Yes, play 8 ACC games per year and you might as well be in the conference. At that point it would be stupid to avoid being eligible for the ACC title game.
Brando: ND Will Be Full ACC Member in 3 Years
- Thread starter pmemorial
- Start date
Yes, play 8 ACC games per year and you might as well be in the conference. At that point it would be stupid to avoid being eligible for the ACC title game.
First off, Northvanole is the real deal. He posted something similar on Warchant regarding this. Is he an insider? Not necessarily. But he knows what he is talking about.
Notre Dame has always valued its independence in Football. But times change. The environment in College Football is not the same as it was 3 years ago let along 20 years ago. Things are really trending to where you need to be a part of a Conference. And if Notre Dame realizes it needs to join a conference then they are a much better fit for the ACC than they are for the Big 10. I just think things are changing to a point where Notre Dame realizes they are better off joining a conference than they are in maintaining their independence. I'll say this: If Notre Dame were to join the ACC, and also the ACC Network were formed with Notre Dame as a Full Member, the Financial benefits would be well beyond what Notre Dame is making right now as an Independent, and beyond what the ACC is making right now with Notre Dame as a Partial member. It would be mutually beneficial to both parties.
Notre Dame has always valued its independence in Football. But times change. The environment in College Football is not the same as it was 3 years ago let along 20 years ago. Things are really trending to where you need to be a part of a Conference. And if Notre Dame realizes it needs to join a conference then they are a much better fit for the ACC than they are for the Big 10. I just think things are changing to a point where Notre Dame realizes they are better off joining a conference than they are in maintaining their independence. I'll say this: If Notre Dame were to join the ACC, and also the ACC Network were formed with Notre Dame as a Full Member, the Financial benefits would be well beyond what Notre Dame is making right now as an Independent, and beyond what the ACC is making right now with Notre Dame as a Partial member. It would be mutually beneficial to both parties.
Possibly. I think "much better fit" is a stretch. Money and proximity (the number one reason why conferences form following geography) favor the Big Ten.
IMHO, it's not such a bad idea to play against teams located in prime recruiting areas, versus teams located close to South Bend.
They can't. ESPN has all of the ACC's rights under contract until 2027. The only possible option for a network is through ESPN, just as the SEC has done.
This is incorrect. The $250 million is only for 1/2 of the Tier 1 rights. The other half of the Tier 1 rights are still up for bid, and there is also an additional $8 million a year (per team) from the BTN. So right now, the Big Ten has $17 million per team from Fox + $8 million per team from BTN = $25 million per team. So already you are sitting at $25 million + whatever the other contract is bid for. Conservatively, the Big Ten will be looking at $30 million a year for each team.
Those two conferences overlap some, but they also have very different footprints. The ACC is more along the coast and obviously includes several Northern programs. So I disagree with your assessment that the ACC is a "B" football conference in the Southeast. It also has the 2nd-most players in the NFL of any conference, behind the SEC.
The Big Ten already makes $32 million per full member. The projection for the Big Ten is closer to $40-45 million per team for the new contracts.
The biggest problem with the other poster's statement is that the ACC simply can't have a network like the Pac 12's. The Pac 12 network is self-owned. The ACC has to partner with ESPN (just like the SEC) because ESPN owns all the ACC's content.
I said it was a conservative estimate. That said, the figure you are quoting is the estimate for the total payout, which includes bowl games and such. I'm talking about the payout for just the TV rights.
It seems when a program has a lot to offer (ND, Alabama, Ohio St) it recruits well wherever. When a "national" program such as BYU doesn't have a lot to offer, it doesn't recruit well nationally. Even if it plays a game in TX and CA and FL and MS and GA.
The point is, the ACC plus ND is not going to worth as much to the networks as the Big Ten plus ND. I understand that media rights is not by any means the only consideration, but as far as money the Big Ten looks like it will be on par with the SEC. Everyone else will be quite a bit back.
not sure what you mean by 1/2 tier 1 rights. anyhow if what you state is accurate then Notre Dame should be looking for a better deal. Also what other benefits does notre dame receive from TV.
Thanks for the comments. We follow this closely on warchant because of our own relationship with the ACC. It's not easy being in a conference - there are always issues. But there are benefits too. There is no better conference when you exclude football. Problem is, you can't exclude football because of its importance on so many levels. I would like ND not to merely join the ACC; I want them to help lead it. I want them to transform it to be more like ND - I am not interested in ND acting like a traditional ACC member.
There is a group of us that follow conference realignment very closely. Too much has happened in the past that impacted us when we weren't even a party to the transaction. You have to stay vigilant watching this stuff. It just so happens that we caught wind of "rumors" regarding a possible ACC network announcement this summer - and some of those rumors include ND - and they include rumors that NBC will be part of that network. How that works is beyond me as ABC owns ESPN. But who knows.
Brent McMurphy of ESPN reported three months ago that he has seen the projections of revenue that if ND joined the ACC - ND would make more money doing that than what they currently make.
But I agree - ND will never join just to make more money. ND is not going to sacrifice its identity. But is its identity totally dependent on independent status in the current landscape of college football? Interesting question. The Irish have to answer that for themselves.
Particularly when 5hw fans of those schools
The point is that ND is not interested in joining the Big 10. Not going to happen.
That was the case to begin with. However, the ACC would be just about on par if the network comes to fruition. They would get an increased TV contract for adding Notre Dame/whoever, and on top of that would get a new source of income from a conference network. That's the main thing pushing the SEC and Big Ten past the other leagues.
The complete Tier 1 package for the Big Ten includes about 50 football games and about 100 basketball games. Fox only got half of those games in the contract they just signed with the Big Ten. The other 25/50 games are still up for bid.
Notre Dame will get more money this next contract, but it won't increase in proportion with the Big Ten, as you seem to be suggesting. The Big Ten is getting an increase for two reason: 1) they are splitting their rights between two networks, so that can get a larger combined total between the two. 2) they are getting an increase for adding the New York/D.C./Baltimore markets. Notre Dame is still going to be under contract with one network (NBC) and they don't get a boost from expansion, as conferences do.
Well the ACC's 3rd in players per college, just ahead of the Big Ten. The Pac 12 comes in 2nd in that.
Blah, blah, blah and guess what, ND football is still and will always be iNDepeNDent. Eat shite Criminoles and Skunkbears.
Like you know shit about ND's future.
Find your safe space ignore button pussy boy.
Poor schadenfreude. No matter how much you want ND in the Big 10, it's not going to happen. It should be obvious to even you that, if ND were to join a conference, it will be the ACC.
Could be. I don't claim to know the future.
If I had to guess what things would look like in ten years, I would put it at ND being indie at 40%, joining ACC at 40%, and joining Big Ten at 20%.
Last edited:
I was under the misunderstanding that moderators on this board have the same control features as we do on the FSU board. That is obviously not the case. Even if you are not a rabid follower of college football, the phenomenon of conference realignment is a fascinating study of when the free market system becomes so rampant that the interested parties no longer control the outcome. Of course, this is why pro sports are examples of collusive activity - they have no interest in having the free market system hurting their product. (As we all know, NFL owners have to approve all ownership changes). The free market system stopped alignments we thought would happen, and created others that seem....."odd". FSU didn't join the SEC; Missouri didn't join the Big Ten; Penn State didn't join the Big East in 1988; West Virginia is the only eastern time zone member of the Big 12; BYU is an independent without the power of ND; Army is an independent and can't even get into the same conference with Navy. And the collateral impact is the end of traditional annual games. Annual rivalries of Texas-Texas A&M, OU-Nebraska; Penn State-Pitt; Clemson-Georgia; Florida-Auburn; Missouri-Kansas; Pitt-West Virginia; - all gone.
There is no referee in this mess. ND is no longer in complete control of its independence status. With regard to independence - I have no doubt of its value and tradition to the institution. But I also don't doubt the unfettered power of money and how it can force parties to react to unacceptable differences in revenue generation power. There will come a point in time when ND knows when its the right time to make the move and can do it on its own terms. The contract between the ACC recognizes that fact - but without concluding or requiring that ND would ever join full time for football. But that contract does not control what happens outside of this parties. There is a risk that there is another time - at a later date - when the result will be the same but the terms may not be as favorable. That is how it has worked so far with everyone else.
But I am not interested in name calling. Cancelled my membership.
There is no referee in this mess. ND is no longer in complete control of its independence status. With regard to independence - I have no doubt of its value and tradition to the institution. But I also don't doubt the unfettered power of money and how it can force parties to react to unacceptable differences in revenue generation power. There will come a point in time when ND knows when its the right time to make the move and can do it on its own terms. The contract between the ACC recognizes that fact - but without concluding or requiring that ND would ever join full time for football. But that contract does not control what happens outside of this parties. There is a risk that there is another time - at a later date - when the result will be the same but the terms may not be as favorable. That is how it has worked so far with everyone else.
But I am not interested in name calling. Cancelled my membership.
the gomers who think everything is about money hate ND because HERE it clearly is NOT about money.
you can slobber all you want but ND will only change if we are not going to get a shot at the playoffs. Other then that there WILL BE NO CHANGE TO OUR INDEPENDENT STATUS.
With the 4 team current system and the likelihood of that being expanded in the next few years there is NO REASON TO CHANGE.
And therefore it will not happen.
you can slobber all you want but ND will only change if we are not going to get a shot at the playoffs. Other then that there WILL BE NO CHANGE TO OUR INDEPENDENT STATUS.
With the 4 team current system and the likelihood of that being expanded in the next few years there is NO REASON TO CHANGE.
And therefore it will not happen.
And that will be very likely. Thing about it: Say all winners of Power 5 conferences are sitting there at 12-1 since the Big 12 will have a Title Game in 2017. And Notre Dame is sitting there at 11-1. And considering all of the Committee members are from other conferences who value the achievement of winning your Conference. I would find it hard to believe Notre Dame would get in unless their Strength of Schedule was so much higher than two of the Conference winners that it would be impossible to leave Notre Dame out. You can say you're Notre Dame and you deserve certain privileges but in the Scenario I mentioned above you have teams that won a Conference and played and won 1 more game than Notre Dame did. Who would really deserve to go?
You didn't get a test run this year because you lost to Stanford. But if you hadn't lost to Stanford I don't think you would have gotten in with 1 loss. The only team you would get in over would be Oklahoma who also would have been 11-1. But in the 2017 scenario Oklahoma with 1 loss would be 12-1.
This board is essentially unmoderated. Virtually anything goes here. Most of us don't like it any more than you do.
As for name calling, I didn't see it. But it must have come from argus man, posting under one of his aliases. Ignore him. He is a certified lunatic, certainly not worth getting out of sorts about. Most of us have had him on ignore for a long time.
blah blah blah
you hate the fact that ND is special. We get that. And that is exactly why your drivel is just that. The committee has already shown they are flexible enough to realize that just following rote like you do is dumb.
It has nothing to do with whether Notre Dame is special or not. It has to do with the fact that other teams may have the same number of losses as Notre Dame, won a Conference Championship and won 1 more game than Notre Dame. It has nothing to do with whether Notre Dame has certain privileges or not. It has to do with how Notre Dame's resume stacks up against Conference Champions' resumes. If Notre Dame has a significant edge in Strength of Schedule I could see them overcoming that. So I do think Notre Dame can theoretically make it in. But in most years Conference Champions' Strength of Schedule wouldn't be much different than the typical schedule Notre Dame plays. My point is they are at a disadvantage not being in a Conference and not playing a 13th game.
No where does it say you get points for the number of wins in a season. ND will always play a tougher nonconf schedule than any conf champ as long as they are iNDepeNDent. They wont need a 13th game.
Of course they will. That's because all 12 of Notre Dame's games are Non-Conference games. If you compare all 12 games whether they are Conference or Non-Conference though there isn't a whole lot of difference. It isn't like every game on Notre Dame's schedule is Stanford. Teams in Conferences have tough games within their conference. Plus most teams are scheduling a lot tougher in the Non-Conference than they used to.
Take a look at FSU's schedule. They play Ole Miss and Florida in the Non-Conference plus a moderately difficult game with South Florida on the road. Then they get Louisville and Miami on the road in conference. And they get Clemson and North Carolina at Home in conference. That is a tough schedule any way you slice it.
Even last year, had we held on and beaten Stanford, we'd likely have been left out, in favor of 11-1 Big 12 champ Oklahoma. And they didn't even have a conference CG. It was clear in the few weeks leading up to that, that the Committee was favoring them over us. I don't think their resume was better than ours. They'd lost to Texas.
It's debateable. But the Committee has stated that conference championships are a factor, and can be used as a tiebreaker sometimes. Even if said conference champ didn't win a CCG.
Latest posts
-
-
Tommy Rees trying to poach another ND coach, but Mike Brown sticking around...- Latest: SubwaydomerDFW
