per ESPN....however, no offers being made to UCONN or Cincinnati at this point.
Still sucks A LOT.
They are voting for candidates.
It may be entirely possible that more than one will receive the 75% of votes needed to become a member. Likely that happens? No.
What a mess. Well 15 yrs of real building of the athletic program taking a big hit. thanks for trying wild, cords, c ham, crean, buzz.
I see nothing of this on espn
One vote shy...formal vote tomorrow. Cluster
http://atlanticcoastconfidential.com/
supposedly conf call at 7 am tomorrow to confirm UL
Quote from: KipsBayEagle on November 27, 2012, 11:49:43 PM
I see nothing of this on espn
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8685360/acc-expected-vote-add-louisville-cardinals-source-says (http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/8685360/acc-expected-vote-add-louisville-cardinals-source-says)
It sucks for the Big East and Marquette, but if I were the ACC, I'd be making the same move. I really hope we find somewhere else to move. I know someone else mentioned in a different thread the possibility of the basketball schools voting to disband the Big East -- is that no longer a possibility because of Tulane and ECU?
The basketball schools need I believe a two-thirds majority to disband. There are currently 7 of us. With Louisville leaving, UConn, South Florida, and Cincinnati are all that's left. I don't believe Temple gets a vote until they are confirmed as full members. We could vote to disband at any time until another member joins fully, but with Temple, it's a small window.
I better not EVER hear about the "presitigious" academic schools of the ACC if they are taking UL and their 22% overall grad rate. This whole thing is just absolutely disgusting. The fans, the rivalries, the season ticket holders of every single one of these schools, and most of all the STUDENT athletes are the ones that suffer most from all thsi greed from University presidents. Funny, how in reality, all those things mentioned above in my post are what pays the bills for these schools, isn't it?? Nothing like biting the hand that feeds you.
This is all so disgusting, it literally makes me sick to my stomach. Greed....it's what drives America. That's REALLY sad.
Glad this board thinks it's the end of the world. This board is never right about these things.
We'll be fine. We've been in four different conferences in the last 15 years. Every-time we do ok. The fifth conference will be more of the same.
Again, the schools that are screwed are the mediocre football schools like Cincy and Uconn. Not the basketball schools only schools. We are not "burdened" with a so-so football program.
And don't think the ACC is secure. The Big 10, Big 12 and SEC are still trying to poach. If UNC leaves, the ACC is just another version of the Big East.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on November 28, 2012, 07:20:30 AM
Glad this board thinks it's the end of the world. This board is never right about these things.
We'll be fine. We've been in four different conferences in the last 15 years. Every-time we do ok. The fifth conference will be more of the same.
Again, the schools that are screwed are the mediocre football schools like Cincy and Uconn. Not the basketball schools only schools. We are not "burdened" with a so-so football program.
And don't think the ACC is secure. The Big 10, Big 12 and SEC are still trying to poach. If UNC leaves, the ACC is just another version of the Big East.
Agreed. +1
Let's get 'er done and form a basketball only powerhouse league. The league would gets lots of attention as an elite, bball only conference. One to be reckoned with. Might happen in the next 30-45 days.
Messes things up a little for the moment, as a UConn pick would have triggered potential UL & UC to the Big 12 movement. Though UConn is probably the next move if the ACC loses FSU or if they just decide they want more.
Moving to Big 12 is best move.
Try to Convince Creighton to come with so Big 12 can get the Omaha market back with a team that sells out almost all of it's games.
Quote from: brewcity77 on November 28, 2012, 05:44:22 AM
The basketball schools need I believe a two-thirds majority to disband. There are currently 7 of us. With Louisville leaving, UConn, South Florida, and Cincinnati are all that's left. I don't believe Temple gets a vote until they are confirmed as full members. We could vote to disband at any time until another member joins fully, but with Temple, it's a small window.
I actually heard they need two schools to leave to have the 2/3 majority needed. I think Temple has a vote because they are currently in the conference for football.
Quote from: KenoshaWarrior on November 28, 2012, 07:37:58 AM
Moving to Big 12 is best move.
Try to Convince Creighton to come with so Big 12 can get the Omaha market back with a team that sells out almost all of it's games.
Right. Then Marquette can start breeding unicorns that sh*t gold bricks too....
I am actually happy to hear; even though it sucks for us. Now is the time for those Providence Italians to form the Catholic Conference.
It's time for us to find a new home so every time another school leaves from the Big East, we don't need to worry about our future.
I hope everyone is ready for the turd sandwich we are all going to have to eat.
so when do hear the first recruit has second thoughts as they signed up to play Big East level of competition and now they are not going to get that?
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on November 28, 2012, 07:20:30 AM
Glad this board thinks it's the end of the world. This board is never right about these things.
We'll be fine. We've been in four different conferences in the last 15 years. Every-time we do ok. The fifth conference will be more of the same.
Again, the schools that are screwed are the mediocre football schools like Cincy and Uconn. Not the basketball schools only schools. We are not "burdened" with a so-so football program.
And don't think the ACC is secure. The Big 10, Big 12 and SEC are still trying to poach. If UNC leaves, the ACC is just another version of the Big East.
I wonder how those ESPN/NBC Sports TV Rights negotiations are going?
Quote from: muguru on November 28, 2012, 05:57:14 AM
I better not EVER hear about the "presitigious" academic schools of the ACC if they are taking UL and their 22% overall grad rate. This whole thing is just absolutely disgusting. The fans, the rivalries, the season ticket holders of every single one of these schools, and most of all the STUDENT athletes are the ones that suffer most from all thsi greed from University presidents. Funny, how in reality, all those things mentioned above in my post are what pays the bills for these schools, isn't it?? Nothing like biting the hand that feeds you.
This is all so disgusting, it literally makes me sick to my stomach. Greed....it's what drives America. That's REALLY sad.
Stability is key here. Greed may be part of it, but ultimately these schools are looking for stability. Can't blame them one bit. We knew this was coming many years ago.
On the academic side, the UNC and Duke grads at work are very pissed but they also knew this was coming. The only conference that can really keep the academics in check and the athletics is the Big Ten.
Quote from: Knight Commission on November 28, 2012, 08:16:05 AM
I wonder how those ESPN/NBC Sports TV Rights negotiations are going?
They are negotiating beyond those two entities. To say they are challenging is an understatement.
Not a matter of if, but when, UNC is going to the Big 10. No idea who the 16th team will be, but lots of chatter about UNC leaving.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 28, 2012, 08:37:11 AM
Stability is key here. Greed may be part of it, but ultimately these schools are looking for stability. Can't blame them one bit. We knew this was coming many years ago.
On the academic side, the UNC and Duke grads at work are very pissed but they also knew this was coming. The only conference that can really keep the academics in check and the athletics is the Big Ten.
I heard the B10 wants UNC. UNC wants the B10. The stumbling block is Duke. That rivalry is important enough but Duke doesn't want to go the B10 with them. Duke is happy associated with an "east coast" conference. So UNC is paralyzed trying to figure out what to do.
If UNC does make the jump to the B10, that gives them a sold east coast core (Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers and UNC) and then the B10 will try and "turn" ND from the ACC to the B10.
The B10 is the top dog, thanks to the B10 network. The ACC can be as shaky as the BE if UNC jumps to the B10, Fla State goes to the SEC and ND flips to the B10 (like TCU flipped to the B12 from the BE.)
If UNC bolts for the B10, i'd think ND would take a seat at the table.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on November 28, 2012, 08:43:15 AM
I heard the B10 wants UNC. UNC wants the B10. The stumbling block is Duke. That rivalry is important enough but Duke doesn't want to go the B10 with them. Duke is happy associated with an "east coast" conference. So UNC is paralyzed trying to figure out what to do.
If UNC does make the jump to the B10, that gives them a sold east coast core (Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers and UNC) and then the B10 will try and "turn" ND from the ACC to the B10.
The B10 is the top dog, thanks to the B10 network. The ACC can be as shaky as the BE if UNC jumps to the B10, Fla State goes to the SEC and ND flips to the B10 (like TCU flipped to the B12 from the BE.)
Great post. While I know there is the UNC/Duke rivalry to worry about they could simply schedule each other every year like MU/UW.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on November 28, 2012, 08:43:15 AM
I heard the B10 wants UNC. UNC wants the B10. The stumbling block is Duke. That rivalry is important enough but Duke doesn't want to go the B10 with them. Duke is happy associated with an "east coast" conference. So UNC is paralyzed trying to figure out what to do.
If UNC does make the jump to the B10, that gives them a sold east coast core (Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers and UNC) and then the B10 will try and "turn" ND from the ACC to the B10.
The B10 is the top dog, thanks to the B10 network. The ACC can be as shaky as the BE if UNC jumps to the B10, Fla State goes to the SEC and ND flips to the B10 (like TCU flipped to the B12 from the BE.)
I only want this to happen because I want the ACC poached as they're the biggest culprits in all of this reshuffling and they only take from the BE.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on November 28, 2012, 08:43:15 AM
I heard the B10 wants UNC. UNC wants the B10. The stumbling block is Duke. That rivalry is important enough but Duke doesn't want to go the B10 with them. Duke is happy associated with an "east coast" conference. So UNC is paralyzed trying to figure out what to do.
If UNC does make the jump to the B10, that gives them a sold east coast core (Penn State, Maryland, Rutgers and UNC) and then the B10 will try and "turn" ND from the ACC to the B10.
The B10 is the top dog, thanks to the B10 network. The ACC can be as shaky as the BE if UNC jumps to the B10, Fla State goes to the SEC and ND flips to the B10 (like TCU flipped to the B12 from the BE.)
Hearing the same thing about UNC and B1G, but not that Duke is the one getting in the way. More to it than that, including NC State and the politics of the state of North Carolina. NC State powers want to be part of wherever UNC is and are putting the screws to it. Even threatening legislation in the state gov't that would force that action.
Also, Big 12 is making hard run at FSU right now. ND may flip to the B1G, but the B1G is still demanding ND for all of football and ND is saying NO...for now. ND has tremendous leverage right now due to their football program's ascent. Timing is everything.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on November 28, 2012, 08:46:26 AM
Great post. While I know there is the UNC/Duke rivalry to worry about they could simply schedule each other every year like MU/UW.
When's the last time tradition has gotten in the way of realignment?
Quote from: MU Fan in Connecticut on November 28, 2012, 08:48:43 AM
I only want this to happen because I want the ACC poached as they're the biggest culprits in all of this reshuffling and they only take from the BE.
BE is every bit as culpable if you go back years ago when they added Miami, Va. Tech, WVU, etc
- Big Ten is waiting on UVA, and UVA is waiting on the court proceedings between Maryland and the ACC.
- Duke/UNC are a package deal if they were to go to BIG
- If UVA, Duke & UNC bolt for BIG Notre Dame will follow
- ACC will be screwed if any of the above happens. This will turn the ACC into half ACC schools and half former Big East schools. Not too many teams outside of Cincy and UCONN want into ACC at this point.
- ESPN is pushing UCONN to join the ACC for many obvious reasons there yet ACC does not want UCONN.
- FSU and Miami want to go to SEC.
Quote from: LAZER on November 28, 2012, 08:52:31 AM
When's the last time tradition has gotten in the way of realignment?
That is exactly my point :)
Quote from: damuts222 on November 28, 2012, 08:57:45 AM
- ESPN is pushing UCONN to join the ACC for many obvious reasons there yet ACC does not want UCONN.
BC is still blocking???
Quote from: damuts222 on November 28, 2012, 08:57:45 AM
- Big Ten is waiting on UVA, and UVA is waiting on the court proceedings between Maryland and the ACC.
- Duke/UNC are a package deal if they were to go to BIG
- If UVA, Duke & UNC bolt for BIG Notre Dame will follow
- ACC will be screwed if any of the above happens. This will turn the ACC into half ACC schools and half former Big East schools. Not too many teams outside of Cincy and UCONN want into ACC at this point.
- ESPN is pushing UCONN to join the ACC for many obvious reasons there yet ACC does not want UCONN.
- FSU and Miami want to go to SEC.
B1G won't take UVA, UNC, Duke and ND because that would be 18 teams. Also, what schools in the ACC are in the AAU ("required" for B1G membership)? As another post said UNC wants to be in the B1G and the B1G wants UNC. And expect at least Florida St. to go to the SEC.
On the plus side, eventually the BE will run out of football schools the other conferences want, that's when all this ends.
why not join the A10? Bring the hoops schools with us and for a true powerhouse league.
I too think this merry-go-round ends when we finally run out of football schools. I've not studied the issue as closely as some but somehow I think the BEast either eventually marries the ACC or the A-10, the former if a viable 5th best football conference can emerge from those two former BCS conferences, the latter if that proves impossible and we go the Catholic BB Conference route. I'm of the opinion that the new western BEast football schools pay the $5MM and head back home just like SMU.
I'll call it the Big Atlantic for now.
Quote from: Heavy Gear on November 28, 2012, 09:08:52 AM
Also, what schools in the ACC are in the AAU ("required" for B1G membership)?
UVA, Duke, UNC and Pitt (if you count them).
edit - modified the quote.
Quote from: jsglow on November 28, 2012, 09:23:19 AM
I too think this merry-go-round ends when we finally run out of football schools. I've not studied the issue as closely as some but somehow I think the BEast either eventually marries the ACC or the A-10, the former if a viable 5th best football conference can emerge from those two former BCS conferences, the latter if that proves impossible and we go the Catholic BB Conference route. I'm of the opinion that the new western BEast football schools pay the $5MM and head back home just like SMU.
I'll call it the Big Atlantic for now.
To be honest, I'm not sure why the schools that were moving to the BEAST don't just reform a new conference and take the best of the west schools not in the PAC-12/Big 12.
Please ACC, just finish us already...
(http://www.mememaker.net/static/images/memes/1042051.jpg)
Quote from: JTBMU7 on November 28, 2012, 09:20:06 AM
why not join the A10? Bring the hoops schools with us and for a true powerhouse league.
Because of:
- Fordham
- St. Bonaventure
- LaSalle
- St. Joe's
- GW
- Duquesne
- Rhode Island
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on November 28, 2012, 09:30:12 AM
UVA, Duke, UNC and Pitt (if you count them).
edit - modified the quote.
The irony of all this is that UNC has a huge under reported academic scandal on its hands. The B1G might have an image problem at some point if they start grabbing all these "problem" children.
Quote from: Aughnanure on November 28, 2012, 09:38:04 AM
Because of:
- Fordham
- St. Bonaventure
- LaSalle
- St. Joe's
- GW
- Duquesne
- Rhode Island
thats no worse than Tulane and SMU...
if you're going to make a basketball conf that's the cleanest way to do it. there'd be 26 teams but you'd still have the main players from the BEAST and you get Butler, Xavier, VCU, etc...
Quote from: mu03eng on November 28, 2012, 09:44:14 AM
The irony of all this is that UNC has a huge under reported academic scandal on its hands. The B1G might have an image problem at some point if they start grabbing all these "problem" children.
I think it's not the academic rigor of the programs the athletes study that concerns the Little 10, it's the ability to say "mwa ha, we're all American Association of University schools, mwa ha" while hob nobbing with donors. Few, if any, athletes are in the AAU-type programs (e.g. research).
I mean, UW has had some academic issues with its athletes, Michigan has too, and that's just what I can think of off the top of my head. Not every single year, and maybe not big 'scandal' type issues, but the AAU distinction is about the institution, not the athletes.
Quote from: JTBMU7 on November 28, 2012, 09:47:42 AM
thats no worse than Tulane and SMU...
if you're going to make a basketball conf that's the cleanest way to do it. there'd be 26 teams but you'd still have the main players from the BEAST and you get Butler, Xavier, VCU, etc...
My point was why join that conference when you can just pick off the best pieces and begin anew.
Quote from: damuts222 on November 28, 2012, 08:57:45 AM
- ESPN is pushing UCONN to join the ACC for many obvious reasons there yet ACC does not want UCONN.
This sort of thing is why I'm guessing Congress will get involved at some point in the coming year. Essentially, you have corporations (TV/Athletic Equipment) pushing public institutions of higher learning funded by tax dollars. I think the wrong e-mail gets in the right hands and the situation will be at least discussed.
I don't want this to happen, but I think it's the only thing that will stop the chaos at this point.
Congress needs to stay away. Not a federal matter in the least.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 28, 2012, 09:59:58 AM
Congress needs to stay away. Not a federal matter in the least.
Exactly. Plus, we want this to be over sooner rather than later right? Congress isn't exactly known for doing things quickly.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on November 28, 2012, 10:01:45 AM
Exactly. Plus, we want this to be over sooner rather than later right? Congress isn't exactly known for doing things quickly.
The fastest way to get congress involved is screw Gtown, lot of alums in a lot of positions of power
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 28, 2012, 08:53:43 AM
BE is every bit as culpable if you go back years ago when they added Miami, Va. Tech, WVU, etc
I thought those three were independents before they joined the Big East?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 28, 2012, 09:59:58 AM
Congress needs to stay away. Not a federal matter in the least.
I'm no fan of congress getting involved in most matters, but it is interesting if you consider that tax dollars are directly or indirectly funding a lot of this movement/buy-out stuff.
I'm sure there is creative accounting to get around it, but if I'm a Maryland tax payer, and I find out they are using my money to buy themselves out of the ACC, I'm going to be pretty pissed and start hammering my congressman.
I know it's a long-shot, but anytime tax dollars and grandstanding are involved, Congress isn't too far off.
Georgia and UNC to B1G
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 28, 2012, 09:59:58 AM
Congress needs to stay away. Not a federal matter in the least.
Anti Trust implications are not a Federal matter?
Or the fact that these athletic departments and conferences are really multi-million dollar corporations in partnerships with television networks masquerading as a wing of a tax exempt university. If all these schools want to say the athletic departments are separate and self-funding and don't use public tax money to support themselves, then let's really treat them as separate and tax them as a separate entity, disallow charitable deductions for athletic donations, and make them pay property taxes on their facilities.
From a state perspective, if the university is able to make all this money through athletics, they should use this money as a profit center to fund the rest of the university and stop asking state tax-payers to support everything else.
Quote from: Litehouse on November 28, 2012, 10:18:45 AM
Or the fact that these athletic departments and conferences are really multi-million dollar corporations in partnerships with television networks masquerading as a wing of a tax exempt university. If all these schools want to say the athletic departments are separate and self-funding and don't use public tax money to support themselves, then let's really treat them as separate and tax them as a separate entity, disallow charitable deductions for athletic donations, and make them pay property taxes on their facilities.
From a state perspective, if the university is able to make all this money through athletics, they should use this money as a profit center to fund the rest of the university and stop asking state tax-payers to support everything else.
Especially when you consider the cost of attending these institutions keeps rising at the rate it does.
Quote from: PBRme on November 28, 2012, 10:14:22 AM
Georgia and UNC to B1G
Are you just typing things? Predicting what you think will happen? Or have you read this somewhere like it's actually imminent? Links would be helpful.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on November 28, 2012, 10:25:41 AM
Are you just typing things? Predicting what you think will happen? Or have you read this somewhere like it's actually imminent? Links would be helpful.
+1
Quote from: Aughnanure on November 28, 2012, 09:56:56 AM
My point was why join that conference when you can just pick off the best pieces and begin anew.
you can't reasonably just "begin anew" when talking about a conference. it's just not realistic. the A10 has good tradition, solid programs, a better fit with the other universitys, east coast exposure, Brooklyn for their tourney... basically we would be moving to stable ground, despite the lower half of the league being weak (though which league doesnt have a weak bottom half?)
Quote from: wiscwarrior on November 28, 2012, 10:16:15 AM
Anti Trust implications are not a Federal matter?
Where is the anti-trust issue here?
Quote from: PBRme on November 28, 2012, 10:14:22 AM
Georgia and UNC to B1G
Georgia to leave SEC, I don't think so. No one leaving SEC, they might raid the ACC though.
Quote from: Litehouse on November 28, 2012, 10:18:45 AM
Or the fact that these athletic departments and conferences are really multi-million dollar corporations in partnerships with television networks masquerading as a wing of a tax exempt university. If all these schools want to say the athletic departments are separate and self-funding and don't use public tax money to support themselves, then let's really treat them as separate and tax them as a separate entity, disallow charitable deductions for athletic donations, and make them pay property taxes on their facilities.
That's fine. You can do all of this. But you realize that is just going to make the grab for money all that more intense right?
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on November 28, 2012, 10:10:28 AM
I'm no fan of congress getting involved in most matters, but it is interesting if you consider that tax dollars are directly or indirectly funding a lot of this movement/buy-out stuff.
I'm sure there is creative accounting to get around it, but if I'm a Maryland tax payer, and I find out they are using my money to buy themselves out of the ACC, I'm going to be pretty pissed and start hammering my congressman.
I know it's a long-shot, but anytime tax dollars and grandstanding are involved, Congress isn't too far off.
It would be more useful to hammer your state legislator. Congress isn't going to get involved in state tax dollars being used for these purposes. It is a state issue.
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on November 28, 2012, 10:10:28 AM
I'm no fan of congress getting involved in most matters, but it is interesting if you consider that tax dollars are directly or indirectly funding a lot of this movement/buy-out stuff.
I'm sure there is creative accounting to get around it, but if I'm a Maryland tax payer, and I find out they are using my money to buy themselves out of the ACC, I'm going to be pretty pissed and start hammering my congressman.
I know it's a long-shot, but anytime tax dollars and grandstanding are involved, Congress isn't too far off.
Why should Congress get involved with how the State of Maryland spends its tax dollars? If they did get involved which side do you think the members of Congress from Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc will be on?
Quote from: nyg on November 28, 2012, 10:46:47 AM
Georgia to leave SEC, I don't think so. No one leaving SEC, they might raid the ACC though.
I think Georgia is looking for more Academic prestige. They already view themselves as Vandy like in their student population. Virginia is out because it would need to be a VaTech package deal. The B1G is a lot more money and would be even more with the Atlanta market. The next logical choices are Mizzou, Fla State, and Miami.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 28, 2012, 10:47:17 AM
That's fine. You can do all of this. But you realize that is just going to make the grab for money all that more intense right?
I get your point. But, can the money grab
really get any more intense?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 28, 2012, 10:50:07 AM
It would be more useful to hammer your state legislator. Congress isn't going to get involved in state tax dollars being used for these purposes. It is a state issue.
Yea, you're right, to start.
I'm not saying congress should get involved, but anytime there are millions of tax dollars and an opportunity to grandstand, you can bet somebody in the federal government is going to take some action.
Quote from: LittleMurs on November 28, 2012, 10:51:50 AM
Why should Congress get involved with how the State of Maryland spends its tax dollars? If they did get involved which side do you think the members of Congress from Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc will be on?
It's certainly a state issue to start. I'm not an expert of federal finance protocol, so maybe it would never reach the fed. level.
I'm just assuming with this volume of $ moving around, and this amount of publicity, somebody at the Fed. level will eventually want to get involved.
Quote from: LittleMurs on November 28, 2012, 10:51:50 AM
Why should Congress get involved with how the State of Maryland spends its tax dollars? If they did get involved which side do you think the members of Congress from Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc will be on?
There are substantial federal dollars that go to funding education (along with state taxes).
University of Illinois 15.3% of their funding comes from "US Grants and Contracts/Federal Appropriations" (18.3 from state)
Wisconsin System is about 26% coming from Federal Grants and Contracts. ($871 million -- $397 comes from state)
(Look up any school + annual report to get data)
Quote from: LittleMurs on November 28, 2012, 10:54:50 AM
I get your point. But, can the money grab really get any more intense?
Sure. You ramp up the costs even more, which is what taxation will do, and schools are going to get more desperate.
Quote from: T-Bone on November 28, 2012, 11:04:03 AM
There are substantial federal dollars that go to funding education (along with state taxes).
University of Illinois 15.3% of their funding comes from "US Grants and Contracts/Federal Appropriations"
Wisconsin System is about 26% coming from Federal Grants and Contracts. ($871 million)
(Look up any school + annual report to get data)
But that money is used for research, student financial aid, etc. It isn't used for athletics.
I don't see any way an SEC team leaves for the Big Ten, the money isn't that much different. They have such a good thing going right now and the quality of football still matters to their fans, no way they give that up to play in the Big Ten and watch their attendance decrease. Maybe Missouri, but they just got there and I doubt they feel like paying another exit fee this soon.
Georgia (or any other school) is not leaving the SEC. I agree with some of the posts here that the ACC could be ripe for picking by both the SEC and B1G.
Quote from: Litehouse on November 28, 2012, 11:06:43 AM
I don't see any way an SEC team leaves for the Big Ten, the money isn't that much different. They have such a good thing going right now and the quality of football still matters to their fans, no way they give that up to play in the Big Ten and watch their attendance decrease. Maybe Missouri, but they just got there and I doubt they feel like paying another exit fee this soon.
The SEC exit fee is zero. They know where they sit in this game.
Quote from: Heavy Gear on November 28, 2012, 11:08:06 AM
Georgia (or any other school) is not leaving the SEC. I agree with some of the posts here that the ACC could be ripe for picking by both the SEC and B1G.
How about we just have a 40-team Big 10 and be done with all this crap?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 28, 2012, 10:46:10 AM
Where is the anti-trust issue here?
I really don't know that there is, but can the schools that are being shut out of the major tv dollars and the collusion of the networks create a scenario where an ambitious attorney/politician might not try to make a case?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 28, 2012, 11:05:29 AM
Sure. You ramp up the costs even more, which is what taxation will do, and schools are going to get more desperate.
I think that's what would ultimately lead to the collapse of the system as we currently know it. It would eventually become true minor league football, and people would start to lose interest.
If the NFL eventually decides they can make more money playing some games on Saturdays I could see interest in college football decreasing as well.
Quote from: Groin_pull on November 28, 2012, 11:10:06 AM
How about we just have a 40-team Big 10 and be done with all this crap?
We won't. It would lead to dilution of revenue for the top dogs. That's why all the switching is being done by just a few teams at a time.
Quote from: Groin_pull on November 28, 2012, 11:10:06 AM
How about we just have a 40-team Big 10 and be done with all this crap?
Don't laugh ... they might be their goal and all those teams broadcast on the three Big 10 networks cutting out ESPN and everyone else.
So, in the end, it is about world domination.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on November 28, 2012, 11:05:54 AM
But that money is used for research, student financial aid, etc. It isn't used for athletics.
As precedent in numerous Title IX challenges has shown us, the courts don't much care exactly where the money is going. If schools take a dime of federal money - for any purpose - they are subject to the decisions of the federal government.
And, FWIW, it's silly to pretend you can separate the two. Most athletic departments are subsidized - in some cases to a large extent - by student fees. Some students pay those fees through federally backed loans or grants. Thus, athletic departments are supported with federal money.
Quote from: Groin_pull on November 28, 2012, 11:10:06 AM
How about we just have a 40-team Big 10 and be done with all this crap?
Well, eventually with the expansion, you might see a conf. go bigger in order to restore some sense with geographic divisions.
It doesn't make much sense to have Rutgers women's tennis heading to Iowa. If you have enough eastern teams, you can create BIG10 east and BIG10 West and create some efficiency for non-revenue generating sports.
"Traditionalists" will scoff, but I think most traditions are headed out the window.
Let's be real.
If Marquette was in a more favorable position/in a power conference there would be no talk on this board of anti-trust issues and the federal government being involved. We'd be posting about how this is just the new NCAA landscape. Just accept the fact Marquette is not a hot commodity on the conference realignment market and move on.
Quote from: Warriors10 on November 28, 2012, 11:27:07 AM
Let's be real.
If Marquette was in a more favorable position/in a power conference there would be no talk on this board of anti-trust issues and the federal government being involved. We'd be posting about how this is just the new NCAA landscape. Just accept the fact Marquette is not a hot commodity on the conference realignment market and move on.
So wait ... you're saying a small, private school without a football program isn't a hot commodity on the conference realignment market?
Thanks for the insight.
Quote from: Pakuni on November 28, 2012, 11:28:26 AM
So wait ... you're saying a small, private school without a football program isn't a hot commodity on the conference realignment market?
Thanks for the insight.
Thanks for the insightful post yourself.
Quote from: Warriors10 on November 28, 2012, 11:27:07 AM
Let's be real.
If Marquette was in a more favorable position/in a power conference there would be no talk on this board of anti-trust issues and the federal government being involved. We'd be posting about how this is just the new NCAA landscape. Just accept the fact Marquette is not a hot commodity on the conference realignment market and move on.
Quote from: Pakuni on November 28, 2012, 11:28:26 AM
So wait ... you're saying a small, private school without a football program isn't a hot commodity on the conference realignment market?
Thanks for the insight.
I think that what Warriors10 was trying to provide wasn't insight, but perspective.
Quote from: Litehouse on November 28, 2012, 10:04:47 AM
I thought those three were independents before they joined the Big East?
In football, yes. In other sports, depends. They were scattered about in a number of conferences like the Metro, Atlantic 10, etc.
Well then I guess there's only one thing left to do.
WIN THE WHOLE DAMN THING!
Quote from: JTBMU7 on November 28, 2012, 10:40:59 AM
you can't reasonably just "begin anew" when talking about a conference. it's just not realistic. the A10 has good tradition, solid programs, a better fit with the other universitys, east coast exposure, Brooklyn for their tourney... basically we would be moving to stable ground, despite the lower half of the league being weak (though which league doesnt have a weak bottom half?)
Actually you can, as long as you have 6 teams who have played with each other for at least 8 years, you can keep your auto NCAA bid.
Quote from: Litehouse on November 28, 2012, 11:06:43 AM
I don't see any way an SEC team leaves for the Big Ten, the money isn't that much different. They have such a good thing going right now and the quality of football still matters to their fans, no way they give that up to play in the Big Ten and watch their attendance decrease. Maybe Missouri, but they just got there and I doubt they feel like paying another exit fee this soon.
Agree, and the SEC is about to launch their own television network with ESPN. The money is going to be staggering. Likely launch in August of 2014. Hold on to your wallets because the price increases from television distributors as a result of these new sports launches is going through the roof.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 28, 2012, 12:25:19 PM
Agree, and the SEC is about to launch their own television network with ESPN. The money is going to be staggering. Likely launch in August of 2014. Hold on to your wallets because the price increases from television distributors as a result of these new sports launches is going through the roof.
Will new deals like this be imbedded in the base costs or be in premium packages? What's your best guess on what they'll cost subscribers? I know I'm paying for the BTN in my basic but thought the cost was minimal.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 28, 2012, 12:25:19 PM
Agree, and the SEC is about to launch their own television network with ESPN. The money is going to be staggering. Likely launch in August of 2014. Hold on to your wallets because the price increases from television distributors as a result of these new sports launches is going through the roof.
So my monthly cable bill is going to go up because the SEC wants a football channel? Why the F*** don't we have "ala carte" programming yet?! That's it... I'm buying a Roku tomorrow.
Quote from: mu03eng on November 28, 2012, 09:44:14 AM
The irony of all this is that UNC has a huge under reported academic scandal on its hands. The B1G might have an image problem at some point if they start grabbing all these "problem" children.
Right, because the Big 10 has never been tainted by scandal or had any of its schools put on probation. ::)
Quote from: Groin_pull on November 28, 2012, 01:26:04 PM
Right, because the Big 10 has never been tainted by scandal or had any of its schools put on probation. ::)
Other than Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Nebraska, Purdue, Iowa, Wisconsin and, last but not least, Penn State, no Big 10 program has been found guilty of a major violation.
Hooray for Northwestern, which has merely had a gambling-related scandal or two.
Quote from: jesmu84 on November 28, 2012, 01:25:03 PM
So my monthly cable bill is going to go up because the SEC wants a football channel? Why the F*** don't we have "ala carte" programming yet?! That's it... I'm buying a Roku tomorrow.
This close to doing the same. My Time Warner agreement ends in January, and I'm basically paying $80/month for ESPN, FS North, and Bravo (don't ask).
Quote from: Groin_pull on November 28, 2012, 01:26:04 PM
Right, because the Big 10 has never been tainted by scandal or had any of its schools put on probation. ::)
That was my point.....At least the $EC is up front with everyone...its football and thats it. B1G likes to sit on the high horse, that much further to fall as all of college athletics gets corrupted.
Quote from: Oldgym on November 28, 2012, 01:37:37 PM
This close to doing the same. My Time Warner agreement ends in January, and I'm basically paying $80/month for ESPN, FS North, and Bravo (don't ask).
Does anyone know if "ala carte" cable will being coming in the relatively near future? Obviously, the cable networks would be strongly against it, but there's been growing support from viewers. People are tired of paying for crap they never watch. Personally, if I knew that even one cent of my cable bill was going to the Big 10 Network, I'd puke.
Thankfully, I live on the West Coast. If I have to fund a college sports network, I'd rather it be the Pac-12 Network.
At the end of the day, MU going to a basketball only conference may work out very favorable. A lot of times people can't see the bubble til it pops, but I think college football is a bubble and its going to pop big in the next 10 years. Too much money is getting thrown around and between the concussion thing and the largely uncompensated labor force, somebody is going to come in and pull the rug out from under all this. Not being part of a football conference avoids all that.
Quote from: Groin_pull on November 28, 2012, 01:47:03 PM
Does anyone know if "ala carte" cable will being coming in the relatively near future? Obviously, the cable networks would be strongly against it, but there's been growing support from viewers. People are tired of paying for crap they never watch. Personally, if I knew that even one cent of my cable bill was going to the Big 10 Network, I'd puke.
Thankfully, I live on the West Coast. If I have to fund a college sports network, I'd rather it be the Pac-12 Network.
In short, doubtful.
Good networks like AMC force companies to carry crap like IFC and Sundance on the same tier or else they won't agree to terms. Then the consumer is stuck paying for all three channels to watch one. ESPN and ESPN2 are by far the most expensive networks to carry because they keep upping their bids to carry live sports and passing on those fees to the cable companies who then pass it along to us. They can't allow people to just pay $10/month for access to WatchESPN because then no company would be inclined to carry the 78 Disney channels that come along with it. Everything is very intertwined, and it's the networks, not the cable companies forcing the status quo to remain in place.
EDIT: On the other hand, maybe Disney channels do better than I would have thought. http://deadspin.com/5964020/more-people-watched-the-spongebob-movie-than-ucla+stanford-or-clemson+south-carolina-tv-ratings-in-context (http://deadspin.com/5964020/more-people-watched-the-spongebob-movie-than-ucla+stanford-or-clemson+south-carolina-tv-ratings-in-context)