more TV money than the SEC (and IMO that is the money directly attributable to a commish), and likely will for the forseeable future, and they shouldn't be, so that seems like a victory for Delany. I will probably always think that the SEC was taken to the cleaners by ESPN in their 2008 deal. No matter how much cash the SECN rakes in, the SEC portion is significantly less than it should be had the 2008 SEC negotiators been as prescient about where college rights values were headed as were the ESPN negotiators. That deal will be an albatross around the SEC neck until 2036.

(10-13-2018 09:57 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 09:48 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 09:39 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 09:22 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(10-13-2018 09:01 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Had he invited Syracuse to join with Penn State I think this would have been a moot point. In fact had he invited Boston College as well then the whole dynamic of college football might have been changed. The ACC might never have gotten into the Northeast and we would probably be standing right now as a P4 which was much more geographically aligned.

I agree. And I think Delany is just being a neanderthal. This is about his legacy and getting to plant his flag in the holy land of hoops. The thought that asking a lifetime project school like Rutgers means the conference has geographical claim was arrogant enough; the Big Ten isn't "NYC," no matter how many Big Ten alums are in the bridge and tunnel population.

The Big Ten blew it on this one more than once bypassing Pitt and Syracuse in that last major round. Schools known to hold a major stake in the northeast (and, hey, that includes NJ-NY metro as much as Rutgers).

The B1G tournament did draw very good crowds to MSG last year despite the awkward dates it was played, and B1G schools are making money hand over fist thanks to Delany's moves the past 10+ years.

So I'm not sure in what sense the B1G has 'blown' anything when things are going gangbusters for them?

Well Quo, when Delany became the Commissioner of the Big 10 they not only earned more TV revenue than the SEC, but more revenue in general.

Now there have been years when the SEC made more TV revenue, and might again after 2023. But the Big 10 hasn't been within sniffing distance of total revenue in almost a decade.

So considering where the Big 10 was and now is, there are more than a few significant questions to be answered as to whether Delaney just had a great position, or whether he has been a stellar leader. I think the truth lies somewhere in between.

And then there is that BTN net value going down 70 million a year ago, with no public reports for this past year being available, that still raise some interesting questions of their own. I'd say the jury was definitely still out!

It's an interesting question as to whether a conference commissioner should get some credit for "local" monetary gains. E.g., if while Slive was commissioner, Ole Miss total athletic revenue rose by $40 million, with half of that being the TV deal Slive negotiated and the other half being "local" stuff like increased ticket sales, more luxury box and suite sales, etc., should Slive get credit for the latter and not just the former?

I tend to say "no", but I guess you could make a case that if a commish makes a conference stronger and thus the games become more appealing, then that will resonate down to increased local revenues. Just not sure how to capture that.

As for Delany and the BTN, I agree that the new cable-cutting phenomenon adds a wrinkle and calls in to question my declaration of victory for Delany and the B1G with regards to their 2007 decision to create the BTN. It's working like crazy now, but that could change.

1. It's true that the commissioner doesn't have direct control over local fund raising. However the commissioner of the SEC did essentially set standards for what was expected at SEC venues and like Slive before him Sankey is now encouraging the same with hoops and it seems to be paying off. Obviously schools like Vanderbilt aren't forced to comply with standards but even Vandy upped its game if not in facilities at least in investment in the sports themselves.

2. It remains my contention that the Big 10 might well be divesting the BTN in preparation for the future changes in the cable market. If so, it is the wiser course of action. If not, it's a big blunder. We'll see.

(10-12-2018 06:00 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-12-2018 05:14 PM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-12-2018 05:02 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(10-12-2018 02:15 PM)Bogg Wrote:  

(10-12-2018 02:09 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Don't really see much possibility here. To the Big Ten, this is a chance to highlight the conference out east every half decade in their 2nd biggest sport. To the Big East, it is their crown jewel event and location has a lot to do it with it (even with so much of conference on the Midwest). Asking them to voluntarily switch out would be like asking the Big Ten to take the Orange Bowl for a year and letting the ACC play in the Rose (not as a semi-final). Sure the Orange might be closer but so what.

Yea. It just seems infinitely easier to pay the A10 off with some cash and non-conference games to give up the Barclays (which is a tremendous basketball arena, btw) for a year or two whenever the B1G wants it. You could even play in the Prudential Center for a year if you really wanted to keep the tournament in a state with a B1G school (acknowledging that it's the least attractive option of the three).

Brooklyn’s arena is nice (albeit very small) but it’s not located in the middle of manhattan.

It's not "very" small. Barclays could have sat 6 of the B1G's 7 MSG sessions last year with room to spare. It's functionally the same size as the Indianapolis venue the B1G uses as a primary location.

Yes, Barclays is a barely 6 years old NBA arena for crissakes, it has all the modern amenities and seats 19,000. And unlike many arenas that are general purpose, it was designed specifically for the Nets so has excellent hoops sightlines.

But, it doesn't have the mystique of MSG, and despite the boom in that part of Brooklyn, it's not Manhattan either (no place else is).

Delany is very image conscious. No use "showcasing" your conference if you are playing second-fiddle to another conference, as they were last year at MSG as the opening act for the Big East. If the B1G can oust the Big East from MSG, it will be because they make MSG an offer it can't refuse (mucho money).

Yes Barclays is “new”but seats about 17,500 for basketball and is the the second or third smallest in the nba, depending on source. * There is a reason why Barclays “record attendance” was 18,000, and that was for a concert with floor seating. And it’s not just because the nets suck.

Like is said, it is “very small,” yet “is nice” for this type of event? In terms of Capacity when msg seats 20k. Barclays is nowhere near 19k capacity for basketball. If looking to enhance image, playing at the perceived secondary arena in NYC and in the smaller of the two, is not exactly the way to do it. Lots of entities and events have moved from msg to Barclays over the years due to availability and cost. But none did so with any doubt as to which venue gave more exposure.

*Side-note the two newest nba arenas in Sacramento and Brooklyn are also the two smallest in terms of capacity overall (new orleans limits seats for pelicans games to 16k but the arena seats 18.5k), so being new is irrelevant here. T mobile arena in New Orleans is among the smallest nhls arenas and would be in the bottom fourth of nba arenas in terms of capacity. Same for the new islanders arena. So new has nothing to do with it.