Jon
-
Posts
19,262 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by Jon
-
Simply because Notre Dame can't carry as much weight against fewer larger conferences as they did against more smaller conferences. Each superconference as more consolidated power than before. Again, it's not about them being locked out completely. It's about having to settle on more limitations and a smaller piece of the pie because the conferences just don't have to budge the way they had to before. The likeliest candidate is a new ACC with added schools from the Big East. But the situation on the east coast will probably develop last. The longer that plays out and the longer Notre Dame holds out, the less bargaining power they'll have if they decide to negotiate with the Big Ten.
-
07-08 - 6.1M 08-09 - 6.4M 09-10 - 6.5M (est) I'm still trying to find the site where I got that, the numbers just stuck in my head. Yeah, those are the reported Big Ten Network figures according the Illinois athletic department. They numbers vary slightly from source to source, but they're all in the same ballpark. ESPN is about $8.4 million per school with another $5-7 million from misc. sources (advertising for the most part).
-
first - your tv revenue numbers are just wrong. don't believe everything that you read (about both sides). the rest of that is just speculation. you're talking in definite statements when you have no idea how the BCS title game will work. I don't know how anyone could at this point, with the potential for such a huge shakeup. No, that's the whole point. I'm talking about how Notre Dame cannot control their destiny without joining a conference. There's no telling what will happen (title game, BCS system, bowl affiliations, TV situation, everything) and that should really worry them. The one guarantee is that the Big Ten, SEC, and Pac-10 are going to do very well for themselves in just about every aspect. Notre Dame has no such guarantee. As for the TV revenue, Big Ten revenue is pretty well reported. The Big Ten Network alone is worth nearly $5 million a year per school and that's going to grow substantially. Just the New York Market would probably mean another $1-2 million per school at least. That doesn't even take ESPN and other advertising revenue into account.
-
Notre Dame's sweet gig is about to go from pretty decent short-term to being very hard to sustain long-term. why? Because decent TV revenue and a spot in BCS discussions are only a guarantee right now by joining a conference. why? The football contract with NBC runs out in 2015 and Notre Dame is barely getting half of what Big Ten teams pull in (soon to be less than half). Compared to the Big Ten and SEC, they're far from being in a stable TV situation. Finish up with a few below average years and NBC isn't exactly going to open up their wallets. And even if they do, it won't come close to what other schools are getting. Right now Notre Dame gets a BCS birth if they finish in the top 8 and they get a payout regardless. There's just no way to guarantee something similar in the new setup. Notre Dame just simply won't be as important to the BCS in a world of super conferences as they are now based on size/power alone. And "guarantee" is the key word. Yes, there's a chance they might not lose much by staying independent. But worst case scenario would leave them at a real disadvantage.
-
Notre Dame's sweet gig is about to go from pretty decent short-term to being very hard to sustain long-term. why? Because decent TV revenue and a spot in BCS discussions are only a guarantee right now by joining a conference.
-
-
Some more interesting stuff from the same guy:
-
Ron Zook is too valuable to the Big Ten. Don't leave us, Ron. The Big 12 dissolving situation (why isn't dissolvement a word?) could potentially be interesting to watch. They need 9 votes to dissolve, which has major implications financially and in terms of the timeline. Right now, Nebraska and the 5 going to the Pac-10 only make 6 schools.
-
Notre Dame's sweet gig is about to go from pretty decent short-term to being very hard to sustain long-term.
-
Part of me thinks the Big Ten knows a playoff is inevitable, and this expansion is a way of guaranteeing two seats at that table. Perhaps, but they're still going to fight it. The entire bowl situation is going to need to be looked at once the musical chairs stop, but even delaying playoffs 10 years could mean a huge difference financially.
-
I'll be pretty disappointed if the Pac-10 isn't done adding 6 teams by the end of tomorrow.
-
Raisin would be allowed, nay, legally obligated, to tear off and stomp on any 2004 USC national champion t-shirts he sees. I can't wait until 1 central...
-
I've been wondering about how ugly it would be if they just grabbed Nebraska. What a complete dud. Not as bad as just grabbing Missouri, but not the least bit impressive. I don't think it's likely. It will probably take a little while for Notre Dame to make a decision and the Big East/ACC/SEC situation to play out, but I'd be shocked if there wasn't a phase II which included at least 2 more schools like Missouri, Rutgers, Syracuse, etc. More quantity than quality, really, but I also think Notre Dame is finally going to have to make the decision to come to the Big Ten in the next month. Also, I wouldn't be shocked if the Big Ten resists divisions entirely in order to try and prevent the BCS from becoming a playoff system.
-
Colorado to the Pac-10 is a done deal. http://www.dailycamera.com/news/ci_15268160
-
Because of Delany's reported reaction to the original rumor.
-
It doesn't make a ton of sense. It's theorized that Missouri would partly serve as a geographic "link" to Texas, though that doesn't make a ton of sense. I can't imagine that Missouri's value as a link (just by looking at a map) would push them over the top and be more important than cable subscription revenue. But it's also quite possible that adding Missouri as 13 would make the Big Ten less attractive for Notre Dame since they want as small of a conference as possible.
-
In addition. Everyone's operating under the assumption that's a done deal. He also had this to say: I'd have to believe that Missouri would be contingent on Notre Dame, not Texas, since Texas and Texas A&M would push the conference to 14 teams. I can't see how they'd risk settling on 15. Unless they're committed to not having divisions, in which case finishing with 15 teams and an open offer to Notre Dame would work just fine.
-
The poster on the Northwestern Rivals board that started the crapstorm in the Big Ten offices a few weeks ago over leaked information just had this to say: I have a hard time buying it, but based on his track record, I can't say I'm ready to discard it just yet.
-
From Adam Rittenberg (who stays away from rumors):
-
http://download.lardlad.com/framegrabs/9F02/203.jpg
-
I can't say I have my head fully around the academic implications since few journalists or bloggers have really done any in-depth writing on it. But that's because it is rather complex and not many people with sports backgrounds have enough knowledge of how these academic groups operate to form a suitable starting point. Here are just two factors: Not many sports journalists are going to know what "promotes policy initiatives for national and international issues" means in terms of dollar value.
-
I can't see Nebraska hanging around for that deal to happen, though, regardless of the word that they'll announce a jump on Friday. And according that rumor, if there's no Nebraska, there's no deal. Understandable on Fox's part. Their national presence during the season leaves a lot to be desired aside from their stake in the Big Ten Network.
-
It varies from conference to conference, but there's still far more potentional money in research than there is in academics. The relationships that each school has does affect that money. The CIC (Big Ten plus University of Chicago) is a really strong group of schools that really helps out each institution. It's also a factor in getting the best students from each state. I can't speak for the Pac-10 and I don't know what their voting process is like, but I'd have to imagine that the top schools wouldn't be thrilled with the prospect of inviting schools not up to their current standards. I can speak for the SEC, though, and say it isn't.
-
The questions is where is the money coming from? Even if it's just the Big Ten and possibly the SEC that make some additions, they'll being going into TV negotiations (within the next year, I believe) with the real possibility of not having a viable long-term plan to remain competitive.
-
It's a tough call for the Pac-10. Academically they'll be really watered down, but what leverage will they have without expansion? They don't have a good TV situation and they've got to keep pace with the Big Ten and SEC. I'm glad the Big Ten isn't in that position. They certainly wouldn't take all those schools just to grab Texas. By the way, good timing on the APR scores for Colorado, who have forfeited scholarships in both football (4) and basketball (1). Their football APR was 920. My goodness that's bad.