ND only School that would add value to Big 12 TV

[HtownOrange]

See:

http://m.newsok.com/big-12-interim-...at-would-add-tv-value/article/3688049/?page=1

Four comments caught my attention:

1. Neinas' response: “Our television partners agreed that the only new member that would enhance the Big 12 value for television was Notre Dame.”

FSU and Clemson were not going to get the wild increases as put forth via the WVU fans and posters. The Big 12 may have known that FSU and Clemson were not likely to leave the ACC for the Big 12, SEC maybe, not Big 12.

2. Neinas' response: “There is some sentiment that an increase in membership would enhance stability. It could be argued that the Grant of Rights agreement signed by the members is the most important instrument to assure conference stability.”

The Big 12 is very dependent on the GOR to hold them together. The more reliant a party is upon the written agreement, the more distrust amongst the parties. The Big 12 remains unstable. Nothing can stop UT from leaving with OU +2, destroying the GOR and TV deal.

3. Neinas goes on in the memo to say he discussed expansion with ESPN president John Skipper, Fox Sports president Randy Freer and ESPN's head of college athletics operations Burke Magnus.
Neinas said all three agreed a 10-member conference was preferred, but they would live with expansion to 11 or 12 teams. He also said both TV partners were in support of Notre Dame becoming a partial member of the Big 12 if the Irish would play a specific number of football games at Big 12 venues.

Adding ND as a partial member adds no value without ND agreeing to play the teams not named UT or OU (already on the schedule) and at their own venues (not neutral site games). This probably applies to the ACC as well.

4. Nenias referenced a December meeting of athletic directors who were spit on the idea of expansion. He wrote that if the conference were to expand, there was strong support for the University of Louisville to become the Big 12's 11th member.

Sounds like Louisville was the target #12. FSU and Clemson were further down the list of preferred schools. I was surprised as Louisville lacks the football history of either FSU or Clemson.

 

[Toga]

"Sounds like Louisville was the target #12. FSU and Clemson were further down the list of preferred schools. I was surprised as Louisville lacks the football history of either FSU or Clemson."

That was pre-Dude

See:

http://m.newsok.com/big-12-interim-...at-would-add-tv-value/article/3688049/?page=1

Four comments caught my attention:

1. Neinas' response: “Our television partners agreed that the only new member that would enhance the Big 12 value for television was Notre Dame.”

FSU and Clemson were not going to get the wild increases as put forth via the WVU fans and posters. The Big 12 may have known that FSU and Clemson were not likely to leave the ACC for the Big 12, SEC maybe, not Big 12.

2. Neinas' response: “There is some sentiment that an increase in membership would enhance stability. It could be argued that the Grant of Rights agreement signed by the members is the most important instrument to assure conference stability.”

The Big 12 is very dependent on the GOR to hold them together. The more reliant a party is upon the written agreement, the more distrust amongst the parties. The Big 12 remains unstable. Nothing can stop UT from leaving with OU +2, destroying the GOR and TV deal.

3. Neinas goes on in the memo to say he discussed expansion with ESPN president John Skipper, Fox Sports president Randy Freer and ESPN's head of college athletics operations Burke Magnus.
Neinas said all three agreed a 10-member conference was preferred, but they would live with expansion to 11 or 12 teams. He also said both TV partners were in support of Notre Dame becoming a partial member of the Big 12 if the Irish would play a specific number of football games at Big 12 venues.

Adding ND as a partial member adds no value without ND agreeing to play the teams not named UT or OU (already on the schedule) and at their own venues (not neutral site games). This probably applies to the ACC as well.

4. Nenias referenced a December meeting of athletic directors who were spit on the idea of expansion. He wrote that if the conference were to expand, there was strong support for the University of Louisville to become the Big 12's 11th member.

Sounds like Louisville was the target #12. FSU and Clemson were further down the list of preferred schools. I was surprised as Louisville lacks the football history of either FSU or Clemson.

 

[SUinNYC]

Sounds like Louisville was the target #12. FSU and Clemson were further down the list of preferred schools. I was surprised as Louisville lacks the football history of either FSU or Clemson.

True, but I still think Louisville is undervalued. It has an extremely profitable, well run athletic department (with the best AD in the country). It has fantastic facilities, a powerhouse basketball program and a football program that is one or two years away from being perennially Top 25. In stock terms, they are a strong buy in my opinion.

 

[omniorange]

See:

http://m.newsok.com/big-12-interim-...at-would-add-tv-value/article/3688049/?page=1

Four comments caught my attention:

1. Neinas' response: “Our television partners agreed that the only new member that would enhance the Big 12 value for television was Notre Dame.”

FSU and Clemson were not going to get the wild increases as put forth via the WVU fans and posters. The Big 12 may have known that FSU and Clemson were not likely to leave the ACC for the Big 12, SEC maybe, not Big 12.

2. Neinas' response: “There is some sentiment that an increase in membership would enhance stability. It could be argued that the Grant of Rights agreement signed by the members is the most important instrument to assure conference stability.”

The Big 12 is very dependent on the GOR to hold them together. The more reliant a party is upon the written agreement, the more distrust amongst the parties. The Big 12 remains unstable. Nothing can stop UT from leaving with OU +2, destroying the GOR and TV deal.

3. Neinas goes on in the memo to say he discussed expansion with ESPN president John Skipper, Fox Sports president Randy Freer and ESPN's head of college athletics operations Burke Magnus.
Neinas said all three agreed a 10-member conference was preferred, but they would live with expansion to 11 or 12 teams. He also said both TV partners were in support of Notre Dame becoming a partial member of the Big 12 if the Irish would play a specific number of football games at Big 12 venues.

Adding ND as a partial member adds no value without ND agreeing to play the teams not named UT or OU (already on the schedule) and at their own venues (not neutral site games). This probably applies to the ACC as well.

4. Nenias referenced a December meeting of athletic directors who were spit on the idea of expansion. He wrote that if the conference were to expand, there was strong support for the University of Louisville to become the Big 12's 11th member.

Sounds like Louisville was the target #12. FSU and Clemson were further down the list of preferred schools. I was surprised as Louisville lacks the football history of either FSU or Clemson.

Point 1. This was from January with data probably gotten during Bowl season. What I think this shows is that ACC teams were not in the discussion in late December and early January as the Dude proclaimed, but became possible targets at this late January meeting upon learning that Louisville and BYU would not add value to the contracts.

So, at best, Neinas would have been charged at this late January meeting to discover how much adding ACC members would be - but the wild numbers thrown out by some came almost immediately after the Dude's first epistle on this topic on January 21. Btw, the January 21st blog by the Dude said he had been holding onto this info (the Big 12 going after ACC members) for three weeks. This document clearly seems to dispute this or else Neinas would have had for this late January meeting the info needed about them.

Point 2. Agreed. Big 12 staying at 10 could be a real problem with the Medium-Sized 8-2 (the 2 being the tagalongs Oklahoma State and Texas Tech).

Point 3. Right, because it would be assumed that ND would as an indy agree to schedule Texas and OU without becoming a Big 12 member. Might indicate a similiar problem with ND as a partial to the ACC. After all, ESPN already gets ND away games against the likes of BC, Pitt, Miami, and SU. So that could kill ND to the ACC as a partial member right there.

Point 4. See above response to Point 1. I really think that when they met to discuss this situation in late January is when they brainstormed the idea of approaching ACC members, especially FSU and Clemson who clearly wanted out of the ACC for the SEC and all of their actions at that time and prior were about that move and not this supposed Big 12 move.

Once the Big 12 did approach them then they decided it couldn't hurt to listen to them. So, at best, the Dude got word that the Big 12 might approach ACC members and the extra $$$ that was being thrown out was as exaggerated as BTN numbers were back in 2009 and 2010.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[omniorange]

True, but I still think Louisville is undervalued. It has an extremely profitable, well run athletic department (with the best AD in the country). It has fantastic facilities, a powerhouse basketball program and a football program that is one or two years away from being perennially Top 25. In stock terms, they are a strong buy in my opinion.

Agreed. I've got a lot of respect for Jurich and the Louisville athletic department.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[HtownOrange]

True, but I still think Louisville is undervalued. It has an extremely profitable, well run athletic department (with the best AD in the country). It has fantastic facilities, a powerhouse basketball program and a football program that is one or two years away from being perennially Top 25. In stock terms, they are a strong buy in my opinion.

I agree that Louisville is undervalued. If their academics were up to par, I'd be a proponent of them in the ACC. I might even consider them with their academics if we could get ND and promises Louisville will improve academics.

 

[HtownOrange]

Point 1. This was from January with data probably gotten during Bowl season. What I think this shows is that ACC teams were not in the discussion in late December and early January as the Dude proclaimed, but became possible targets at this late January meeting upon learning that Louisville and BYU would not add value to the contracts.

So, at best, Neinas would have been charged at this late January meeting to discover how much adding ACC members would be - but the wild numbers thrown out by some came almost immediately after the Dude's first epistle on this topic on January 21. Btw, the January 21st blog by the Dude said he had been holding onto this info (the Big 12 going after ACC members) for three weeks. This document clearly seems to dispute this or else Neinas would have had for this late January meeting the info needed about them.



Cheers,
Neil

Your assessment makes sense and may be correct, but I personally think that all potential schools were already assessed. As with all opinions, I have the following proofs to support my opinion [enter chirping crickets].

From the B1G expansion and the comments that came out, we know that at least 12 teams made enough sense to add to the then contract, but that consensus could not be reached. We are also left with the impression that several more teams were considered before being omitted as not being beneficial. Not much support for my above opinion, but at least a basis. Again, your assessment makes as much or more sense than mine. Not worth fighting over as the net result is still the same, nobody moved the TV deal increase needle.

(On a side note: it may also indicate that the Big 12 is being overpaid at this point!)

 

[SUinNYC]

I agree. If academics were up to snuff, they'd be a solid addition to the ACC. In fact, the same could have been said about WVU.

 

[Louie&Bouie]

I'd said from the beginning of this (as in, SU/Pitt to the ACC), that I would miss WVU more than any other school in the BE. They are a worthy rival. One that has provided many memorable moments in my lifetime as an SU fan. I wish they were with us in the ACC, and I think it was a mistake by the leadership of the ACC to not invite them, whatever the thought process was behind that decision.

Looking backward on the past 10 months, I think that had the ACC invited WVU, there would be no discussion about the foothold that the ACC has in the new playoff system. Throw in Louisville, and I would've been ecstatic. That would've given the ACC two deep, well-run athletic departments.

Let everyone else fight for ND. Let's get Miami and FSU to actually carry their weight. They want to be flagships, start winning like one. Golden is the right man for the job, if you ask me. Jimbo's got talent, but can he harness it? Clemson is Milli Vanilli (sp?). They have no more cachet or history than SU or Pitt does IMO. The reason people love the SEC is because they produce solid programs who win. Starkville isn't a TV Mecca. Nor are Baton Rouge, Tuscaloosa, Knoxville, Oxford, Auburn, Or either of the Columbias (East or West).

Shut up and win. That's what this boils down to. For all of us. Just wish WVU was by our side for it. The hillbilly jokes are cute, but at the end of the day,WVU was/is a fighter.

 

[omniorange]

Your assessment makes sense and may be correct, but I personally think that all potential schools were already assessed. As with all opinions, I have the following proofs to support my opinion [enter chirping crickets].

From the B1G expansion and the comments that came out, we know that at least 12 teams made enough sense to add to the then contract, but that consensus could not be reached. We are also left with the impression that several more teams were considered before being omitted as not being beneficial. Not much support for my above opinion, but at least a basis. Again, your assessment makes as much or more sense than mine. Not worth fighting over as the net result is still the same, nobody moved the TV deal increase needle.

(On a side note: it may also indicate that the Big 12 is being overpaid at this point!)

Agree on the side note which is why I believe the much disputed info that came out that expansion only getting the new candidates the same amount (estimated as $20 million). ABC and Fox had already overpaid the Big 12 to keep the conference alive with only 10 teams and without a CCG. It's looking more and more like that any expansion candidate outside of ND would not move the needle beyond $20 million per team.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[PeteCalvin]

"Sounds like Louisville was the target #12. FSU and Clemson were further down the list of preferred schools. I was surprised as Louisville lacks the football history of either FSU or Clemson."

That was pre-Dude

How soon people forget that the 10th spot in the Big 12 was a head to head battle between WVU and Louisville, complete with political intrigue. It would only make sense that the loser of that battle would be the top choice for expansion (much like SU with the ACC the second time around).

I mentioned this once before, but, FWIW, my understanding from a UofL alum is that there are many fellow alums who are not happy with Pitino for interfering in that process. People feel that his grandstanding in support of the BE put the AD in a position where he was hesitant to act when the timing was essential. Some even heard through channels that UofL had the upper hand on the invite and the delay of the AD to act (due to Pitino's interference) cost them.

 

[Guinness]

I agree that Louisville is undervalued. If their academics were up to par, I'd be a proponent of them in the ACC. I might even consider them with their academics if we could get ND and promises Louisville will improve academics.

Academic issues not withstanding I think the ACC made a mistake not taking WVU. I hope that they don't make the same mistake with L'ville. The number of chairs left are increasingly small and the number of quality programs to fill them are even smaller. If they have any thoughts of going past 14 I hope they don't wait on ND.

 

[KaiserUEO]

i still think that the pac, b1g, sec and ACC will eventually tell the bevo, "listen u cowtippers, we are our there playing a champ game and its effecting the F4. you cant declare the winner of the red river shootout in october your champion and coast till new years. EXPAND, or find yourselves not getting in the F4".

 

[billsin01]

Academic issues not withstanding I think the ACC made a mistake not taking WVU. I hope that they don't make the same mistake with L'ville. The number of chairs left are increasingly small and the number of quality programs to fill them are even smaller. If they have any thoughts of going past 14 I hope they don't wait on ND.

I have zero idea why academics matter to any of this. I mean, I get why people like the notion that their school isn't a total joke and I get that a school's academic reputation is extremely important in terms of attracting grant money and I get that everyone feels comfortable knowing they can do the "sure, the SEC would pound us into submission on the field -- but they CHEAT and aren't good schools academically!!!!" But, ultimately, I'd much rather play WVU than Virginia. I also, until this thread, would have no idea if Louisville ranked higher or lower than Maryland in those us news and world report "official rankings". I'm pretty sure 80% of america is with me on that score. Bizarre that people seem to be taking so much pride in being in a sports conference with UVA or Maryland or Wake or NC State.