MUScoop

MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Aughnanure on March 11, 2013, 09:01:00 PM

Title: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Aughnanure on March 11, 2013, 09:01:00 PM
Would still be equal money for all teams with either deal ($50 mil a year) , so I don't get it. Stay at 10 then.

New Big East and Fox Team Up
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/12/sports/ncaabasketball/fox-sports-and-new-big-east-are-teaming-up.html?_r=1&

The levels of boola-boola in Fox's bloodstream have been rising for years — one symptom was luring the play-by-play announcer Gus Johnson from CBS — but they are peaking now because of the start-up in mid-August of Fox Sports 1, an all-sports cable channel. Fox Sports executives laid out many of the network's plans last week, but they did not discuss a deal with the Catholic 7 — the basketball universities that are seceding from the Big East — which is expected to be announced in a week or so.

The seven universities acquired the Big East name last week by leaving behind tens of millions of dollars in exit and entry fees that they would have received — had they not left — as a result of other universities' comings-and-goings from the drastically realigned conference.

The new Big East will join a Fox Sports 1 college roster that features the Big 12, the Pacific-12 and Conference USA. Fox also owns 49 percent of the Big Ten Network, carries the Big Ten football championship game and alternates the Pac-12 football title game with ESPN.

The seven Catholic universities had privately voiced concerns that the Big East was changing to chase football cash; aware of the discontent, Fox last fall made clear its desire to talk to the group. The universities also knew that the terms of what essentially acted as a prenuptial agreement would let them leave the Big East as a unit, without paying exit fees, and make their own TV deal.

Fox won them over with a 12-year deal worth about $500 million, according to reports. But the contract could spike to $600 million if the conference grows to a dozen teams, according to two people briefed on the contract but not authorized to speak publicly about its terms. A number of universities are said to be candidates to join the new Big East, including Xavier, an Atlantic 10 member, and Creighton, of the Missouri Valley Conference.

ESPN, by contrast, will be paying the old Big East about $20 million annually to carry a conference featuring Connecticut, Cincinnati, Temple and South Florida — which are not leaving, for now — in addition to Navy (in football only) and a group of new, mostly Southern universities.

Football is the financial bell cow of college sports, but Fox chased the basketball-only conference for several reasons:

¶ Fox Sports 1 doesn't need football, but basketball is the cream of the old Big East, especially as Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Louisville and Rutgers exit the conference.

¶ Basketball adds volume to Fox Sports 1 as it plans to make its debut Aug. 17 with as many as 90 million subscribers.

¶ The seven universities bring Fox history and rivalries, especially Georgetown, St. John's, Seton Hall and Providence, four of the original seven Big East teams, and Villanova. (Marquette and DePaul are the sixth and seventh programs.)
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: GGGG on March 11, 2013, 09:07:02 PM
That's $4.1 M per school per year...assuming 12 teams.

Networks don't pay "mid-major" conferences nearly that much.  So can we stop that nonsense now?  This move is looking better and better.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: NavinRJohnson on March 11, 2013, 09:11:27 PM
SLU and Dayton, Come on Down!

I'd actually prefer a 10 team league, but for that kind of incremental revenue, I can be flexible.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Aughnanure on March 11, 2013, 09:13:06 PM
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on March 11, 2013, 09:11:27 PM
SLU and Dayton, Come on Down!

I'd actually prefer a 10 team league, but for that kind of incremental revenue, I can be flexible.

I like SLU. Just wish there was an obvious #12 other than Dayton.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: NavinRJohnson on March 11, 2013, 09:16:02 PM
Quote from: Aughnanure on March 11, 2013, 09:13:06 PM
I like SLU. Just wish there was an obvious #12 other than Dayton.

I know many don't  like it, but I think Dayton is an ideal fit.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown on March 11, 2013, 09:16:42 PM
There's no way this doesn't include overtures for Gonzaga. If making $4m per year isn't enough for them to figure out how to make the travel work, I don't know what would.

Seriously - Fox has to be insane to pass on the opportunity to sign the #1 team in the nation when you have a chance.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Aughnanure on March 11, 2013, 09:18:59 PM
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on March 11, 2013, 09:16:02 PM
I know many don't  like it, but I think Dayton is an ideal fit.

Just wish they were in western Pennsylvania...or Kentucky...or West Virginia instead. I like the one state per team model. I think Richmond has high upside but other than them I can't comeup with a good argument to deny Dayton if we're going to 12 (assuming ND and Gonzaga are of course out).
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: marquette20 on March 11, 2013, 09:19:50 PM
I think they stick at 10 for a couple years unless they need more teams for the non-revenue sports
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown on March 11, 2013, 09:20:09 PM
Before anyone says it - I reject this idea that it is too hard on student athletes to have that kind of travel. They already play non con games all over the country. $4m allows them to fly private.

If I can knock out 5 hours of work with in-air wifi from coast to coast so can their team with homework.

Also - this farce that Gonzaga can't find a home for their other non-basketball teams? Hogwash. Why would they be kicked out of the WCC?
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Aughnanure on March 11, 2013, 09:20:24 PM
Quote from: sixstrings03 on March 11, 2013, 09:16:42 PM
There's no way this doesn't include overtures for Gonzaga. If making $4m per year isn't enough for them to figure out how to make the travel work, I don't know what would.

Seriously - Fox has to be insane to pass on the opportunity to sign the #1 team in the nation when you have a chance.

Adding Gonzaga or Notre Dame would make this league absolutely impossible to label as anything other than high major... as much as BCS fans and ESPN may try.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: KipsBayEagle on March 11, 2013, 09:20:33 PM
I guarantee you Gonzaga would be a requirement with this deal for Fox in a 12 team conference.  The reason being is that it would give them a strangle hold on the 11:00 time bracket.  With pac 12 and big east games with gonzaga at 11 est, fox can carve out it's own niche in college basketball by monopolizing that air time.  (unique marketing, zero competition)
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Groin_pull on March 11, 2013, 09:21:29 PM
Screw Dayton. Go for Richmond or VCU to get to 12.  
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown on March 11, 2013, 09:22:44 PM
Quote from: Groin_pull on March 11, 2013, 09:21:29 PM
Screw Dayton. Go for Richmond or VCU to get to 12.  

8) Xavier
9) Butler
10) Gonzaga
11) SLU
12) Creighton

Solved. Next topic
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Aughnanure on March 11, 2013, 09:22:47 PM
Quote from: sixstrings03 on March 11, 2013, 09:20:09 PM
Before anyone says it - I reject this idea that it is too hard on student athletes to have that kind of travel. They already play non con games all over the country. $4m allows them to fly private.

If I can knock out 5 hours of work with in-air wifi from coast to coast so can their team with homework.

Also - this farce that Gonzaga can't find a home for their other non-basketball teams? Hogwash. Why would they be kicked out of the WCC?

This. The best argument I heard was from someone pointing out how these kids pretty much just sit down and study/play video games when they're not practicing, so how hard can it be to sit on a plane for an extra hour and a half (or basically 2 Game of Thrones episodes).
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Avenue Commons on March 11, 2013, 09:23:22 PM
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on March 11, 2013, 09:11:27 PM
SLU and Dayton, Come on Down!

I'd actually prefer a 10 team league, but for that kind of incremental revenue, I can be flexible.

Fox wants lots and lots of programming.

The extra cash could be more for C7 members if the splits aren't all equal.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Aughnanure on March 11, 2013, 09:24:35 PM
Quote from: sixstrings03 on March 11, 2013, 09:22:44 PM
8) Xavier
9) Butler
10) Gonzaga
11) SLU
12) Creighton

Solved. Next topic

God how amazing would that be?
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: NavinRJohnson on March 11, 2013, 09:25:20 PM
Quote from: sixstrings03 on March 11, 2013, 09:20:09 PM
Before anyone says it - I reject this idea that it is too hard on student athletes to have that kind of travel. They already play non con games all over the country. $4m allows them to fly private.


I think you just kind of summed up where this thing is going long term. Gonna be super conferences for the professional sports of football and basketball, where travel, etc. is not really an issue, with more traditional and separate regional conferences for the rest, and the two will have little nothing to do with one  another.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: NavinRJohnson on March 11, 2013, 09:26:37 PM
Quote from: Avenue Commons on March 11, 2013, 09:23:22 PM

The extra cash could be more for C7 members if the splits aren't all equal.

I agree with that.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: chapman on March 11, 2013, 09:28:03 PM
What's with the arachnophobia?  Take the cash, go to 12 with SLU and  

(http://content.sportslogos.net/logos/33/814/full/2454_richmond_spiders-alternate-2002.gif)
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: chren21 on March 11, 2013, 09:28:17 PM
Seriously in 20 years won't the travel times be cut in a third?
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Aughnanure on March 11, 2013, 09:28:21 PM
Quote from: Avenue Commons on March 11, 2013, 09:23:22 PM
Fox wants lots and lots of programming.

The extra cash could be more for C7 members if the splits aren't all equal.

Didn't think about that. Makes sense.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Groin_pull on March 11, 2013, 09:30:35 PM
Quote from: sixstrings03 on March 11, 2013, 09:22:44 PM
8) Xavier
9) Butler
10) Gonzaga
11) SLU
12) Creighton

Solved. Next topic

I would love the Zags. But it just doesn't seem like that's a real possibility. Hope that changes.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: chapman on March 11, 2013, 09:41:08 PM
Quote from: sixstrings03 on March 11, 2013, 09:20:09 PM
Before anyone says it - I reject this idea that it is too hard on student athletes to have that kind of travel. They already play non con games all over the country. $4m allows them to fly private.

Because it's a total myth that they're circling the globe in non-conference play.  Gonzaga traveled to Florida, Oklahoma, and Indianapolis in non-conference play this year, with the first being for a tournament.  Kind of similar to another team that scheduled very aggressively by going to Florida, Maui, and Charleston.  The year before they went to Champagne and Cincinnati.  Now you're asking them to go from two or three longer trips to 13.


Quote
Also - this farce that Gonzaga can't find a home for their other non-basketball teams? Hogwash. Why would they be kicked out of the WCC?

Because the WCC will not let them just dump their non-revenue sports (i.e. costs) in a conference for no benefit to anyone else.  They would have to pay to play, and after stripping a conference of its largest revenue generator the pay won't be tiny.


Quote from: chren21 on March 11, 2013, 09:28:17 PM
Seriously in 20 years won't the travel times be cut in a third?

Well, this is a 12 year television deal.  We can check the progress of air travel and teleportation then :)
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Avenue Commons on March 11, 2013, 10:01:07 PM
Has it occurred to any any of you that if Fox wanted Gonzaga (the no. 1 team in the country) that the story would have leaked by now?

Where there's smoke there's fire. Welcome Butler, Xavier, Creighton, SLU and Dayton.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown on March 11, 2013, 10:14:18 PM
Quote from: Avenue Commons on March 11, 2013, 10:01:07 PM
Has it occurred to any any of you that if Fox wanted Gonzaga (the no. 1 team in the country) that the story would have leaked by now?

Where there's smoke there's fire. Welcome Butler, Xavier, Creighton, SLU and Dayton.
respectfully, no one here has seen this kind of thing happen before with any kind of coverage... It's unprecedented and none of us know what it would or would not look like.

This is entirely speculation on this board. I still haven't heard a death blow that would prevent a university from pursuing an opportunity to multiply its tv revenues by 8
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown on March 11, 2013, 10:16:04 PM
Quote from: chapman on March 11, 2013, 09:41:08 PM
Because the WCC will not let them just dump their non-revenue sports (i.e. costs) in a conference for no benefit to anyone else.  They would have to pay to play, and after stripping a conference of its largest revenue generator the pay won't be tiny.
is this in their contract that they can be charged any amount of money if the other members don't like it?
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown on March 11, 2013, 10:19:05 PM
If Boise St and SDSU can justify shipping a whole damn football team across the nation, Gonzaga can figure out how to do that with bball.

Btw you don't think the conference members wouldn't be amenable to a block scheduling policy for grouping road games close to one another in order to get the Zags in?

I'm not saying I know everything about the situation but if they don't come to the new league there's no way it's due to insurmountable logistical issues
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown on March 11, 2013, 10:22:47 PM
Quote from: chapman on March 11, 2013, 09:41:08 PM

Because the WCC will not let them just dump their non-revenue sports (i.e. costs) in a conference for no benefit to anyone else.  They would have to pay to play, and after stripping a conference of its largest revenue generator the pay won't be tiny.

genuine question here.... How would Gonzaga's non-revenue sports cost the conference anything? What do we pay currently to support the UConn women's soccer team?
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: forgetful on March 11, 2013, 10:24:51 PM
If you do the math it is $50 Million per year for 10 teams and $50 million per year for 12 teams.  Why rush to 12 for $0 extra dollars.  Stay at 10 and see how things play out with the other teams.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Warrior_2002 on March 11, 2013, 10:25:25 PM
Quote from: Avenue Commons on March 11, 2013, 10:01:07 PM
Has it occurred to any any of you that if Fox wanted Gonzaga (the no. 1 team in the country) that the story would have leaked by now?

Where there's smoke there's fire. Welcome Butler, Xavier, Creighton, SLU and Dayton.

Ah screw it!!!  Just go to 16 teams.  7+ Butler, Xavier, Creighton, SLU, Dayton, Richmond, Gonzaga, St. Mary's, Detroit (or whatever other Catholic University is out there worthy of entering the league).  Get a $1Billion deal from Fox and call it a day.   ;D  
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Brewtown Andy on March 11, 2013, 10:31:14 PM
Quote from: sixstrings03 on March 11, 2013, 10:22:47 PM
genuine question here.... How would Gonzaga's non-revenue sports cost the conference anything? What do we pay currently to support the UConn women's soccer team?

We pay to travel to Storrs to play them.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Brewtown Andy on March 11, 2013, 10:32:44 PM
Quote from: GoldenEagle2002 on March 11, 2013, 10:25:25 PM
Ah screw it!!!  Just go to 16 teams.  7+ Butler, Xavier, Creighton, SLU, Dayton, Richmond, Gonzaga, St. Mary's, Detroit (or whatever other Catholic University is out there worthy of entering the league).  Get a $1Billion deal from Fox and call it a day.   ;D  

I get that you're mostly kidding, but that would be death. First the WAC, now the Big East. 16 team conferences don't work.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: buckchuckler on March 11, 2013, 10:33:24 PM
Quote from: forgetful on March 11, 2013, 10:24:51 PM
If you do the math it is $50 Million per year for 10 teams and $50 million per year for 12 teams.  Why rush to 12 for $0 extra dollars.  Stay at 10 and see how things play out with the other teams.

Well, more teams means more opportunities for tournament teams, which means more tournament revenue for the conference.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown on March 11, 2013, 10:36:34 PM
Quote from: Brewtown Andy on March 11, 2013, 10:31:14 PM
We pay to travel to Storrs to play them.
I guess I just assumed that reflects the investment we decided to make in choosing to have that sport at MU, rather than UConn costing us money.

I don't understand how Gonzaga would be singled out and charged extra cash for having soccer/volleyball teams remain in WCC with everyone else?

If they are fine with the cost now why would that change with Gonzaga's BBall team leaving for the new BE?
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Norm on March 11, 2013, 10:44:21 PM
Quote from: sixstrings03 on March 11, 2013, 09:22:44 PM
8) Xavier
9) Butler
10) Gonzaga
11) SLU
12) Creighton

Solved. Next topic
If Gonzaga is out, substitute Richmond or VCU for them.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: MUBasketball on March 11, 2013, 11:41:03 PM
Can we PLEASE stop this nonsense about Gonzaga joining? As a basketball only addition, maybe it could work (but that won't happen, so why discuss it?).

The primary problem is all the non-revenue sports. If they were to join this league as a full sports member, their CLOSEST conference game would be 1,432 miles (Creighton). Think about how crazy that is?

Let's look at some of Gonzaga's other sports and their farthest road trips this year:

Volleyball: Provo, UT and Las Vegas
Track & Field: Austin, TX and Fayetteville, AR -- rest of the schedule all on the west coast
Soccer: Every game played in California, Washington, and Oregon
Tennis: Boise, ID - All other games on the west coast
Golf: South Bend, IN and Denver, CO -- otherwise all west coast

Have I proven my point? With most of these sports, they don't play ONE road game as far away as Creighton is. If they joined the Big East, Creighton would be the shortest road trip. It's insanity, and it's not going to happen.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: 79Warrior on March 12, 2013, 01:01:54 AM
Quote from: KipsBayEagle on March 11, 2013, 09:20:33 PM
I guarantee you Gonzaga would be a requirement with this deal for Fox in a 12 team conference.  The reason being is that it would give them a strangle hold on the 11:00 time bracket.  With pac 12 and big east games with gonzaga at 11 est, fox can carve out it's own niche in college basketball by monopolizing that air time.  (unique marketing, zero competition)

Gonzaga is just geographically impossible. I don't see the Zags going coast  to coast every week for ball. They just don't fit.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Sunbelt15 on March 12, 2013, 06:11:31 AM
Quote from: Groin_pull on March 11, 2013, 09:21:29 PM
Screw Dayton. Go for Richmond or VCU to get to 12.  

VCU will bring stronger competition in than SLU and Dayton.  Why Dayton anyway? Are they kissing the feet of the C7 for them to be considered so quickly?
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Brewtown Andy on March 12, 2013, 07:23:52 AM
Quote from: sixstrings03 on March 11, 2013, 10:36:34 PM
I guess I just assumed that reflects the investment we decided to make in choosing to have that sport at MU, rather than UConn costing us money.

I don't understand how Gonzaga would be singled out and charged extra cash for having soccer/volleyball teams remain in WCC with everyone else?

If they are fine with the cost now why would that change with Gonzaga's BBall team leaving for the new BE?

Because they get a cut of Gonzaga's basketball money. Either because of TV contracts or their NCAA units.

No Gonzaga basketball = no Gonzaga basketball money. Where's the value for the rest of the WCC to keep the other sports around?

And why would the New Big East want a basketball only member for that matter?
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on March 12, 2013, 07:25:32 AM
Quote from: Sunbelt15 on March 12, 2013, 06:11:31 AM
VCU will bring stronger competition in than SLU and Dayton.  Why Dayton anyway? Are they kissing the feet of the C7 for them to be considered so quickly?

ABD!
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Knight Commission on March 12, 2013, 07:34:25 AM
Quote from: 79Warrior on March 12, 2013, 01:01:54 AM
Gonzaga is just geographically impossible. I don't see the Zags going coast  to coast every week for ball. They just don't fit.

Dont be surprised if Gonzaga joins the Big East in M and W basketball only.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Marqevans on March 12, 2013, 07:39:14 AM
Quote from: chren21 on March 11, 2013, 09:28:17 PM
Seriously in 20 years won't the travel times be cut in a third?


In the last 50 years travel times have not changed by car or by train. They may have improved slightly by plane, but crowded airports have probably kept travel times the same.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: chapman on March 12, 2013, 07:46:09 AM
Quote from: sixstrings03 on March 11, 2013, 10:22:47 PM
genuine question here.... How would Gonzaga's non-revenue sports cost the conference anything? What do we pay currently to support the UConn women's soccer team?

We pay by pooling revenue generating sports (basketball, and for some, football), which pay the costs associated with money losers (everything else).  UConn's women's soccer team can be paid for because of UConn's basketball and football teams, and the basketball team generates revenue in part because Marquette is a member of the Big East.  From a Gonzaga perspective, the WCC would see far less revenue (basketball) to cover the costs of non-revenue sports (everything else) without the kingpin, and wouldn't host Gonzaga for all of the costs but see none of the revenue benefit.  
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: GGGG on March 12, 2013, 07:55:46 AM
Quote from: sixstrings03 on March 11, 2013, 09:20:09 PM
Before anyone says it - I reject this idea that it is too hard on student athletes to have that kind of travel. They already play non con games all over the country. $4m allows them to fly private.

If I can knock out 5 hours of work with in-air wifi from coast to coast so can their team with homework.

Also - this farce that Gonzaga can't find a home for their other non-basketball teams? Hogwash. Why would they be kicked out of the WCC?


They would likely be kicked out of the WCC because there is a requirement in their bylaws (or some such) that requires members to play basketball.  And why would the WCC want them around without their basketball program?  Would the Big East keep Georgetown around if it parked its basketball program elsewhere?

Gonzaga isn't happening. 
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: GGGG on March 12, 2013, 07:56:43 AM
Quote from: KipsBayEagle on March 11, 2013, 09:20:33 PM
I guarantee you Gonzaga would be a requirement with this deal for Fox in a 12 team conference. 


I guarantee you it isn't.  It simply isn't.  No rumors have mentioned them at all.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: GGGG on March 12, 2013, 07:59:14 AM
Quote from: sixstrings03 on March 11, 2013, 10:36:34 PM
I guess I just assumed that reflects the investment we decided to make in choosing to have that sport at MU, rather than UConn costing us money.

I don't understand how Gonzaga would be singled out and charged extra cash for having soccer/volleyball teams remain in WCC with everyone else?

If they are fine with the cost now why would that change with Gonzaga's BBall team leaving for the new BE?


Because Gonzaga's basketball program brings value to the conference...value that brings television $$$.  If they leave, they take that value with them, but the WCC members still have the cost of travelling to Spokane.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: bilsu on March 12, 2013, 08:17:46 AM
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on March 11, 2013, 09:07:02 PM
That's $4.1 M per school per year...assuming 12 teams.

Networks don't pay "mid-major" conferences nearly that much.  So can we stop that nonsense now?  This move is looking better and better.
You cannot be a major conference without football. There can be major basketball teams in a mid-major conference, but the conference is mid-major.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: GGGG on March 12, 2013, 08:27:50 AM
Quote from: bilsu on March 12, 2013, 08:17:46 AM
You cannot be a major conference without football. There can be major basketball teams in a mid-major conference, but the conference is mid-major.


Thank you for repeating the false narrative. 

When this basketball conference is making more money than some FBS football conferences, it is by definition not mid-major.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Groin_pull on March 12, 2013, 08:28:45 AM
Quote from: bilsu on March 12, 2013, 08:17:46 AM
You cannot be a major conference without football. There can be major basketball teams in a mid-major conference, but the conference is mid-major.

Stop with your stupid labels. Major...mid-major...they mean nothing. The new Big East is looking at 4-5 bids every year. Most conferences would kill for that.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: hairy worthen on March 12, 2013, 08:34:29 AM
Quote from: bilsu on March 12, 2013, 08:17:46 AM
You cannot be a major conference without football. There can be major basketball teams in a mid-major conference, but the conference is mid-major.

So you are saying quantity of sports equals quality. By that logic the Sunbelt and Mac conferences must be high major conferences because they have football and all other sports.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: muwarrior69 on March 12, 2013, 08:36:08 AM
Quote from: Aughnanure on March 11, 2013, 09:01:00 PM
The new Big East will join a Fox Sports 1 college roster that features the Big 12, the Pacific-12 and Conference USA. Fox also owns 49 percent of the Big Ten Network, carries the Big Ten football championship game and alternates the Pac-12 football title game with ESPN.


Big 12, PAC12, 49%share of BTN, now Big East. PAC12/Big East Challenge anyone?
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: GGGG on March 12, 2013, 08:53:08 AM
According to USA Today, the new BE is "an authentic and elite basketball league."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/bigeast/2013/03/11/big-east-bids-farewell-to-tradition-in-last-conference-tournament/1977077/

In other words, not "mid-major."
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Eldon on March 12, 2013, 09:01:09 AM
And then there's this

Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Warriors10 on March 12, 2013, 09:05:27 AM
Quote from: ElDonBDon on March 12, 2013, 09:01:09 AM
And then there's this

Because the WCC is a mid-major conference, that's why Gonzaga wants out.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: GGGG on March 12, 2013, 09:56:05 AM
Quote from: Warriors10 on March 12, 2013, 09:05:27 AM
Because the WCC is a mid-major conference, that's why Gonzaga wants out.


If I'm the President of Gonzaga, I don't join the Big East.  I'm not shipping my student-athletes at least 1,500 miles away for every conference road game for the sake of a couple million $$. 

Not to mention my largely west coast alumni base would likely not get to see games that start at a reasonable time on television because they would still be at work, and not get to see them in person when we visit their metropolitan area once or twice a year.

It simply doesn't make sense.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: 79Warrior on March 12, 2013, 10:05:47 AM
Quote from: Knight Commission on March 12, 2013, 07:34:25 AM
Dont be surprised if Gonzaga joins the Big East in M and W basketball only.

Explain why they would put their players at a disadvantage every week with coast to coast road trips? Yes, I would be very suprised if they came in. You are dreaming.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Avenue Commons on March 12, 2013, 10:19:53 AM
Look at it this way: The distance between traveling from Spokane to Providence is only a couple hundred miles less than flying to Providence from DUBLIN, IRELAND!

In other words, the travel commitment for a weeknight game is roughly the equivalent of a transatlantic flight. It will not happen.

I've said it before, the only way it happens is if Gonzaga relocates to University of Detroit's campus.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: GGGG on March 12, 2013, 10:22:30 AM
And let's say the situations were reversed.  Let's say that the WCC was the caliber of the new BE, and the BE was the caliber of the current WCC.  And Marquette was the current #1 team in the country.

Would you want Marquette joining the WCC?  Where every road game is 4,000 mile round trip and a 9 or 10:00 start time?  Just for the sake of a couple million?
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Tums Festival on March 12, 2013, 11:25:28 AM
I think somehow the eastern schools get Richmond or VCU in, possibly over Dayton.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Groin_pull on March 12, 2013, 11:26:28 AM
Quote from: Heavy Gear on March 12, 2013, 11:25:28 AM
I think somehow the eastern schools get Richmond or VCU in, possibly over Dayton.

Good.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: GGGG on March 12, 2013, 11:26:47 AM
Quote from: Heavy Gear on March 12, 2013, 11:25:28 AM
I think somehow the eastern schools get Richmond or VCU in, possibly over Dayton.

I think the issue is Dayton v. St. Louis for the last spot.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Pakuni on March 12, 2013, 11:36:36 AM
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on March 12, 2013, 11:26:47 AM
I think the issue is Dayton v. St. Louis for the last spot.

If that's really what it comes down to, then it ought to be a pretty easy decision.
St. Louis is the better program in the bigger market without any significant overlap from a fellow conference member.
Plus, another team in the central time zone opens up another team/host for weekday doubleheaders, i.e. 7 p.m. Eastern early game followed by 9 p.m. game in Milwaukee, Chicago, St. Louis or Omaha.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Tums Festival on March 12, 2013, 11:36:51 AM
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on March 12, 2013, 11:26:47 AM
I think the issue is Dayton v. St. Louis for the last spot.

+1
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Brewtown Andy on March 12, 2013, 11:40:37 AM
Quote from: Avenue Commons on March 12, 2013, 10:19:53 AM
Look at it this way: The distance between traveling from Spokane to Providence is only a couple hundred miles less than flying to Providence from DUBLIN, IRELAND!

In other words, the travel commitment for a weeknight game is roughly the equivalent of a transatlantic flight. It will not happen.

I've said it before, the only way it happens is if Gonzaga relocates to University of Detroit's campus.

Just look at how much WVU is now complaining about the constant trips to Texas. And that's only half of that trip.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: 🏀 on March 12, 2013, 11:40:59 AM
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on March 12, 2013, 11:26:47 AM
I think the issue is Dayton v. St. Louis for the last spot.

Completely agree.

I believe Richmond is in.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Avenue Commons on March 12, 2013, 11:44:44 AM
Quote from: Heavy Gear on March 12, 2013, 11:25:28 AM
I think somehow the eastern schools get Richmond or VCU in, possibly over Dayton.

VCU is a non-starter because of the FOIA issue. The conference will want all private schools in order to keep league finances confidential. This appears to be a legitimate concern as I understand it.

If a Richmond-based school is added, it will almost certainly be Richmond.

But, there is a reason we keep hearing SLU and Dayton. If you were starting a closely held, private business, and candidates were mostly equal, would you hire your friends or strangers?
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: NavinRJohnson on March 12, 2013, 11:49:01 AM
Quote from: bilsu on March 12, 2013, 08:17:46 AM
You cannot be a major conference without football. There can be major basketball teams in a mid-major conference, but the conference is mid-major.

OMG
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Tums Festival on March 12, 2013, 11:58:22 AM
Quote from: Avenue Commons on March 12, 2013, 11:44:44 AM
VCU is a non-starter because of the FOIA issue. The conference will want all private schools in order to keep league finances confidential. This appears to be a legitimate concern as I understand it.

If a Richmond-based school is added, it will almost certainly be Richmond.

But, there is a reason we keep hearing SLU and Dayton. If you were starting a closely held, private business, and candidates were mostly equal, would you hire your friends or strangers?

If the eastern schools are having some heartburn over Creighton being the 10th team, as has been reported, I don't see how both SLU and Dayton both get in. At some point an additional eastern school will have to be in the mix.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: mu35577 on March 12, 2013, 12:00:42 PM
Quote from: muwarrior69 on March 12, 2013, 08:36:08 AM
Big 12, PAC12, 49%share of BTN, now Big East. PAC12/Big East Challenge anyone?

I would love a Pac12/ Big East Challenge in the future! Here's to a nice November trip to LA
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Aughnanure on March 12, 2013, 12:01:14 PM
Quote from: bilsu on March 12, 2013, 08:17:46 AM
You cannot be a major conference without football. There can be major basketball teams in a mid-major conference, but the conference is mid-major.

Where the hell did you come up with this crap definition?

So we all have to play an ridiculously expensive sport than none of us except a handful of media-obsessed schools can win? Sounds legit.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Avenue Commons on March 12, 2013, 12:15:01 PM
Quote from: Heavy Gear on March 12, 2013, 11:58:22 AM
If the eastern schools are having some heartburn over Creighton being the 10th team, as has been reported, I don't see how both SLU and Dayton both get in. At some point an additional eastern school will have to be in the mix.

The eastern schools have a much greater allegiance to their fellow Catholic schools than they have concerns about geography. Just sayin'

Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Norm on March 12, 2013, 12:16:43 PM
Quote from: Avenue Commons on March 12, 2013, 11:44:44 AM
VCU is a non-starter because of the FOIA issue. The conference will want all private schools in order to keep league finances confidential. This appears to be a legitimate concern as I understand it.

If a Richmond-based school is added, it will almost certainly be Richmond.

But, there is a reason we keep hearing SLU and Dayton. If you were starting a closely held, private business, and candidates were mostly equal, would you hire your friends or strangers?
I thought this was hashed out on these threads and that the FOIA issue is not as big a deal as originally thought. I don't have the link to the thread, but I thought someone had pointed out that this really wouldn't preclude VCU or any other public university from joining the league.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: WarriorInNYC on March 12, 2013, 12:27:17 PM
Quote from: Norm on March 12, 2013, 12:16:43 PM
I thought this was hashed out on these threads and that the FOIA issue is not as big a deal as originally thought. I don't have the link to the thread, but I thought someone had pointed out that this really wouldn't preclude VCU or any other public university from joining the league.

This is the impression I was under as well.  Thought this was only relevant to emails to/from VCU and did not subject the whole conference to the FOIA.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: 🏀 on March 12, 2013, 12:34:12 PM
Quote from: WarriorInDC on March 12, 2013, 12:27:17 PM
This is the impression I was under as well.  Thought this was only relevant to emails to/from VCU and did not subject the whole conference to the FOIA.

Quote from: Norm on March 12, 2013, 12:16:43 PM
I thought this was hashed out on these threads and that the FOIA issue is not as big a deal as originally thought. I don't have the link to the thread, but I thought someone had pointed out that this really wouldn't preclude VCU or any other public university from joining the league.

Yes, it is only correspondence with VCU. Emails, mail, etc... anything sent to VCU for their review, their signature/approval or for their info can be requested via FOIA. So unless VCU wants to be completely in the dark in regards to anything conference related ($$$, new members, tournament location, etc), they won't be invited.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: keefe on March 12, 2013, 12:46:41 PM
Quote from: chren21 on March 11, 2013, 09:28:17 PM
Seriously in 20 years won't the travel times be cut in a third?

Only if the FAA eases the restrictions on supersonic flight. Commercial air travel is now maxed out on speed.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: MarquetteDano on March 12, 2013, 12:48:43 PM
Quote from: keefe on March 12, 2013, 12:46:41 PM
Only if the FAA eases the restrictions on supersonic flight. Commercial air travel is now maxed out on speed.

Can't we get a little more out of commerical flights without breaking the sound barrier?  I have always wondered about this... seems like cruising speeds are considerably lower than the barrier.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: keefe on March 12, 2013, 12:53:18 PM
Quote from: sixstrings03 on March 11, 2013, 10:22:47 PM
genuine question here.... How would Gonzaga's non-revenue sports cost the conference anything? What do we pay currently to support the UConn women's soccer team?

This is the Chico's "The WCC is Spiteful" theory. It is as yet unproven.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: GGGG on March 12, 2013, 01:19:40 PM
Quote from: Norm on March 12, 2013, 12:16:43 PM
I thought this was hashed out on these threads and that the FOIA issue is not as big a deal as originally thought. I don't have the link to the thread, but I thought someone had pointed out that this really wouldn't preclude VCU or any other public university from joining the league.


First, you can look up the tax returns of any athletic conference.  They are all non-profit institutions.

Second, just because one of the member institutions are public, that doesn't mean the conference would be open to FOIA.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: GGGG on March 12, 2013, 01:21:10 PM
Quote from: Pakuni on March 12, 2013, 11:36:36 AM
If that's really what it comes down to, then it ought to be a pretty easy decision.
St. Louis is the better program in the bigger market without any significant overlap from a fellow conference member.
Plus, another team in the central time zone opens up another team/host for weekday doubleheaders, i.e. 7 p.m. Eastern early game followed by 9 p.m. game in Milwaukee, Chicago, St. Louis or Omaha.


St. Louis is in the midst of a leadership meltdown and an uncertain basketball future.  I think that is the only thing that is preventing them from being a shoo-in.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Pakuni on March 12, 2013, 01:23:37 PM
Quote from: PTM on March 12, 2013, 12:34:12 PM
Yes, it is only correspondence with VCU. Emails, mail, etc... anything sent to VCU for their review, their signature/approval or for their info can be requested via FOIA. So unless VCU wants to be completely in the dark in regards to anything conference related ($$$, new members, tournament location, etc), they won't be invited.

Not entirely true.
Many matters - personnel records, students records, privileged materials, matters related to contract negotiations, health records, etc. - are exempt from FOIA requests in Virginia. So if, for example, Larry Williams and VCU's AD trade emails about ousting the league commissioner or moving the tourney site, those aren't subject to FOIA.

Most of the things that would be subject to FOIA - TV deal figures, athletic department revenues and expenditures, coaching salaries - are already public either through the schools making them public or through Dept. of Education filing requirements.

There's really nothing to be afraid of here. I mean, can anyone think of one instance this has been a big deal since Marquette has been affiliated with public schools in an athletic conference (i.e. the past 20 years)?
Somehow, the Big 10, ACC, SEC, Big 12 and Pac-12 have found a way to manage with public institutions.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Avenue Commons on March 12, 2013, 01:42:55 PM
Budgets are already disclosed to US Dept of Ed, but many other critical financial details about a conference's finances are not. FOIA changes that. I can't appropriately say anything other than it is my understanding that FOIA is a non-starter for VCU. I hate to be that vague poster, but just listen to the reports. It'll be Butler, Xavier and Creighton for sure. SLU and most likely UD at 80% likely, only issue now is when.

Things will move quickly after the "official official" split today after the Big East conference call and vote today.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Pakuni on March 12, 2013, 01:54:59 PM
Quote from: Avenue Commons on March 12, 2013, 01:42:55 PM
Budgets are already disclosed to US Dept of Ed, but many other critical financial details about a conference's finances are not. FOIA changes that. I can't appropriately say anything other than it is my understanding that FOIA is a non-starter for VCU. I hate to be that vague poster, but just listen to the reports. It'll be Butler, Xavier and Creighton for sure. SLU and most likely UD at 80% likely, only issue now is when.

Things will move quickly after the "official official" split today after the Big East conference call and vote today.


I'm not suggesting VCU is or should be in. I'm just suggesting that the FOIA shouldn't be the reason for keeping them out. It's a fairly trivial matter that every other major conference contends with easily. The notion that the financial issues of the Big East somehow require added privacy that doesn't exist for the Big 10 or SEC is silly.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Litehouse on March 12, 2013, 01:56:49 PM
People have been using some info requested from South Florida as an example of why FOIA is a problem.  However, I believe Florida's "Sunshine Law" is one of the nation's most open public records law.  Virginia's law may be more restrictive.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Eldon on March 12, 2013, 02:07:23 PM
Quote from: Pakuni on March 12, 2013, 01:23:37 PM
Not entirely true.
Many matters - personnel records, students records, privileged materials, matters related to contract negotiations, health records, etc. - are exempt from FOIA requests in Virginia. So if, for example, Larry Williams and VCU's AD trade emails about ousting the league commissioner or moving the tourney site, those aren't subject to FOIA.

Most of the things that would be subject to FOIA - TV deal figures, athletic department revenues and expenditures, coaching salaries - are already public either through the schools making them public or through Dept. of Education filing requirements.

There's really nothing to be afraid of here. I mean, can anyone think of one instance this has been a big deal since Marquette has been affiliated with public schools in an athletic conference (i.e. the past 20 years)?
Somehow, the Big 10, ACC, SEC, Big 12 and Pac-12 have found a way to manage with public institutions.


USF

http://collegesportsbusinessnews.com/issue/january-2013/article/big-east-catholic-7-outline-separation-issues
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Pakuni on March 12, 2013, 02:07:58 PM
Quote from: Litehouse on March 12, 2013, 01:56:49 PM
People have been using some info requested from South Florida as an example of why FOIA is a problem.  However, I believe Florida's "Sunshine Law" is one of the nation's most open public records law.  Virginia's law may be more restrictive.

Yes, florida probably has the least restrictive FOIA laws in the country.
That said, what did we really learn from the USF FOIAs?
That the two sides were negotiating over the name and how to split exit fees. Was that a revelation to anybody? We all could have guessed that was the case three months ago.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Pakuni on March 12, 2013, 02:09:25 PM
Quote from: ElDonBDon on March 12, 2013, 02:07:23 PM
USF

http://collegesportsbusinessnews.com/issue/january-2013/article/big-east-catholic-7-outline-separation-issues

As my post above notes, there was nothing in those reports that wasn't a) already obvious and b) confirmed later by the schools.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Eldon on March 12, 2013, 02:10:55 PM
Isn't the FOIA federal? 
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Pakuni on March 12, 2013, 02:12:51 PM
Quote from: ElDonBDon on March 12, 2013, 02:10:55 PM
Isn't the FOIA federal? 

Yes and no.
There is a federal Freedom of Information Act that covers access to federal records, and then state acts that apply to state/county/municipal/school, etc. governments.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: keefe on March 12, 2013, 02:13:52 PM
Quote from: MarquetteDano on March 12, 2013, 12:48:43 PM
Can't we get a little more out of commerical flights without breaking the sound barrier?  I have always wondered about this... seems like cruising speeds are considerably lower than the barrier.

There is some incremental speed available but that gets into fuel consumption - the single largest variable expense for the flag carriers. Current fleets can fly faster but with altitude restrictions and load factors it is cost prohibitive. The solution to flying faster is to fly higher and lighter - the FAA controls the first and the shareholders effectively control the second so it won't happen for at least two reasons.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Avenue Commons on March 12, 2013, 02:19:04 PM
Quote from: keefe on March 12, 2013, 02:13:52 PM
There is some incremental speed available but that gets into fuel consumption - the single largest variable expense for the flag carriers. Current fleets can fly faster but with altitude restrictions and load factors it is cost prohibitive. The solution to flying faster is to fly higher and lighter - the FAA controls the first and the shareholders effectively control the second so it won't happen for at least two reasons.

Isn't here also an issue of the current jets just being old?
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: keefe on March 12, 2013, 02:28:29 PM
Quote from: Avenue Commons on March 12, 2013, 02:19:04 PM
Isn't here also an issue of the current lets just being old?

That's part of it and why I used the caveat "current fleets." The challenge for the commercial carriers is asset utilization, ie keeping iron in the air and off the ramp. Slight increases from current indicated air speeds significantly increase required maintenance which pulls assets out of the air and into the hangar. Power plants would need more frequent pulls and airframes would experience increased fatigue and therefore more frequent inspections.

The older a fleet the more frequent the need for preventative maintenance (PM.) The airlines all use the military aviation PM system which is based on Juran principles of measurement, inspection, and probability. Older airframes and power plants are more prone to failure and therefore require increased PM. Anything that accelerates the need for PM is avoided and that includes flying beyond current IAS.
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: Avenue Commons on March 12, 2013, 02:45:44 PM
Quote from: keefe on March 12, 2013, 02:28:29 PM
That's part of it and why I used the caveat "current fleets." The challenge for the commercial carriers is asset utilization, ie keeping iron in the air and off the ramp. Slight increases from current indicated air speeds significantly increase required maintenance which pulls assets out of the air and into the hangar. Power plants would need more frequent pulls and airframes would experience increased fatigue and therefore more frequent inspections.

The older a fleet the more frequent the need for preventative maintenance (PM.) The airlines all use the military aviation PM system which is based on Juran principles of measurement, inspection, and probability. Older airframes and power plants are more prone to failure and therefore require increased PM. Anything that accelerates the need for PM is avoided and that includes flying beyond current IAS.

You a TQM believer?
Title: Re: NY Times: Fox would up TV deal to $600 million for 12 teams
Post by: MU Fan in Connecticut on March 12, 2013, 04:01:58 PM
Quote from: keefe on March 12, 2013, 02:28:29 PM
That's part of it and why I used the caveat "current fleets." The challenge for the commercial carriers is asset utilization, ie keeping iron in the air and off the ramp. Slight increases from current indicated air speeds significantly increase required maintenance which pulls assets out of the air and into the hangar. Power plants would need more frequent pulls and airframes would experience increased fatigue and therefore more frequent inspections.

The older a fleet the more frequent the need for preventative maintenance (PM.) The airlines all use the military aviation PM system which is based on Juran principles of measurement, inspection, and probability. Older airframes and power plants are more prone to failure and therefore require increased PM. Anything that accelerates the need for PM is avoided and that includes flying beyond current IAS.

My company likes when they do PM on airplanes.
EhPortal 1.39.9 © 2025, WebDev