Tracer Bullet

For the love of god I'm not shocked at anything. For teams like ND and Nebraska, with the prestige they have, their value isn't necessarily tied to their continued and constant success on the field. That's all I was saying. I'll speak more slowly next time. you can speak as fast or slow as you like, but the more logical the better. ND and Nebraska have, for comparison's sake, been better than half the teams in the Big Ten in the last 10 years. A conference looking to improve itself might seek out teams with rabid fan bases that have prestige and recent success (being at least in the top half of its current members would likely fit this definition). But it's more about the prestige than being better than Purdue and Indiana. Done with this. Of course it is. But being prestigious while also currently being a good football program is why conferences are after ND (or Nebraska) and not, say, Harvard or Army.

Better to lose in the Fiesta bowl than squeak out a win in the Emerald bowl. Even better if you didn't have to cheat to get there. I was actually being serious. Seeing ND obliterated in games people already resent them being in doesn't help anything. Being in a BCS game, even if you lose, is good for the program. Financially, for fans, for recruiting. Cheating to get to the Emerald Bowl, or a national title game, is bad for the program. At least in my opinion. You have more direct experience, so you may feel differently.

wait, wait, wait...what? methinks you're confusing Neyer with someone or you didn't read him much before he went "insider." I'm guessing he was the primary source for most stat-friendly people on this site (and almost everywhere). I don't understand where people seem to think that I'm slamming Neyer's opinions on stats. I might not think he's the "Einstein" of them, but I just said I'm indifferent towards him as a writer. saying someone that spearheaded the popularity of a movement such as stats in baseball has a "decent attitude" towards that movement sounds a little...I don't know what the word is, but it's not good. The 50/50 line didn't really seem to be the focus of the article. Just that the Soriano contract was and is a pretty bad one, primarily due to the $18m he's going to get each of the next 5 years. I'm not sure who Neyer's brethren are, but you certainly seem to be slamming him.

Better to lose in the Fiesta bowl than squeak out a win in the Emerald bowl. Even better if you didn't have to cheat to get there.

For the love of god I'm not shocked at anything. For teams like ND and Nebraska, with the prestige they have, their value isn't necessarily tied to their continued and constant success on the field. That's all I was saying. I'll speak more slowly next time. you can speak as fast or slow as you like, but the more logical the better. ND and Nebraska have, for comparison's sake, been better than half the teams in the Big Ten in the last 10 years. A conference looking to improve itself might seek out teams with rabid fan bases that have prestige and recent success (being at least in the top half of its current members would likely fit this definition).

wait, wait, wait...what? methinks you're confusing Neyer with someone or you didn't read him much before he went "insider." I'm guessing he was the primary source for most stat-friendly people on this site (and almost everywhere).

Ehh. Nebraska hasn't been that important to college football in awhile. I think the last notable thing they did was piss everyone off by going to the national championship game in 2001 or so. I was thinking about this too, but it seems the legacy or "presence" of the program has more to do with actual, present-day success. Look at ND. They haven't done [expletive] lately, but everyone is still fretting over them. Over the last 10 years, Nebraska's CFB record is 3rd in the new Big Ten, better than PSU and UM. And which team will win more games in 2010: UM or Nebraksa? Do you really not know why conferences covet ND football or are you just trying to sound stupid? Did I not reference the reason in my post? And I sound stupid... ND has been to 3 bowl games, including 2 BCS bowls, in the last 5 years (and were bowl-eligible and invited to a bowl in 4/5 years) and is one of the highest revenue programs in the country. You're really shocked that a conference would want to add a team like that? Yes, playing that card sounds stupid.

The Big 12 lost a TON of dead weight in Colorado, and a TON of basketball dead weight in Nebraska. The conference actually just got stronger and more difficult, especially for the B12 north teams in football. Now they'll play UT and OU every year as opposed to playing NU and CU. In terms of basketball, it's much harder all around. You will most likely play all teams twice as opposed to getting to play CU or NU twice (for north teams) and the south teams will now have to play KU, Mizzou, and the up and coming KSU twice instead of playing CU or NU once. Basketball RPI was just insured of going WAY up for an already top 2 year in and year out RPI conference. getting rid of iowa st and kansas st would have been getting rid of dead weight... they lost one of their largest media markets and their third or fourth most prestigious football program. Hahaha.... I'm not speaking of markets, nor prestige. I'll agree that KSU football has gone downhill since the 90's, but am it's on it's way back up. KSU basketball is a preseason top 5-10 next year who gave the big 12 (vs KU) their highest rated TV game ever last year. Colorado isn't the media darling you talk it up to be. That state does NOT support that school at all (hence all the empty seats at both FB and BB games). Colorado couldn't care less about college sports. It's a professional sports media darling that is not a big loss at all for the Big 12 in terms of market. NU Bball is always a joke, and will never be any different. Football, yes, they have prestige, but watch that drop when they start getting pummeled in the Big 10 by Penn State, Ohio State, etc. I won't argue about Iowa State however, as they've not been good at much since I was in college in the 90's. A few years of bball, but overall, nothing impressive. And if you want to really talk about KSU bball being good for only one year, look at this. Before last season this was put out, and wow, Sagarin has KSU as #27 all time in terms of bball... http://assets.espn.go.com/photo/2009/1004/cbe1.pdf the level of competition may have increased in the North, but Colorado and Nebraska football are not dead weight. It's sort of petty to keep pretending that it is.

Ehh. Nebraska hasn't been that important to college football in awhile. I think the last notable thing they did was piss everyone off by going to the national championship game in 2001 or so. I was thinking about this too, but it seems the legacy or "presence" of the program has more to do with actual, present-day success. Look at ND. They haven't done [expletive] lately, but everyone is still fretting over them. Over the last 10 years, Nebraska's CFB record is 3rd in the new Big Ten, better than PSU and UM. And which team will win more games in 2010: UM or Nebraksa? Do you really not know why conferences covet ND football or are you just trying to sound stupid?

Ehh. Nebraska hasn't been that important to college football in awhile. I think the last notable thing they did was piss everyone off by going to the national championship game in 2001 or so. The conference gets a lot stronger in basketball. That's unquestionable. it may also have gotten stronger in womens water polo, but who cares? this is about CFB.

Why do you insist on being a dick? I was just providing evidence that I was not the only one who thought this way. Neyer is pretty respected baseball writer not some smuck on a message board who insists on acting 12 whenever he can. But Neyer isn't saying what you're saying. 2 months ago, when Soriano was coming off a terrible year and 2 straight injury-plagued years, he suggested there was a 50/50 chance that the Cubs release him AT SOME POINT BEFORE HIS CONTRACT EXPIRES. That's 5 years. I'd have to agree that the Cubs might release Soriano in 2014 when he's due $18m and they're coming off their 2nd WS victory in 5 years and he's the 25th man on the roster. But that doesn't mean they should release him in 2010 and it certainly doesn't say that no other team would sign up to pay him $1.6m for 4 years.

Oh, God, no. I didn't think you did. But I thought you suggested a team wouldn't have to get much cash if they only had to give up a crappy player. Was just trying to get a sense for how much cash. My sense is, you'd have to give a team a crapload of cash to take Soriano, even if all you got was a warm body, b/c his contract is going to be brutal here pretty quickly. I suppose if he puts up the 4.4 WAR season that he's on pace to, and maybe another one, you have to put up less. But then again, even after 2 years, he's still due $18m per for 3 years.

where does it say only a handful of teams would sign him for the league minimum?

Even when the conference is threatened (which hasn't happened yet)? The Big East isn't going to push Notre Dame out of the conference if they don't join in football, but they need a plan if/when the conference gets raided. Knowing how Notre Dame will act is an important part of that plan. When is the conference getting raided? There were a couple rumors about Pitt or Rutgers, but I heard very little talk about a massive run on BE teams. btw - who the F is Frank the Tank?

Even when the conference is threatened (which hasn't happened yet)? The Big East isn't going to push Notre Dame out of the conference if they don't join in football, but they need a plan if/when the conference gets raided. Knowing how Notre Dame will act is an important part of that plan. I think they know how ND will react. Swarbrick has been in discussions with the BE during this whole thing. ND's 2 goals have been remaining independent and keeping the Big East afloat. But if the BE says "all or nothing," I think ND walks away pretty quickly. Whether that's to the Big Ten, the ACC, or what, I don't know. But the BE knows they don't get ND for football under any scenario, so keeping the ND brand for all other sports is worth it to them. what ND brand does notre dame have besides football? notre dame is no more relevant than missouri in basketball or nearly any other sport. notre dames big draw is football, thats it. ND football brand carries over to all sports. Is the basketball program an all-time great? of course not. but it's still Notre Dame. I've seen fans of other teams (for non-football sports) show up on campus. It's still a big deal. Just like I'm sure other schools are that have huge programs (I'm thinking Bama football, UCLA hoops, Kentucky hoops, UNC/Duke hoops, etc). Even if you're visiting for a lacrosse game, you go check out the sights on campus b/c you're a sports fan. And it's also worth it b/c many ND fans and esp ND alums follow non-football sports. So that's a pretty big draw, even though the sports aren't the money makers football is. It's tickets sold and butts in seats.

Not no team. It's impossible to know but I think it would only be a handful of teams. a handful of 30 teams

Even when the conference is threatened (which hasn't happened yet)? The Big East isn't going to push Notre Dame out of the conference if they don't join in football, but they need a plan if/when the conference gets raided. Knowing how Notre Dame will act is an important part of that plan. I think they know how ND will react. Swarbrick has been in discussions with the BE during this whole thing. ND's 2 goals have been remaining independent and keeping the Big East afloat. But if the BE says "all or nothing," I think ND walks away pretty quickly. Whether that's to the Big Ten, the ACC, or what, I don't know. But the BE knows they don't get ND for football under any scenario, so keeping the ND brand for all other sports is worth it to them.

who's watching? The state of Texas and the other 14 people in the Big 12 footprint? No cable carriers will feel compelled to carry a Big 12 network outside of those areas. So are you telling me that if someone like Kevin Durant shows up at a school in this league again (which will happen), he's going to be broadcast nationally playing against EVERY school in the league. Now the lesser teams (not talking about KSU as our entire bball schedule was televised last year) like Baylor get broadcast nationally, and gets some exposure. People WILL watch that just to see someone like Durant. I get where you're coming from, but you can't be so short sighted about it. it's not just about kevin durant; the big ten network televises field hockey and soccer and volleyball and women's basketball. of course a men's basketball player who is the best player in the country is going to be a big deal, but people on the east and west coast and in the great lakes/ohio valley aren't going to want to pay an extra .75 to 1.00 to have the big xii network on their cable provider. the high profile big xii games (texas-ou, texas-kansas basketball, etc) are going to be broadcast nationally and nobody is really going to care if they miss out on ksu-baylor. the big ten network isn't included by most cable providers in the northeast and mid-atlantic states, and there are tons of big ten grads in those places. I'm curious to know what type of ratings the smaller sports get on the B10 network. Who in the hell watches field hockey? I'm curious to know where the B10 network gets its income, other than from the schools themselves "paying" for their ad slots.

I don't think it wastes it. The Nebraska and Colorado moves were necessary to put things in motion. If The Big 12 stays together, there really wasn't much more they could do to attract Notre Dame aside from going after 2 Big East schools. But that carries a big risk. They didn't want to be the ones to destabilize the eastern conferences alone. It required the SEC's help. This would just be phase 1. Phase 2 comes in a couple of years or so and Notre Dame shouldn't be less of a possibility then than it was a month ago. If anything, I think the discussions/negotiations the Big Ten has had with Notre Dame during this time will help set things up later. Are you assuming that ND football is worse or at least no better in the next 2-3 years? Neither. I think Big East rule stating that if 2 football schools leave the conference, then the league can split between football and non-football schools without penalty while still retaining revenues. As Frank the Tank alluded to, the conference is going to be on edge of other things around the country add to the likelihood that Big East schools are targets for other conferences. The implications for Notre Dame, particularly around non-revenue sports, aren't going away. And the longer expansion talk lasts, the more likely it is that the Big East is going to want to know where Notre Dame stands. The Big East knows where ND stands. I'm not positive Frank the Tank does.

It's only because he made less in the first couple years. Don't pay attention to that fangraphs nonsense, their $ values are terribly skewed. Agreed, but it's still ridiculous to say that he has almost negative value right now even if the Cubs picked up a good chunk of his contract. but how much? I mean, obviously he's worth more than league minimum going forward. But how much of his contract would the Cubs have to pick up for another team to want him through the end of his contract? I don't know. Probably at least half if they wanted to get a decent return. I think they could move him without paying that much, but then you would actually be getting a crappy return. Personally, I really don't think trading Soriano needs to be done or needs to be any kind of priority. They can eat the money as he gets older and crappier so long as they don't compound it with other bad contracts. This off season and the following are going to be critical to see if this team is actually moving in a new direction. so you think if we offered Soriano to every team in the league with no cash included and asked for just any warm body in their organization, we'd have some takers? I'm surprised. I can't see how anyone would want to pay what's left on his contract, even with the numbers he's put up so far this year. I'll admit it could be my bias b/c I hated his contract so much when we gave it to him.

Somebody big and meaingful, not Nebraska. But it gets them the title game/money grab they wanted. And it's not like Nebraska football isn't in the tough half of the programs in the Big Ten.

I don't think it wastes it. The Nebraska and Colorado moves were necessary to put things in motion. If The Big 12 stays together, there really wasn't much more they could do to attract Notre Dame aside from going after 2 Big East schools. But that carries a big risk. They didn't want to be the ones to destabilize the eastern conferences alone. It required the SEC's help. This would just be phase 1. Phase 2 comes in a couple of years or so and Notre Dame shouldn't be less of a possibility then than it was a month ago. If anything, I think the discussions/negotiations the Big Ten has had with Notre Dame during this time will help set things up later. Are you assuming that ND football is worse or at least no better in the next 2-3 years?

It's only because he made less in the first couple years. Don't pay attention to that fangraphs nonsense, their $ values are terribly skewed. Agreed, but it's still ridiculous to say that he has almost negative value right now even if the Cubs picked up a good chunk of his contract. but how much? I mean, obviously he's worth more than league minimum going forward. But how much of his contract would the Cubs have to pick up for another team to want him through the end of his contract?

yeah, my question was really aimed at Lou's apparent perceptions of each player.

The Pac-10 needs 1 more even if Texas et al don't join. Seems like Utah is a popular rumor that spot.