I keep seeing this but people have to remember, system wise it is unc and NC State that are joined, not duke and unc. I do not see the UNC Board of Governors ever allowing one to leave the ACC without the other, so if you want unc you are getting NC State as well.
If and when the BIG expands
- Thread starter sammyk
- Start date
I keep seeing this but people have to remember, system wise it is unc and NC State that are joined, not duke and unc. I do not see the UNC Board of Governors ever allowing one to leave the ACC without the other, so if you want unc you are getting NC State as well.
Sure it does; it would spell DOOM for Pitt.
Sorry man--it's kind of sad that people still care about Pitt. Expansion has nothing to do with Pitt
And I don't think it would impact Pitt at all. Pitt would stay in the ACC and be irrelevant most of the time--aside from 1-2 shocking wins most years
Nebraska has some good Olympic sports, like WVB, solid in baseball, etc. That being said football is the only thing that matters in these TV discussions and if Frost gets Nebraska good again, say top ten-ish, very good to great Nebraska on TV will move the needle as much as any blue blood.
No. There was "back channel contact" between the Big Ten and Nebraska, but it was initiated by the Big Ten which did very little to keep it quiet. Same with Nebraska. And Nebraska wasn't particularly worried about Missouri leaving. it was more about six other schools, none of which were named Missouri...or Nebraska. As it turned out, Lady Luck smiled on Nebraska.
For that to happen, you'd have to be talking about Nebraska in the same breath as Alabama and Clemson.
A
anon_1eeb2b426hv3y
Guest
I'd rather have a shot at winning national championships. Need to be in it to win it.
Last edited:
There are two issues here. One is about the school having wrestling. Times have changed, and the B1G is probably a pretty attractive option for many. Given the revenue that BTN distributes to schools, the wrestling thing is a pretty big deal. Wrestling loses money at most schools, but so do the vast amount of other sports.
IF ND and Texas had come, their non-revenue sports would have been subsidized just as wrestling might be. That leads to the Title IX discussion. Wrestling, although just one of many sports which lose money, has been the one that has been lopped off at Colleges and University since Title IX has been strictly enforced. This is not debatable.
There's enough beef in the conference as is. Adding Oklahoma/UT/Notre Dame and the New England patriots isn't necessary. We aren't in the MAC.
Not apples to apples but speaking of the Pats, the afc east is usually one of the weakest divisions in the nfl and it works to the Pats advantage.
What's this revenue that the "BTN distributes to schools" and how much of it is attributable to wrestling?
Wrestling loses money at all, not most, schools except for those that don't have it .And what do other sports losing money have to do with wrestling losing money?
While you're at it, could you provide an overview on the strict enforcement of Title IX?
I just read that the Big Ten Television distribution is $51 million per school. That is significant:
http://awfulannouncing.com/ncaa/big...n-reaches-an-insane-51-million-per-school.htm
I don't know that wrestling loses money at Iowa. While Penn State might still be losing money, my understanding is that it is getting close to being self-supportive.
I'm not going to touch the Title IX discussion with you because I figure it's akin to a political discussion where you're not going to convince me, and I'm not going to convince you. I will just leave it there.
The Big Ten Network (BTN) distributes nowhere near $51mm per school. But just for shits and giggles, how much of that number is attributable to wrestling?
Iowa wrestling loses about the same amount as PSU wrestling does. And PSU will stand to lose more unless it raises ticket prices substantially.
You really ought to know what you're talking about.
I think it depends on how things shake out.
Look at Virginia - The state forced the ACC to take VT - not because they were tied to UVA - but because the Big East wouldn't be viable P6 conference at the time. The state didn't want VT to suffer.
Look at Texas - you hear that TT is tied to Texas. Why was one school allowed to leave without others. Because the others would still be in a major conference.
If NCState is invited to the SEC (strong chance if the BIG raids the ACC - as the SEC wouldn't cede a good populated (and growing) state to the BIG - the state will be fine with it.
That is the other thing about BIG expansion. Nobody mentions Iowa State. IF the Big12 were to fall - they would be in trouble. Iowa Legislature might force Iowas hand into it. I don't know if it makes a difference - but Since PSU was added - all teams have been 100% welcomed into the conference. I realize 13-0 (iowa abstaining) wouldn't make a difference - but if Oklahoma has to bring OSU or Texas has to bring TT or Kansas has to bring KSU - then Iowa State would more than likely be considered.
If the ACC were to fall - only one school would be affected in the same way would be Pitt - and they more than likely would end up in the Big12 (great travel partner for WVU, new state, good academics, etc)
It's interesting that the Big XII is usually the conference most discussed as being in trouble. But according to this, they are 3rd of the five Power conferences in terms of revenue distribution per school:
https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/03...-the-big-12-in-distributions-to-the-campuses/
That said, the ACC is gearing up a network thru ESPN and projects increased revenues that would bump it to 3rd soon. The Pac 12 will be the worst at that point with the Big XII right above it.
It's also probably important that the Big XII is surrounded by the other Power conferences. That makes it seem more likely to be poached once the next wave of realignment happens.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/03...-the-big-12-in-distributions-to-the-campuses/
That said, the ACC is gearing up a network thru ESPN and projects increased revenues that would bump it to 3rd soon. The Pac 12 will be the worst at that point with the Big XII right above it.
It's also probably important that the Big XII is surrounded by the other Power conferences. That makes it seem more likely to be poached once the next wave of realignment happens.
At what point is a conference too big? Isn't not being able to play everybody else every year in football already too big. So 14 goes to 16. Then 16 goes to 18. Then 18 goes to 20. Why?
What's even more crazy is that since this is all for football anyway we end up with men's rugby and women's field hockey teams going halfway across the country to play a game, passing a bunch of other schools it could be playing instead on the way.
What's even more crazy is that since this is all for football anyway we end up with men's rugby and women's field hockey teams going halfway across the country to play a game, passing a bunch of other schools it could be playing instead on the way.
It's a good question. As to other sports, travel can be rationalized by breaking the conference into divisions based on geography. And since the major drivers of revenue are football and basketball, other sports can have conference affiliations that make economic sense i.e minimizing the amount of money lost
They might be the same system - which isn't exactly apples to apples comparisons to the ones I gave - however - as long as the schools are taken care of - I don't see the schools being forced in the same conference. They might be forced to scheduled each other in an OOC game yearly or home/home basketball.
The already allow schools from the same system to be in different conferences. East Carolina is part of the system. Precedent is in place for schools to be in different conferences. Again if NC State/UNC both have a landing place - then the state will stay out of it.
If some 1/2 drunk - and 3/4 stupid - clown on the next barstool tells you that:
"The BigTen Media Rights gives $51 Million (hell, why not make it $100 Million
http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools...misc_non_event/ncaa-financial-report-1617.pdf
ALL Media Rights (including BOTH PSU generated - local TV/Radio etc, AND all distributions from the Conference) = ~$23 Million
ALL other (non-media rights) Conference distributions... largely football Bowl money = ~$8 Million
You aren't reading your own link correctly. The $8 million clearly says "non bowl revenue". There is another line further down that says $2.6 million for bowl distributions.
AND, that's for 2017. Add in the $6.1 million NCAA distributions and you are in the ballpark of the $38.5 million that media outlets have been reporting for that year. Referring to the $51 million as "media rights" is the part that is not accurate. It's actually the amount distributed by the B1G to conference members. I think the difference is that the $38.5 million does not include the local media rights money. Probably why when you total these numbers you get around $40.3 million.
Actually, I think I am also wrong to a degree. Line 13 says "non bowl" but also states "Conference distributions of revenue generated by a postseason bowl to conference members should be recorded in this category. Distributions for reimbursement of post-season bowl expenses should be included in Category 19."
So the $8 million is the conference bowl distribution. The $2.6 million is specifically the reimbursement of bowl expenses. I think it's an accounting trick as it's all really revenue, but gets offset by the expense to participate in the bowl.
But I do believe that line 12 should be included when adding up the total "distributions".
Ugh, I get it. But you are quoting numbers from 2017 and he is quoting 2018 reports. And yeah, I already said he was wrong about calling the $51 million as "media rights". Are you that angry that you can't even have a conversation?
Just putting out the information in response to a hugely erroneous contention (which, IIRC, was by some other poster... not you).
I'm kinda' funny that way
I treat all back and forth as conversational as opposed to confrontational.
True enough, it wasn't me. And it was erroneous as you stated. But you were also comparing 2017 figures to 2018 projections. Sooo, thought I'd try to clean that up a little by getting the 2017 figures you link to match the media reports on the 2017 distributions.
You may have noticed I even corrected myself in a second post below my first. Or maybe you overlooked that.
Well, the OP started out by stating that the BTN distributed $51mm per school and then edited his way out of that idiocy.
The $51mm is the amount to be or already distributed for 2018 and, as such, hasn't been reported yet by PSU. It includes such non-media items as bowl revenue, NCAA distributions, conference football and basketball championship gate receipts,
Regardless of what the numbers represent, nowhere do I see an even fleeting mention of the overriding importance of wrestling. It was never mentioned during the Big Ten's abortive (thank you, Jim Ed) flirtation with Texas. Indeed, Texas indicated that it would likely find homes for certain sports, notably baseball, tennis, and golf, outside of the Big Ten if it joined. None of this caused the Big Ten's interlocutor to bat an eye.
We disagree--I'd take ND, Texas or Oklahoma every day. NE can stay in the NFL
Comparing conferences in college football to divisions in the NFL doesn't make sense. It's 75% of a team's schedule vs. 38%. We played less than half the games against the conference you'd have a point
They're discussed because of their location. The other 4 conferences could all take teams from the Big XII. The ACC teams could only go to the SEC, Big Ten and the Big XII. The Pac XII could probably only go to the Big XII--maybe the Big Ten. We know the Big Ten and SEC are safe.
I enjoy wrestling but, if we're being honest, it might be the least competitive sport at the DI level...and that's not a new revelation. Iowa, Iowa State, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State & Penn State have pretty much dominated the sport. Who else has even won titles? Michigan State, Minnesota and Ohio State? Any one else in the past 50-70 years? That's not a good thing for any sport
EZU...lol. No one gives a rats ass about EZU. Hell all their fans only care about football. Most of them are bandwagon unc fans when it comes to basketball.
Yeah, although I think 16 is probably the max
If we're being honest--every conference in the country would add Texas & Notre Dame if they had the chance.
16 is probably the max. But with a 9 game schedule, 7 against your own division, you don’t see the other division schools very often. If they do go to 16, I hope they try something different. Figure out a system that keeps rivalries intact but also rotates schedules better. I’d rather have fluid divisions than play the same 7 schools every year.
Yeah, i remember thinking that about miami and Bama back in the old days. Problem is, we had to play them down there in sept, and it would be 95. They never played up here in November, tho.
Outside of athletics, what are the true benefits to B1G membership? What would prevent PSU and others from creating a new “ACC” combining the old eastern powers with the original ACC schools?
My point is that I’ve never felt a fit with PSU and the B1G. Yes, it’s worked but the B1G has been anything but welcoming and supportive of PSU. Recent scandals at MSU and OSU just show how different things are as a few wanted PSU shutdown and expelled back in 2011-12.
PSU needs to be selfish and I hope they are exploring other options. I would welcome aligning with fellow east coast institutions. More major markets in the EST zone than in the CST and it’s growing.
My point is that I’ve never felt a fit with PSU and the B1G. Yes, it’s worked but the B1G has been anything but welcoming and supportive of PSU. Recent scandals at MSU and OSU just show how different things are as a few wanted PSU shutdown and expelled back in 2011-12.
PSU needs to be selfish and I hope they are exploring other options. I would welcome aligning with fellow east coast institutions. More major markets in the EST zone than in the CST and it’s growing.
Delco, media and marketing power is in the EST zone. I’m sure they could be a leader in forming a new, modern day, relevant and sustainable conference instead of bowing to Chicago and the big 2.... From Boston to Miami, thru NYC, Philly, DC, and ATL.... huge base and PSU could be a top dog. They started the conference realignment in the early nineties. Why not start it up again? The brand is strong and getting stronger. The B1G will never change its power base. That’s why ND has told them repeatedly to FO.
Similar threads
