2009-10 College Football Coaching Hiring/Firing Thread

[Wolfpack]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

There is no way that any school is leaving the SEC, unless they are kicked out. I would imagine that Arkansas would rather play the Big 12 schools, but they would be losing $8-10-million in TV revenue if they switched to the Big 12.

The only reason I'd even think Arkansas would leave is because they had those long-standing rivalries in the old Southwest Conference. Granted, there's now nearly a generation of players and fans who don't even know there was a Southwest Conference and that the SEC has always had 12 teams and Arkansas was one of them, but tradition is a rather hard thing to kill.

Of course, we've got a raving lunatic on the NC State Scout board going on about demographics or some other nonsense saying that State should be the 12th team in the Big 10 and that somehow it's logical for them to ask and for State to accept such an offer. So, I don't think Mizzou-to-Big-10-Arkansas-to-Big-12 is as far-fetched as some scenarios I've seen.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by tarcone

The Big 12 put OU, Okie St and Texas together.

One of these three was not like the other. Putting PSU/OSU/Mich together would be like putting OU, Texas and Nebraska together. And there actually have been a lot of complaints that OU-Nebraska don't play every year - I couldn't see Michigan and Ohio St agreeing to that, so they'd either have to be together with Penn St on the other side or the conference needs to have 1 permanent cross-division game for each school.

The Big East discussion always interests me. I'm clearly in the camp that wants UMass to be in it when it splits, but we're not going to get that invite unless we're already moving to FBS and probably the MAC for a couple years. There's also a very outside chance some CAA members (led by Delaware and James Madison) may try to move up together and form kind of an eastern version of the Mountain West.

Some numbers I threw together on a UMass board

Distance - 1(Amherst to Philly) 2(Extended to Pittsburgh/DC suburbs) 3(Further)
I may be off on some of the football teams if they have non-scholarship teams

Code:School Public/Private/Catholic Enrollment (rounded to nearest 1000) Distance Football 
UMass Public 26 
 
A-10 
Temple Public      32 1 1 
GW      Private     23 2 N 
UNC-C  Public      22 3 N 
URI      Public      16 1 AA 
Fordham Catholic 13 1 AA 
Dayton Catholic   11 3 AA (Non-Scholarship) 
St. Louis Catholic 11 3 N 
Duquesne Catholic 10 2 N 
St. Joe's Catholic  8 1 N 
Xavier Catholic     7 3 N 
LaSalle Catholic    6 1 N 
Richmond Private  3 2/3 AA 
St. Bonnie Catholic 3 2 N 
 
CAA 
VCU               Public 33 3 N 
George Mason Public 30 2 N 
Georgia State Public 27 3 AA 
Northeastern Private 23 1 N 
ODU              Public 22 3 AA 
Towson          Public 20 2 AA 
Delaware        Public 19 1 AA 
JMU               Public 18 2 AA 
Drexel          Private 17 1 N 
Hofstra         Private 13 1 N 
UNC-W          Public 12 3 N 
W&M              Public 8 3 AA 
 
Some others 
Penn St      Public 37 2 1 
UConn        Public 29 1 1 
Pitt             Public 32 2 1 
Rutgers       Public 35 1 1 
Syracuse   Private 18 2 1 
Villanova  Catholic 10 1 AA 
West Va       Public 29 2 1 
Albany        Public 18 1 AA 
BU            Private 32 1 N 
Maine         Public 12 2 AA 
UNH            Public 15 1 AA 
Stony Brook Public 24 1 AA 
Quinnipiac   Private 9 1 N 
Buffalo        Public 29 2 1

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

One of these three was not like the other. Putting PSU/OSU/Mich together would be like putting OU, Texas and Nebraska together. And there actually have been a lot of complaints that OU-Nebraska don't play every year - I couldn't see Michigan and Ohio St agreeing to that, so they'd either have to be together with Penn St on the other side or the conference needs to have 1 permanent cross-division game for each school.

The Big East discussion always interests me. I'm clearly in the camp that wants UMass to be in it when it splits, but we're not going to get that invite unless we're already moving to FBS and probably the MAC for a couple years. There's also a very outside chance some CAA members (led by Delaware and James Madison) may try to move up together and form kind of an eastern version of the Mountain West.

Some numbers I threw together on a different board Distance - 1(Here to Philly) 2(Pittsburgh/DC suburbs) 3(Further)
I may be off on some of the football teams if they have non-scholarship teams

Code:School Public/Private/Catholic Enrollment (rounded to nearest 1000) Distance Football 
UMass Public 26 
 
A-10 
Temple Public      32 1 1 
GW      Private     23 2 N 
UNC-C  Public      22 3 N 
URI      Public      16 1 AA 
Fordham Catholic 13 1 AA 
Dayton Catholic   11 3 AA (Non-Scholarship) 
St. Louis Catholic 11 3 N 
Duquesne Catholic 10 2 N 
St. Joe's Catholic  8 1 N 
Xavier Catholic     7 3 N 
LaSalle Catholic    6 1 N 
Richmond Private  3 2/3 AA 
St. Bonnie Catholic 3 2 N 
 
CAA 
VCU               Public 33 3 N 
George Mason Public 30 2 N 
Georgia State Public 27 3 AA 
Northeastern Private 23 1 N 
ODU              Public 22 3 AA 
Towson          Public 20 2 AA 
Delaware        Public 19 1 AA 
JMU               Public 18 2 AA 
Drexel          Private 17 1 N 
Hofstra         Private 13 1 N 
UNC-W          Public 12 3 N 
W&M              Public 8 3 AA 
 
Some others 
Penn St      Public 37 2 1 
UConn        Public 29 1 1 
Pitt             Public 32 2 1 
Rutgers       Public 35 1 1 
Syracuse   Private 18 2 1 
Villanova  Catholic 10 1 AA 
West Va       Public 29 2 1 
Albany        Public 18 1 AA 
BU            Private 32 1 N 
Maine         Public 12 2 AA 
UNH            Public 15 1 AA 
Stony Brook Public 24 1 AA 
Quinnipiac   Private 9 1 N 
Buffalo        Public 29 2 1

I think UM and OSU would break tradition and not play the final week of the year anymore. It'd kind of suck but it'd be worth it for a title game without question.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by the_meanstrosity

It won't be Missouri or any other school in the Big 12. The Big 10 is looking to add a program that will match their academic standards.

That stuff is annoying. Allegedly UMass' President said any move to FBS football would only happen if we were invited to the ACC because it represents a perception of higher academic quality. I think that is bullshit (and probably a red herring thrown out by the administration to dodge the question) and the Big East is the better natural fit for us. The "academic profile" thing always seemed overrated to me. Stanford and Cal are in the same conference as Oregon State, Notre Dame (in the Big East) is perceived as an academically prestigious university largely because of past football success, Rice co-exists with UAB and Memphis, U Texas is in the Big 12, etc. We're the state university in a state with dozens of prestigious private ones, not someone who will ever be in the Ivies or Patriot League - I don't have a problem with being academically compared to Rutgers, Pitt, WVa, Syracuse and UConn (although of course I hope we come out ahead.)

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

I think UM and OSU would break tradition and not play the final week of the year anymore. It'd kind of suck but it'd be worth it for a title game without question.

Maybe they could create a new tradition like OU-Texas and make for another every year huge October rivalry game. Maybe pick one of the two October weekends most squarely in the middle of the month. Every other year (when USC goes to South Bend), USC and ND also play their rivalry game in October.

It would be a pretty neat Saturday in October to have the Red River Shootout, UM-OSU and ND-USC all on one day.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Maybe they could create a new tradition like OU-Texas and make for another every year huge October rivalry game. Maybe pick one of the two October weekends most squarely in the middle of the month. Every other year (when USC goes to South Bend), USC and ND also play their rivalry game in October.

It would be a pretty neat Saturday in October to have the Red River Shootout, UM-OSU and ND-USC all on one day.

I actually agree with that. I think it'd be great. Do the RRS at noon, UM-OSU at 3:30 and USC-ND at 8. ABC could have a field day with that.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

That stuff is annoying. Allegedly UMass' President said any move to FBS football would only happen if we were invited to the ACC because it represents a perception of higher academic quality. I think that is bullshit (and probably a red herring thrown out by the administration to dodge the question) and the Big East is the better natural fit for us. The "academic profile" thing always seemed overrated to me. Stanford and Cal are in the same conference as Oregon State, Notre Dame (in the Big East) is perceived as an academically prestigious university largely because of past football success, Rice co-exists with UAB and Memphis, U Texas is in the Big 12, etc. We're the state university in a state with dozens of prestigious private ones, not someone who will ever be in the Ivies or Patriot League - I don't have a problem with being academically compared to Rutgers, Pitt, WVa, Syracuse and UConn (although of course I hope we come out ahead.)

I don't disagree, but I know the Big 10 board are very proud when it comes to their academics. It's one of the primary reasons they added Penn State and I'm guessing it will be the same for their next selection. If I'm the Big 10 I wait to see how Notre Dame does under Kelly since their tv contract with NBC is up in 2015. If Kelly struggles over the next few years then it becomes possible that NBC decides not to extend the contract.

[Swaggs]

Originally Posted by the_meanstrosity

I don't disagree, but I know the Big 10 board are very proud when it comes to their academics. It's one of the primary reasons they added Penn State and I'm guessing it will be the same for their next selection. If I'm the Big 10 I wait to see how Notre Dame does under Kelly since their tv contract with NBC is up in 2015. If Kelly struggles over the next few years then it becomes possible that NBC decides not to extend the contract.

I have heard that argument a lot, lately -- particularly with NBC failing and being sold, but realistically, if NBC drops Notre Dame, won't Fox or someone else pick them up? I have also heard that it is generally pretty inexpensive, compared to the incoming advertising dollars, to produce and televise a football game and that the ND deal has been pretty profitable for NBC.

I think the Big East would probably go for this idea moreso than the Big 10 (b/c of their network and desire to own all of their conference games' historical TV rights), but I would think offering Notre Dame membership AND continuing to allow them to have their own TV contract, for home games, would be the only way that they would consider joining a conference.

Even then, they probably are not going to want to play 8-9 conference games, when they will probably still want to play USC and Navy, as well as other frequent rivals like BC, Pitt, and Stanford.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

I have heard that argument a lot, lately -- particularly with NBC failing and being sold, but realistically, if NBC drops Notre Dame, won't Fox or someone else pick them up? I have also heard that it is generally pretty inexpensive, compared to the incoming advertising dollars, to produce and televise a football game and that the ND deal has been pretty profitable for NBC.

I think the Big East would probably go for this idea moreso than the Big 10 (b/c of their network and desire to own all of their conference games' historical TV rights), but I would think offering Notre Dame membership AND continuing to allow them to have their own TV contract, for home games, would be the only way that they would consider joining a conference.

Even then, they probably are not going to want to play 8-9 conference games, when they will probably still want to play USC and Navy, as well as other frequent rivals like BC, Pitt, and Stanford.

I don't know what Notre Dame's ratings look like this year, but last year they were the worst in the history of the deal. Ebersol even noted that in order for the partnership to be successful Notre Dame needed to be near the top 10. Ebersol did predict they would continue the agreement, but as you said things are much different now than last season. If ratings continue to drop and Notre Dame continues to struggle they may be interested in a conference.

[RainMaker]

Hasn't part of the problem besides poor performance been poor scheduling? The schedules have been rather "blah" the last few years. I'm not just talking about quality of opponents, but the intrigue they bring. What kind of reaction does the casual college football fan get to seeing Nevada, UConn, and Washington State? Wouldn't scheduling an SEC school bring in some interest? How about a top mid-major like Boise State or TCU?

Some of it hasn't been their fault with teams lik Michigan and even USC to an extent having a down year.

I'm not saying they have to schedule tougher, just smarter. There was not a single game on their schedule this year that I said to myself "I have to watch this game". That's sad considering they had one of the best QBs in the country.

So until the team has the talent and performance to warrant watching their games, maybe they should throw a Texas or Alabama on their schedule to draw some more interest.

[MJ4H]

Arkansas doesn't want to leave the SEC.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by molson

Syracuse seems like it would be a natural fit if not for the complete collapse of the football program....Ah well.

They beat Northwestern, and were very competitive with Minnesota. It's not like they are completely below Big 10 standards. Michigan St. and Syracuse would, however, instantly become a marquee, must see every time its on matchup in basketball, something I think it lacks right now.

That said, while Penn St. has been stumping to get someone added to be their travel partner/geographic rival, I think the Big 10 will take a "what's in it for us?" approach this time. And I think Syracuse will be far down that list. Far, far down that list.

I really think that the only way they get off their "wait for Notre Dame to need a conference" approach to adding that 12th team (and there is ample reason for them to continue that approach) is if they add an elite athletic program/university.

If they discard geography as a criterion, I see very few candidates. Texas, certainly. I don't think any of Pitt, WVU, Missouri, Nebraska, Rutgers or BC qualify. One team I have not seen mentioned is Stanford. Its a hike - which may keep them from joining - but I think as an institution, they fit very well in the Big 10. Cincinatti also fits well in a lot of ways, but not sure how much value they add to the Big 10 - other than the extra money from the championship game.

Texas and Stanford are the only two I can think of that add enough value to the league beyond waiting for Notre Dame. Of course, who knows, maybe entering serious negotiations with Texas will spur Notre Dame into panic - after all they've always had the security blanket of knowing the Big 10 was waiting for them.

This also assumes that noone is leaving the SEC, for any conference. After all, what's in it for them?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Mizzou gets mentioned to move to the Big 10 nearly every year. Already has the rivalry with Illinois and is a natural geographic rival with Iowa. It probably would be a more competitive fit for Mizzou since the money slope leans to the South in the current B12 arrangement, but I don't think the fan base would ever buy in to a situation where they weren't in the same conference with Kansas. That rivalry all but defines the Big 12 North.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Samdari

One team I have not seen mentioned is Stanford. Its a hike - which may keep them from joining - but I think as an institution, they fit very well in the Big 10.

If your argument for Stanford to go east is money, that's the only way it makes sense, and even then, what they lose in travel costs, would be a huge hit on what they take in (and I'll bet Big Ten teams wouldn't be too thrilled about a bi-annual trip to California either).

Your proposed argument, that it fits as an institution, ignores that it's already in a conference that does that. The Pac 10 has similar types of academic and all around well-rounded athletic progam requirements that the Big 10 does. Just as the "elite academic" thing gets in the way of the Big 10, it has also been used as a common excuse for why the Pac 10 has not expanded to 12.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

If your argument for Stanford to go east is money, that's the only way it makes sense, and even then, what they lose in travel costs, would be a huge hit on what they take in (and I'll bet Big Ten teams wouldn't be too thrilled about a bi-annual trip to California either).

Your proposed argument, that it fits as an institution, ignores that it's already in a conference that does that. The Pac 10 has similar types of academic and all around well-rounded athletic progam requirements that the Big 10 does. Just as the "elite academic" thing gets in the way of the Big 10, it has also been used as a common excuse for why the Pac 10 has not expanded to 12.

I was thinking only in terms of why it makes sense for the Big 10. Did not really consider Stanford's side of the coin.

The travel costs for the football/men's basketball teams there is peanuts compared to what they take in, but for ALL sports to travel, that would be a hefty chunk of change. I don't think the travel once a year to California would be a showstopper for the other Big 10 teams, but all of Stanford's away games then become cross country, that's a pretty big burden.

The generic argument that Stanford is in a conference that fits it pretty well also applies to Texas, imo. But, its a slam dunk from the Big 10's perspective to take either of those tow vs wait for Notre Dame. I don't think its a slam dunk for all the others.

Now that I think about it, the generic argument that Stanford is in a conference that fits it pretty well also applies to BC in the Big East, too.

[bob]

Originally Posted by Samdari

Now that I think about it, the generic argument that Stanford is in a conference that fits it pretty well also applies to BC in the Big East, too.

Except that BC is in the ACC.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

The Pac 10 has similar types of academic and all around well-rounded athletic progam requirements that the Big 10 does. Just as the "elite academic" thing gets in the way of the Big 10, it has also been used as a common excuse for why the Pac 10 has not expanded to 12.

Arizona State?

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by bob

Except that BC is in the ACC.

Which they don't fit into was my point.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

-See if Florida State, Maryland, or BC are interested in joining. I don't anticipate it happening, but I could see them entertaining the idea.

From what I've read BC's revenue has increased by a decent amount since the move to the ACC so I don't see them considering a move back to the Big East. Miami, on the other hand, has supposedly seen a drop in revenue so (assuming that's true) they may actually consider a move back to the Big East.

The Big East really needs to look at dropping DePaul. They're bringing nothing to the conference right now and there are other schools that could be competitive in basketball and bring another football team into the mix. Memphis brings an attractive basketball program, but they had about 2,500 fans at a Thursday night ESPN game earlier this year so they have some work to do before a Big East invite comes around.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by Atocep

The Big East really needs to look at dropping DePaul. They're bringing nothing to the conference right now.

Access to the Chicago tv market?

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Samdari

Access to the Chicago tv market?

My assumption would be that DePaul needs to be somewhat relevant to make up for the travel costs.

[DaddyTorgo]

ACC has been a good moneymaker for BC. There's pretty much no chance they leave.

*so says my source

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I dont see them breaking up Iowa and Minnesota. And Rutgers to Minny is a long haul. I still think they would go East/West. It makes more sense geographically and travelwise.

The Big 12 put OU, Okie St and Texas together. So I dont know how big of stretch it would be to put PSU, OSU and Mich together.

Fun stuff to talk about.

Even if they weren't in the same division they'd still play each other every year. As long as teams have one team in the other division they play every year breaking up rivals shouldn't be a problem. If there is expansion to 12 teams I'd be shocked if Ohio State and Michigan weren't put in opposite divisions, it seems like it would only make sense to leave open the possibility of them having rematch in the championship game.

[Logan]

Probably a good spot for this. No surprise to anyone who follows the Big East, Leavitt is a fucking psycho.

Sources: South Florida Coach Jim Leavitt Struck Player -- NCAAFB FanHouse

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by Atocep

My assumption would be that DePaul needs to be somewhat relevant to make up for the travel costs.

Well, you cannot capture the market without a team there (so the thinking goes). And with history both ancient and somewhat recent, long term, someone probably believes they will be relevant again someday.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Logan

Probably a good spot for this. No surprise to anyone who follows the Big East, Leavitt is a fucking psycho.

Sources: South Florida Coach Jim Leavitt Struck Player -- NCAAFB FanHouse

Yep.

Did you hear how they also might not have passports in time for their game in Toronto?

Bad time to be a USF fan.

[sooner333]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

That rivalry all but defines the Big 12 North.

That rivalry all but defines the states of Kansas and Missouri. Nebraska defines the Big 12 North by itself.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by the_meanstrosity

I don't disagree, but I know the Big 10 board are very proud when it comes to their academics. It's one of the primary reasons they added Penn State and I'm guessing it will be the same for their next selection. If I'm the Big 10 I wait to see how Notre Dame does under Kelly since their tv contract with NBC is up in 2015. If Kelly struggles over the next few years then it becomes possible that NBC decides not to extend the contract.

Yes, but using USNews as a proxy for academic reputation - BC 34, Miami 50, Virginia Tech 71. Guess which one the ACC regrets taking? The Presidents clearly do care about the academic side of things and everyone connected will pay lip service to it but in the end the money and prestige from successful football and basketball programs overwhelms the academic side.

Originally Posted by RainMaker

There was not a single game on their schedule this year that I said to myself "I have to watch this game". That's sad considering they had one of the best QBs in the country.

Considering what you post in the weekly college football threads there was apparently 1 games all year you said that about, so its not surprising you didn't find early season matchups of ND-Michigan or ND-USC intriguing. Or even any of the 8 other games that came down to the last drive.

Part of the problem with scheduling is the NBC deal that requires ND to schedule 8 home games, 3 away and 1 neutral. Schools like Texas and Ohio St (both of who we played a few years back) or Oklahoma (who is on the schedule soon) will only do home and homes (as they rightly should). It's forced us into some lackluster one and done's with the likes of San Diego St and Western Michigan which I am vehemently against. Nevada actually was a top-tier non-BCS team this year (#5 after TCU/BYU/Boise maybe Utah) and we have BYU on the schedule soon as well but sadly those teams just don't draw TV ratings more than middling Big Ten teams like MSU or Purdue.

Either way, NBC gave the 5-year extension (probably at lower money) to 2015 after the 2007 season when we had our worst season and ratings in the history of the deal. Ebersol said we had to be top 10 (or more accurately, competing for the top 10) for it to be worth it, but ND's only finished top 10 3 times since the deal started in 1992/3?, and once since 1995 (Weis' first year 2005). The money might get reduced more but I don't see NBC dropping the ND brand, particularly since all but 1 of ND's games are 2:30/3:30 starts and you could easily sign a different contract for prime-time games if they wanted to expand their college football footprint.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by Logan

Probably a good spot for this. No surprise to anyone who follows the Big East, Leavitt is a fucking psycho.

Sources: South Florida Coach Jim Leavitt Struck Player -- NCAAFB FanHouse

Having not followed USF outside the national scope I'm a bit surprised. I know Leavitt from his days at KSU as an assistant so I'm a little shocked.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Samdari

Access to the Chicago tv market?

I'm a DePaul fan and my parents actually had season tickets when I was growing up. Saw some great players like Dallas Comegys and Rod Strickland. If this was the 80's the move would be fantastic for the Big East and they'd have that Chicago market.

But right now, DePaul is irrelevant in Chicago. They have a radio deal but I honestly have yet to see them on TV all season. It's not a real good market for college sports and the main reason the Big 10 does well here is because there is so much alumni in the city from all the schools. No one cares about Big East basketball here and I don't see how they gain any penetration without DePaul becoming a perennial top 25 team.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Considering what you post in the weekly college football threads there was apparently 1 games all year you said that about, so its not surprising you didn't find early season matchups of ND-Michigan or ND-USC intriguing. Or even any of the 8 other games that came down to the last drive.

Part of the problem with scheduling is the NBC deal that requires ND to schedule 8 home games, 3 away and 1 neutral. Schools like Texas and Ohio St (both of who we played a few years back) or Oklahoma (who is on the schedule soon) will only do home and homes (as they rightly should). It's forced us into some lackluster one and done's with the likes of San Diego St and Western Michigan which I am vehemently against. Nevada actually was a top-tier non-BCS team this year (#5 after TCU/BYU/Boise maybe Utah) and we have BYU on the schedule soon as well but sadly those teams just don't draw TV ratings more than middling Big Ten teams like MSU or Purdue.

Either way, NBC gave the 5-year extension (probably at lower money) to 2015 after the 2007 season when we had our worst season and ratings in the history of the deal. Ebersol said we had to be top 10 (or more accurately, competing for the top 10) for it to be worth it, but ND's only finished top 10 3 times since the deal started in 1992/3?, and once since 1995 (Weis' first year 2005). The money might get reduced more but I don't see NBC dropping the ND brand, particularly since all but 1 of ND's games are 2:30/3:30 starts and you could easily sign a different contract for prime-time games if they wanted to expand their college football footprint.

It's not about how good the game is, it's getting someone to tune in in the first place. As a casual college football fan, I'd rather watch the top Big 10 matchup than see Notre Dame play most of those schools. I guess there was interest in the USC matchup but it wasn't like USC was bringing in the powerhouse they had in year's past. I believe I remember reading that the game against USC a few years ago was the highest rated game they've had in awhile and that was because USC was really worth watching (Reggie Bush, Matt Leinart, etc).

I know the scheduling is tough consider their restrictions on the TV schedule. But I do think a game against an Alabama or other top school would do wonder for the ratings each season. Being an independent, they have the unique ability to be more creative and play a wider array of teams.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Bad time to be a USF fan.

As is pretty much any time after mid-October.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Logan

As is pretty much any time after mid-October.

And there it is.

[Galaxy]

Didn't UMass and Villanova both turn down proposals to move up two or three years ago?

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by Atocep

The Big East really needs to look at dropping DePaul. They're bringing nothing to the conference right now and there are other schools that could be competitive in basketball and bring another football team into the mix. Memphis brings an attractive basketball program, but they had about 2,500 fans at a Thursday night ESPN game earlier this year so they have some work to do before a Big East invite comes around.

Regarding the 2,500 fans for Memphis, it was a rainy cold night. On top of that, Memphis has done nothing to capitalize on the D'Angelo Williams highwater mark. The result is the fanbase is largely apathetic to the football program until the university shows a willingness to spend money on the program.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

Regarding the 2,500 fans for Memphis, it was a rainy cold night.

I don't know if Armageddon is a decent excuse for drawing (officially) 4,117 for a college football game in the south. Hell, Presbyterian drew roughly that & they went 0-11 in I-AA.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I don't know if Armageddon is a decent excuse for drawing (officially) 4,117 for a college football game in the south. Hell, Presbyterian drew roughly that & they went 0-11 in I-AA.

I'd imagine a lot of high schools draw that regularly.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Athens Banner-Herald reporting that Bud Foster turned down the UGA defensive coordinators job.

Foster turns down UGA || OnlineAthens.com
Foster said he also talked to Florida’s Urban Meyer and Florida State’s Jimbo Fisher about coordinator positions, but things got most serious with Georgia.

“Some of it was just conversation and then the Georgia deal — obviously he’s very interested and it was something that could have been an interest on my part,” Foster told the Roanoke (Va.) Times.

Virginia Tech assistant athletic director Dave Smith told the Athens Banner-Herald by e-mail earlier in the day that Georgia had contacted Foster, who has been defensive coordinator at the school for 15 years.

Foster said the contact from Georgia had been ongoing.

“We’ve been in touch,” he said.

Asked if Georgia was the only school to put an offer on the table, Foster said “Yeah, probably.”

Foster said he talked to Virginia Tech officials starting Saturday about a new deal that will add an annuity to his current five-year rollover contract.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Logan

As is pretty much any time after mid-October.

Originally Posted by Galaxy

Didn't UMass and Villanova both turn down proposals to move up two or three years ago?

UMass hasn't been formally offered Big East membership at any time at least since 2000. They may have had informal discussions around the time UConn moved up (late 90's - coming off an NC in football and when we still had prestige in basketball) but even then I don't think anything formal was extended. Villanova (and all the other Catholics without FCS football) I believe does have a standing offer as a Big East all-sports school if they choose to upgrade to FBS but they really don't have the school to do it - not enough alumni/student support in football, and the Philly market is mostly pro sports oriented, with the college fans very splintered due to the Big 5. IF something were to happen with the CAA, or some large-scale changes came from the NCAA (reducing scholarships again?) they might be forced into a move, but they seem very content where they are now.

Originally Posted by RainMaker

It's not about how good the game is, it's getting someone to tune in in the first place. As a casual college football fan, I'd rather watch the top Big 10 matchup than see Notre Dame play most of those schools. I guess there was interest in the USC matchup but it wasn't like USC was bringing in the powerhouse they had in year's past. I believe I remember reading that the game against USC a few years ago was the highest rated game they've had in awhile and that was because USC was really worth watching (Reggie Bush, Matt Leinart, etc).

I know the scheduling is tough consider their restrictions on the TV schedule. But I do think a game against an Alabama or other top school would do wonder for the ratings each season. Being an independent, they have the unique ability to be more creative and play a wider array of teams.

They are creative and do play a wider array of teams than anyone else in the country (save maybe Navy). Tennessee (and possibly Vanderbilt) are the only SEC teams I can remember ND playing in recent years, but they've played high-profile teams from every other BCS conference in that time.

As for TV ratings, they do get lower rating than the top B10 or top SEC game most weeks, but here's the thing - the contract is for $9 million a year (albeit for only 8 weeks). The SEC by comparison costs CBS $55 million a year for 1 game (1st-choice) and ESPN $150 million a year for the rest (some of which it sublicenses to regional carriers). The Big 10 has its own network (which is projected to make ~110 million a year) but also has a deal with ABC/ESPN for $100 million a year. The Big 12's deal with ABC/ESPN is about $60 million/year. The ACC only gets ~37 million/year, but that's an expiring contract and will likely go up significantly. The Pac-10 really gets screwed at about $25 million/year, but their contract is up after 2011 and their new commissioner was hired mainly due to expertise in negotiating TV deals. I don't have all the figures for ratings, but on a viewer per dollar basis the ND deal is almost certainly much better than any BCS one. If NBC wanted to increase their footprint they'd be better off trying to get the Pac-10 or ACC to give them a game of the week and put it in primetime in addition to Notre Dame at 2:30/3:30 rather than try to replace ND by competing with ABC/ESPN and CBS for the big conferences. At a certain point, it's also a brand NBC wants to be associated with beyond mere football fans tuning in - ND alumni/viewers tend to be more affluent than college football fans in general.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I don't see the ND TV contract going away when it expires, but it seems very likely to me that they'll be renewed on Versus (where I suspect they'll be before the contract expires anyway).

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I don't see the ND TV contract going away when it expires, but it seems very likely to me that they'll be renewed on Versus (where I suspect they'll be before the contract expires anyway).

Do you see NBC completely giving up on college football, saving/televising the best ND games like USC, Michigan and Oklahoma while optioning the rest to Versus, or going after a different league (ACC after this year, Pac-10 after 2011, or Big East after 2013) ?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Do you see NBC completely giving up on college football, saving/televising the best ND games like USC, Michigan and Oklahoma while optioning the rest to Versus, or going after a different league (ACC after this year, Pac-10 after 2011, or Big East after 2013) ?

If I had to bet, I'd be tempted to say they leave the niche altogether but it's probably smarter to think they'll share it with Versus ala ABC/ESPN.

Versus wants to be ESPN when it grows up & college football is part of that growth so this only makes sense.

[BishopMVP]

I didn't realize NBC and Versus were going to be/as closely tied together as ABC and ESPN are. Based off the quick googling, I'm assuming Comcast's takeover will pass the requisite regulatory hurdles, but it won't be for another 12-18 months.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

I didn't realize NBC and Versus were going to be/as closely tied together as ABC and ESPN are. Based off the quick googling, I'm assuming Comcast's takeover will pass the requisite regulatory hurdles, but it won't be for another 12-18 months.

There's a school of thought that says NBC went on life support the minute the deal was signed. Seeing their bones picked wouldn't be a big shock.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

or going after a different league (ACC after this year,?

Looks like that will be a Fox national package with a new deal to add primetime and midday games on FOX not the regional sports affiliates.

It is a lump sum roll that includes FB and BBall and is reportedly worth more than the ESPN/SEC deal.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

I don't like the section with Mark Mangino in a bathing suit.

Oh God, I can't unwatch that.

SI

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Oh God, I can't unwatch that.

SI

The only sensible thing to do then is re-watch it.

[the_meanstrosity]

A bit of a surprise as Kansas State's defensive coordinator, Vic Koenning, is leaving for the defensive coordinator position at Illinois. Koenning had returned to Manhattan last season as a part of Bill Snyder's staff. I had assumed he would be the leading candidate once Snyder re-retired, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Illinois is getting themselves a talented coordinator.

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/po...koenning-as-dc

[MJ4H]

Illinois is breaking out the pocketbook in a major way. I think they are doubling Petrino's salary. I'm interested to see how this translates next year. I might even root for Illinois with Petrino there.

[the_meanstrosity]

Originally Posted by MJ4H

Illinois is breaking out the pocketbook in a major way. I think they are doubling Petrino's salary. I'm interested to see how this translates next year. I might even root for Illinois with Petrino there.

I've heard that. It sounds like Koenning will be paid fairly well. I have also heard that Koenning wanted to spend more time with his family while Snyder expects you to work longer hours and thus he's been looking at a few other coordinator jobs (Georgia) as well. Zook may save his job yet.