Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29
  1. #21

    Join Date
    February 16, 2001
    Posts
    14,845
    First of all by doing this they are all making more money and as cobb who is in the industry says...there is still a lot more to be made. It didn't work for the WAC because they don't have the reach of the SEC, PAC, B1G and ACC. You have to have eye balls and new highly populated states to make more money...it is not rocket science and they did not have them.

    As far as getting along I believe it will become easier when you only have to play your division during the regular season....especially when they have 4 divisions with likely 5 teams in them. These will be local rivalries that will have the local bragging rights at stake...something that has been missing a bit in the ACC. For instance I could see a Carolina division with the 4 NC schools and Clemson in them. Those games will most likely sell out since they are easy travel games and the fans live and work together. That doesn't mean there won't be some cross over division games, but I see more cross over conference games like us playing Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State, Wisconsin etc...just like we have lined up for the first time in our history.


    Quote Originally Posted by BUGGZY View Post
    i didn't say more likely, i said just as likely. i'm just not convinced there isn't a bubble for all this revenue. let's not forget the WAC was going to be a 16 team media super conference in the 1990's. it's not easy to get 14+ schools to agree how to generate and share revenue. at some point, i feel some will be unhappy and the house of cards will crumble. i could also be wrong and the conferences grow SO big that groups of schools within the conferences happily form divisions that coexist for the sake of greater revenue.

    what i can say for sure is that it doesn't make any sense that 14+ schools can happily agree with each other, so if it works, it's because they all find ways to compromise for the sake of generating greater revenue as a group....and i'm sTILL not convinced that compromise makes for long term happiness.
    Last edited by Stech; Tue Sep 17 2013 at 07:30 AM.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by BUGGZY View Post
    i didn't say more likely, i said just as likely. i'm just not convinced there isn't a bubble for all this revenue. let's not forget the WAC was going to be a 16 team media super conference in the 1990's. it's not easy to get 14+ schools to agree how to generate and share revenue. at some point, i feel some will be unhappy and the house of cards will crumble. i could also be wrong and the conferences grow SO big that groups of schools within the conferences happily form divisions that coexist for the sake of greater revenue.

    what i can say for sure is that it doesn't make any sense that 14+ schools can happily agree with each other, so if it works, it's because they all find ways to compromise for the sake of generating greater revenue as a group....and i'm sTILL not convinced that compromise makes for long term happiness.
    You bring up a good point with the old WAC. However, part of the WAC's problem was that it spanned 4 different time zones, 5 hours apart (Louisiana to Hawaii) And they weren't bringing in the money to help offset some of those costs associated with that.
    There was also the problem of an inconsistency in the vision across the member schools which is something that may be a problem down the road that mega conferences need to be mindful of. Which is why I feel conferences should have an identity to help unify them.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Posts
    15,119

    Notre Dame could make a deal with any number of bowls....

    Quote Originally Posted by hokieball View Post
    That doesn't make sense. Actors and lawyers get paid on retainer as a way of reserving their services when you need them. It's a way of compensating those professional for foregoing income they could be earning by pursuing other business opportunities. In his regard, what other options does Notre Dame have? You either get selected for a BCS game or you don't. It's not like they're going to go to the NFL if they don't get paid. This doesn't seem like an apt comparison to me.
    They could sign a deal in which they promised to play every year and make more than the BCS deal. NBC would create a bowl for Notre Dame if necessary. Notre Dame has plenty of options, and imagine how foolish the BCS officials would have looked last year if Notre Dame had been in a separate bowl deal, the Irish had won their bowl, and there was another split championship. The BCS pays Notre Dame on retainer because advertisers pay and because it's too risky not to.

    People forget that the BCS is not paying for a conference, they are paying for the 1-2 schools from a conference that play in BCS game(s). If the ACC proffers Wake for a BCS game it is worth much, much less than Notre Dame alone.

    And this is all part of the reason Notre Dame will not join the ACC unless they have no other option. Why would they share revenue equally with Wake, BC, Syracuse, et al.? It doesn't make sense, unfortunately for us.
    Last edited by lawhokie; Tue Sep 17 2013 at 08:54 AM.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    September 23, 2001
    Posts
    8,806
    Quote Originally Posted by lawhokie View Post
    They could sign a deal in which they promised to play every year and make more than the BCS deal. NBC would create a bowl for Notre Dame if necessary. Notre Dame has plenty of options, and imagine how foolish the BCS officials would have looked last year if Notre Dame had been in a separate bowl deal, the Irish had won their bowl, and there was another split championship. The BCS pays Notre Dame on retainer because advertisers pay and because it's too risky not to.
    So, Notre Dame's leaving money on the table by not creating their own bowl game? I doubt that. First off, the game would be a farce. Secondly, if they could, then they would. Why bother with the BCS if you could make more money going it own your own?

    In reality, they have no other option if they ever want to win another national championship. The BCS, and soon the CFP, runs college football and ND knows that. College Football has outgrown (or evolved past) relying on Notre Dame to bring in money. It's not 1980 anymore. So that brings us back to the beginning: why are they getting paid so much for non-participation?

  5. #25

    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Posts
    15,119

    I said Notre Dame had options, not that the BCS was not the best option.

    Quote Originally Posted by hokieball View Post
    So that brings us back to the beginning: why are they getting paid so much for non-participation?
    Notre Dame had a BCS and a non-BCS option. The BCS had a non-ND and a ND option. The parties contracted because it was the best option for both, like any other contract. Notre Dame and BCS officials aren't complaining, so we have to assume the payments to ND were properly evaluated. It only makes sense to assume that sophisticated contractual parties negotiate to the limits of their position and that they arrive at an equitable deal. In other words, given the hundreds of factors that affect negotiations, ND is probably getting paid what they it's worth.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Posts
    85
    Roscoe's interpretation of the deal:

    Either:
    1. We don't have all the facts, or
    2. It's a stupid deal

    I agree that smart people will ususally come to an equitable negotiated settlement. I don't see the equity here.

    Quote Originally Posted by lawhokie View Post
    Notre Dame had a BCS and a non-BCS option. The BCS had a non-ND and a ND option. The parties contracted because it was the best option for both, like any other contract. Notre Dame and BCS officials aren't complaining, so we have to assume the payments to ND were properly evaluated. It only makes sense to assume that sophisticated contractual parties negotiate to the limits of their position and that they arrive at an equitable deal. In other words, given the hundreds of factors that affect negotiations, ND is probably getting paid what they it's worth.

  7. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    August 07, 2013
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by Roscoe View Post
    Roscoe's interpretation of the deal:

    Either:
    1. We don't have all the facts, or
    2. It's a stupid deal

    I agree that smart people will ususally come to an equitable negotiated settlement. I don't see the equity here.
    You would've hated our first deal with the BCS because we received more money.

  8. #28
    Old Line Hokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    3659′36″N 7813′30″W
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by goldendomer View Post
    You would've hated our first deal with the BCS because we received more money.
    Kudos to Notre Dame for pulling it off the past 30 years. They still have the brand name and the national television contract with NBC. How long this ride will last depends on the future actions of the SEC and Big 10 (the big boys) and the changing demographics of the U.S Roman Catholic Church (decreasing European Catholic population in the Northeast and Midwest and more Hispanic and Filipino Catholics who don't really care about Notre Dame football).

  9. #29

    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Posts
    15,119

    #1 is certainly true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Roscoe View Post
    Roscoe's interpretation of the deal:

    Either:
    1. We don't have all the facts, or
    2. It's a stupid deal

    I agree that smart people will ususally come to an equitable negotiated settlement. I don't see the equity here.
    It's really not sensible to simply assume that the scores of attorneys, forecasters, accountants, etc. on each side fought over every contractual term, and then one side got rooked. I've read summaries of deals that I thought were ridiculously one-sided, but when you dig into the actual negotiations every term usually makes sense. Bad deals happen, but it's rare. Nobody made a stupid deal imo.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •