CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Five => Big Ten => Topic started by: Cincydawg on August 29, 2023, 10:55:18 AM
-
This was prompted by the thread about OU/UW going to the B1G.
What if B1G/SEC teams just never played ND in the future? Informal unwritten rule. Bowl games excepted.
-
You wave coin at these charlatans and they fold like a deck chair on the Titanic,so not going to happen
-
I believe USC has stated that their rivalry with the Irish will continue. Ditto for Navy. And a semi-independent Notre Dame will find other teams to fill their non-ACC slate such as Purdue, 2024-2028, and Michigan 2033 and 2034. The question is if their revenue will be competitive or not. I'm thinking it won't be enough.
-
the question of the thread was......... what if USC, Michigan, and Purdue refused to schedule ND going forward??
it's not an outlandish thought
-
So we're talking about the mid to late 2030s? The space aliens will be running things then so all bets are off.
Ok. There are enough decent non-B1G teams out there for the independent Irish to fill a schedule. So, I would just expect ND to throw the B1G the middle finger. Again.
-
What might their schedule comprise, and would it be worth $$$$$ ???
Stanford Army Navy Cal Clemson Wake Forest UNC BC AF
Add the B12 to the mix of nonplayers ...
-
see, that's what causes the Big, as a conference, to ban members from scheduling the Irish.
the Irish middle finger gets old and the new commish wants to make a name for himself
-
What might their schedule comprise, and would it be worth $$$$$ ???
Stanford Army Navy Cal Clemson Wake Forest UNC BC AF
Add the B12 to the mix of nonplayers ...
Clemson, FSU, Miami, UNC
the rest are worthless as ratings games
-
to what end? to f-over nd? to force their hand into joining a conference?
i can see them trying to force them into a conference if/when the p5 break away and form nfl-lite.
i don't see them doing it after the changes and just leaving nd out.
-
Clemson, FSU, Miami, UNC
the rest are worthless as ratings games
Sure, but they won't play those four each and every year. And FSU and Clemson MIGHT not end up able to play ND.
-
to what end? to f-over nd? to force their hand into joining a conference?
i can see them trying to force them into a conference if/when the p5 break away and form nfl-lite.
i don't see them doing it after the changes and just leaving nd out.
Some of both, I think, either they join the party and share the revenues, or get cut out completely.
-
Sure, but they won't play those four each and every year. And FSU and Clemson MIGHT not end up able to play ND.
why not?
-
Clemson, FSU, Miami, UNC, Duke, Wake Forest, BYU, Stanford, Navy, Army, Air Force, MAC teams...there's enough to put together a respectable schedule if blackballed by the B1G and SEC. And the Irish would probably be fine with adding more home non-P5 games. Might even be smarter. I mean, the B1G is turning into a meat grinder.
-
why not?
If they joined the SEC ...
-
I don't think ND will get cut out completely, too much $$$ involved
but, I do think they will be forced to join the Big or the SEC or make one more power conference out of the ACC and a few others
We're mostly all guessing the B1G
-
If they joined the SEC ...
well certainly
if that happens the Irish will be forced to join the B1G
-
The B1G with ND is worth more.
ND alone is now worth enough to make that dubious for them.
Make it clear cut for them.
-
yup, I'm really not sure what is taking so long
-
Stubborness - on both sides,The BIG left them at the alter years a go and ND returned the favor when offered an olive branch
-
I think it's taking long simply because of $$$. My notion is to make that equation more painful for them, and the option more palatable.
-
As long as the decision-makers allow ND to be special when it comes to a playoff route, they have no reason to join a conference.
-
The playoff does offer inducement to be in a conference
-
The playoff does offer inducement to be in a conference
I don't think the playoff inducement for conference champions is enough to induce Notre Dame, or other independents, to abandon independence from conferences. Big Ten team media rights jump to $100M per team in 2026. Notre Dame was seeking $75M per year on their deal. But that is for 7-games. As I peruse internet articles, I see several saying Notre Dame will maintain its independence in football if it gets $75M per year on its next deal. However, many of the articles I read say it is likely Notre Dame will get $60M per year from its next television contract starting in 2026.
I could be misunderstanding the financial aspects of what I reviewed, but if Notre Dame thinks a gap of $25M is acceptable to remain independent for media rights, they have an enormous revenue stream elsewhere. Indeed, their football ticket prices are ginormous, and they have heavyweight contributions to athletics. That said, it is not good business to give up $25M so your school can play Stanford, Florida State, Clemson, and Georgia Tech rather than Ohio State, Wisconsin, Penn State, and Iowa. Just my personal opinion.
-
yup and a gap of $25M will only go to $50M some day
why wait
-
None of us know what size gap would induce ND to jump, I'm merely pondering how to increase said size by a fair amount.
At some point, they'd jump, or become an afterthought.
-
Screw you Notre Dame we need more content for the shareholders. Get with the program or GTFO
-
perhaps it's the networks NBC
they see a value bargain with the ND contract
-
None of us know what size gap would induce ND to jump, I'm merely pondering how to increase said size by a fair amount.
At some point, they'd jump, or become an afterthought.
A few thoughts:
First, it appears that stubbornness is a major reason that Notre Dame is not already in the B1G. That being the case, I think that trying to force their hand by refusing to play them would backfire because it would (quite reasonably and fairly) tick them off which would only harden their stance and lead to them digging in even more.
Second, I honestly don't think that they are a good long-term addition. They are presently a super-helmet no doubt about it. In the long-term, however, I see them as a diminishing brand for two reasons:
- Religious identification is a consistently declining part of how Americans see themselves. As such, I see their long-term fanbase shrinking as there are less and less people for whom being catholic is central to their self-identity.
- IMHO, a big part of the LARGE Notre Dame anti-fan group is specifically because they are NOT in a league and appear to be treated as different/special*. This disappears the instant that they join a league.
WRT Notre Dame being treated as different/special:
I attended the tOSU/Miami BCSCG back in 2003 (2002 season). In the stadium prior to the game they ran a BCS promo video on the jumbotrons. The video included a little snippet on each of the then BCS leagues. As each BCS league was listed the video showed footage relating to that league. Then, after listing all six BCS leagues came "and Notre Dame" while footage of the golden dome ran. EVERYONE in the stadium booed. Even today, 20+ years later probably the only thing from that game that tOSU and Miami fans would readily agree upon is that Notre Dame shouldn't have been treated (within the video) as the equivalent to a league.
I've never liked Notre Dame but my intense distaste for them sprang from that moment. Treat ND as equivalent to my school, ok fine. Treat ND as equivalent to my school plus Michigan plus Penn State plus Wisconsin plus etc, NO.
-
I don't agree about the stubborness factor, at all, it's illogical to me. Maybe they are illogical. Money trumps nearly anything else.
The reason I'd want them in my conference is money. They reason they'd want in my conference is money. Anything else is emotion.
-
emotion is almost always illogical
-
emotion is almost always illogical
Yes and that is kinda the point.
I don't agree about the stubborness factor, at all, it's illogical to me. Maybe they are illogical. Money trumps nearly anything else.
The reason I'd want them in my conference is money. They reason they'd want in my conference is money. Anything else is emotion.
If logic (money) dictates that we should want them and logic (money) dictates that they should want us and yet it hasn't happened then, as Spock would say, the only logical conclusion is that something not based in logic is gumming up the gears. My argument is that the illogical "gum" IS stubbornness.
-
My point is that the money factor to date is not compelling. My OP was about making it more compelling.
The ND PTBs may now believe they are doing just fine and don't need however much more money a conference might bring, if indeed it would bring more. It's not stubborness, in my view, it's a monetary comparison that is wanting. And there are some negatives associated with joining a conference for ND.
-
The playoff does offer inducement to be in a conference
Yes, in a 4 team playoff. No, in a 12 team playoff.
-
Yes, in a 4 team playoff. No, in a 12 team playoff.
I think it does in a 12 team playoff more than the current 4 team.
If we presume ND is arrogant and prideful and stubborn and attaches "value" to being independent, that "value" can be exceeded with money. Maybe the value they assign is say $10 million a year, if you make it $25 million, they suddenly recompute.
-
I think it does in a 12 team playoff more than the current 4 team.
If we presume ND is arrogant and prideful and stubborn and attaches "value" to being independent, that "value" can be exceeded with money. Maybe the value they assign is say $10 million a year, if you make it $25 million, they suddenly recompute.
I thought the idea was that the playoff induces them to join a conference because they might think it's necessary in order for them to get access to the playoff? I.e. that if there are four conference champions each at 12-1 or better, and ND at 11-1, the committee has to engage in some serious gymnastics to justify ND over the conference champs. ND pretty much has to go 12-0 to be a shoo-in because it's exceedingly rare you'd have 4x 13-0 conference champs.
On the other hand, with a 12 team playoff, you have 6 conference champs (likely to get reduced to 5 now that the PAC is no longer a power conference), and 6 or soon to be 7 at-large picks. 11-1 ND is in. 10-2 ND is in. 9-3 ND might be in--you know the committee will try to justify it.
So a larger playoff reduces the pressure on ND to join a conference, because they know they can get into the playoff with a lesser record than they would if it was 4 teams and they had no chance at being a conference champ b/c they aren't in a conference.
-
The first four have to be conference champs, and they get a bye, which is an advantage. ND cannot be one of the four.
ND would be potentially only 5-12, never 1-4.
-
If I'm correct, the SEC and B1G will each be at 24 teams. Within each of them will be 4 divisions. They each play 5 divisional and 10 total conference games, a division final (8 teams included) and a CCG (4 teams included) to end the season.
The winners of the B1G and the SEC play for the trophy.
There is your 8-team playoff.
And F Notre Dame.
-
If I'm correct, the SEC and B1G will each be at 24 teams. Within each of them will be 4 divisions. They each play 5 divisional and 10 total conference games, a division final (8 teams included) and a CCG (4 teams included) to end the season.
I don't remember who proposed this here but if we are going to 24 teams (like you, I assume that we are) then I like this idea:
- 3 OOC Games.
- 5 "divisional" games, playing each of the other teams in your six-team division once.
- 3 non-divisional league games, playing one team each from each of the other three divisions in a rotation.
- All 24 teams play a ninth league game where hosting rotates among the divisions and the matchups are #1vs#1, #2vs#2 . . .#6vs#6.
- The two #1vs#1 games are league semi-finals with the two winners advancing to a league CG.
-
So, back in the day, a pretty great season for many teams was going to an NYD bowl game, winning your conference, even upsetting whoever ended up #1.
Now it'll be anything short of the NC will tend to be viewed as coming up short. Two teams will win a CG of any import and one will win the NC.
-
So, back in the day, a pretty great season for many teams was going to an NYD bowl game, winning your conference, even upsetting whoever ended up #1.
Now it'll be anything short of the NC will tend to be viewed as coming up short. Two teams will win a CG of any import and one will win the NC.
Been that way since 1998.
-
I took pleasure in winning the conference for a long time, anything more was gravy. I also liked when they won a NYD bowl, even years later, but I'm starting not to view it that way of course, I guess I'm slow.
Imagine the Dawgs slip up against the Vols and don't even make Atlanta, at 11-1 they might still make the CFP. More likely would be the Sugar Bowl, which would seem like a major disappointment to most fans.
-
Been that way since 1998.
True, but not to the same extent as now.
When the BCS started in 1998 it was only two teams so there were still plenty of really good teams playing in Bowls that were NOT the BCSNCG.
Playoff expansion is sucking all the oxygen out of the room. The year before last when Ohio State went to the RoseBowl it definitely "felt like" a consolation bowl but the Buckeyes were 10-2 and #6 and it was a high profile matchup at #11vs#6.
Even with automatic bids when we expand to 12 there will almost never be a top-10 team in a non-CFP Bowl.
Finally, the recent practice of players sitting out non-CFP bowls adds to the "its just a exhibition, nobody cares" feeling. Anymore when I watch my team in a non-CFP bowl I'm more interested in seeing how next year's projected starters look than I am in seeing whether or not my team wins.
-
The only system that makes sense is one of promotion/relegation. Good programs rise, crappy programs fall, and everyone gets meaningful chances at postseason play. But that would require leadership based on the health of the game, not how much content they can generate for shareholders next season.
-
Perpetual quarterly increased profits!!!!!!
-
Perpetual quarterly increased profits!!!!!!
This is a mostly inaccurate characterization of capitalism / the stock market BTW.
For *some* businesses and stock prices, perpetual growth is the goal for the stock price to go up. You see this mostly in things like tech... Lack of growth is stagnation, and stagnation is death.
For others, I'd argue *most* businesses, income distribution to shareholders is the goal, so it doesn't really matter that much what the stock price is as long as the stock is generating quarterly dividends.
Coca-Cola isn't chasing perpetual growth. They're just maintaining a business that generates stable profits and paying those out to shareholders every quarter.
And right now, a lot of the big content companies are trying to survive. Content is king, and if you don't have content, you don't have revenue. So they're all trying to lock up live sports, which is the easiest content to use to move advertising spots for high dollar value.
And sometimes that entails killing conferences to get teams to move into your sphere of influence.
But it's not about perpetual quarterly growth in that case--it's knowing that there's limited content out there, and someone is going to own it. You don't want that content owner to be "the other guy".
-
This is a mostly inaccurate characterization of capitalism / the stock market BTW.
For *some* businesses and stock prices, perpetual growth is the goal for the stock price to go up. You see this mostly in things like tech... Lack of growth is stagnation, and stagnation is death.
For others, I'd argue *most* businesses, income distribution to shareholders is the goal, so it doesn't really matter that much what the stock price is as long as the stock is generating quarterly dividends.
Coca-Cola isn't chasing perpetual growth. They're just maintaining a business that generates stable profits and paying those out to shareholders every quarter.
And right now, a lot of the big content companies are trying to survive. Content is king, and if you don't have content, you don't have revenue. So they're all trying to lock up live sports, which is the easiest content to use to move advertising spots for high dollar value.
And sometimes that entails killing conferences to get teams to move into your sphere of influence.
But it's not about perpetual quarterly growth in that case--it's knowing that there's limited content out there, and someone is going to own it. You don't want that content owner to be "the other guy".
This is the view when you get old, and you look at your stockholdings you acquired 20 years ago or more and look at the current stock price, and dividend. For those that went up considerably, say 5x, and kept the dividend at 2-3%, you are now earning 5x 2-3% on your original investment on top of the price increase.
Sorry to bring this back to age, but I am already there, and don't have enough of those types of stocks in my portfolio, but for the ones that are in there, it's money.
That said, Notre Dame is not following along with Adam Smith, unless the institution thinks it is raising more $ from donors as an independent than they could possibly raise from donors as a member of a nationwide conference stretching from East to West, such as the Big Ten Conference. Perhaps if FSU joined the Big Ten, along with Cal and Stanford, the Big Ten would have outposts in all four corners, and the ACC would be so diminished, Notre Dame would almost have to join and would maintain its national schedule in the process, and get better media rights.