Another issue for ND?

[kingottoiii]

B1G/P12 scheduling agreement

So if the B1G goes to 9 conf games and 1 game vs a P12 team, won't that make it very difficult for ND to keep their rivalries? USC, Stanford, Purdue, Michigan, and Mich St will all have only 2 OOC slots open. So how does ND fit in?

Also IMO this agreement kinda stinks for the sport in general. Sure we get to see B1G vs P12 games, but it means we will see less B1g/P12 vs ACC/SEC/B12 games. If I am a B1G team I want a 1AA and a MAC as cupcakes to off set the 10 BCS games I am playing. It would be insane to play another BCS team. Which means the B1G and P12 will have their own little exclusive club.

 

[44PRIDE]

With the exception of the SEC, there will be so much low quality "pack fill" teams in these superconferences that scheduling "light" should never be a problem. I mean, Indiana, Northwestern, Washington, UCLA...

As for ND, there options get slimmer and slimmer as time progresses.

 

[Chip]

I'm wondering if the 9 game conf schedule will be a lasting thing. Pac 12 didn't have to switch to it, they already did it before because they were a 10 team league and wanted round robin. Thamel tweeted that the B1G said they will not go to a 9 game conf schedule in 2017, but that Pac 12 will stick with it (as they always have).

If everyone does go to 9 game schedules eventually, it could also pave the way for a potential 13 game season.

I don't think Stanford or USC would ever intentionally drop ND from their schedule. Nor would Purdue or Michigan State. I know the Michigan series took some time off, but I think Michigan also wants to keep them on.

I'm sure ND is smart enought to know where some walls might be closing in, but I don't think it's anywhere close yet to them needing to give up football independence.

 

[kyleslamb]

I'm wondering if the 9 game conf schedule will be a lasting thing. Pac 12 didn't have to switch to it, they already did it before because they were a 10 team league and wanted round robin. Thamel tweeted that the B1G said they will not go to a 9 game conf schedule in 2017, but that Pac 12 will stick with it (as they always have).

If everyone does go to 9 game schedules eventually, it could also pave the way for a potential 13 game season.

I don't think Stanford or USC would ever intentionally drop ND from their schedule. Nor would Purdue or Michigan State. I know the Michigan series took some time off, but I think Michigan also wants to keep them on.

I'm sure ND is smart enought to know where some walls might be closing in, but I don't think it's anywhere close yet to them needing to give up football independence.

It's basically at that point if this agreement accomplishes what it is partially supposed to do (put pressure on Notre Dame). Not only does Notre Dame have a pretty bad football affiliation left at their feet, which will impact bowl revenues (of which they share), but now their five top rivals might have to back out of scheduling agreements. Does anyone think Comcast will want anything to do with Notre Dame's football schedule without those teams?

This absolutely is a warning shot. Notre Dame will have to sink or swim with the Big East or finally decide once and for all if it wants the ACC or Big Ten.

 

[Scooch]

This deal is not about putting pressure on ND.

At all.

It's about securing a ton of inventory for two cable channels.

 

[TexanMark]

I agree Kyle...if push comes to shove...I see ND going B10 in this scenario.

The ACC needs to hook up with the SEC in a similar strategy.

Scooch..yes TV is first consideration but ND is a secondary consideration..or a byproduct.

 

[Scooch]

Maybe a byproduct, at best.

I think you guys wildly overestimate how "important" ND is to the Big Ten. Without them they've become the richest conference in America. And they know ND will go to the ACC first anyway.

 

[elimunelson]

This deal is not about putting pressure on ND.

At all.

It's about securing a ton of inventory for two cable channels.

I agree it's about the inventory but i'm sure there is a few people doing the Dr. Evil laugh when they realize that the increased inventory demands on these two conferences squeezes ND.

 

[Chip]

This deal is not about putting pressure on ND.

At all.

It's about securing a ton of inventory for two cable channels.

Yeah, I don't really get this pressuring ND thing. Do they want to pressure them into the ACC? Does that help the Big 10? Seems to me that those schools that schedule ND every year probably want ND on their schedule at least as much, but probably more, than ND wants them on their schedule. So Stanford has 9 Pac-12 games, 1 Big 10 game, 1 ND game, and 1 other game on their schedule. They're thrilled. I don't think the prospect of having to play Minnesota means they run from the ND game. Same goes for all of those schools.

I know they all hate that ND is independent, has their own TV contract, keeps their bowl money, but I don't think any Big 10 teams are ringing a Salvation Army bell for funds right now.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

The scheduling transition in football will be slower because of existing non-conference contract commitments. But by the 2017 season, the two conferences are expected to have a full, 12-game Pac-12/Big Ten schedule in place, meaning each Pac-12 team will play a separate Big Ten program on an annual basis.

Is Scott implying that the Pac-12 will move to 11 conference games, plus an annual Big 10 opponent? Or 9 & 3, with one of the Big 10 games being with a permanent crossover opponent?

 

[kyleslamb]

This deal is not about putting pressure on ND.

At all.

It's about securing a ton of inventory for two cable channels.

Several people within the Big Ten absolutely would disagree with you. This absolutely is (in part) about Notre Dame. Yes, you're absolutely right that television is a large part of this, but you better believe Notre Dame is a partial reason for this too. At very least it's a certain byproduct. The Big Ten is tired of waiting and they're going to force Notre Dame to make a decision sooner rather than later. Regardless of what Notre Dame is saying to people, the Big Ten doesn't believe when push comes to shove they'll go to the ACC. But if they're going to, they want it all laid out on the table.

 

[KaiserUEO]

this is good.

now the ACC and the bevo#tbd should do the same.

yep, scooch...inventory again.

nd's inventory will dry up and soon enough...nd will be forced to play he bigleftovers or the SEC. and when matched v the SEC...lets just say that they will join a conf pretty soon after the 1st couple of arsewhoopins.

 

[TexanMark]

this is good.

now the ACC and the bevo#tbd should do the same.

yep, scooch...inventory again.

nd's inventory will dry up and soon enough...nd will be forced to play he bigleftovers or the SEC. and when matched v the SEC...lets just say that they will join a conf pretty soon after the 1st couple of arsewhoopins.

I bet the ACC looks at the SEC first...but the Bevo + followers should be the second conference we ask...we (ACC) don't want to be relegated to playing the SunBeast.

 

[kyleslamb]

BTW, lest I not be clear, I don't think Notre Dame is the primary reason for this. I think in order it goes:

1) Television
2) Putting distance between Major conferences and non-AQ conferences (Delany has been pushing for a subdivision split into threes, and then and only then would he support a playoff), and,
3) Pressure Notre Dame

I don't think the Notre Dame factor is the primary motivating factor. Money is obviously first and foremost. It's a strategic move with several established advantages, though, and pressuring Notre Dame is part of an aggressive push the Big Ten has been making in recent months behind closed doors.

 

[KaiserUEO]

I bet the ACC looks at the SEC first...but the Bevo + followers should be the second conference we ask...we (ACC) don't want to be relegated to playing the SunBeast.

well, im not so sure we(ACC) want to be playing the SEC either.

that was my 1st thought, but i chose wiser. ole miss would be 8-4 every year in the ACC, or any conf for that matter.

Oh Lord

 

[kingottoiii]

I think it is about

-TV $

-Inventory for the BTN, PTN

-Trying to become bigger than the SEC. Although I think this move is like Europe creating the EU to combat the US (SEC). It will be closer but still not top dog.

-Creating separation with non BCS leagues

-Having an all boys club with each other B1G/P12 exclusivity

-Putting pressure on ND

 

[Chip]

BTW, lest I not be clear, I don't think Notre Dame is the primary reason for this. I think in order it goes:

1) Television
2) Putting distance between Major conferences and non-AQ conferences (Delany has been pushing for a subdivision split into threes, and then and only then would he support a playoff), and,
3) Pressure Notre Dame

I don't think the Notre Dame factor is the primary motivating factor. Money is obviously first and foremost. It's a strategic move with several established advantages, though, and pressuring Notre Dame is part of an aggressive push the Big Ten has been making in recent months behind closed doors.

Why doesn't the Big 10 just pressure Purdue and Michigan to just remove ND from their future schedules? If this is really part of the plan, wouldn't those 2 schools see through it? Just tell those schools you're either with us or against us. I would have added Michigan State but it looks like they haven't finalized an extension to that series after the 2013 game.

 

[kyleslamb]

Why doesn't the Big 10 just pressure Purdue and Michigan to just remove ND from their future schedules? If this is really part of the plan, wouldn't those 2 schools see through it? Just tell those schools you're either with us or against us. I would have added Michigan State but it looks like they haven't finalized an extension to that series after the 2013 game.

I think this is just a little bit less of an abrasive way of applying pressure. After all, as everyone has said, Notre Dame isn't the only reason this is being done. So this is better as it isn't overtly aggressive but it also accomplishes other things in the process.

 

[sufan]

I bet the ACC looks at the SEC first...but the Bevo + followers should be the second conference we ask...we (ACC) don't want to be relegated to playing the SunBeast.

---------------------

ACC teams FSU, Clemson, GT already have annual rivalry games against SEC schools: UF, USC, UGA, which are true long-term rivalry games.

Wake also now has a long term series against Vanderbilt.

Have to wonder whether Big 12 is going to want to work out a cooperative scheduling arrangement with the SEC anytime soon with A&M and Missouri now in SEC.

Also, do UT and OK want to share profits with the other Big 12 conference schools for yet another game? Somehow, I doubt it.

 

[BORZAK]

This deal is not about putting pressure on ND.

At all.

It's about securing a ton of inventory for two cable channels.

???? SWING AND A MISS ????

 

[sufan]

B1G/P12 scheduling agreement

So if the B1G goes to 9 conf games and 1 game vs a P12 team, won't that make it very difficult for ND to keep their rivalries? USC, Stanford, Purdue, Michigan, and Mich St will all have only 2 OOC slots open. So how does ND fit in?

Also IMO this agreement kinda stinks for the sport in general. Sure we get to see B1G vs P12 games, but it means we will see less B1g/P12 vs ACC/SEC/B12 games. If I am a B1G team I want a 1AA and a MAC as cupcakes to off set the 10 BCS games I am playing. It would be insane to play another BCS team. Which means the B1G and P12 will have their own little exclusive club.

--------------

Delany discusses partnership with Pac-12

More detail:

1) "The scheduling partnership means the Big Ten won't be moving from eight conference games to nine beginning in the 2017 season. The league had announced the increase in August.

"If it's not off the board, it's coming off the board," Delany said. "When this opportunity was raised, it's pretty much the understanding that it's in lieu of."

2) It's not about ND:

"One concern with the Pac-12 scheduling partnership is how it would impact other longstanding Big Ten nonconfernence series such as Michigan-Notre Dame and Iowa-Iowa State.

The answer: not much if at all."

3) It's about network inventory, branding, expansion of markets.

(It also tells Texas and ND: the PAC 12 and Big 10 are moving forward, though it does make the conferences more attractive: if UT joins the PAC, they would additionally be playing a top Big 10 team and ND would be playing a top PAC 12 team.

It likely shuts the door on additional expansion unless UT or ND are involved.

 

[OrangePA]

B1G/P12 scheduling agreement

So if the B1G goes to 9 conf games and 1 game vs a P12 team, won't that make it very difficult for ND to keep their rivalries? USC, Stanford, Purdue, Michigan, and Mich St will all have only 2 OOC slots open. So how does ND fit in?

Also IMO this agreement kinda stinks for the sport in general. Sure we get to see B1G vs P12 games, but it means we will see less B1g/P12 vs ACC/SEC/B12 games. If I am a B1G team I want a 1AA and a MAC as cupcakes to off set the 10 BCS games I am playing. It would be insane to play another BCS team. Which means the B1G and P12 will have their own little exclusive club.

Many on this board will probably disagree, but the Pac 12-Big Ten strategy appears to me to be a response to the new Big East decision to go national.

Clearly the Big Ten Network wants greater coverage/exposure out west. The best way to do that is to televise Pac 12 teams on a regular basis. The same approach fits with the Pac 12 TV package.

A few weeks ago, the Big East created a national TV market by expanding west.

The Big Ten and the Pac 12 are doing something similar without having to worry about re-alignment issues or lawsuits.
Say what you want, but the BE braintrust is on to something.

 

[Chip]

Say what you want, but the BE braintrust is on to something.

Not to poop in their wheaties, but the league was raided 3 separate times and only has 1 original football member left. It's not like they had a lot of options if they wanted to make a run at survival.

 

[sufan]

Many on this board will probably disagree, but the Pac 12-Big Ten strategy appears to me to be a response to the new Big East decision to go national.

Clearly the Big Ten Network wants greater coverage/exposure out west. The best way to do that is to televise Pac 12 teams on a regular basis. The same approach fits with the Pac 12 TV package.

A few weeks ago, the Big East created a national TV market by expanding west.

The Big Ten and the Pac 12 are doing something similar without having to worry about re-alignment issues or lawsuits.
Say what you want, but the BE braintrust is on to something.

----------------

The Big 10 and PAC 12 are uniquely positioned to benefit from their conference channels, their Rose bowl game, the fact that neither conference is in competion with each other and that the expansion of their relationship will likely mutually expand their markets.

In part, it may also be a response to the fact that ND and UT are not going anywhere and there are no consensus expansion candidates left. Otherwise with 14 teams, the Big 10 would likely go to 9 conference games.

The Big 10 and PAC 12 are essentially the conferences of the midwest and far west. They are focusing on their strengths. If the Big 10 really wanted to expand its footprint, they would would take RU and UConn. That didn't happen.

As to the Big East, they could evolve into an interesting, diverse, competitive conference. I like the way they have pairings of teams: UL, Cinn; UCF, USF; RU, UConn, Houston, SMU; however this "national" configuration competes in each of its regions with strong schools and conferences that capture the majority of that market.

They will need at least one team to be ranked top 10 to gain credibility along with a bowl tie-in that allows their champion to compete against another top ranked team.

 

[Scooch]

1. The Big Ten and Pac-12 were not "reacting" to the Big East. I sincerely doubt either of those conferences spend more than 5 minutes a month thinking about the Big East.

2. My point about any affect on ND being at best an unintended consequence is completely supported by the Big Ten not moving to 9 conference games.